St. Greta Says The Name ‘Climate Change’ Is Too Timid Or Something

It’s been awhile since we heard from St. Greta Of Stockholm. Nice to see she hasn’t given up on doom, as this is and edited extract from The Climate Book created by Greta Thunberg and to be published on 27 October

Greta Thunberg on the climate delusion: ‘We’ve been greenwashed out of our senses. It’s time to stand our ground’

st greta carMaybe it is the name that is the problem. Climate change. It doesn’t sound that bad. The word “change” resonates quite pleasantly in our restless world. No matter how fortunate we are, there is always room for the appealing possibility of improvement. Then there is the “climate” part. Again, it does not sound so bad. If you live in many of the high-emitting nations of the global north, the idea of a “changing climate” could well be interpreted as the very opposite of scary and dangerous. A changing world. A warming planet. What’s not to like?

Perhaps that is partly why so many people still think of climate change as a slow, linear and even rather harmless process. But the climate is not just changing. It is destabilising. It is breaking down. The delicately balanced natural patterns and cycles that are a vital part of the systems that sustain life on Earth are being disrupted, and the consequences could be catastrophic. Because there are negative tipping points, points of no return. And we do not know exactly when we might cross them. What we do know, however, is that they are getting awfully close, even the really big ones. Transformation often starts slowly, but then it begins to accelerate.

So, doom?

The German oceanographer and climatologist Stefan Rahmstorf writes: “We have enough ice on Earth to raise sea levels by 65 metres – about the height of a 20-storey building – and, at the end of the last ice age, sea levels rose by 120 metres as a result of about 5C of warming.” Taken together, these figures give us a perspective on the powers we are dealing with. Sea-level rise will not remain a question of centimetres for very long.

So, um, what caused that to happen? Bueller? And why is that different from today? Of course, most of that ice is nowhere near the oceans, and wouldn’t make it there. Anyhow, there’s more doom and gloom from St. Greta, moving to

Saving the world is voluntary. You could certainly argue against that statement from a moral point of view, but the fact remains: there are no laws or restrictions in place that will force anyone to take the necessary steps towards safeguarding our future living conditions on planet Earth. This is troublesome from many perspectives, not least because – as much as I hate to admit it – Beyoncé was wrong. It is not girls who run the world. It is run by politicians, corporations and financial interests – mainly represented by white, privileged, middle-aged, straight cis men. And it turns out most of them are terribly ill suited for the job. This may not come as a big surprise. After all, the purpose of a company is not to save the world – it is to make a profit. Or, rather, it is to make as much profit as it possibly can in order to keep shareholders and market interests happy.

This leaves us with our political leaders. They do have great opportunities to improve things, but it turns out that saving the world is not their main priority, either.

Sounds like she wants government to institute those restrictions. You know, the ones that most Warmists won’t voluntarily put in their own lives based on their beliefs.

We cannot live sustainably within today’s economic system. Yet that is what we are constantly being told we can do. We can buy sustainable cars, travel on sustainable motorways, powered by sustainable petroleum. We can eat sustainable meat and drink sustainable soft drinks out of sustainable plastic bottles. We can buy sustainable fast fashion and fly on sustainable aeroplanes using sustainable fuels. And, of course, we are going to meet our short- and long-term sustainable climate targets, too, without making the slightest effort.

So, what economic system does she want? Maybe the full book will say. Not that I’ll read it. It will be very silly.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

14 Responses to “St. Greta Says The Name ‘Climate Change’ Is Too Timid Or Something”

  1. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    “Senator” Tommy Tubberville (D-1890) claimed Dems are NOT ‘soft on crime’ but are ‘pro-crime’, seeking reparations for the criminals -“bullshit!”, he bellowed. “They” (Blacks) want what you got”!

    As we’ve said many times, the crux of the nuGOP every election year is that violent Negroes are coming for your stuff and your women; only a strong white Republican will protect you from the violent Negroes (or killer Muslims or rapist Mexicans).

    Of course, “Senator” Tumorville and nuGOPhers ignore that the victims of crime are mostly Black women, men and children, not suburban whites.

    It is nuCons benefiting from ‘inner city crime’, which is why they support the conditions that promote it! Tax cuts for the wealthy!! Service cuts for the poor!! Hate, hate, hate!!

    • L'Roy White says:

      You get 4 dowds for that stupid spiel.

      As we’ve said many times, the crux of the nuGOP every election year is

      Yes, you have said that many times and it’s still a left wing lie. Your party releases criminals, even pays their bail, then when they recommit you blame Republicans? 4 more dowds for you. Stop lying. And who are these criminals? White?

      “nuGOPhers ignore that the victims of crime are mostly Black women, men and children, not suburban whites.”

      Is that because blacks commit more crime among black victims or do you believe White people drive down to the democommie ghettos every day/night and commit crimes against blacks? I can personally vouch that the people in the ghetto committing crimes are blacks. Men and boys mostly. Without fathers since abortion and welfare has made fathers irrelevant. The GOP didn’t do that, YOU DID. You murder our babies, you incarcerate our men and boys, you create dependence on hand outs among our women, you destroy our families and then you blame Republicans? LIAR!

      It is nuCons benefiting from ‘inner city crime’, which is why they support the conditions that promote it! Tax cuts for the wealthy!! Service cuts for the poor!! Hate, hate, hate!!

      4 more dowds. Ya gotta stop lying. Or are you just repeating the propaganda that’s been beaten into your little brain since childhood? How does anyone other than democommies benefit from the policies of democommies? You created the ghettos, filled them with welfare blacks and resisted every effort to get them off the dole for the last 70 years and still try to blame others? You are insane.
      Plus, nobody with an IQ over 70 believes your tax cut BS any more. That’s the same old shit. Try something new. And when has “service for the poor” ever been cut? Are the poor better cared for today or when? We even sent “the poor” to havens like Martha’s Vineyard but the selfish hateful democommies there threw them out. THREW THEM OUT! My gaia why would you heartless dogs throw out the poor after you spent trillions of our money to create them?

      You privileged white leftist democommies surely have a twisted sense of truth, fairness and morality. You all love black people as long as we stay in our ghetto and believe exactly what you tell us to believe. But the minute one goes off your plantation you try to figuratively hang him. (Thankfully since you democommies used to literally lynch us).

      Are you going to steal the midterm too or just have insurrections when you loose?

      Overall you get 4 dowds for lying.

    • James Lewis says:

      Dear Elwood:

      Two things.

      Look at the FBI statistics.’

      Your comment has nothing to do with “climate change.” It is an obvious attempt to change the subject.

      • Elwood P. Dowd says:


        My apologies. I intended the comment for another topic.

        Regarding the FBI statistics. Can you point out the data that refutes, even in part, my point?

        My point: The GOP instills fear of Black criminals in their white base.

        • James Lewis says:

          Dear Elwood:

          You haven’t shown a source for what Tuberville supposedly said. Let me help you.

          “US Senator Tommy Tuberville said on Saturday that Democrats are in favor of “compensation” because they are “pro-crime”.

          Tuberville, R-Ala. made the remarks at a rally hosted by former President Donald Trump in Nevada.

          “They want compensation because they think those who commit crimes are owed them,” Tuberville said as the crowd cheered after him. “Nonsense!” He added.”

          His subject was Democrats, not blacks per se.

          You write, “Of course, “Senator” Tumorville and nuGOPhers ignore that the victims of crime are mostly Black women, men and children, not suburban whites.”

          What Tuberville said was, ““We’re going to get inflation under control, and we’re going to stop this damn crime.”

          There is absolutely no reference to race.

          A review of the FBI statistics show that blacks, who are about 13% of the population commit around 50% of the felonies. Since the majority of crimes are committed in high crime areas, populated by a majority of blacks, it should be no surprise that blacks are the majority of the victims.

          Are you against stopping crime and protecting blacks from black on black crime???

  2. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    St. Teach of Raleigh typed:

    “Of course, most of that ice is nowhere near the oceans, and wouldn’t make it there.”

    That is likely the most stupid sentence typed in history. Other contenders:

    “The spork is the devil’s utensil because it’s the amalgamation of masculine fork and feminine spoon, trying to blur gender lines in society.”

    “I don’t want to swim in the ocean because I might get pregnant by a sperm whale.”

    “Adam and Eve were white because I seen their pictures.”

    And of course,

    “The election was stolen!”

    • L.G.Brandon!, L.G.Brandon! says:

      Don’t forget the guy who spent a year in his basement got
      “81 million votes, more than any human in history”.

      See, you make stupid statements too.


      • Elwood P. Dowd says:

        Luther typed: Don’t forget the guy who spent a year in his basement got
        “81 million votes, more than any human in history.”

        Has someone received more than 81 million votes? Do you have proof? You don’t believe that President Brandon won the election? That’s why we said the statement, “The election was stolen!”, was another stupid statement.

        See, you make stupid statements too!

        Anyone who actually still believes, “The election was stolen!”, is suffering from delusions.

        • L.G.Brandon!, L.G.Brandon! says:

          At this point, if you don’t believe the election was stolen, with the hiding of Hunter’s laptop alone and FBI agents working for pedo then you are the stupidest commenter here. Period.

          Do you have proof? You don’t believe that President Brandon won the election?

          Do you have proof he won? Show us the audit. Put people under oath. You are a damn liar. The very fact you refuse to investigate the thousands of accusations shows you know the election was stolen and an investigation and audit would show that. You are all liars. And traitors. And commies.

          See where Kanye West was suspended from Twitter for his interview with Tucker Carlson. Carlson and the GOP listened while you leftist commies couldn’t stand to hear a black man tell it like he sees it. Once again, white democommie leftists people have the final say over a black man’s opinions. Liars. All liars.

          MAGA, traitor!

          • Elwood P. Dowd says:

            Can’t believe I overlooked the stupidest comment of all. And my apologies to St. Teach.

            Here goes. Buckle up.

            “A President can declassify documents even by thinking about it.”

          • Elwood P. Dowd says:

            I stand corrected. There may be a statement stupider than Teach’s.


            Do you have proof he (Biden) won?

            Can I prove that President Brandon won, LOL? Nope cannot.

            But ALL the evidence supports that he won. For one thing, the United States of American says that he won. He even won red states GA and AZ, and purple states VA and PA. In AZ, the DonJon-supporting CyberNinjas couldn’t get a win for tRump. Not a single recount showed any significant discrepancies. Judges laughed over 60 of PedoDon’s cases out of court. There has not been a single shred of credible evidence that DonJon won.

            Tell us more about the ‘audits’ you recommend? Should these audits be conducted for every election or only when Republicans lose?

            As you may not realize, it’s usually impossible to prove a negative, like “Can you prove the election WASN’T stolen?” Here’s an example, “Can you prove you didn’t rape two teenagers?” or “Can you prove that Teach hasn’t stolen money from his company?” or howabout in a court of law – Let’s say the prosecution alleges Herschel murdered Chad. Can Herschel PROVE that he didn’t murder Chad?

            You are deluded at this time. You many recover; you may not.

  3. H says:

    Teach you know what caused the end of the last ice age, changes in the tilt of the Earth in regards to our orbit. You knew that, you have mentioned the Milankovitch cycles often . Why are you posing that as a question now?
    “Most ice melting will never reach the ocean….” What did they teach you are Blaine? Wasn’t Earth Science a required course?

  4. Phil Taylor says:

    The debate on climate change could be resolved tomorrow.
    The people and governments that believe in made made global warming (AGW) would stop advocating some sort of tax or wealth re-distribution scheme to solve the issue and start advocating research and development as a solution to find a motor that works better than the internal combustible engine as well as replacement of oil or natural gas for heating of our buildings.
    Climate skeptics would be ok with this strategy. The elimination of air pollution would be its own reward..
    With more people on board, a more aggressive attack to find a solution could be employed. Instead of debating, more doing would occur.
    This is a reasonable compromise. Those AGW supporters who balk at this idea, should have their motives questioned (even to themselves) Are they really environmentalists, or are they simply exploiting this theory to advance their own agendas?

    • david7134 says:

      We made that argument to our troll. He freaked. The climate religion will not accept recapture or any other method that would reduce carbon, of course carbon dioxide does absolutely zero to the atmosphere. They will only accept elimination of fossil fuels, mostly from the US, China and India get a pass for 50 years. And they even admit the elimination of fossil fuels will do nothing.

      This is just an effort at destroying our wealth, country and exceptional being.

Pirate's Cove