• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Greta burns some major carbon, opps.

S

Simpletruther

Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
May 18, 2019
Messages
19,651
Reaction score
3,715
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Good lord are these attempts to attack people who do not arrogantly deny AGW from their armchairs ever stupid and dishonest. A person pushing for policies that would effect themselves along with everyone else isn't a hypocrite for not acting as if all the policies they push for already exist.



If you have to address groups in various parts of the world, you're going to generally have to travel there. Nobody is a hypocrite and nothing about AGW is undermined if such a person has to use carbon to travel because duh.

This thread is just as idiotic as when some liar claims that someone who thinks we should pay higher tax rates so we aren't borrowing a trillion a year is a hypocrite if they don't try to voluntarily pay a higher rate then they have to.

It bears repeating: A person pushing for policies that would effect themselves along with everyone else isn't a hypocrite for not acting as if all the policies they push for already exist.
 

ROFLMAO. The major upset of the far right by a 16 year old Swedish school girl in pigtails is just another example of who lame they are as a group.

 

Bernie Sanders and Greta Thunberg are hypocrites for not walking and/or swimming everywhere like Jesus would have. Jesus would have advocated for clean energy AND walked from town to town preaching the gospel. That's how it's done.
 
Winston said:
Bernie Sanders and Greta Thunberg are hypocrites for not walking and/or swimming everywhere like Jesus would have. Jesus would have advocated for clean energy AND walked from town to town preaching the gospel. That's how it's done.
Click to expand...

Bernie, yes. A 16 year old Swedish school girl? Not so much.
 

A prefer a more gentle tone, but I try to comply to posters such as yourself that offer a more blunt dialogue.

Good grief are these liberal replies stupid and dishonest.

Yes there is this new technology called telephone you don’t seem familiar. And even new fancy tv phones that show your faces if one is so vein to need their face seen. You might want to look into that. And yes one doesn’t have to wait for a “policy” to live out their ideals themselves and be an example, what pathetic bankrupt shilling for these rank hypocrites.

And no, I didn’t deny global warming, just more dishonesty (it’s piling up now).
 
Another idiotic "person who fights for good policies flew on a plane" article, I presume.

People who fight for policies to destroy the environment, by attacking people who push for better policies with logical fallacies and ad hominem attacks.
 

This is why it's straight-up child abuse for the leftists to use Greta and have her do their bidding. Any adult with a functioning brain would know that if she just got on a damn commercial flight, it would be less carbon than transporting her via boat or whatever vessel, when there's a crew which needs to get back and forth.
 
trouble13 said:
Were there no sailboats available?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

A better question is, does she not have skype? Or some equivalent app to conference call?

But then it’s not as fun to get to travel and show off and feel good about yourself st the same time.
 
Winston said:
Bernie Sanders and Greta Thunberg are hypocrites for not walking and/or swimming everywhere like Jesus would have. Jesus would have advocated for clean energy AND walked from town to town preaching the gospel. That's how it's done.
Click to expand...

I think it was Ghandi who said, “Be the change you want to see in the world.” I won’t be taking any lectures in plane travel from a child who sailed here and back in a multi-million dollar yacht leant to her by the Prince of Monaco and flew in professional yacht racers to do it.
 
If she produces extra X amount of emissions to save Billion TIMES X, it's clearly worthwhile.

Only dummies would not understand that.
 
Simpletruther said:
A better question is, does she not have skype? Or some equivalent app to a conference call?

But then it’s not as fun to get to travel and show off and feel good about yourself st the same time.
Click to expand...

If she would have flown back to Europe you would have criticized, so instead, she took a sailboat. You would have criticized her if it was wood because trees would have been cut down to create it. Almost all boats over 25' and any boat that is going to cross the ocean has a diesel engine for both backup power and electrical generation when the PV cells aren't sufficient.
 
Mr Person said:
A person pushing for policies that would effect themselves along with everyone else isn't a hypocrite for not acting as if all the policies they push for already exist.
Click to expand...
Not always, but they are in this case.

If a "climate crusader" can't be bothered to mitigate their carbon consumption (or better still, not consume vastly more than the rest of us), why should I believe his concern is genuine or his demands are even reasonable?
 

Well I think the boat thing was for show, but come in. They should have factored in the opposition was going to run some numbers on this stunt and show it was just a gimmick.
 

No, just staying home and Skyping would have shown at least some common sense attempt to cut footprint. I don’t think that is nitpicking.
 
Simpletruther said:
Well I think the boat thing was for show, but come in. They should have factored in the opposition was going to run some numbers on this stunt and show it was just a gimmick.
Click to expand...

Of course. When you're older and more mature, you get on a commercial flight and say "deal with it". Instead, she's pulling these stupid stunts.
 
Slavister said:
If she produces extra X amount of emissions to save Billion TIMES X, it's clearly worthwhile.

Only dummies would not understand that.
Click to expand...

You are a tad optimistic in her power of persuasion.
 
Acadia said:
Of course. When you're older and more mature, you get on a commercial flight and say "deal with it". Instead, she's pulling these stupid stunts.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but it's likely some grownups were all in on this gimmick instead of giving good council.
 

I really wonder how anyone, like you, can believe they've come up with a killer gotcha when they say that stupid bull****.

What's the thought process?

"I know, if I say I won't accept AGW if any person that says I should accept it has to travel around the world to speak to various groups, they'll have to stop traveling around the world! And then, because they won't be traveling the world, they won't spread their message, so I'll still win! Mmmwwwwuuuhahahahaha!"




Some of the dumbest **** on Earth. Don't stain your mouth or our minds with such dishonest idiocy. A person advocating for a policy that affects everyone need not pretend as if that policy is in existence while they are its proponent, especially not if the policy has to do with emissions and you actually have to travel the world to say the things that you think will make it more likely for the message to get through.


Stupid

stupid

stupid

bitter dishonesty.
 

That’s a nice straw man you set up there. I didn’t say anything about believing in AGW. But who needs a child spewing carbon everywhere to scream at others for their carbon footprint and be another useless mouth restating the problem?
 




Did I make a booboo? Well, I don't tolerate foolishness well. Since you bring up hypocrisy, let's examine this:

Simpletruther said:
The ever present irony and hypocrisy of the alarmist is truly epic.
Click to expand...

Doesn't sound "gentle" to me, does it? Sounds more like douchebaggery, doesn't it?

:thinking





Your attempt to invent some special standard for people who unlike you do not deny AGW, which if honored would hamstring them in their attempts to spread their message simply doesn't work for anyone but those in your choir. And I'm afraid people just are not as stupid as you need them to be to accept that swill.

If a person needs to travel the world to address groups in person, that person will do what is needed. I'm sure you'd love it if Greta just sat at home and said nothing....or made podcasts nobody would listen to.... but apparently she's already outwitted you. The only people who are going to agree with your bull**** are AGW deniers.




Simpletruther said:
And no, I didn’t deny global warming
Click to expand...

Oh, of course not. Perish thought, sir, perish it indeed!

You "didn't deny" it, you just borrowed a hamfisted fake standard that if honored would result in nobody who accepts AGW traveling to speak to anybody else about it. Everyone else, for any other reason, will be allowed to travel under your genius plan. It's only the people who want to educate others about AGW who cannot travel under your plan. And you don't deny global warming because, what, you didn't say the exact words "I deny global warming"?

:lamo

Unfortunately for you, people are not as stupid as you need them to be for your dishonest swill to work.
 
Last edited:
Napoleon said:
That’s a nice straw man you set up there. I didn’t say anything about believing in AGW. But who needs a child spewing carbon everywhere to scream at others for their carbon footprint and be another useless mouth restating the problem?
Click to expand...

Ah, you see, the bolded was already addressed:


The only people who insist that someone who doesn't deny AGW not burn carbon when traveling the world intends that their message not be spread. If Greta honored the fake rule you invented for purpose of limiting her travel, she wouldn't travel. But the UN doesn't assemble to listen to a podcast. She has to actually go there to address them.

So yes, you are a denier. Don't bother continuing your dishonest "I didn't say 'quid pro quo' so there cannot have been a quid pro quo" defense. Nobody else will pretend that someone who wants to spread a message about AGW is not allowed to travel the world because carbon.

:lamo
 


These people are pathetic and desperate, they just throw out dumb defections because they got not fact, no intelligence, nothign to support their position. And they just regurgitate their marching orders.

People who want to reduce emissions do not have to live in the woods free of any energy to be for reducing emissions. But sadly, people like the OP have absolutely no argument so spouting idiotic deflections is all they have

Craig234 said:
Another idiotic "person who fights for good policies flew on a plane" article, I presume.

People who fight for policies to destroy the environment, by attacking people who push for better policies with logical fallacies and ad hominem attacks.
Click to expand...

logical fallacies and ad hominem attacks is pretty much all right wingers have
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…