She didn't say we would be wiped out in 5 years. She said we would be dead if we didn't stop using fossil fuels in 5 years. There is a difference. We have 14 days to stop using fossil fuels and if we fail we sign our death warrant. Who knows how long we can hang on after that. /s
She didn't say we would be wiped out in 5 years. She said we would be dead if we didn't stop using fossil fuels in 5 years. There is a difference.
An inconvenient distinction.
Alarmism, exaggeration, sensationalism, hyperbole - these are the tools of the propaganda machines. We would do well to eschew them. They don't really help. They just replace one matrix with another.
But just in case, after next week, I'm going to let the air out of my tires, take a sledge hammer to my 2-stroke lawnmower, and we're only cooking outside on sunny days using the pavement bricks. /s
COVID lockdowns dropped our emissions so low for 2 years that we bought ourselves another couple years before we have to stop using fossil fuels before we start dying.
If you mock Greta for saying this and a liberal is present, you be immediately be attacked for not understanding what she is saying.
I think global warming/climate change is 100% a hoax being done to make slush funds and control people. Look at what France just did. No Domestic flights under 1.5 hours. Of course the elites can still fly anywhere anytime on their private planes.
Yep, not to defend the little POS, but, quite obviously, this is the proper interpretation of what it said.
I don't know if the twaat OP, and this OP, just have horrible text interpretation capacity or what, but this is the sort of thing that makes us look stupid.
Plus, even if it did say :
Humanity will be wiped out in five years if we don't stop using fossil fuels
Which is what OP thinks it says...
But even if it did say that, all they had to do was to say that, due to pandemic and lockdowns, emissions dropped enough to prevent it, and so we must do more of that... See how it works?
Nothing they do or say is without a very specific purpose
She didn't say we would be wiped out in 5 years. She said we would be dead if we didn't stop using fossil fuels in 5 years. There is a difference. We have 14 days to stop using fossil fuels and if we fail we sign our death warrant. Who knows how long we can hang on after that. /s
An inconvenient distinction.
Alarmism, exaggeration, sensationalism, hyperbole - these are the tools of the propaganda machines. We would do well to eschew them. They don't really help. They just replace one matrix with another.
But just in case, after next week, I'm going to let the air out of my tires, take a sledge hammer to my 2-stroke lawnmower, and we're only cooking outside on sunny days using the pavement bricks. /s
This is the way.
Cook outside using charcoal or wood.
Can't do that. Charcoal and wood release CO2. We're all gonna die. No choice but to use solar power...
/s
COVID lockdowns dropped our emissions so low for 2 years that we bought ourselves another couple years before we have to stop using fossil fuels before we start dying.
It’s science. I think.
Truthiness, too.
Correct.
And if we don't stop our fossil fuels to zero within the next 14 days, the next 20 years will be no takesies backsies for sure!
Whoosh!!!!!!
(The sound of goalposts moving quickly)
Important distinction raised by you. Why? Because it makes it more vague and therefore not able to be proved or disproved.
As Dan Bongino says, precision matters.
If you mock Greta for saying this and a liberal is present, you be immediately be attacked for not understanding what she is saying.
I think global warming/climate change is 100% a hoax being done to make slush funds and control people. Look at what France just did. No Domestic flights under 1.5 hours. Of course the elites can still fly anywhere anytime on their private planes.
Right. And im saying the lack of precision is on purpose.
I agree.
Yep, not to defend the little POS, but, quite obviously, this is the proper interpretation of what it said.
I don't know if the twaat OP, and this OP, just have horrible text interpretation capacity or what, but this is the sort of thing that makes us look stupid.
Plus, even if it did say :
Which is what OP thinks it says...
But even if it did say that, all they had to do was to say that, due to pandemic and lockdowns, emissions dropped enough to prevent it, and so we must do more of that... See how it works?
Nothing they do or say is without a very specific purpose