A Huge Climate Change Movement Led By Teenage Girls Is Sweeping Europe. And It’s Coming To The US

[marke]

Full title: A Huge Climate Change Movement Led By Teenage Girls Is Sweeping Europe. And It’s Coming To The US Next.

Young women are leading the growing global climate movement.



Europe Climate Change Protests: Teenage Girls Organize Mass School Walkouts And Protests

That children have to take action then the grown ups fail in their duties and responsibilities.

The children skipping school aren't ruining the planet – you are | Srećko Horvat | Opinion | The Guardian

Climate change propaganda finds greater support among the young and ignorant.

 

[American]

Full title: A Huge Climate Change Movement Led By Teenage Girls Is Sweeping Europe. And It’s Coming To The US Next.

Young women are leading the growing global climate movement.



Europe Climate Change Protests: Teenage Girls Organize Mass School Walkouts And Protests

That children have to take action then the grown ups fail in their duties and responsibilities.

The children skipping school aren't ruining the planet – you are | Srećko Horvat | Opinion | The Guardian

Clueless teenagers wearing jackboots marching through Europe in the name of Climate Change. Imagine the propaganda posters!

 

[Oborosen]

It got worse when people abandoned science for politics.

The previous head of the IPCC worked for a company called TERI. TERI is one of the largest scammers of carbon credits.
talk about running a con game carbon credits are the biggest con game out there.

99% of these people do not live the way they want others to live.
Al Gore for example uses more electric in a month than most people use in a year.

These zealots are dangerous to the rest of us.

That is like one guy wanted to dump his solution into hurricanes to weaken them and or take them out.
what this idiot doesn't realize is that hurricanes are a very much needed part of earth climate control.

same goes for these polar vortex's.

the fact is these morons have no clue what they are wanting.
you remove green house gasses from the atmosphere and we freeze to death and starve.

Without naturally occurring greenhouse gases, Earth's average temperature would be near 0°F (or -18°C) instead of the much warmer 59°F (15°C).
NASA GISS: Science Briefs: Greenhouse Gases: Refining the Role of Carbon Dioxide

At present, roughly 30% of the incoming solar radiation is reflected back to space by the clouds, aerosols, and the surface of Earth. Without naturally occurring greenhouse gases, Earth's average temperature would be near 0°F (or -18°C) instead of the much warmer 59°F (15°C).

these geo engineering idiots will make things worse not better.
why? because they are ignorant.

I think it was revealed that Al Gore has a heated pool at one of his homes in California and keeps it running all year round. Which ends up costing twice as much as a usual house runs in the same time.

I'll look for the article, because it's been a while.

 

[ludin]

Clueless teenagers wearing jackboots marching through Europe in the name of Climate Change. Imagine the propaganda posters!

what these people do not understand is that Antarctica use to have a flush tropical forest on it.
it thrived with tree's and wild life.

what makes these people that that this cycle can't happen again?
They are like OMG the glacier is melting. well it use to be there was never a glacier there.

a massive global weather event called the ice age put one there.
what triggered it? who knows probably a massive influx of troposphere air (just using The day after tomorrow as an example).

not that it would happen in a few days but over years and years. when it comes to how earths climate functions is affected and
works we are still really ignorant.

we know more about how a black hole functions than we do our own climate.

 

[tecoyah]

no this is what indoctrination and stupidity gets you instead of education and science.

I find your choice of words interesting when position is considered as it requires the lack of education and denial of the science.

 

[American]

what these people do not understand is that Antarctica use to have a flush tropical forest on it.
it thrived with tree's and wild life.

what makes these people that that this cycle can't happen again?
They are like OMG the glacier is melting. well it use to be there was never a glacier there.

a massive global weather event called the ice age put one there.
what triggered it? who knows probably a massive influx of troposphere air (just using The day after tomorrow as an example).

not that it would happen in a few days but over years and years. when it comes to how earths climate functions is affected and
works we are still really ignorant.

we know more about how a black hole functions than we do our own climate.

They're upset because they don't know where Santa Claus will live without the snow. :lol:

 

[American]

I find your choice of words interesting when position is considered as it requires the lack of education and denial of the science.

Your post is incoherent.

 

[longview]

I find your choice of words interesting when position is considered as it requires the lack of education and denial of the science.

Not really! The "Science" behind catastrophic Human caused global warming, is weak at best.
I think most of us can agree that CO2 does function as a greenhouse gas, but that is not enough
to fill the boots of the catastrophic predictions.
The science is that "IF" we double the CO2 level, it will create an energy imbalance at the top of the atmosphere of about 3.71 Watts per meter squared.
This imbalance would then force the surface temperatures to increase to balance the input and output energy.
ACS has the actual equations for those interested.
Climate Sensitivity - American Chemical Society
So "IF" we manage to Double the CO2 level, and "IF" CO2 climate sensitivity is the stated 3.71 Wm-2,
then we might see warming of ~1.1 C.
The problem is that 1.1 C, spread over the 180 years it would take to reach a 2XCO2, would look almost exactly like
the warming we and our parents and grandparents have been living through.
To become catastrophic, the warming from the CO2 forcing, would then need a feedback factor applied,
and so far no one has been able to observe this required feedback factor.
While it is likely the feedbacks are real, (Both positive and negative), that we have not been able to detect them raises questions.
Feedbacks would not be able to tell the difference between sources of inputs, and so would see any warming or cooling as an input.
For the feedbacks to cause an Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity (ECS) of 3 C, requires a feedback factor of 3/1.1=2.72,
SO now we are at "IF" we manage to Double the CO2 level, and "IF" CO2 climate sensitivity is the stated 3.71 Wm-2,
and "IF" the feedback factor is 2.72, then we might see unusual warming. not necessarily bad or dangerous, just unusual.
FYI the only study that has managed to detect CO2 forcing, detected lower levels than the 3.71 Wm-2.
http://asl.umbc.edu/pub/chepplew/journals/nature14240_v519_Feldman_CO2.pdf

 

[tecoyah]

Your post is incoherent.

Actually it is very clear but phrased in a way to be inoffensive.....you may be confused by this tactic due to a lack of familiarity.

 

[ludin]

I find your choice of words interesting when position is considered as it requires the lack of education and denial of the science.

since you have no clue what the argument is it hard to say anyone is denying anything.
please specific in detail what is being denied?

 

[ludin]

Not really! The "Science" behind catastrophic Human caused global warming, is weak at best.
I think most of us can agree that CO2 does function as a greenhouse gas, but that is not enough
to fill the boots of the catastrophic predictions.
The science is that "IF" we double the CO2 level, it will create an energy imbalance at the top of the atmosphere of about 3.71 Watts per meter squared.
This imbalance would then force the surface temperatures to increase to balance the input and output energy.
ACS has the actual equations for those interested.
Climate Sensitivity - American Chemical Society
So "IF" we manage to Double the CO2 level, and "IF" CO2 climate sensitivity is the stated 3.71 Wm-2,
then we might see warming of ~1.1 C.
The problem is that 1.1 C, spread over the 180 years it would take to reach a 2XCO2, would look almost exactly like
the warming we and our parents and grandparents have been living through.
To become catastrophic, the warming from the CO2 forcing, would then need a feedback factor applied,
and so far no one has been able to observe this required feedback factor.
While it is likely the feedbacks are real, (Both positive and negative), that we have not been able to detect them raises questions.
Feedbacks would not be able to tell the difference between sources of inputs, and so would see any warming or cooling as an input.
For the feedbacks to cause an Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity (ECS) of 3 C, requires a feedback factor of 3/1.1=2.72,
SO now we are at "IF" we manage to Double the CO2 level, and "IF" CO2 climate sensitivity is the stated 3.71 Wm-2,
and "IF" the feedback factor is 2.72, then we might see unusual warming. not necessarily bad or dangerous, just unusual.
FYI the only study that has managed to detect CO2 forcing, detected lower levels than the 3.71 Wm-2.
http://asl.umbc.edu/pub/chepplew/journals/nature14240_v519_Feldman_CO2.pdf

Scientists just discovered that antarica was a troplical forest at one point.
the CO2 was at 1k ppm.

forest and animals etc thrived in such conditions.
I have yet to see anything that says we cannot return to that point in time.

the more you look into this the people that push this stuff seem to know less and less.
it is like they are purposely ignoring hisotrical data and historical context on purpose.

they are like OMG we are at 450 ppm we are all going to die.

umm well what happened when co2 levels were at 1k ppm?
nothing catastrophic occured.

then something more than likely that effect triggered a huge long ice age.
probably caused by a massive polar vortex.

the heat we can deal with. a frozen planet not so much.
we need to prepare because there is nothing that says it can't happen again.

hydroponic farming is going to be a must in order to keep up with food demand.
although i expect massive loss of life due to that extreme cold factor.

 

[KLATTU]

I always compared Dems to teenage girls at a One Direction concert in regards to Obama. So the Dems and teenage girls seem a perfect match.

#GUFFAW

 

[Harshaw]

Full title: A Huge Climate Change Movement Led By Teenage Girls Is Sweeping Europe. And It’s Coming To The US Next.

Young women are leading the growing global climate movement.



Europe Climate Change Protests: Teenage Girls Organize Mass School Walkouts And Protests

That children have to take action then the grown ups fail in their duties and responsibilities.

The children skipping school aren't ruining the planet – you are | Srećko Horvat | Opinion | The Guardian

Adults adore children they can exploit to push for what they (the adults) want.

I have always found that quite distasteful.

 

[Bergslagstroll]

since you have no clue what the argument is it hard to say anyone is denying anything.
please specific in detail what is being denied?

You are correct that you don’t know that the argument is from deniers. Because just on this forum you have posters that claim that there will be global cooling. While other deniers acknowledge global warming but claim it is because of natural factors not C02. You also have posters that acknowledge manmade global from C02 but claim it will not be that bad. While other deniers claim that you can’t measure global temperatures.

That the only thing deniers seem to agree on is not to agree with the scientific consensus that there is an urgent need to act on manmade global from C02.

 

[Bergslagstroll]

I always compared Dems to teenage girls at a One Direction concert in regards to Obama. So the Dems and teenage girls seem a perfect match.

#GUFFAW

73 percent of Americans acknowledge that manmade global warming is happening, and 62 percent of Americans acknowledge that humans are the primary cause of warming.

Americans’ climate change concerns surge to record levels, poll shows | Environment | The Guardian

That is a high numbers considering decades of disinformation from fossil fuel companies.

https://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/attach/2015/07/The-Climate-Deception-Dossiers.pdf

Merchants of Doubt – How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming

That the evidence of manmade global warming is today so overwhelming that fossil fuel companies disinformation campaigns are starting to be less effective. There also Americans are staring to already experience the effect of manmade global warming.

"The impacts of climate change are already being felt in communities across the country. More frequent and intense extreme weather and climate-related events, as well as changes in average climate conditions, are expected to continue to damage infrastructure, ecosystems, and social systems that provide essential benefits to communities. Future climate change is expected to further disrupt many areas of life, exacerbating existing challenges to prosperity posed by aging and deteriorating infrastructure, stressed ecosystems, and economic inequality. Impacts within and across regions will not be distributed equally. People who are already vulnerable, including lower-income and other marginalized communities, have lower capacity to prepare for and cope with extreme weather and climate-related events and are expected to experience greater impacts. Prioritizing adaptation actions for the most vulnerable populations would contribute to a more equitable future within and across communities. Global action to significantly cut greenhouse gas emissions can substantially reduce climate-related risks and increase opportunities for these populations in the longer term."

Fourth National Climate Assessment

It can also good to note that the report I’m quoting from is a scientific report from the federal government under Donald Trump. So, the Trump administration could have stopped the report or at least come with their own scientific rebuttal if there were any scientific errors in the report. Something the Trump administration haven’t done.

 

[longview]

You are correct that you don’t know that the argument is from deniers. Because just on this forum you have posters that claim that there will be global cooling. While other deniers acknowledge global warming but claim it is because of natural factors not C02. You also have posters that acknowledge manmade global from C02 but claim it will not be that bad. While other deniers claim that you can’t measure global temperatures.

That the only thing deniers seem to agree on is not to agree with the scientific consensus that there is an urgent need to act on manmade global from C02.

Please state what you think the scientific consensus is agreeing to?

 

[Bergslagstroll]

Re: A Huge Climate Change Movement Led By Teenage Girls Is Sweeping Europe. And It’s Coming To The U

Thousand of students are planning to strike this friday in the UK.

"The school climate strikes that have led to tens of thousands of young people taking to the streets around the world over recent months are poised to arrive in the UK next Friday.

Thousands of pupils are expected to walk out of lessons at schools and colleges across the country amid growing concern about the escalating climate crisis.

The movement started in August when the 16-year-old schoolgirl Greta Thunberg held a solo protest outside Sweden’s parliament. Now, up to 70,000 schoolchildren each week are taking part in 270 towns and cities worldwide."

UK pupils to join global strike over climate change crisis | Environment | The Guardian

Another positive example of change is that UK plan to open the world's biggest offshore windfarm this year, that will provide power for one million homes.

Biggest offshore windfarm to start UK supply this week | Environment | The Guardian

 

[Bergslagstroll]

Please state what you think the scientific consensus is agreeing to?

NASA, a federal agency under Donald Trump, have a good summary.

"Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources."

Scientific Consensus | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

You also for example have the The Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C from the IPCC with more than 6,000 scientific references published last year.

"Incheon, Republic of Korea, October 8 – Limiting global warming to 1.5°C would require rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society, the IPCC said in a new assessment. With clear benefits to people and natural ecosystems, limiting global warming to 1.5°C compared to 2°C could go hand in hand with ensuring a more sustainable and equitable society, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said on Monday.

The Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C was approved by the IPCC on Saturday in Incheon, Republic of Korea. It will be a key scientific input into the Katowice Climate Change Conference in Poland in December, when governments review the Paris Agreement to tackle climate change.

“With more than 6,000 scientific references cited and the dedicated contribution of thousands of expert and government reviewers worldwide, this important report testifies to the breadth and policy relevance of the IPCC,” said Hoesung Lee, Chair of the IPCC."


Summary for Policymakers of IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5degC approved by governments — IPCC

 

[Lord of Planar]

I think it was revealed that Al Gore has a heated pool at one of his homes in California and keeps it running all year round. Which ends up costing twice as much as a usual house runs in the same time.

I'll look for the article, because it's been a while.

What Al Gore doesn't get, is we don't care if he chooses to use for and pay for more power. We care about his F'n hypocrisy. He tells us we have to change our ways, but refuses to do the same. What ever his actual motivation is behind it, doesn't matter. The hypocrisy alone places him squarely in the evil scum bucket.

 

[Lord of Planar]

They're upset because they don't know where Santa Claus will live without the snow. :lol:

Or maybe the snowflakes think they will melt with more CO2.

 

[longview]

NASA, a federal agency under Donald Trump, have a good summary.

"Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources."

Scientific Consensus | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

You also for example have the The Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C from the IPCC with more than 6,000 scientific references published last year.

"Incheon, Republic of Korea, October 8 – Limiting global warming to 1.5°C would require rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society, the IPCC said in a new assessment. With clear benefits to people and natural ecosystems, limiting global warming to 1.5°C compared to 2°C could go hand in hand with ensuring a more sustainable and equitable society, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said on Monday.

The Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C was approved by the IPCC on Saturday in Incheon, Republic of Korea. It will be a key scientific input into the Katowice Climate Change Conference in Poland in December, when governments review the Paris Agreement to tackle climate change.

“With more than 6,000 scientific references cited and the dedicated contribution of thousands of expert and government reviewers worldwide, this important report testifies to the breadth and policy relevance of the IPCC,” said Hoesung Lee, Chair of the IPCC."


Summary for Policymakers of IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5degC approved by governments — IPCC

I will place in Bold the core of the statement,
"Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources."
So the consensus is that warming over the last century is likely due to Human activity!
Not really a strong statement.

 

[bubbabgone]

Re: A Huge Climate Change Movement Led By Teenage Girls Is Sweeping Europe.

73 percent of Americans acknowledge that manmade global warming is happening, and 62 percent of Americans acknowledge that humans are the primary cause of warming.

...

It can also good to note that the report I’m quoting from is a scientific report from the federal government under Donald Trump. So, the Trump administration could have stopped the report or at least come with their own scientific rebuttal if there were any scientific errors in the report. Something the Trump administration haven’t done.

A couple of comments:
1) those 62 percenters don't know any more about climate change than you do because they're exposed only to the same daily claptrap you are and you think there's a really a consensus.
2) regarding that 4th annual report you mentioned that came out while Trump is President ...

- Climate expert Dr. Roger Pielke Jr.: The claim of economic damage from climate change is based on a 15 degree F temp increase that is double the "most extreme value reported elsewhere in the report."
The "sole editor" of this claim in the report was an alumni of the Center for American Progress, which is also funded by Tom Styer."
- Climate analyst Paul Homewood: ‘Cherry picks’ a few bad weather events…extrapolates using the most scary scenarios’
- Climatologist Dr. Pat Michaels on the report: ‘Systematically flawed’ – Report ‘should be shelved’
- Trump v. Trump?!: Dr. Ken Haapala: 'The global warming chorus immediately seized on the new USGCRP report claiming the Trump administration is contradicting President Trump’s claims about global
warming. Amusingly, some of the chorus interviewed people who worked on the USGCRP, who were political appointees under the Obama Administration.'
- Greenpeace co-founder Dr. Patrick Moore: "The science must be addressed head-on. If POTUS has his reasons for letting this Obama-era committee continue to peddle tripe I wish he would tell us what
they are."
- Dr. John Dunn: "Two years into the Trump administration it is sad to see this 400-page pile of crap."
- Climate Depot's Morano: "It is a political report masquerading as science. The media is hyping a rehash of frightening climate change claims by Obama administration holdover activist government
scientists. The new report is once again pre-determined science. The National Climate Assessment report reads like a press release from environmental pressure groups — because it is! Two key authors
are longtime Union of Concerned Scientist activists, Donald Wuebbles and Katharine Hayhoe.
- The new book, The Politically Incorrect Guide To Climate Change: MIT climate scientist Richard Lindzen wrote of the National Academy of Sciences: "Regardless of evidence the answer is predetermined. If
the government wants carbon control, that is the answer that the Academies will provide."
Scientists rip new federal climate report as ‘tripe’ – ’embarrassing’ – ‘systematically flawed’ – Key claim based on study funded by Steyer & Bloomberg | Climate Depot
​

 

[Lord of Planar]

Scientists just discovered that antarica was a troplical forest at one point.
the CO2 was at 1k ppm.

forest and animals etc thrived in such conditions.
I have yet to see anything that says we cannot return to that point in time.

Yes, but keep in mind, this was during the Eoscene, more than 50 million years ago. The earth was near it's final stages of cooling from intense tectonic changes. Not from radiation balances.

they are like OMG we are at 450 ppm we are all going to die.

I see them as Charlatans.

umm well what happened when co2 levels were at 1k ppm?
nothing catastrophic occured.

Fantastic crops as long as the soil has the nutrients for the extra growth. If the studies are correct that say we humans tend to have a diminished thinking capacity starting at 600 ppm, then this may cause problems. However, I am optimistic that we will adjust over time, as it is a gradual change. These studies are taken in office environments, where there could tactically be other factors in play. I mean really... Who functions well in a sterile cubical environment... I haven't thought too much about this aspect, but if anything is real about CO2 increasing, it is related to how it affect's our body chemistry, and the body chemistry of other life on the planet.

then something more than likely that effect triggered a huge long ice age.
probably caused by a massive polar vortex.

I'm not sure that the orbital cycles trigger these changes as thought. I will not be arrogant and say they don't. I'm just skeptical about it. We simply do not know. It is another untested hypothesis. The flood in Noah's time in my humble opinion, was most likely a large comet that came so close to the earth, it scrapped the outer atmosphere, slowed down, and lost all it's ice as it melted over several weeks.

I know people will cry "Christian fool," but I am far from that. The closest religious term that fits me is agnostic. Other cultures at the time have recorded the flood too.

the heat we can deal with. a frozen planet not so much.
we need to prepare because there is nothing that says it can't happen again.

I don't thing and average of as much as 6 degrees either way would matter so much. I like the extra CO2 because plant life relies on it. Give me 800 to 1,000 ppm and I will not complain.

hydroponic farming is going to be a must in order to keep up with food demand.
although i expect massive loss of life due to that extreme cold factor.

Maybe, but not necessarily.

I saw something one of the Asian cultures were doing. I forget if it was the Chinese, Japanese, or some other culture. They are doing something similar to hydroponics, but instead of chemicals, the have the roots of plants inside of large aquariums. The waste of fish is being used to provide the nutrients in the water.

 

[bubbabgone]

...

Summary for Policymakers of IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5degC approved by governments — IPCC

How much do you know about how the SPM (Summary for PolicyMakers) operates?
It's sham. It's loaded with and essentially written by Government appointees for their bosses.
At least the Governments recommend actual scientists to the Working Groups. Although those scientists come with alarmist baggage in tow. Like many science publications and web outfits, the IPCC is all very incestuous.
And regarding the SPM ...

The Working Group II Summary for Policymakers
has been criticized for various errors and for emphasizing
the negative impacts of climate change. These
problems derive partly from a failure to adhere to
IPCC’s uncertainty guidance for the fourth assessment
and partly from shortcomings in the guidance
itself. Authors were urged to consider the amount of
evidence and level of agreement about all conclusions
and to apply subjective probabilities of confidence to
conclusions when there was high agreement and much evidence.
However, authors
reported high confidence in some statements for
which there is little evidence. Furthermore, by
making vague statements that were difficult to
refute, authors were able to attach ‘high confidence’
to the statements. The Working Group II Summary
for Policymakers contains many such statements
that are not supported sufficiently in the literature,
not put into perspective, or not expressed clearly.
When statements are well-defined and supported by
evidence—by indicating when and under what
climate conditions they would occur—the likelihood
scale should be used.
Recommendation: Quantitative probabilities (as in
the likelihood scale) should be used to describe the
probability of well-defined outcomes only when
there is sufficient evidence. Authors should indicate
the basis for assigning a probability to an outcome or
event (e.g., based on measurement, expert judgment, and/or model runs).
http://reviewipcc.interacademycouncil.net/report/Executive Summary and Front Matter.pdf
​

 

[Lord of Planar]

I always compared Dems to teenage girls at a One Direction concert in regards to Obama. So the Dems and teenage girls seem a perfect match.

#GUFFAW

My two teenage daughters made plenty of mistakes. Most the time I let them do so. I believe giving enough rope to hand one self. They have learned that I have given them sound advice, and did not turn into the rebellions types.

Oh... They are both in their 30's and I finally have a granddaughter that will be two in a couple weeks. Neither of them F'd their lives up.