Ach, he'll already be well known in the Aberdeen dosshouses, Aka

Meanwhile, back to Lil Miss Greeta ...

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/09/the-apotheosis-of-st-greta/
.
‘You have stolen my dreams and my childhood with your empty words’ is perhaps the whitest thing anyone has ever said at the UN. What is the correct answer? Is it (a) Go to your room? Or is it (b) Forgive me, to make it up you, Daddy and I are going to set the entire course of human civilisation on a new track?

The correct answer — if you want to see your name in the Times or get a slot on CNN, and if you want to avoid getting mobbed by climate cultists — is of course, to apologise, mortify the flesh, shove tofu plugs into your every orifice, hail Greta Thunberg as the most radical and relevant UN debutante since Yasser Arafat, and then praise the pigtailed prophet of planetary paranoia for ‘staring down’ the dark emperor of pollution, Donald Trump.

The emissions you can smell aren’t carbon, but methane. If you watch the footage, Greta leans forward excitedly at Trump’s approach. It’s almost as if she’s expecting he’ll do the same as every other leader, and seek her blessing, like the MPs who declared a ‘climate emergency’ for her, or Jean-Claude Juncker, the unelected president of the EU, who made a show of kissing her hand when she came to pour brimstone on Brussels. But Trump keeps going, completely oblivious, and obviously with more important things to do than to kiss her ring.

How can you stare down someone who doesn’t even know you’re there? Magical powers. The acclamation of Greta Thunberg is as profoundly irrational as the millenarian cult of purgation and redemption that she advocates — puritan in its authoritarian demands, lascivious in its sensitivity to pain. The intrusion of this kind of sub-religious foolishness into politics is always a bad sign. It shows that we are in an environmental crisis, and that the world is coming to an end. But which environment, and which world?

The environment that is dying is the liberal democratic order in which we live. The world that is coming to an end is political: the post-1945 order, led by the United States. The form of Great Thunberg’s protest is familiar to any student of medieval Europe, the civilisation that produced the Children’s Crusade and Joan of Arc. The content of her protest is a deliquescence of Protestantism into narcissistic terror.

‘We are in the beginning of a mass extinction and all you can talk about is money and fairytales of eternal economic growth,’ says Greta. She was five years old when the wheels came off the European economy in 2008, and stole the dreams of a generation. The Swedes, like most other Europeans, have given up on procreation. Their demography is sustained by massive immigration which, their leaders tell them, is necessary in order to maintain the tax base and the welfare system.

Environmentalism is for rich white people, and so is life without religion. ‘The eyes of all future generations are upon you,’ Greta threatens. ‘And if you choose to fail us, I say we will never forgive you.’ This is prophetic, and pathetic too, in its faithless Lutheranism and reverse predestination.

The visionary child speaks on behalf of every unborn generation. She knows what the future will say, and who will be saved and who will be damned in memory. If only she could apply it to something useful, like prognosticating the result of the Kentucky Derby and using the proceeds to build a vast geodetic dome so that the elect could survive in a benign microclimate while the sinners wheel their recycling bins to the lip of the burning pit, then climb in and tip themselves into the flames.

‘You come to us young people for hope? How dare you!’ Greta says, as if she’s reading Nietzsche on her boat trip cross the Atlantic. This anger is as close as she gets to the morbid heart of the environmental sub-religion. But the people she cites are explicit that economic growth must be stopped, and population growth too. No air-conditioners for the Indians, no children for the Africans. Hence Bernie Sanders’ semi-senile admission that the ‘saving’ of the planet on terms amenable to wealthy white lefties will require population control — in effect, a global programme for the sterilisation of non-white women. Greta, of course, doesn’t talk about the dirty stuff.

An earlier angry Euroteen, Fred Nietzsche, noticed that there is always something filthy and furtive about a prophet. ‘Whenever on earth the religious neurosis has appeared,’ Nietzsche wrote in Beyond Good and Evil (1886), ‘we find it tied to three dangerous dietary demands: solitude, fasting and sexual abstinence’. Greta came to New York in the ostentatious solitude of a racing yacht. In her auto-hagiography, she describes how she stunted her growth by starving herself. She is a child bride, betrothed to the earth as in some tedious Nordic saga.

‘What was eccentric and sick in his nature,’ Nietzsche wrote of his prophet, ‘with its fusion of spiritual poverty, faulty knowledge, spoilt health and overexcited nerves remained concealed from his own eyes and from the eyes of those who looked at him. He was not an especially good person, even less an especially wise person, but he signified something that exceeded all human measure of goodness and wisdom.’

A culture without purpose seizes on a false prophet because she signifies a faith that it has lost. This is why the cult of St Greta attracts converts in the affluent classes of western Europe and North America. American pollution and carbon emissions have been falling for decades, and the majority of the world’s pollution and carbon emissions come from India and China, but the stations of her martyrdom are in Stockholm, London and New York. Not just because the Chinese police would make short work of her and her PR handlers if they tried any nonsense near the Great Hall of the People, but because this daft circus only means something in the decaying West.

As with all apocalyptic visions, the sure way to turn them from warnings to realities is to follow their prescriptions. If Western governments commit themselves to zero-growth economies and demographic wastage, they’ll quickly collapse beneath the twin challenges of Asian economies and mass migration. Our environments will be ruined and our world ended — just like Greta said. It would take a heart of unmelted ice not to laugh.

It is Islington trendy. Picture of single Polar bear floating about on a sliver of melting ice -- the symbol suggests it when that melts it is all over for the bear. (but they swim very successfully.  Bear population down to 20,000 - etc

How did that turn out?

population now up to 55,000 plus.

odd isn't it  - what other propaganda will decent hard working folk have shoved in their faces  when at leisure.

ps there was an austrian who used to go around europe religiously spouting guilt laden  rhetoric to the masses - drowning out facts or common sense - telling lie after lie and blaming others and specific groups.   He  got a messianic following -  now what was his name?

Get the poor manipulated girl away from the public glare and charge the parents with child cruelty.

https://kurtnimmo.blog/2019/09/25/greta-thunberg-fake-as-the-climate-change-hoax/
.
Good read, including - 16-year-old Greta Thunberg’s emotional accusations about climate change went viral on the internet and social media. The event was as staged and choreographed in a similar fashion to Nayirah’s testimony. Instead of tears, young Greta played the victim.

Naturally, the corporate propaganda media turned the teenage actress into a hero.

That’s right. This girl is an actress, so she has experience reading from scripts and pretending to be something she is not.



Plant-for-the-Planet is a globalist effort to brainwash highly susceptible children and mould them into intolerant activists, not unlike the character portrayed by little Greta Thunberg, method-acting angry at adults for destroying her future.

Here’s the backstory on Plant-for-the-Planet. It is “partnered” with the Avina Foundation, the Club of Rome, and the Global Marshall Plan. Avina is funded by the Rockefeller Foundation, while the Club of Rome, a cabal of the global elite and corporatists, published The Limits to Growth in 1972.

The report, funded by the Volkswagen Foundation, argues in favour of population control and rolling back civilization to save the planet. The Club of Rome was founded in 1968 “during a meeting at Rockefeller’s private house in Bellagio, Italy. The meeting was organized by Aurelio Peccei, an Italian industrialist who had close relations to the Olivetti Corporation and Fiat. He claimed to have solutions for world peace and prosperity, which could be accomplished through a New World Order,” writes Derek Willis.

The Club of Rome was established with 75 prominent industrialists, economists and scientists members from 25 nations. The Bilderberg Group and the Club of Rome are the most important foreign policy arms of the Round table, which is led by the Committee of 300… Many of the Club of Rome members were drawn from NATO.”

More recently, the organization published The Club of Rome: Climate Emergency Plan, based on dubious climate science produced by the UN’s IPCC. It calls for population reduction and the impoverishment of billions—the organization argues economic growth shouldn’t exceed 1%—an effort led by “governments, business leaders, the science community, NGOs and citizens” to dismantle civilization. 

The German Marshall Fund is a “transatlantic” organization established in 1972 on the 25th anniversary of the Marshall Plan. It is also pushing hard on the climate change scheme to force draconian measures on the civilized world. Much of Europe has agreed western civilization must be rolled back if the planet is to be saved.

The global elite and its cronies are now pulling out all stops to force the climate agenda down our throats—and there is no better way to do that than to exploit children.

Havn’t we realised yet that Greta Thurnberg with her secondary school education knows far more than NASA with its army of Phd Scientists, who have observed that it is changes in the solar orbit of the Earth along with alterations to it’s axial tilt, that are responsible for ‘climate change’ and not Co2 levels.

Perhaps her secondary education far outstrips that of Serbian Astrophysicist Milutin Milankovitch, who proposed about how the seasonal and latitudinal variations of solar radiation that hit the Earth in different ways, and at different times, have the greatest impact on Earth’s changing climatic patterns, who’s comprehensive mathematical model proved it.

A study of Milankovitch’s model was published in the journal ‘Science’ back in 1976, confirming it was accurate, and in 1982 adopted by the National Research council of the US National Academy of Sciences, as a truth, declaring that ‘orbital variations remain the most thoroughly examined mechanism of climate change on time scales of tens of thousands of years, and are by far the clearest case of a direct effect of changing insolation on the lower atmosphere of Earth’.

Of course Greta Thurnberg with her secondary school education knows far more than any of these organisations and their Phd educated scientists, and that we should prepare to be obliterated by her own climatatic predictions.

I’ll be still here in 30 years time if 5g hasn’t given me cancer by then.

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=195562

uhm, trilby, mate...since "The Truth Seeker" mentioned NASA with its army of Phd [sic] Scientists [sic]

https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/

Carbon dioxide (CO2). A minor but very important component of the atmosphere, carbon dioxide is released through natural processes such as respiration and volcano eruptions and through human activities such as deforestation, land use changes, and burning fossil fuels. Humans have increased atmospheric CO2 concentration by more than a third since the Industrial Revolution began. This is the most important long-lived "forcing" of climate change.

The Role of Human Activity
In its Fifth Assessment Report, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a group of 1,300 independent scientific experts from countries all over the world under the auspices of the United Nations, concluded there's a more than 95 percent probability that human activities over the past 50 years have warmed our planet.

The industrial activities that our modern civilization depends upon have raised atmospheric carbon dioxide levels from 280 parts per million to 400 parts per million in the last 150 years. The panel also concluded there's a better than 95 percent probability that human-produced greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide have caused much of the observed increase in Earth's temperatures over the past 50 years.

*making fun

I made it as far as one whole minute in.  Yup, good comparison, Bapster!

About
Kurt Nimmo has blogged on political issues since 2002. In 2008, he worked as lead editor and writer at Infowars, and is currently a content producer for Newsbud.

Why am I not surprised by that?

that, plus his work was about far longer periods anyway.

maybe so, Charlie but people often refer to Einstein Newton Tesla etc when using data

People (scientists) obviously refer to previous scientists' laws, equations, theories, hypothesis, etc but they don't rely on their data as there is more accurate data available now.

More accurate with the proviso that you can measure now what you could measure then.

Thank you.

From your Wiki link: At NASA, in their edition of "On the Shoulders of Giants", Milanković has been ranked among the top fifteen minds of all time in the field of earth sciences.[38]

Praise indeed.

Not all edy. I seriously dislike sites like that which detract from the often brilliant work done by scientists and then twist it to try and fit their warped agenda.

TBF the initial strike did gain a lot of attention for the issue but its going too far now.
Especially with banners proclaiming 'How Dare You'. Encouraging children to be rude. Shocking.

No comparison to when the Football Lads and such groups roam.

Yes but an obvious one at that, lacks subtlety.

Oh sorry, you mean the plot or the clot?