Thunberg, the 16-year-old Swedish girl who is sweeping the whole world behind her in the fight against the climate crisis when she spoke at the climate conference held earlier this week in New York. We bring here the full text of her speech, from the UN television
"My generation is the one that will have to bear the consequences." This is what Greta Thunberg, the 16-year-old Swedish girl who is sweeping the whole world behind her in the fight against the climate crisis, warned when she spoke at the climate conference held earlier this week in New York. We present here the full text of her speech, from the UN television:
The moderator opened by asking Thunberg what her message was to the participants of the climate conference and Thunberg answered: "My message is that we are watching you."
"This is wrong. I shouldn't have been here. I should have been at school on the other side of the ocean but you come to us, the young people and take away our hope. how dare you You stole my dreams, my childhood with your empty words. People are suffering, people are dying, entire ecosystems are collapsing and we are at the beginning of a mass extinction, and all you can talk about is money and fairy tales of eternal economic growth? How dare you?"
"For over thirty years, science has been helping us understand the situation clearly. How do you continue to look away and say that you are doing enough when the political solutions are still not in sight. You say you hear us and that you understand the urgency, but no matter how sad and angry I get, I don't want to believe that you really understand the situation and still fail to act, it will be bad. "
"I refuse to believe the popular idea of cutting emissions in half within ten years, this gives us a fifty percent chance of stopping a temperature rise of one and a half degrees. There is a risk of starting a chain of irreversible processes that will be beyond human control. Maybe a 50% chance is good enough for you, but we may reach a situation where the feedback loops will cause additional warming to occur that is currently hidden within the air pollution. The prospect of equality and climate justice will have to rely on a solution of my generation. You suggest that my generation will pump out hundreds of billions of tons of carbon dioxide with technologies that barely exist. 50 percent risk is unacceptable to us, the ones we will have to bear the consequences."
"In order to increase to a 67 percent chance of staying below the rise of the global temperature by a degree and a half, the best thing to do is to lower the limit set by the IPCC from 420 gigatons of carbon, to 350. How dare you say that it is enough to do this in a situation of business as usual and few technological solutions with today's levels. This means that the remaining carbon budget will run out in less than eight and a half years, and until then there will be no technological solutions. These numbers are too convenient and you are still not mature enough to admit that you fail to understand your betrayal. The eyes of future generations are watching you, and if you choose to fail, we will never forgive you. We will never let you get away. Here and now is the time and place where we draw the line. The world is waking up and change will come whether you like it or not."
More of the topic in Hayadan:
14 תגובות
Father, give you more credit than you give yourself. After all, you have already read at least two or three articles in your life and you probably know that not every article is "worth reading". You also know that articles, like trees in the forest, do not say anything about the forest and its "causes" but give a narrow description of an observation of it. I am not taking sides here, but only commenting, as someone who has read dozens or hundreds of articles and books on the subject, and one should be really careful with sweeping statements and predicting the future in such a complex system.
It is also easier and more comfortable for me to grasp the attitude that puts the blame on us, at the same time, as a student of my teachers who taught me to do "good science", I recommend, first to myself, to be really careful with statements that are sometimes populist and sweeping.
As for Greta, she is charming and compelling but represents a dangerous trend of making statements that are not backed up by deep knowledge and evidence.
Shabbat Shalom
Well, they continue to have their say every day in countless new scientific articles.
Avi Blizovsky
The "scientists" did not say their word. There is no such thing in science as "they have said their word" because "the word of the day" is not permanent and eternal. When it comes to such short periods of change (the mid-seventies until today) nobody really has the faintest idea as to the causes, let alone the results. When I submitted my thesis on this very subject in 2004, the professors laughed at me because the results showed an "unreasonable" jump in the rate of atmospheric warming and "craziness" over Antarctica. We claimed at the time that there was a flaw in the measurement of the satellites, that the grid was placed incorrectly and that the interpretation was wrong. Two years later Al Gore's film came out and suddenly I was called to give a lecture on the thesis at a conference. At that time, a counter-current also appeared to him, represented in Israel by Professor Nir Shabiv, who argued for a completely different causality than that of the "human factor". Cyclical changes in the temperature of the sun's surface.
To this day I have no idea (actually have a feeling) as to the question "who is right". I have a deep knowledge that even if we are only responsible for 1% of the increase in the rate of warming, we are 100% responsible for it.
If I were you I would be careful with interpretation and extrapolation. We do not know enough and despite our tendency to inflate our power we are but dust in the planetary wind. Nothing will happen if we become extinct and become extinct, we are in the blink of an eye insignificant and meaning beyond the one we give ourselves. Even if tomorrow morning we turn dark green we are still on borrowed time like any living species that has existed and will exist. We are on the Titanic in one direction... to the iceberg.
We ask the wrong and least significant questions. The question is not if but when and more than that...how. If we want a single true solution the answer is Thanos' answer in the movie "The Avengers". Voluntary dilution of about half of ourselves. The painful way is infection, diseases, murder, wars and holocausts... the other way is a conscious decision to reduce/stop birth for a generation.
Any other ecological solution is nothing at all. Neither pollution nor greenhouse gases will kill us. The rationale for the transition to the use of renewable (green) energies is simple, in less than fifty years, at our current rate of growth, the fossil energy sources will run out and we will die of hunger, thirst and thirst, not heat. This is the sad truth. We will not die from condensate and benzene, we will die from lack of natural gas.
Someone here has already given you the second alternative solution... nuclear energy. This is the "right" energy for us. Bill Gates also thinks so (see the film about him chapter 3). I agree with him completely. The name of the future.
Greta is a presenter, not the owner of the solution. As such it has importance, even if marginal. It is charming but less relevant to the matter of warming which is relatively marginal in our complex relationship with the planet.
A pleasant Shabbat.
It's a bit strange to suspect the vast majority of climate scientists who claim that man-made warming exists and does exist, in a conspiracy.
After all, in order to concoct such a complex conspiracy, you need to connect tens of thousands of people who, by the nature of their occupation, must be faithful to facts and reality. So Mila in the September 11 attacks, you can perhaps say that it was the government and in the moon landing NASA, here too it is a bit delusional but maybe it can somehow be coordinated and hidden.
But here we are talking about scientists from all over the world from different countries and organizations that are not related to each other. So how would they technically adapt the same conspiracy?
The facts are quite clear: there is a warming that started during the industrial revolution and has accelerated in the last decades. It may be possible to debate whether this is good or bad - Russia, which will allow Siberia and likewise northern sea lanes, is not exactly sorry for the warming, but to say that man-made warming does not exist is a bit far-fetched.
Lorem Ipossum, you are not a scientist. The scientists have had their say. Read the article I posted today regarding the need for a new economy.
In addition, to your previous request to bring all sides, I have prepared another article, to be published later this week, on the betrayal of the mass media.
Well, I probably shouldn't have brought the words of a British comedian and stand-up artist to this site. It is clear that his criticism of the politics of identities (expressed in the name of the channel) that pervades the global left at this time was not understood at all. The guys of identity politics are busy gagging white people (who should stand in the corner and think academically about their White supremacy) on the one hand, and at the same time accuse a black American political activist of being a race traitor, White supremacist, and of course as a fascist and a Nazi (derogatory epithets especially liked by the left at this time towards anyone who doesn't think like them) - and that was just a week ago in the American Congress.
In the second video I linked, he doesn't laugh at her, but mainly about her high-profile meeting with Jeremy Corbyn, about the hypocrisy and cynicism with which he used her for his propaganda purposes, and how he has no real interest in what message she might convey. In the first video I linked - well, when the true disorder and distress behind the quiet and introverted girl was revealed - the treatment he gave her may have been less gentle. Certainly his treatment was much less brutal than the treatment given to her by those who convinced her that the world was going to end in 12 years, and we would all die.
Personally, I'm not going to deny climate change - I'm not a scientist and I don't pretend to conduct research and find out how many scientists claim one way and how many say otherwise. Only the solutions seem completely ridiculous to me: to switch immediately to solar energy and wind turbines - it is a waste and a bad idea both from the feasibility point of view, also from the ecological point of view, both from the quality of life point of view and from the economic point of view. About the only solution for a large-scale reduction in CO2 emissions - beyond the utilization of nuclear energy - no one dares to speak or even, heaven forbid, try to promote the issue. If the situation was really serious - they would talk and start to convince that there is a safer technology for immediate use, and there is a very safe technology that is still in development.
In the meantime, I would like to see the young guys give up the smartphone and the internet, the air conditioning in the summer and most of the heating in the winter, the use of the private cars of father and mother, the transportation to school, the consumption of animal products and things grown within a radius of more than 50 km from home and consumption of products produced abroad. We all have to contribute our part, otherwise the earth will turn into a hot and sooty mass within 12 years.
The channel is called Grate White Man and apparently stupidity in one area leads to stupidity in other areas.
I didn't understand why he mocks her, he talks nonsense - he claims that there are scientists who claim that the weather is cyclical, etc. and claims that those who say the opposite get a lot of money. Only what, the situation is exactly the opposite. Check the funding sources of the few scientists (most of them are not climate scientists either) who claim that there is no warming problem.
Greta has the courage to say what others cannot or are afraid to say.
It is a fact that I have been writing about the climate crisis for twenty years and no one is doing anything about it.
I too thought that this was a cynical but not particularly harmful publicity stunt for the benefit of a certain political interest, until the last speech came in which it was clarified what kind of trauma the poor girl was under, and that indeed there should be some more responsible adults involved than her parents and a group of cynical politicians.
Greta's treatment starts at 5:30:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOhLO-7SHGw
(and also the section that breaks after it - at 13:00), and of course everything else.
And a bit of analysis on Thunberg's unfortunate situation:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJT5Je9JxGw
The welfare authorities should be involved and the adults who made this girl so hysterical and scared should be removed.
Someone should hug her and tell her that the world is not so bad, and when she grows up she can do her part to improve the carbon balance.
In the meantime, give her water to calm down from the hysteria and make the abusers laugh at her.
for pleasure She reads the science website
This is a media gimmick that uses a girl on the autistic spectrum as a presenter for the purpose. The issue of global warming is much more complex than such and such scientific reports. The solutions include damage to many industries and populations. The show is not suitable for this site.
What's right is right.
How does a 16-year-old girl understand so much?
alerting