Why this potato is so popular she didn't say anything that hasn't been said before yet everyone is treating her as...

People who attack her appearance only do so because they can't attach her points.

powerful....

Attached: woah....png (1324x795, 1.1M)

What's the problem exactly?

I don’t understand the opposition to climate change. Trading big petro out for big solar? What’s the problem? The US kills countries for oil. Maybe give “big alternative energy” a chance

They want a global energy based currency. Or to be more exact, they want every citizen to have a fixed quota of energy in their use, including food.

Key words: David Rockefeller, Maurice Strong, technocracy, smart grids, eradication of cash, digitalisation, energy based currency, carbon footprint

Attached: Maurice Strong.png (637x869, 525K)

Climate change was not "invented" by this dude lol
It first showed up in peer-reviews journals along in 1952. Nice try tho.

Not to be that guy, but it actually first appeared in 1896 in a paper by Svante Arrhenius

We’ve known about it for a long long time

I do, but I don't believe that it's man-made

Because it's a little girl

Only idiots do. But, intellectually she doesn't differ at all from these guys. You can try to proof me wrong, but you can't. So why do the media ridicule the other and praise the other?

Attached: doomsday13.jpg (620x413, 58K)

Glow in the dark NWO propaganda

Attached: _70273003_malala-624-deep[1].jpg (976x703, 71K)

The political side of it it mostly
A. Taxes to force industry to behave
B. Crude regulations written by Politicians who have never done any form of labor
C. Nothing is done to subsidize the development of the new tech needed to displace petroleum
Beyond that its not a particularly big issue. Its a boring issue.
And a lot of autistic screeching.

As I understand, that's when he figured out carbon dioxide absorbs red and infrared.
I'm talking about this one:
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.2153-3490.1956.tb01206.x

It's from 56, not 52, my bad.

What do you think is causing it?

Why can't a 'proof' you wrong?

>Beyond that its not a particularly big issue
It will make life shittier for you, your kids and your grandkids.

The media actually shut down this woman for being too REDpilled for American neocons and democrat liberals to handle.

Solar pannels are inefficient and polluting. Nuclear fusion if it's made efficient is the only way humanity Will atain a zero carbon energy supply for all

I believe it’s man made (man spiking CO2 levels leading to increased greenhouse effect obviously), but I also believe there’s no way humans will act in time. Biodiversity will drop, weather will get shittier, and more refugees will be at our doorsteps

I don’t argue much about it anymore though. Time will see who is right, as again, I believe mankind will not act

Climate change politics was indeed invented by Maurice Strong. Or Maurice Strong was David Rockefeller's protegé, so in reality climate change is Rockefellers' brainchild.

Maurice Strong also organised the Stockholm Conference in 1972 and Rio de Janeiro's Earth Summit in 1992.

youtube.com/watch?v=1YCatox0Lxo

About his network (a CBC documentary):

youtube.com/watch?v=Qu_XGuP_LY8

Attached: Maurice Strong Complicated Legacy.png (814x870, 586K)

Because she's singlehandedly going to stop climate change

ah yes, let's build ticking time bombs in the middle of our society. The ground in Bavaria is still polluted because of Chernobyl.

This man is delusional, get him to the infirmary

>Why can't a 'proof' you wrong?
For so many reasons you probably can't even imagine.

Carbon plants cause more direct deaths and deaths due to health complications than all nuclear plants both on average and aggregate.

>Solar pannels are inefficient and polluting
Beats coal.

>Nuclear fusion if it's made efficient
As I understand, we can't throttle nuclear fusion, so that's why we don't use it.

>but I also believe there’s no way humans will act in time
there's no stopping it, but we can slow it down so we have more time to figure shit out

I'm not talking about politics, I'm talking about science. If you're opposed to the policies enacted against climate change, fine. Just don't deny the science.

Nuclear fusion is different from fission
Nuclear fusion for the production of energy simply isn't viable and we don't use it.
It will be the shit once we figure it out, tho, since if you fuse the right stuff, it doesn't produce radioactive shit.

What is exactly that you don't believe? That the planet is heating up or that it is caused by men?

>It will make life shittier for you, your kids and your grandkids.
It might. But the core problem boils down to the fact that capital isn't invested to start getting viable replacement technology up and running.
And despite that, the 'polluters' are the worlds populations and growing states, which won't really change their ways unless you nuke them. Basically.

I still find it hilarious and laughable that it took a rich investor from PayPal to invest untold amount of money into car production, and over just a few short years there was suddenly electric cars on the marked that wasn't small jokes of moped cars.
This is the economic realities for all fields where tech exist, but hasn't reached mass production or competitive advantage.
"Regulations" to deal with this issue is basically dead in the water, because you need to get tech that can economically muscle it away by being cheaper or having less infrastructure maintenance to get going.

It doesn't take a genius to look at industrial shithole smogged London and simply ask
"If the entire civilized world is like that, won't that affect the environment?"
The answer is yes, and its that simple.
Or even simpler:
Do you really want to pollute your own backyard? Because its a shit deal.

Stop thinking and go and eat a banana.

Isn’t a big push for all green parties to subsidize the development of green technologies though? I thought that was always one of their prime goals

I understand the benefits of acting, I just don’t think humanity is capable of acting. As the Norwegian said, we can’t stop all nations

They fused hydrogen with lases. It just takes more energy than it gives out

Attached: 576 - 4efGIER.jpg (232x217, 12K)

>It might. But the core problem boils down to the fact that capital isn't invested to start getting viable replacement technology up and running.
There's a lot of money being pumped into it.
Not enough, I'd say. But that's something you can change by voting and dispelling myths

>This is the economic realities for all fields where tech exist, but hasn't reached mass production or competitive advantage.
"Regulations" to deal with this issue is basically dead in the water
not necessarily. the so called 'carbon tax' can force companies to invest in more efficient energy solutions and energy-saving techniques.

Climate change believer DESTROYED by logic and facts

Yes, and that obviously can't be used to make energy, since it consumes more than it gives.
But you can still use fusion to get more energy than you put in. It's just that you can't throttle it.
You get the energy out in a full burst.

Because it's an old hag who looks like a little girl. The illegal becomes legal with her.

>Isn’t a big push for all green parties to subsidize the development of green technologies though?
Okay
So
Image for a second
That all technology is subsidized via that Universities are subsidized, the post/package system is state run across entire continents meaning its also subsidized.
And on top of that, you have governments 'investing' in startups, with some small money.

This means all technology that can be assembled/used off site is now subsidized, indirectly.
But this is the cheap subsidiaries. And when a company wants more than that, you run into a issue: A company with a few millions of cash can't just take over a empty factory and build state of the art massive for mass production. They need to spend years building up capital to afford that investment, where small scale production happens.
Meanwhile they also rely on import from China or nearby primary resource countries because they can't refine products at the assembly line.
Which means small scale investments/subsidiaries won't have impact.
Large subsidiaries could lead to Top down economic problems: You have infinite budget for product, but the real tech investment is a different product. Which means you have a lot of money, but no means to divert that to the real product without commitment of fraud. I.e what the worst part of the Soviet state economy turned into.

==
But:
So what IS exactly the second real problem? If you don't have enough cash to do mass production, all products are equal. Scammers and real investors are equal.
So you can't invest top dollars top down via the government to get there.
But private investors won't invest into a company that wants to make new unexplored technology with unexplored pitfalls. Investors are simply not interested in making new stuff, they just want money or influence.

also
none of these are big deals or obstacles. Subsidiaries will get the ball rolling, but it won't blueball China/India into spending their own money to fix their own problems

Attached: 1338073672443.jpg (630x471, 222K)

*ahem*

swedes are a blight

i have no idea who the fuck this girl is or where she came from
Dumb westerners

Are you pretending to be stupid? Why would you need walls of text for that?

Can you speak Portuguese?

>none of these are big deals or obstacles. Subsidiaries will get the ball rolling, but it won't blueball China/India into spending their own money to fix their own problems
They're doing it tho. China is. Even tho they polute a lot, they're going to have to do something, because climate change will hit them hard.
China houses the largest solar farm in the world.
They're putting money into this stuff.

according to modelling data, most of my state will be uninhabitable in summer by 2030

i hope you have learnt something today, thank you

Attached: 1525382720123.png (657x527, 21K)

she is the bravest young girl alive, standing up for an issue that the world's governments refuse to address.
she is a champion of the everyday person.

I'm just pointing out how telling me to go eat a banana simply isn't a very good way to show that your belief that climate change isn't real is true.

You had the change to avoid that, but you yourself choose otherwise. If you don't understand why, it's completely your problem, not mine.

In her defense global warming is one of the best sci-fi ever written

20 years ago they were predicting the world being destroyed by 2010, according to modelling data. People have short memory.

Attached: IPCC model.jpg (960x720, 172K)

>but you yourself choose otherwise
I did? I have been reasonable throughout this entire conversation. You're the one who decided to bring in the insults.

Can you speak Portuguese?

because the jews

Attached: jews.jpg (850x400, 67K)

Yes

Only stupid zoomers who will experience its effects care about climate change. Fuck zoomers why should I care about them?

yes hopefully they are wrong

>

Attached: 1540352635699.jpg (1930x2574, 1.19M)

he looks like he migt be gretas grandfather too...
not saying its a conspiracy...just sayin

yeah, i'm thinking this is based

>China is.
China has reached peak capacity for expanding.
Meaning their only way to increase expansion rate is by using technology that isn't encumbered by the same supplychain.
THAT is why China are investing into Green energy: Because it doesn't share the same bottleneck as coal, nuclear and oil do. Instead you have a bottleneck over Rare Earth Metals, which is negligible compared to drilling for more oil or testing new nuclear designs.

But that still leaves India, and every single third world nation that wants to gain "quality of living for all their second class citizens". And better infrastructure.

why the fuck would people lie about climate change? what is there to gain from lying about it?
>oh no those evil elites want us to have clean energy and less dependence on saudi arabia

Attached: spongebob wat.png (500x370, 237K)

Wether it's manmade or not, we should do something about it, not just stand still and watch the floods destroying countries

It's a cult. Everyone is a sinner since living today basically means doing some polluting. So you have to accept that you are a sinner and atone through spreading the word or something. And governments love it because it's a perfect excuse to hike up the taxes.

it's like...dood...climate change is real and shit...i never even thought of it that way before

>THAT is why China are investing into Green energy
Do you not think it has something to do with the fact they will be negatively impacted by it?

>But that still leaves India, and every single third world nation that wants to gain "quality of living for all their second class citizens"
Well, then it is in their interest that they limit their carbon dioxide emissions, since in 3rd world countries will be the most impacted by it.

Except that doing something on your end and 'atoning' for your sins is the least effective way to combat it.

>And governments love it because it's a perfect excuse to hike up the taxes
Except of course for conservative governments, which are opposed to raising taxes.

>Except of course for conservative governments, which are opposed to raising taxes.
Yeah, how many of those are there? And how many are courageous enough to piss off Johnny Mouthbreather by actually cutting spending?

I don't understand why Europe is freaking out about it when they've already reduced how much they were polluting by 90%. Even if they polluted zilch, that doesn't stop people like China or India or America from polluting and fucking shit up. They should focus their efforts on that, rather than banning plastic forks.

>I dont believe man done animal extinction
>I dont believe man done climate change
>i dont believe in magnets how do they even work lol
>Fuck ya all lefty hillary posters and jews all just liying to me

Attached: 1497815813506.png (729x627, 553K)

Thats naive user.
In the third world its in the best interest to get towards Western standard of living, for many reasons. Including the fact it benefits the elite, since improved infastructure benefits luxury.
But it also benefits the elite in a simpler way: The nations subhumans will go trough education and prosperity, and stop being so edgy and feral.

So it should be in India's best interest to do some big investment into Tide, Solar, Battery, Nuclear or Wind. Or stop polluting their rivers.
But its not that simple, because the people running the countries are generally segregated away from living on the streets or in the nature affected.
London used to be like that too, and so did a lot of the world.

I just find your view naive and shallow. India won't simply man up until somebody points a gun at their head, and they can't simply send riot police to deal with it.

>>i dont believe in magnets how do they even work lol
kek

Female privilege

her unironic plan will be to gain political power in France or the UK and order the nuclear fleet to unload their entire payload of submarine-based ballistic missiles onto polluting nations

screencap this

I want to punch her in her face

literally never heard of her

And I watch youtube all day hmmm

Anyone else a bit excited for the new world? I want to live in subarctic and subantarctic colonies. Obviously a lot of people would die and shit, but I see it as an opportunity to start over. The transition would be brutal, but I think in the long run it certainly wouldn't be the end of days Governments would fall and we'd begin anew, just with the equator as the uninhabitable zone that the pôles nowadays are.

I can't wait until I drown genuinely

No one lives here and no one ever has. It's waiting for us.

Attached: 1280px-Yellow-eyed_Penguins_Auckland_Islands.jpg (1280x960, 398K)

The world's wealthiest, most powerful and second most polluting of all countries has one.

>In the third world its in the best interest to get towards Western standard of living, for many reasons
Yes. But it is also in our best interest not to emit CO2. There's nothing naive about this.
We emit CO2, the atmosphere heats up, we get fucked. Besides, prosperity does not have to come at a cost of the environment.
The Indian government doesn't deny global warming either.

>I just find your view naive and shallow. India won't simply man up until somebody points a gun at their head
Well, don't you think you'd be better pointing a gun to the US and China, since they pump way more CO2 into the atmosphere than India?
I mean, at this point, you're just shitting on us 3rd worlders.

Attached: Auckland2.jpg (1024x768, 94K)

p sure people live in auckland

Understandable. Still, would like to stop big corporations to pollute our air

Auckland, eh?

youtube.com/watch?v=k9eBUtvmFxI

Literally who?

The elites often live in places where local infrastructure already matches up to the western world, they don't really care if that becomes accessible for the rest of the classes, just take a look at China and India.

>yet everyone is treating her as messiah
There has been a coordinated push from the media to make her a figurehead. None of it is actually grassroots.

>The only way to combat climate change is an international soviet and the destruction of all bourgeois governments.

Attached: 1558974862054.jpg (1242x1394, 207K)

I'm so tired of people thinking nuclear plants are just waiting to explode. Modern reactor designs are inherently incapable of a meltdown and steam explosion. Designs like CANDU are completely different from light water reactors like Chernobyl or Fukushima, a meltdown is practically impossible. If you're concerned about public health, there are far more dangerous facilities around like chemical plants and fuel refineries.

hasta la Vista Greta!

Attached: Hänsel-and-Gretel_142493730241391_7307676825380867906_n.jpg (1080x1080, 254K)

I am not an edgy right-winger, climate change denier or misogynist but something about her looks are off and eerie like nearly uncanny valley tier. I am all for environmental action though
Your brain on /pol
You won't be worrying about whatever 'immediate problems' are when your home is flooded. Also it is not zero-sum, we can both solve those and climate change.
Nice sarcasm what are you doing for climate change yourself?
This

Look how smug is that little slut

Grandpa Arni has bought Greta a new doll

Attached: 1557694155700.jpg (543x1024, 60K)

youtube.com/watch?v=Gh-DNNIUjKU

Attached: Yg4vUgZf_400x400.jpg (400x400, 31K)

Attached: 1554296184805.jpg (1607x1608, 148K)

youtu.be/ovKw6YjqSfM

Attached: 1558973385386.jpg (271x250, 4K)

she is only popular cuz she is hot. if she was wasnt attractive no one would know her name. the world is shallow and built around how people look instead of their ideals. im overqualified, but very ugly so im doomed to work dead end jobs. college was a waste on someone like me. m thinking about scraping my degree and just becoming a trucker... way of the road boys

She's not attractive at all.

>she is hot
wtf she looks like has down syndrome, i bet she smells nasty too

Redpill me on bristol lads.

>smug despite not doing anything outstanding
>looks mongoloid
>autistic
absolute embodiment of swedes