Climate Change Student Strikes: An Aspergers Kid Believed Climate Change Claims

By Jan Ainali – still picture out of File:Greta Thunberg i Bryssel.webm, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=75565690

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

The following is in no way intended to disrespect people with Aspergers or Autism, but to provide insight.

I know Aspergers people in my personal life. There is no denying the intellectual gifts of people with High Functioning Autism and Aspergers; many great scientific breakthroughs have been made by people whose minds work a little differently.

But one issue Autistic and Asperger people share is they tend to take what they are told very literally; they sometimes find it difficult to distinguish fact from fiction, when the fiction is presented as a fact.

Greta Thunberg, schoolgirl climate change warrior: ‘Some people can let things go. I can’t’

One day last summer, aged 15, she skipped school, sat down outside the Swedish parliament – and inadvertently kicked off a global movement

Greta Thunberg cut a frail and lonely figure when she started a school strike for the climate outside the Swedish parliament building last August. Her parents tried to dissuade her. Classmates declined to join. Passersby expressed pity and bemusement at the sight of the then unknown 15-year-old sitting on the cobblestones with a hand-painted banner.

Eight months on, the picture could not be more different. The pigtailed teenager is feted across the world as a model of determination, inspiration and positive action. National presidents and corporate executives line up to be criticised by her, face to face. Her skolstrejk för klimatet (school strike for climate) banner has been translated into dozens of languages. And, most striking of all, the loner is now anything but alone.

She was never quite like the other kids. Her mother, Malena Ernman, is one of Sweden’s most celebrated opera singers. Her father, Svante Thunberg, is an actor and author (named after Svante Arrhenius, the Nobel prize-winning scientist who in 1896 first calculated how carbon dioxide emissions could lead to the greenhouse effect). Greta was exceptionally bright. Four years ago, she was diagnosed with Asperger’s.

I overthink. Some people can just let things go, but I can’t, especially if there’s something that worries me or makes me sad. I remember when I was younger, and in school, our teachers showed us films of plastic in the ocean, starving polar bears and so on. I cried through all the movies. My classmates were concerned when they watched the film, but when it stopped, they started thinking about other things. I couldn’t do that. Those pictures were stuck in my head.”

Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/mar/11/greta-thunberg-schoolgirl-climate-change-warrior-some-people-can-let-things-go-i-cant

The following from Psychology Today explains how taking things literally affects people on the Autism Spectrum.

People with Autism Spectrum Disorder Take Things Literally

Failure to understand colloquialisms in ASD
Posted Apr 07, 2013

Let me give you an example of the problems faced by someone with ASD. I was told this tale by someone who had the job of placing adults with high-functioning ASD into work. One of her star individuals was a woman who was a highly skilled accountant. She had been working for her new company for a couple of weeks when her line manager came up to her and said that she was so good she felt she could wrap her up in cotton wool and take her home with her. A couple of hours later firemen were having to take the door off a lavatory cubicle – the woman with ASD had locked herself in there, convinced that her line manager was a crazed lesbian who wanted to kidnap her and involve her in some bizarre fetish involving cotton wool.

Read more: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-gift-aging/201304/people-autism-spectrum-disorder-take-things-literally

If you think about it, Greta’s position is entirely logical, from her point of view. If the world is about to end, it makes no sense to continue with life as if nothing was happening.

What Greta likely doesn’t understand is most climate activists, even people voicing radical climate claims, don’t absolutely believe their own claims in the way Greta does. If everyone who says they are concerned wholeheartedly believed climate change was about to destroy the world, they would all abandon their jobs and normal lives, and march until something was done about it.

I don’t want to give the impression that Aspergers people are all easily led astray, their condition is more complicated than that. If it ever occurs to Greta to investigate climate claims in detail, instead of simply accepting what she is told, she will likely have no hesitation in changing her views – it is entirely possible she will flip over to hardline climate skepticism as soon as she realises what she has been told doesn’t make sense.

Of course if Greta becomes a climate skeptic, the movement she founded will likely continue; they will simply stop talking about her and try to pretend she doesn’t exist, the way Greenpeace tried to erase co-founder Patrick Moore from their history.

Advertisements

146 thoughts on “Climate Change Student Strikes: An Aspergers Kid Believed Climate Change Claims

  1. Meetings International invites all the participants from all over the World to attend “ International Conference on Coastal Ecosystem and Management” from September 16-17, 2019 in Amsterdam, Netherlands to discuss on the theme: Sustainable Management of Coastal Ecosystem- a Global Responsibility.
    E-mail: coastalzone@insightsummits.com
    Link: https://europeanmeetings.net/conferences/coastalzone
    Registration Link: https://europeanmeetings.net/conferences/coastalzone/registration
    Abstract Submission Link: https://europeanmeetings.net/conferences/coastalzone/abstract-submission
    Word press: https://wordpress.com/stats/day/coastalzone778282296.wordpress.com
    Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Coastal-Zone-2019-2257899037564057/?modal=admin_todo_tour

  2. Stupid and wrong may be expected, but smart and wrong is nearly as common, historically.

    Obsessed and wrong is nearly universal.

    What became clear to me a while ago is that the math on this panic doesn’t work.

    You can’t just be passionate, you have to do the math.

    • Smart/stupid and right/wrong are different dimensions.

      Sometimes it’s really stupid to be right…

      Smart/Stupid is the axis of rational functionality.

      Right/wrong is the axis of metaphysical assumptions and their degree of coherence with the real world.
      Climate change is the complete example. Starting from a wrong assumption that atmospheric CO2 dominates Earth’s average temperature very clever people have predicted lots of clever stuff..

      ..none of which is right because the earths temperature is demonstrably not linked to CO2 in the way they assumed.

      Whereas people who have been right about CO2 have been remarkably stupid and lost their jobs….

      • Nice analysis Leo.

        However, allowing your choices to be based on integrity is not necessarily “stupid” , it is a choice of personal values, where financial gain may not be be all and end all in life.

        Sadly too many scienctists are fully prepared to sell the ‘smarts’ to the hightest bidder and have no integrity. That is much of the problem today.

    • What this kid is doing would be perfectly logical if the world really is going to end in 12 years. If you really believe that, then why are you pretending you’re going to be around in 2031? Why aren’t we shutting down power plants, outlawing combustion engines, and otherwise ending any kind of human activity that produces CO2?

      All this kid is doing is take the alarmists seriously, and at their word. Something the alarmists themselves are not doing.

      • “All this kid is doing is take the alarmists seriously, and at their word. Something the alarmists themselves are not doing.”

        That’s exactly right. Her behavior just exposes the hypocrisy of the alarmists who keep sounding the CAGW alarm but never really take it seriously themselves, at least not seriously enough to modify their own lives. “Do what I say, not what I do” is their attitude.

      • The stupidest thing of all is the panic by American youth who’ve been brainwashed to believe that their infinitesimal personal choices (meatless Mondays, NYC?) actually will make any difference. If ANYONE out there in Solla Sollew ACTUALLY thought we have a “problem” with CO2, the Federal Government, in concert with the EU, Russia, and the UN, would be going nuts lobbying for India and China to stop building coal-fired power plants in favor of zero-emissions next-gen nuclear. Instead you hear . . . crickets.

        But yeah, no straws in your vegan Goop are Saving the Planet, yeah!

    • When it all becomes clear what this was all about, there really could be the equivalent of a metoo movement, only this time everything will be documented, sometimes even to be found in court transcripts. The usual suspects should contemplate this ugliness in their futures if they continue their pseudoscience-based charades.

      • Too late for that. The “believers” have passed the point of no return long ago. The only thing left for them is to double down, again and again, rig the numbers to show warming. Even if we slide back into a full blown glaciation with CO2 at 500 PPM they will still be saying it is all CO2’s fault (and ours by extension).

        • As with the metoo movement there is a spectrum of how people will deal with it. At one end there will be people who get it and are courageous enough to speak out, possibly leading to the cascade effect among other former sufferers of this mental abuse. I hope so. I’ll help fan the flames.

    • While emotionally satisfying, that’s a slippery slope to get on.
      What happens when the government decides that teaching children to be skeptical of government is emotional abuse?
      In Germany, homeschooling is illegal.

  3. I understand that kids and people with Asperger’s are more likely to take what they are told literally.

    But what I fear most is that so many of our children at the elementary and high school levels have been fed so much baloney on the issues surrounding climate and environment that they are in some respects becoming almost like Asperger kids: but they are brainwashed and more gullible to the propaganda.

    I know this isn’t true of all kids in these last two generations, but the miseducated ones tend to be more political activists than the others.

    • I was talking to a young customer(high school senior, I believe) a few days ago. As an aside he mentioned something related to climate. I asked if understood some of the science. He replied almost vehemently “Oh yes. I’ve read a lot about it. This climate science is sooo unfounded). He obviously is very smart, just the way he talks and interacts. It was so good to hear a not very old man talking rationally about science and climate.

  4. So does that mean that if this young women were shown the Sceptics case,
    that she would completely reject her previous beliefs ?

    I recall that King Charles the 1 st. was said to always act on the last
    thing that he was told. Hitler too.

    MJE

    • “So does that mean that if this young women were shown the Sceptics case,
      that she would completely reject her previous beliefs ? …”.
      =============================
      Wearing my amateur psychologist’s hat I would say very doubtful, by now the narrative is indelibly imprinted on her brain.
      Any challenges to her beliefs would be potentially very psychologically damaging.

    • Sounds like Scott Adams.
      Adams says that whatever argument he hears last is the one that is the most convincing.
      I am not sure I buy his assertion of complete uncertainty, but…
      At least Adams recognizes that all this means is that he cannot decide whom to believe.
      Or so he says.

      • Menicholas

        I really can’t say I find any alarmist arguments convincing. They are predicated on atmospheric CO2 being the single agent of doom, yet there has not yet been a single successful empirical study that demonstrates it causes the planet to warm.

        Apply that single test to alarmist claims and 99% of them fall apart.

        But then I’m not a scientist, nor do I suffer from Aspergers. I’m just a simple layman.

          • …. and it’s the answer to the wrong question.

            I’ll take suggestions, but isn’t the correct question along the lines of – “In an open system, has atmospheric CO2 at levels of greater than 280ppm and up to 410ppm, on a background of water vapor and in the presence of clouds and convection, caused any discernible effect on any global climate parameter?”

            If AGW was dangerous, the climate “scientists” would be able to point at something that answers the question

          • philincalifornia

            Try mine: “Atmospheric CO2 has never been observationally demonstrated to cause the planet to warm

            Then yours: “In an open system, has atmospheric CO2 at levels of greater than 280ppm and up to 410ppm, on a background of water vapor and in the presence of clouds and convection, caused any discernible effect on any global climate parameter?

            As Einstein pointed out, if you can’t explain it to a six year old you don’t understand it yourself (paraphrasing).

            Now, figure out which of those two examples a six year old would be more likely to understand, then think of your average guy in the street. They are much the same when it comes to science.

            Much of the problem with sceptical scientists is that they are convinces science will win the argument. But in the face of rampant alarmist propaganda, they come out with statements that are meaningless to the public.

            We’re all gonna die because the planets warming!” Isn’t scientific, but it’s effective.

            How about sceptics try something like “The worlds greening so much we won’t know what to do with the food. Or,

            Canada’s going to have winters that are only three months long. Or,

            Our children won’t know what hurricanes are.

            You know, the nonsense spouted by alarmists, just turned on them, instead of the 1% of sceptical climate scientists on the planet trying to impress laymen with terms they don’t understand!

      • “Last heard, most believed” is well established in human behavior. Even our law gives the closing arguments to the defense.

        • Glenn Vinson

          Pretty difficult to convict anyone of anything when the single critical piece of incriminating evidence is absent.

          IMHO, to counter the alarmist propaganda there is only one piece of irrefutable scientific evidence sceptics need to hammer home which is that CO2 has never been empirically demonstrated to cause warming.

          It’s a simple, memorable fact the public can use.

  5. The worst part of this story is that she has been scandalously brainwashed and then exploited by her activist parents for the “cause”.

    • I rather think that she has been exploited by her teachers, not by her parents, and that her parents, being not scientifically literate, didn’t realise what was going on.

    • From the Guardian article :
      “I remember when I was younger, and in school, our teachers showed us films of plastic in the ocean, starving polar bears and so on.”

      Looks more like the “brainwashing adults” were her teachers, though it also looks like her “activist parents” (?) didn’t do much to try to verify exactly which “facts” she was being brainwashed with.

      • “I cried through all the movies.”

        And she is driven by emotion rather than rational thought. Overwhelmed by the propaganda of starving polar bears, the passionate but wrong-headed reaction kicks in. She’s exactly the kind of easily-exploited robot the activists want and need to push the agenda.

      • And I was shown films of mushroom clouds and naked children running from planes dropping napalm, while being ordered to “duck and cover” under a cheap wooden desk while they blared the fire alarms.
        Whaddaya know, 50 years + and I’m still here!

  6. Not every Asperger is gifted, but I am. And for that reason I can give you the ultimate evidence why there is no global warming. It is because clouds are warming the planet, rather than cooling it.

    This is the big mistake in the concept of the GHE. Next do assuming the surface would have an emissivity of 1, clouds would furthermore cool the planet. What would then be heating it? GHG!

    But this is totally wrong from the very beginning. Surface emissivity is about 0.91 and clouds are heating the planet by shifting average emissivity up to a higher level in the atmosphere, just like it is explained here..

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUFOuoD3aHw

    If you think it to the end it should become obvious. And it is a 100% supported by empiric data..

    https://de.scribd.com/document/369953233/The-Net-Effect-of-Clouds-on-the-Radiation-Balance-of-Earth-2

    • –Leitwolf March 11, 2019 at 11:52 pm
      Not every Asperger is gifted, but I am. And for that reason I can give you the ultimate evidence why there is no global warming. It is because clouds are warming the planet, rather than cooling it.–

      Venus clouds are warming Venus. Earth clouds are not warming Earth, much.

      If you remove the clouds from Venus, Venus surface temperature would decrease dramatically.
      If keep the Venus clouds and move Venus to earth distance from sun, one also would dramatically lower Venus surface temperature.

      Why there is no global warming, depends upon what is meant by global warming.
      An interglacial period on Earth is “global warming”, and we are in an interglacial period.
      During interglacial periods, what mostly happening is that regions outside of tropics is warming by very significant amount. And key aspect of glacial and interglacial periods is the land regions of the northern hemisphere.
      If global warming means getting hotter in some fashion like Venus, Earth has no global warming.
      Rather Earth is in an Ice Age, and we have not left this ice age for millions of years- and will not leave it. But we have glacial and interglacial period within our Ice Age and the interglacial periods are periods of global warming.
      It is possible that Earth average temperature could increase to, say 18 C, and would call this global warming.
      In Earth long history [and not during ice age periods] Earth’s average temperature has increased higher than 18 C, but warming like Venus is hot. Instead the most notable aspect is warmer polar regions. And not that one has “hotter days” it’s a more uniform global temperature and warmer night and winters.
      In such as warmer global temperatures, it seems reasonable there would be more clouds.
      But the most significant factor is warmer oceans.
      And we in an icebox climate [ice age] because are oceans are cold, and the oceans take a long time to warm or cool. Are cold oceans are not going to become warm any time, soon.

      • gbaikie

        God help us all.

        Try to teach a kid to remember that, far less recite it and justify every part of it.

        No wonder sceptics struggle so badly to convey a simple message when they are obsessed with scientific detail no one can remember!

        Effing Venus. WTF!

        • –HotScot March 12, 2019 at 4:52 pm
          gbaikie

          God help us all.

          Try to teach a kid to remember that, far less recite it and justify every part of it.–

          If I was trying to teach kids, I would probably spend a lot time explaining what pseudo science is.
          So something like, the whole world is over flowing with pseudo science. Your assignment is to find a few and explain why you think the ones you selected are pseudo science.

          I would give some clues. Sometimes they are called soft sciences. Sometimes they are given useful label with some sort of ism, such as Marxism.
          And only pseudo science requires herds of people selling it.
          And follow the money.

    • Leitwolf, your technical description is less than helpful. The Albedo of clouds is 10 times the Albedo of the ocean. So clouds have a major cooling effect by reflecting sunlight back into space. Actually the amount of cloud cover today is going to control the average temperature of the planet for at least the next 2 or 3 days.

      • Just think one step further. True, clouds are reflecting a lot of solar radiation, but they are just as opaque for LWIR and reflect it back to the surface, of which there would be more if we followed the consensus model. That is 342W/m2 of solar radiation vs. 390W/m2 LWIR from the surface.

        In the end however it is not a guessing or theorizing question, but one that can simply be answered by empiric data, and that is what I did. These data (~100 mio records from about 2000 stations over 3 years) show that temperatures are positively correlated with clouds. The more clouds, the warmer it is.

        Even if we keep in mind that correlation does not have to mean causation, this remains a remarkable fact that must be ignored. It is a conditio sine qua non for the GHE model that clouds cool the planet, while data and logic suggest the opposite to be true.

        • Leitwolf, I think you are confused by Trenberth’s separation of back radiation and heat transport. On average, the sky is colder than the ground. Ground gets 168 W/sqM from Sun. Between sky and ground, heat radiates from ground to sky at (390-324=) 66 W/sqM. Then evaporation and convection are 78 and 24 respectively to equal the 168 received from the Sun. All from Kiehl & Trenberth, 1997.
          At night a cloudy sky results in less IR emitted from the ground because the clouds are much warmer than blue sky. So your data just shows positive temperature correlation with cloudy nights, which is to be expected.
          And to demonstrate how easily one can go wrong, making the not-quite-correct assumption that average temp is half way between daytime and night time temp, your calcs will show a positive correlation for average temp too!

          • I wish I could make sense of what you trying to say.

            “At night a cloudy sky results in less IR emitted from the ground because the clouds are much warmer than blue sky”

            I do not know what that shall mean?! Clouds have the same temperature as the ambient atmosphere that his hosting them. And as far as I recall, there are no blue skies at night..?!

            “So your data just shows positive temperature correlation with cloudy nights, which is to be expected”

            No, no, no, that is not what I said. Again: temperatures are higher with clouds than without clouds, over night AND day! Dont try to fit the facts (or my words) to your beliefs, science does not work that way. Communication does not either.

          • –DMacKenzie March 12, 2019 at 10:20 pm
            Leitwolf, Re “ I wish I could….”
            You need some knowledge of the Stefan-Boltzmann equation and its use re atmospheres. Learn here:
            http://cybele.bu.edu/courses/gg612fall99/gg612lab/lab1.html
            When you understand this, you will grasp the effect of a cloud layer.–

            It doesn’t seem to explain much. I quote:
            “Of course we’re assuming here that the surface of the planet is all of uniform temperature, but this kind of cavalier cowboy-style assumption making is what thought experiments are for.”
            Rather silly.
            What it is, is an Ideal thermally conductive blackbody model.
            And such an ideal thermally conductive blackbody model at Earth distance from the Sun,
            would have uniform temperature of about 5 C. And some people imagine that means this is the same as average temperature of about 5 C .
            Anyhow Earth doesn’t have a uniform temperature, but roughly speaking, Earth average temperature is about 5 C.
            Earth average ocean temperature during our present ice age is in the range of about 1 to 5 C. And currently it’s about 3.5 C.
            And roughly speaking, the ocean has average of about 3.5 C, because it’s mostly warmed by sunlight. I would not say it’s solely warmed by sunlight because Earth’s geothermal energy might having some warming effect. But if want to exclude this possible warming effect, then it’s solely warmed by sunlight.
            The average surface temperature of the ocean is much warmer than the entire ocean.
            The average ocean surface temperature is about 17 C.
            And average land surface air temperature is about 10 C
            And if combine the ocean 70% and land 30% one gets an average global temperature of about 15 C.
            An interesting puzzle is the northern hemisphere is about 1 C warmer than southern Hemisphere.
            In terms of other average temperatures, the tropical ocean has average temperature of about 26 C and the average of the rest of the ocean is about 11 C.
            In terms relation to land masses, the tropical ocean is about 80% of the surface area of the tropics and entire tropics is about 40% of the entire surface of earth and the tropics receives more than 1/2 of all sunlight reaching Earth.
            And it’s well known that the tropical ocean warms the rest of the world, or the tropical ocean is the heat engine of the world.

            Roughly, the ocean surface temperature is warmer than entire ocean because warmer water rises. And the ocean is currently cold because colder denser water of poles falls.
            In regards to the atmosphere the surface air is warmest because surface air is denser, then the air above it.

            So, you have thin region of earth called surface air temperature which warmest air on top of warmest part of ocean, the ocean surface temperature, which we measure and call it Earth’s average temperature, or more correctly Earth’s average surface air temperature.

            But roughly Earth is about 5 C or it’s not accurate to say it’s less than -10 C or more than 30 C. But if think the temperature of entire ocean is important [and it is] 5 C is pretty close to 3.5 C temperature of the ocean. But, that, is mostly a matter of chance, as the entire ocean for most of Earth history, or what we know of last 500 million years, has had entire ocean temperature of 10 C or warmer.

          • Oops, now I am guilty of inaccurate statements.
            “At night a cloudy sky results in less IR emitted from the ground because the clouds are much warmer than blue sky. “
            Should be “At night a cloudy sky results in less radiative heat transfer from the ground because the clouds are warmer than the open sky”
            The radiative heat transfer is a result of q=factor x (Thot^4-Tcold^4), the SB equation, which is 390-324=66 W/sqM on Trenberth’s chart. If you don’t believe me about the cloud and open sky temperature, buy a cheap IR gun and “shoot” them. Your readings of the open sky will be somewhat incorrect because the gun is preset for an emissivity of .95. But you can still tell which is colder or warmer.

            Anyway, my point is that planet Earth, without clouds, would be a lot warmer because the average Albedo would be about half of its present 0.3 A lot more sunlight would reach the surface. Your statement that clouds make it warmer, in your statistical analysis, is a result of Thot^4 during the day being a bigger number than at night. You are misinterpreting the causation of your correlation.

          • “Oops, now I am guilty of inaccurate statements.”

            LOL! You have been inaccurate all the way. And you definitely do not understand a single word of what I am saying. I dont mean that insultive, because I know the problem. People, including myself, have huge trouble wrapping their minds around other peoples thoughts and take on new perspectives. So they either try to fit what hear into their perspectives, regardless if it fits or not, or they just deny. This is exactly what are doing.

            “If you don’t believe me about the cloud and open sky temperature, buy a cheap IR gun and “shoot” them.”

            You mean something like this..?

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5LovP3WN4M&list=UUXCHTLXS2_YE46VBwkl18zA

            Remember: everything you know, I know it too. But I know a lot more on top of it.

            So again: CLOUDS ARE WARMING EARTH!

            “Anyway, my point is that planet Earth, without clouds, would be a lot warmer because the average Albedo would be about half of its present 0.3”

            No! Why not? Because without clouds not just more sun light would warm Earth, but also more LWIR would radiate into space. The coin has two sides.

            “Albedo” btw. is a framing term which confuses people. The albedo itself is totally irrelevant, but the relation of absorptivity to emissivity is. Of course absorptivity = 1 – albedo, but to my knowledge we do not have a term for the deviation of emissivity from 1. By using the term albedo everyone focuses on the deviation of absorptivity from 1, but forgets about the other side. Like you do.

            The basic question is what is bigger. Is it more sun light reflected by clouds, or more LWIR reflected back to the surface? Looking at the data I can tell that is about 70W/m2 of solar radiation reflected and somewhere between 80-100W/m2 of LWIR reflected. So the net effect is warming the planet, not cooling it.

            So we have 35W/m2 as the surface emissivity itself is not 1, but rather 0.91, and we get another 80-100W/m2 from cloud forcing, which add up to 115-135W/m2. This will make up for the biggest part of the “GHE” of 150W/m2.

      • –Leitwolf, your technical description is less than helpful. The Albedo of clouds is 10 times the Albedo of the ocean. So clouds have a major cooling effect by reflecting sunlight back into space–

        When sun is at zenith and a clear day, one gets about 1050 watts per square meter of direct sunlight and about 1120 watts per square meter of indirect and direct sunlight.
        So about 1360 watts per square meter of direct sunlight is entering at the top of the atmoshere and going thru clear skies, only 1120 watt of direct and indirect sunlight reach the surface:
        1360 – 1120 = 240 watts of sunlight is reflected by clear atmospheric conditions.

        And when sun is not near zenith, a clear sky reflects more than 240 watts per square meter. Most of the time when sun is in the sky, it’s not near zenith.
        The sun is only at zenith at noon and in tropics.
        When sun is at zenith in tropics at noon, 3 hours before and after noon, it is 45 degrees away from zenith and when sunlight is 45 degree [and more] away from zenith, the sunlight passes thru more atmosphere. 60 degrees away from zenith [or 30 degrees above the horizon] the sunlight passes thru twice as much atmosphere as compared when the sun is at zenith.
        Or in tropics and when sun was at zenith at noon, 4 hours before and after noon, the sun is 60 degrees away from zenith.

        In terms of harvesting solar energy, one has about 6 hours of the day when you can collect the most amount of energy- or 3 hours before and 3 hours after noon. This is called peak solar hours.
        Clouds of course effect how much solar energy one can collect, but solar panel can collect indirect sunlight. So during peak solar hours and cloudy one collect more solar energy as compared clear skies and sun further than 60 degrees away from zenith [not during the time of peak solar hours].

        So what reflecting most of sunlight is clear skies.

        • Sorry, but your post is neither on topic nor correct. Some of near infrared and a larger part of UV is getting absorbed by the lower atmosphere, and is thus not available for solar panels. But that does not mean that energy would get reflected (back into space) or would not heat the planet.

          Your thinking is way too one dimensional and your conclusion “So what reflecting most of sunlight is clear skies” is completely wrong.

          • “Sorry, but your post is neither on topic nor correct. Some of near infrared and a larger part of UV is getting absorbed by the lower atmosphere, and is thus not available for solar panels.”
            UV is small portion of sunlight’s energy. Near IR is about 1/2 of sunlight:
            wiki:
            ” In terms of energy, sunlight at Earth’s surface is around 52 to 55 percent infrared (above 700 nm), 42 to 43 percent visible (400 to 700 nm), and 3 to 5 percent ultraviolet (below 400 nm)”
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunlight
            About 100 watts of Near IR is absorbed [but is re-emitted]. But you still dealing a lot sunlight reflected even when the sun is at zenith and sunlight near zenith is small portion of earth surface- and small portion of earth has least amount sunlight reflected.

        • Clouds absorb some sunlight. And it doesn’t matter if is sunlight is direct or indirect sunlight.
          And clouds “create” indirect sunlight. Clouds diffuse/scatter sunlight, indirect sunlight is disffused/scattered sunlight.

          The tilt of earth has a lot to do with glacial and interglacial periods. It’s quite complicated but the Milankovitch cycles roughly has to do with changing of Earth tilt. And most agree that interglacial and glacier periods have “something” to do with the Milankovitch cycles. Some imagine it’s Milankovitch cycles and CO2, but even these people don’t exclude the effect of the Milankovitch cycles rather they imagine CO2 has some sort of additive effect.

          To simplify, let’s imagine Earth without a tilt, instead of 23.5 degrees, it’s 0 degree tilt.
          First I would say this would have a cooling effect. Anyhow, say you at 45 degree latitude.
          So every day the sun at noon is 45 degree above horizon [or 45 degrees away from zenith] at noon time. And you always have a 12 hour day. Sun starts at horizon and 6 hours later it’s noon, and 6 hour later the sun at the horizon. 6 hours to rise from 0 degrees above horizon to noon [if averaged {and it’s not} 45 degree / 6 is 7.5 degrees per hour. Or in 3 hours it’s halfway:
          45 / 2 = 22.5 degrees above the horizon.
          So, sometime after 9 am the sun will about 30 degrees above the horizon and sunlight will traveling thru about twice as much atmosphere, and this amount atmosphere diffuses and reflect more sunlight as compared to the noon time sun. So noon time sun might be 1000 watts of direct and indirect sunlight and sunlight at 30 degrees could be around 600 watts per square meter.
          If you are on high mountain top, the sunlight would need to pass thru less atmosphere, and this effect will larger when sun low on horizon as compared to noon.
          And of course clouds can be both lower than mountain top or higher than the mountain top.

          When the sun is 30 degrees above horizon and you getting about 600 watts if you point at the sun, a level surface receives less than 600 watts per square meter. Or if you had solar panel, it would be tilted about 20 degrees relative to level ground in order to get more sunlight per square meter.
          With clouds in terms of absorbing sunlight it doesn’t matter if they are tilted or not.

          So at 45 latitude [since large part of Canadian border is 49 degrees latitude- 4 degrees south of the border] the night time air temperature could be all over the map [it could be 20 C or -40 C or colder] but if ground is dry it’s fairly predictable what ground surface temperature would be if not windy and if not cloudy. In morning ground could colder than 0 C and by noon time it could be about 40 C, though air surface temperature could be less than 20 C [and unlikely to be warmer than 30 C]
          Note: We don’t measure ground temperature in terms of a daily temperature, rather it’s air temperature [5 feet high in shaded white box].

          If instead of clear skies, it’s cloudy, then it’s unlikely air temperatures become cooler than 0 C at night [though weather can bring warmer or much colder air temperatures] and if cloudy the air temperature might about 20 C at noon, and ground temperature would not be 40 C, though unless really overcast the ground at noon is warmer than air temperature.

          Anyhow clouds can absorb a bit of sunlight, and mainly they keep night warmer. 45 degree latitude of land area is an insignificant part of total surface area of Earth, but this region is not always cold as hell, than that is “global warming”.

          Let’s look at something more interesting, Venus.
          Venus has axis tilt of 2.64 degrees and it’s tilt probably has nothing to do with it’s average temperature.
          Venus rocky surface is quite hot and very little sunlight reaches the rocky surface. Sunlight does not warm the rocky surface, rather the atmosphere warms [or maintains] it’s temperature.
          People have called the clouds of Venus, a greenhouse gas, but clouds of Venus are droplets of very strong acid, which boil if over 300 C. These droplets don’t boil but they do evaporate at lower temperatures, it rains acid, and it evaporates, as does rain also evaporates on earth without reaching the surface ground. The acid condenses and rains. The acid also absorbs water, and so acid can be slightly diluted with water, but remains a strong acid- even diluted it’s stronger than battery acid. It’s transparent with a yellow tint [making Venus looking yellow to brownish].
          It is said the clouds reflect about 75% of the sunlight and the thick clouds encase the entire planet.
          All clouds absorb some sunlight, Venus clouds apparently absorb more sunlight than Earth clouds, but what is important is that Venus has about twice the intensity of sunlight as Earth has. So Earth rain clouds with the intense sunlight of venus, would absorb more energy, but venus acid clouds absorb more in comparison to rain clouds. Or if Venus had Earth’s rain cloud, planet Venus would shine more brightly. Or acid clouds would appear blindly bright, but would be more bright if they were water droplets rather than acid.
          When acid or water evaporates, it causes the air to be the same temperature as the acid or water- it warm or cool the air [if warmer or cooler than the air- ie: swamp coolers or steam baths]. Another factor is if add water to acid, that causes heat.
          wiki: “Venusian clouds are thick and are composed mainly (75-96%) of sulfuric acid droplets.”
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Venus
          Not wiki: “Battery Acid, the electrolyte in all lead / acid cell batteries, is sulfuric acid (H2SO4) at a concentration of between 15% and 35%.”
          [There is a lot water added to 96% acid to make 75% and a lot water to go from 75% to 35%- and add acid to water, rather than water to acid [as that would cause it to explode in your face].

  7. Definitely something wrong.
    I listened to her TED TALK, and all I saw was no emotion for such a young girl who is terrified of her near future.
    Anybody into body language would see she is a social robot. Is this girl even human in soul and spirit?
    BTW: Her mom manages all her social accounts.
    That said, there is always money involved but little Greta isn’t a true beneficiary.

  8. What is disgusting and utterly vile is the exploitation of this child.

    I would say she is affected mentally by the completely untrue claims of catastrophe. Some would call it child abuse.

    It’s akin to me telling my 7 year old son that “chemtrails are poisoning us and the air you are breathing is poisoned” and then using him to promote the idea.

    I wonder how much the patent falsehoods by catastrophe alarmists, like her mother, is impacting her mental health

    • Mark – Helsinki

      To be fair, my 37 year old son grew up during the Global Cooling scam, or at least suffered the hangover from it. He’s mentally quite stable (allegedly) other than he has bought the AGW story hook line and sinker.

      This kid will have to deal with the inevitable change in attitude toward AGW like all the rest of us, except that you and I are a bit more prepared.

      Like politicians, her parents will tell her ‘we were acting on the best information we had to hand at the time’.

      I think sceptics realise that whilst the terms AGW and ‘climate change’ will themselves change (re-branding and repackaging) the concept will evolve in some form or another and the uncritical masses will be nudged in a slightly different direction. They won’t notice they have been mugged off again because the cause is greater than the climate, that’s just a vehicle, the cause is global socialism.

      • I understand what you say, though it really doesn’t affect my conclusion, that the child is being used as a tool, you see, it is impossible to criticise this kid because of her unfounded belief, which was why she was chosen. She’s bullet proof in that context.

        my point is rather the use of this child, and how she will feel when she is discarded afterward, which she certainly will be once this Strike fad passes, she will be utterly depressed and dejected.

        Worse is her mother who allows her to b used this way.

        • Mark – Helsinki

          my point is rather the use of this child, and how she will feel when she is discarded afterward, which she certainly will be once this Strike fad passes, she will be utterly depressed and dejected.

          For a blog that focusses on science and empirical evidence, that’s ever so slightly judgemental.

  9. A transcript of a video by François Rittaud, French president of the climate realists association:

    Climate strike: a bad idea
    This video is for all of you, students, high school students, high school students, who are preparing for a global school climate strike.
    You think you’re demonstrating for a good cause. You think that this movement is a spontaneous cry from the heart that will improve the world. The problem is that it’s not true.
    You can improve the world, you even have an important place in it. But not in this strike there. First of all, because you don’t really have the hand. Demonstrating so that everyone can study and so that foreign students, for example, can be welcomed with dignity, yes, that makes sense, because you can do something about it.
    On the other hand, wasting a day of your studies so that old diplomats could fly around the world for the millionth time to repeat their solemn proclamation. That, that’s no use.
    Demonstrating is also unknowingly supporting the climate change business. A big business worth hundreds of billions of euros. And who may not be so philanthropic. To demonstrate is to encourage the sellers of “miracle solutions” that have never worked, but that impoverish us, starting with the poorest.
    We’ve forgotten it now, but what made the yellow vests revolt at first? The carbon tax, which had to fight for the climate, when it cannot. And above all, it hits many of those who are already in difficulty.
    What I would like to do is make you want to think about all this on your own. The problem is not whether or not to believe me. The problem is that you are never allowed to hear this statement I make with others. On climate, on the environment, on energy and ecological issues, you are systematically obliged to listen to the same speech, the same music.
    What is being proposed to you in this strike is to repeat like parrots what we want to put in your head. These are not your words, they were written by others than you. These are words that teach you to be afraid and feel guilty. Whereas if you look at things for yourself, you will see like many others three things. One, you don’t have to be afraid of the weather. Secondly, you have nothing to be ashamed of in living with the progress of our time, for example by travelling. And three, climate policies are worse than useless, they are harmful.
    Dear students, dear high school students, be free. Free to think in your own way, rather than the way you are told. It is by exercising this freedom there that you can truly transform the world.

    Translated with http://www.DeepL.com/Translator

  10. Historically, vile leftist movements have always targeted children, because the adults are not so easily brainwashed, they seek to poison the roots of the next generations with their indoctrination.

    When you are on your illogical moral high horse, such disgusting tactics are justified in their minds.

  11. Stop scaring my kids! Well, not really my kids since they understand enough math and physics to know that the world won’t end in 12 years. Maybe stop scaring my daughters roomate at CU. She confused my daughter taking a Cosmology class with cosmetology and figured it would be an easy A. Yes, she can vote.

  12. I fear this poor girl is going to kill herself, either due to fear of the future or because she realises how misguided she has been.

  13. Greta Tunberg is an exploited child by the alarmist movement. And with an Asperger diagnosis it makes this even worse. Are there no limits to what they may do?

    And the movement of school”strikes” she has started. My name for it is climatejugend. They are as brainwashed as their predecessors the Hitlerjugend. Just sying.

  14. The problem is not with people who think: “if the world is ending 12 years then there’s no point in normal life” … it’s the fact that the people running society have a bizarre mental illness so that they see absolutely nothing wrong telling the public the world will certainly end in 12 years … and then totally ignoring their own statements.

    They suffer from EHS (Extreme hypocrisy syndrome)

    • Mike Haseler (Scottish Sceptic)

      My problem is with sceptical scientists who try to communicate with the rest of society, in a language they simply don’t understand.

      Meanwhile, alarmists are happy to use propaganda.

  15. The Club of Rome want a copy of this book in every school . . .
    https://www.clubofrome.org/2018/12/03/the-club-of-rome-launches-the-first-climate-emergency-plan/
    The Committee of 300 set the CoR agenda; they are:
    Queen Elizabeth II
    Abdullah II of Jordan
    Kerry, John Forbes
    Abramovich, Roman Arkadyevich
    King, Mervyn
    Ackermann, Josef
    Kinnock, Glenys
    Adeane, Edward
    Kissinger, Henry
    Agius, Marcus Ambrose Paul
    Knight, Malcolm
    Ahtisaari, Martti Oiva Kalevi
    Koon, William H. II
    Akerson, Daniel
    Krugman, Paul
    Albert II of Belgium
    Kufuor, John
    Alexander – Crown Prince of Yugoslavia
    Lajolo, Giovanni
    Alexandra (Princess) – The Honourable Lady Ogilvy
    Lake, Anthony
    Alphonse, Louis – Duke of Anjou
    Lambert, Richard
    Amato, Giuliano
    Lamy, Pascal
    Anderson, Carl A.
    Landau, Jean-Pierre
    Andreotti, Giulio
    Laurence, Timothy James Hamilton
    Andrew (Prince) – Duke of York
    Leigh-Pemberton, James
    Anne – Princess Royal
    Leka, Crown Prince of Albania
    Anstee, Nick
    Leonard, Mark
    Ash, Timothy Garton
    Levene, Peter – Baron Levene of Portsoken
    Astor, William Waldorf – 4th Viscount Astor
    Leviev, Lev
    August, Ernst – Prince of Hanover
    Levitt, Arthur
    Aven, Pyotr
    Levy, Michael – Baron Levy
    Balkenende, Jan Peter
    Lieberman, Joe
    Ballmer, Steve
    Livingston, Ian
    Balls, Ed
    Loong, Lee Hsien
    Barroso, José Manuel
    Lorenz (Prince) of Belgium, Archduke of Austria-Este
    Beatrix (Queen)
    Louis-Dreyfus, Gérard
    Belka, Marek
    Mabel (Princess) of Orange-Nassau
    Bergsten, C. Fred
    Mandelson, Peter Benjamin
    Berlusconi, Silvio
    Manning, Sir David Geoffrey
    Bernake, Ben
    Margherita – Archduchess of Austria-Este
    Bernhard (Prince) of Lippe-Biesterfeld
    Margrethe II Denmark
    Bernstein, Nils
    Martínez, Guillermo Ortiz
    Berwick, Donald
    Mashkevitch, Alexander
    Bildt, Carl
    Massimo, Stefano (Prince) – Prince of Roccasecca dei Volsci
    Bischoff, Sir Winfried Franz Wilhen “Win”
    McDonough, William Joseph
    Blair, Tony
    McLarty, Mack
    Blankfein, Lloyd
    Mersch, Yves
    Blavatnik, Leonard
    Michael (Prince) of Kent
    Bloomberg, Michael
    Michael of Romania
    Bolkestein, Frits
    Miliband, David
    Bolkiah, Hassanal
    Miliband, Ed
    Bonello, Michael C
    Mittal, Lakshmi
    Bonino, Emma
    Moreno, Glen
    Boren, David L.
    Moritz – Prince and Landgrave of Hesse-Kassel
    Borwin – Duke of Mecklenburg
    Murdoch, Rupert
    Bronfman, Charles Rosner
    Napoléon, Charles
    Bronfman, Edgar Jr.
    Nasser, Jacques
    Bruton, John
    Niblett, Robin
    Brzezinski, Zbigniew
    Nichols, Vincent
    Budenberg, Robin
    Nicolás, Adolfo
    Buffet, Warren
    Noyer, Christian
    Bush, George HW
    Ofer, Sammy
    Cameron, David William Donald
    Ogilvy, David – 13th Earl of Airlie
    Camilla – Duchess of Cornwall
    Ollila, Jorma Jaakko
    Cardoso, Fernando Henrique
    Oppenheimer, Nicky
    Carington, Peter – 6th Baron Carrington
    Osborne, George
    Carlos – Duke of Parma
    Oudea, Frederic
    Carlos, Juan – King of Spain
    Parker, Sir John
    Carney, Mark J.
    Patten, Chris
    Carroll, Cynthia
    Pébereau, Michel
    Caruana, Jaime
    Penny, Gareth
    Castell, Sir William
    Peres, Shimon
    Chan, Anson
    Philip (Prince) – Duke of Edinburgh
    Chan, Margaret
    Pio, Dom Duarte – Duke of Braganza
    Chan, Norman
    Pöhl, Karl Otto
    Charles – Prince of Wales
    Powell, Colin
    Chartres, Richard
    Prokhorov, Mikhail
    Chiaie, Stefano Delle
    Quaden, Guy Baron
    Chipman, Dr John
    Rasmussen, Anders Fogh
    Chodiev, Patokh
    Ratzinger, Joseph Alois (Pope Benedict XVI)
    Christoph, Prince of Schleswig-Holstein
    Reuben, David
    Cicchitto, Fabrizio
    Reuben, Simon
    Clark, Wesley Kanne Sr. (General)
    Rhodes, William R. “Bill”
    Clarke, Kenneth
    Rice, Susan
    Clegg, Nick
    Richard (Prince) – Duke of Gloucester
    Clinton, Bill
    Rifkind, Sir Malcolm Leslie
    Cohen, Abby Joseph
    Ritblat, Sir John
    Cohen, Ronald
    Roach, Stephen S.
    Cohn, Gary D.
    Robinson, Mary
    Colonna, Marcantonio (di Paliano) – Prince and Duke of Paliano
    Rockefeller, David Jr.
    Constantijn (Prince) of the Netherlands
    Rockefeller, David Sr.
    Constantine II Greece
    Rockefeller, Nicholas
    Cooksey, David
    Rodríguez, Javier Echevarría
    Cowen, Brian
    Rogoff, Kenneth Saul “Ken”
    Craven, Sir John
    Roth, Jean-Pierre
    Crockett, Andrew
    Rothschild, Jacob – 4th Baron Rothschild
    Dadush, Uri
    Rubenstein, David
    D’Aloisio, Tony
    Rubin, Robert
    Darling, Alistair
    Ruspoli, Francesco – 10th Prince of Cerveteri
    Davies, Sir Howard
    Safra, Joseph
    Davignon, Étienne
    Safra, Moises
    Davis, David
    Sands, Peter A.
    De Rothschild, Benjamin
    Sarkozy, Nicolas
    De Rothschild, David René James
    Sassoon, Isaac S.D.
    De Rothschild, Evelyn Robert
    Sassoon, James Meyer – Baron Sassoon
    De Rothschild, Leopold David
    Sawers, Sir Robert John
    Deiss, Joseph
    Scardino, Marjorie
    Deripaska, Oleg
    Schwab, Klaus
    Dobson, Michael
    Schwarzenberg, Karel
    Draghi, Mario
    Schwarzman, Stephen A.
    Du Plessis, Jan
    Shapiro, Sidney
    Dudley, William C.
    Sheinwald, Nigel
    Duisenberg, Wim
    Sigismund (Archduke) – Grand Duke of Tuscany
    Edward (Prince) – Duke of Kent
    Simeon of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha
    Edward (The Prince) – Earl of Wessex
    Snowe, Olympia
    Elkann, John
    Sofía (Queen) of Spain
    Emanuele, Vittorio – Prince of Naples, Crown Prince of Italy
    Soros, George
    Fabrizio (Prince) – Massimo-Brancaccio
    Specter, Arlen
    Feldstein, Martin Stuart “Marty”
    Stern, Ernest
    Festing, Matthew
    Stevenson, Dennis – Baron Stevenson of Coddenham
    Fillon, François
    Steyer, Tom
    Fischer, Heinz
    Stiglitz, Joseph E.
    Fischer, Joseph Martin
    Strauss-Kahn, Dominique
    Fischer, Stanley
    Straw, Jack
    FitzGerald, Niall
    Sutherland, Peter
    Franz, Duke of Bavaria
    Tanner, Mary
    Fridman, Mikhail
    Tedeschi, Ettore Gotti
    Friedrich, Georg – Prince of Prussia
    Thompson, Mark
    Friso (Prince) of Orange-Nassau
    Thomson, Dr. James A.
    Gates, Bill
    Tietmeyer, Hans
    Geidt, Christopher
    Trichet, Jean-Claude
    Geithner, Timothy
    Tucker, Paul
    Gibson-Smith, Dr Chris
    Van Rompuy, Herman
    Gorbachev, Mikhail
    Vélez, Álvaro Uribe
    Gore, Al
    Verplaetse, Alfons Vicomte
    Gotlieb, Allan
    Villiger, Kaspar
    Green, Stephen
    Vladimirovna, Maria – Grand Duchess of Russia
    Greenspan, Alan
    Volcker, Paul
    Grosvenor, Gerald – 6th Duke of Westminster
    Von Habsburg, Otto
    Gurría, José Ángel
    Waddaulah, Hassanal Bolkiah Mu’izzaddin
    Gustaf, Carl XVI of Sweden
    Walker, Sir David Alan
    Hague, William
    Wallenberg, Jacob
    Hampton, Sir Philip Roy
    Walsh, John
    Hans-Adam II – Prince of Liechtenstein
    Warburg, Max
    Harald V Norway
    Weber, Axel Alfred
    Harper, Stephen
    Weill, Michael David
    Heisbourg, François
    Wellink, Nout
    Henri – Grand Duke of Luxembourg
    Whitman, Marina von Neumann
    Hildebrand, Philipp
    Willem-Alexander – Prince of Orange
    Hills, Carla Anderson
    William (Prince) of Wales
    Holbrooke, Richard
    Williams, Dr Rowan
    Honohan, Patrick
    Williams, Shirley – Baroness Williams of Crosby
    Howard, Alan
    Wilson, David – Baron Wilson of Tillyorn
    Ibragimov, Alijan
    Wolfensohn, James David
    Ingves, Stefan Nils Magnus
    Wolin, Neal S.
    Isaacson, Walter
    Woolf, Harry – Baron Woolf
    Jacobs, Kenneth M.
    Woolsey, R. James Jr.
    Julius, DeAnne
    Worcester, Sir Robert Milton
    Juncker, Jean-Claude
    Wu, Sarah
    Kenen, Peter
    Zoellick, Robert Bruce

  16. The news bulletin tonight featured some kids holding signs to promote the day tomorrow. One read ‘Winter isn’t Comiig’. Perhaps some basic literacy might be useful before bizarre climate forecasting.

    • This young person needs a good lesson in the concept of “confounding factors”. The history of autism causes is ripe with it. And great harm has come about because of it. It used to be called “cold mothering syndrome”. The new cause is vaccines. In both cases confounding factors are hidden beneath pseudoscience. Yet well-meaning proponents of this fake science ignored one of the most important components of rigorous scientific methods. What harm is there in that though if someone says later “I was just trying to do good things for you”?

      Plenty. Children were removed from their parent, given intervention that did not work, and denied interventions that could work. And we are in the middle of a surge of childhood diseases that has even worse misery ahead of us when people die because someone was trying to do good.

      So too the climate crisis scare. Confounding factors are being ignored and worse misery is ahead unless this nonsense gets turned around.

  17. Be very very careful everybody..

    Have you figured out why I don’t comment as much as I used to?
    Of course you haven’t, never even noticed did you?

    Because this comes in exactly with one of my first ever comments here, about booze being The Root Cause of Climate Change.
    (My mind is now changed – I assert that sugar is the cause)

    Hence..
    If you were a bottle-fed baby – chances are you afflicted to some extent with Kwashkior (possibly Marasmus)
    i.e You will be slow-witted, belligerent and easily angered.
    Lets witness the treatment Griff gets around here……

    If you are male and have a waist size of 37″ or greater (35″ for girls) – you are addicted to sugar.
    It is a chemical depressant, you are in a chronically depressed state of mind and hence prone to Buck Passing and Magical Thinking.
    e.g. That we will never run out of oil, that CO2 is plant fertiliser, that cold objects radiatively heat warm objects, that we are richer than ever, that our health has never been better. Need I go on?

    Do you drink alcohol.
    It is a massively potent chemical depressant. 2 drinks per day may be OK for your physical body but 2 drinks per month wreck your mind, thinking & personality. Cannabis is even worse,
    Same results for eating sugar in all its forms, refined, cooked starch, fructose syrup.

    Double check on all that?
    Do you ‘need’ coffee?
    Because the Human Animal cannot lie, it uses coffee to try escape the depressant effects of all that sugar it is eating. May use nicotine or cocaine also.

    That works does it?
    OK
    Tell that to the traffic cop that pulls you up for DUI
    Tell him you had 6 pints of beer but a double espresso and a Marlboro makes you safe to drive.
    That should work

    Science is a variation on driving.
    You, me, no-one can do science while full of sugar, no matter how much coffee we drink.
    Same goes for politics. Just witness Brexit.
    Also applies to marriage……

    By constantly filling yourself with sugar, booze & cannabis – you are effective making yourself Autistic.
    I shows up everywhere – not just here so don’t feel TOO bad

    Now, are you still gonna assert that Ehrlich was wrong?
    Because, there is now very little else to eat apart from sugar…….

    Here again we see the Magical Thinking, the truth vs fiction muddle.
    Because, The Starvation is nothing like you saw in the movie or on TV.
    There are no piles of blackened corpses, no tidal waves, lightning storms, tsunamis of ice or even Rihanna being a bimbo in front of a radar screen.
    Therefore, in the chronically depressed mind and its world of magical thoughts, it is not happening.

    Stand up straight.
    Can you see your toes without bending over?
    If you can’t, THERE is The Starvation – there is Ehrlich’s prediction coming true

    • Have you figured out why I don’t comment as much as I used to?
      Of course you haven’t, never even noticed did you?

      After reading that waste of space of a post, might I suggest you go back to not commenting so much. And I say that as a skinny, non-alchol drinking, non-coffee drinking, non-cannabis using person who can see his toes without bending over. Time has proven Ehrlich’s predictions wrong. I won’t sugar coat it for you: He was wrong then and he continues to be wrong now.

    • “Can you see your toes without bending over?”

      YES, but only with the aid of glasses (made of plastic)

      I’m male 6’2″ and have a waist size of 34″
      addicted to sugar (but only for the last 60 yrs)
      I drink average 11 cups of sweet coffee / day ( Hate the tast of tea).

    • The Root Cause of Climate Change.
      (My mind is now changed – I assert that sugar is the cause)
      ======
      Makes sense. After all there is plenty of carbon in sugar. The fix is pretty straight forward. A carbon tax on sugar.

      Thank god for this timely discovery. I was worried we were going to run out of gasoline for the car. Especially with the trudope carbon tax.

      All along the solution has been sitting right in front of us. Don’t put sugar in the gas tank.

      • All along the solution has been sitting right in front of us. Don’t put sugar in the gas tank.

        Good thing I wasn’t drinking a beverage when I read that, as I hate having to clean up the monitor.

    • I’m thinking, after skimming over that post, that you stopped posting because when you do you realised stupid comes out. I hope you re-read this one and come to that same conclusion. Thanks in advance.

    • That’s two minutes of my life I’ll never get back.

      Well, four actually. I had to read it twice so I was sure I wasn’t hallucinating. All that sugar you know.

  18. I’m diagnosed ASD (Aspergers) and I’m glad you brought this up. Whatever we get into, we tend to go ‘all the way’ and can’t understand why other’s actions don’t match their words. I get shouted down by ‘ASD rights’ folks for saying this, but our fixated obsessions can be dangerous. 45 years ago I started following the Maharishi for example, his ‘stress removal’ system was even backed up by science, Brian Josephson Nobel prize winner and other physicists, because ‘Quantum Mechanics of Consciousness’ and many studies, blah blah. I became a fanatic for a few years, would have done anything to convert the world to Maharishi in the 1970s. I only turned against them when they turned against me first, I was too weird (just like they turned against Andy Kaufman). Only then I began to see how deep down the rabbit hole I’d fallen. Long story. Of course the rights advocates refuse to talk about ASD problems.

  19. Not only is “climate alarmism” not science it is anti-science, the only way an empire can continue is to push such. All known empires did it, deliberately falsifying knowledge. Just look at Ptolemy’s system pushed for 1000 years. Kepler broke that wide open, being the first modern scientist.

    When the Pentagon lined up on this issue with 58 ex-flag officer signatures against Trump’s climate commission, it seems most missed the red alert – Empire needs false narratives. It need lies.

    Now “Asperger” “spectrum disorder” fits exactly into this imperial stunt. Not because of the so-called disorder, but the drugs used to treat it like Respiridone – simply menticide. It is a very short step from anti-science t to menticide, and today after many years of research into induced disorders the drugs are now pushed by “doctors” who have not the faintest idea what they are dealing with. Unbelievable vagueness, fake psychology abounds – it is worse than “climate”, and childrens minds are being bulldozed with insidious chemicals! Psychiatrists are whispering amongst themselves they are actually causing the symptoms!

    This is aside from the drug gangs, meth, … and prescription opioid scandal (Sackler family).

    How many kids with induced fear of climate are being proscribed not only Respiridone, but Ritalin? Ritalin has being doled out for years like Prozak, to produce smiling placid school classes – the Prozak grin.

    I do not know if Greta is on such prescription drugs, but it seem standard accross the transatlantic.
    Trouble is, sudden withdrawal is highly dangerous. There are permanent brain modifications.

    The pervasive drug culture is simply not noticed and menticide continues. So whenever dealing with hysterical climate kids remember you maye be daling with very dangerous, to them, drug induced syndromes.

  20. In my opinion you are much more dangerous than any Aspergers kid. Climate change is real. We see it is happening. We have data, also. International science community is telling us our activity is heating the planet. We know it since 40 yrs ago. We don’t know if the deadline will be after 12, 40 or 100 years. But we know there will be a deadline. We know pretty well our economic model is no more sustainable.
    On the other hand, we pretend to not care. Sure, is much easier. We have all comfort we need, now. Why we should accept any little sacrifice? But hiding a problem is just delaying it.

    An aspergers kid is helping activism. You should thank her, rather than insult her. Because compeared to her, you are just useless, in the best case.
    Jerry above wrote to not scare his kids. It is the opposite, actually the Aspergers kid is helping his kids. Again, the same Jerry wrote climatologists say world is finishing in 12 years. Nobody said this. They say we have 12 years to change before the no return point. Nobody spoke about the end of the world, just him.
    There are any scientist here to prove the ipcc report is totally fake? Or it s just the fear they could be right, and we are spoiling future of our kids? That the point. Not which illness affects Greta.

    • In my opinion you are much more dangerous than any Aspergers kid.

      Ignorance, such as that displayed in your post, is what is dangerous.

      Climate change is real

      Yes, the climate changes. It always has, it always will. Don’t conflate that with “man caused climate catastrophy”.

      We see it is happening

      No. What you see happening is weather.

      We have data, also

      And the data does not say what you clearly think is says. Extreme weather events (again, not climate in and of themselves) are not getting more frequent nor are the getting more intense *ACCORDING TO THE DATA* should you ever care to actually look at the data rather than take some activist/alarmists word for it. But that would require you to look and think for yourself, something you posts shows you have never done.

      International science community is telling us our activity is heating the planet

      That’s an assertion without evidence. Appealing to authority doesn’t make it any less a baseless assertion.

      We know it since 40 yrs ago.

      Have you looked at the predictions made based on what “we know since 40 yrs ago”. Every single prediction of danger and doom has failed to materialize. Clearly what “We know it since 40 yrs ago” isn’t so based on the results. You see science is predictive. If your theory fails in it’s predictions, that theory is garbage.

      We don’t know if the deadline will be after 12, 40 or 100 years

      You could have ended that sentence after the third word.

      We know pretty well our economic model is no more sustainable.

      And here comes the real crux of the issue. It’s not about climate, it never was, it’s about pushing socialism.

      They say we have 12 years to change before the no return point

      And are you aware that they’ve said the same thing many times before? In the late 80s the point of no return was the year 2000, for example. And each time that point of no return passes, they say a different date for the point of no return. How many points of no return have to pass before you wake up and realize it’s bullshit?

    • “There are any scientist here to prove the ipcc report is totally fake?”

      You have it backwards, Mar. It is up to those who are promoting a hypothesis to provide evidence that their hypothesis is correct. The only job for the Skeptic is to say “we don’t see any evidence” when that is appropriate, as is the case with the current state of climate science.

      Mar, all you have to do is provide us with a little of that IPCC evidence that shows conclusively that human-derived, or natural CO2 is affecting the climate in any way and that argument will be over. Skeptics will bow to the facts.

      Do you have any such evidence? Does the IPCC have any such evidence. Not that I have ever seen.

    • Mar

      Please post the credible, empirical, repeatable scientific studies which demonstrate that atmospheric CO2 causes the planet to warm.

      I’ll save you the bother of looking because there are none.

      Now, take any alarmist claim or scientific paper and apply that test to each of them and you will find they all amount to bollox!

      CO2 induced climate change is modern day witchcraft.

      Tragically, you will be too scared to apply that test in case it makes you actually use your brain.

  21. Greta Thunberg looks frighteningly fanatical to me. She reminds me strongly of a cadre of the Chinese Red Guard during the Cultural Revolution in China.

  22. having taken a 14 daze course of Prozac I dunno about a grin?
    turned me zombie like
    Ive had 2 friends suicide on antidepressants and they were’nt suicidal before
    another died, another started having seizures.
    those I know stil taking them are unable to get OFF them as the sideeffects of withdrawal are far worse then the issues they started taking them for.
    someone dies, youre normally and justifiably upset
    go see a do and get handed ssris as a treatment for normal grief!
    kid a bit hyper? dull em down with meds rather than find an outlet for the normal energy not being allowed to be burnt off playing etc
    its NOT science or medicine
    its criminal

    • It is menticide. And Ritalin/Prozac fade beside Respiridone and a host of brain chemistry blockers. They link support/financing to the drug obligation, which is technically illegal most places.
      The make normal psychotherapy either expensive or link it again to pharma.

  23. Poor Greta. I do feel sorry for her. Exceptionally bright, or so we’re told, yet unable to think for herself. Her parents, and teachers, school administrators, and society have all failed her. Some day, perhaps in ten years, when the full gravity of the lies she was fed all her life about “dangerous manmade climate”, and “evil fossil fuels” she may even file a multi-$billion class-action lawsuit. At least by then, perhaps she will have acquired a modicum of wisdom to go along with her bright mind.

  24. She started a world-wide movement of brash, transparent hypocrites who use fossil fuels every day, but then claim that others should not.

    • Yes, John Bell,

      Fossil fuels enable these people’s very expression of rejecting fossil fuels. Their comfort level enabled by fossil fuels is the very foundation of their ability to complain about fossil fuels. They themselves are so addicted to fossil-fuel use that they cannot even see it. If you took away fossil-fuels, then this level of comfort to complain about them would be gone.

  25. One of the problems is bad reporting, most of it probably unintentional. Just this morning, on Fox 13 out of Tampa, the morning host Russell Rhodes was reporting on the story about Florida wanting to go to DST year around. He said that it would save energy because DST gives us an extra hour of daylight each day. Now, he probably meant that there was an extra hour of daylight in the evening, but that’s not what he said. So how many people that do not really understand DST now think there is going to be an extra hour of daylight each day due to DST? Lax reporting, off hand comments that are not factual and plain ignorance do just as much harm as those who willfully set out to deceive.

  26. How Asperger’s folks think is entirely due to conditioning. It is entirely possible for them to develop independence of thought if encouraged to do so. Note the word ENCOURAGED. One trait of Aspergers folks is complete contempt for motivational tools based on belittling, insulting, taunting, sneering and humiliating.

    Schools are appalling centres of pedagogic brainwashing, with teachers presenting facts and children expected to regurgitate them. That sort of highly controlled environment panders to the ASD propensity for control, order and lack of uncertainty. It does not prepare them for the uncertainties, contradictions and hypocrisies of adult life.

    I grew up in an environment where an OCD narcissist father was either totally controlling or totally laissez faire. I did not have one single conversation in 17.5 years with him where a discussion about my childhood, my education, my future, was concerned. Not one. He had everything planned out for his shop floor factory employee who he expected to be a virtuoso violinist, a Nobel Prize-winning scientist and the Rasputin with girls in SE England. I was conditioned to be like an ASD, whether I was one or not.

    I learned to trot out the party line with the best of them. I believed in nothing, knew I was prisoner of my birth and simply waited for a chance to escape. It is a wise child who knows the difference between parenting and coercive employment….

    By chance, I was told by Cambridge University to take a gap year in 1982/3 at a time when gap years were rare. I went to Austria to a different sort of school, studied violin in Salzburg.

    I was exposed to a regimen of encouragement, technical inowledge and emotional warmth studying advanced violin. I faced no pressure to perform for narcissists, spent 13 days between fortnightly two hour sessions taking full responsibility for my development and experienced the fruits of a master-apprentice relationship evolving into a student-mentor relationship. Discussions were respectful, open, discursive and non-binding. Motivation raidly emerged from eithin.

    The bottom line? All the rules and dogma of 17.5 years dissolved as the reality of better methods was acquired.

    I never believed what I was told again. Ever. Why not? Life had taught me that bullshitters lie to get promoted, threaten to retain power and trash those who find a way to avoid them in future.

    The fact is that with such overwhelming levels of State propaganda spread from the tentacles of US power, few people get the chance like me to develop free of it.

    You need to grow up as a bullshitter to live a successful adult life as a bullshitter. Those who try out politics starting from an honourable truthful position never last long: their bullshitting is not refined enough and the truth is career-derailing. And only bullshitters embrace successfully the bullshitting and psychopathic world of the MSM….

    The truth is that everything played out in public is false: both sides spread lies when it suits, smear when it suits, ostracise when it suits, embrace corruption and murder when it suits. There is no honour whatever in politics and the media today. Not so much in certain branches of science either.

    The way to stimulate original thought is to shield the thinkers from the mass media. Far better to let them just observe, imagine, concoct and synthesise in a cocoon.

    The way to create compliant masses is to brainwash and divert.

    And the way to get ASD genetic carriers to take politicians by the horns is not to educate them sufficiently to see both sides of complex arguments.

    However, all those who think Americans should get away with Iraq, Libya, Syria and maybe more in future scot-free need comparable punishments rained down on their nation. Three thousand dead on 9/11 and you were squealing like cowardly wussies. But millions dead in the Middle East is ‘just one of those things’? Try twenty five million US dead and see how many people care……it will be fewer than you imagine. ‘Finally, finally, finally, those American scum got what was coming to them’ will be the most prevalent attitude out there, I am afraid….

    Then American voters might learn how to throw out genocidal politicians, the first- and only prerequisite for leadership by global consent…..

    You Americans who think that Green Misdirection is a greater crime than mass murder need shock therapy the like of which you have never experienced…

    Folks like me who consider mass murder to be anathema and Green Misdirection a propaganda stunt to be vigorously opposed are targeted by the mass murdering anti-green zealots in the US and the mass murdering green zealots in the UK.

    It says that mass murder is what unites western politicians and green propaganda is an allowable bunfight.

    Rather depressing, eh?

    • Three thousand dead on 9/11 and you were squealing like cowardly wussies. But millions dead in the Middle East is ‘just one of those things’?
      ======
      Lessons of history. Sew the wind, reap the whirlwind. Don’t wake a sleeping giant.

    • The larger question is should we REALLY be following the emotional obsessions of autistic children when deciding how to order the economy and standard of living of the ENTIRE WORLD?

      In whose fruitbat universe is that a GOOD idea????

      Like AOC’s rantings, what kills me is that there could even be a serious discussion that this could EVER be a “thing.”

    • Rhys Jaggar

      I rather believe an apology is due to our American cousins mate.

      Tony Blair, our then PM, played a significant part in the Iraq war. Nor are we blameless in innumerable other conflicts. And we are also pretty self serving when it comes to terrorism on our shores.

      As for your comment about 9/11, well, that was off the scale. Rude, cruel and entirely uncalled for. I can’t recall anything but empathy and solidarity from the US when, for example, the Manchester arena was bombed by terrorists.

      I can’t apologise for him folks but I hope you understand this is not the attitude of anyone in the wide circle of friends I have in the UK.

      • Don’t worry, we don’t blame you for the nuts in your midst just as we know you do not blame us for the nuts we have to put with.

  27. “But one issue Autistic and Asperger people share is they tend to take what they are told very literally; they sometimes find it difficult to distinguish fact from fiction, when the fiction is presented as a fact.”
    Perhaps, but she is only 15 and that is a more important factor. The ability to distinguish between fact and fiction should improve with age and experience, if you exclude various adults that work for Hollywood.

  28. Please note that Arrhenius did not conflate the physical chemistry of CO2 in its pure state with its properties as part of a gas mixture, and nowhere in his published work did he use the word ‘greenhouse’.

    There is no seminal paper or scientist associated with ‘greenhouse theory’.

    • Arrhenius also realized, and stated in one of his books, that CO2 added to the atmosphere from burning coal has a positive effect on the Earth and humankind. Alarmists sort of leave out that detail.

  29. Sorry Greta you seem to be just another obsessed child.
    There are many like you these days, but such numbers, or such a juvenile consensus, does not make you correct or ‘special’. It just means you are one of many, many who have learn a script and are confident enough to recite it (just like praying). So given your autistic tendencies, you will find it particularly difficult to change your mind as the evidence for catastrophic climate change does not happen in the coming years.

    And besides why should anyone believe someone as young and inexperience of people and the ways of the world.

    Final note:
    Greta you are being used as a pawn in a much larger political game, a game which you have no control over, a game that will turn away from you when events make it convenient to do so.

  30. Nuts, fake, and plain lies .
    Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Instagram, 03/10/19 ,while holding up a National Geographic magazine, said, “The world is going to end in 12 years. If you have kids, it will end in probably something like six years, because they will just breathe more. I have the science right here.”

    The magazine issue was from 1989.

    Trump’s Climate Commission under Dr. Happer, despite Pentagon resistance, will bring out the cultural illness to full view.

    AOC has teamed up with failed comedian “Nye the science guy” – enjoy the pantomine! Do not hide behind children when you call the Pentagon for regime change when the entire scam is scuppered!

  31. Greta should not be abused as poster girl for climate alarmists. She needs medication for AS developmental disorder. “Deficits in self-identifying emotions or in observing effects of one’s behavior on others can make it difficult for individuals with AS to see why medication may be appropriate. The atypical antipsychotic medications risperidone, olanzapine and aripiprazole have been shown to reduce the associated symptoms of AS, risperidone can reduce repetitive and self-injurious behaviors, aggressive outbursts, and impulsivity, and improve stereotypical patterns of behavior and social relatedness”

    • They are deadly drugs, the “doctors” have no clue what they are doing, and psychiatrists whisper privately they are actually causing the symptoms. All you describe there is brainwashing.
      With “spectrum disorder” they have their climate change – anything can be proved hot or cold.

      Only problem is children’s minds are being bulldozed by chemical hammers.

      All of this will now hit MSM shows – just watch the censorship!

  32. Yes, people with Asperger’s/autism spectrum often have trouble reading voices, micro-expressions, body language, and sometimes shut out sensory signals coming in too strong, too many to process. For that matter, being inumdated with web-logs, podcasts, videos, texts, IRC…can overwhelm most peopke these days. Please don’t get me started on Ocrazio, & the left’s effort to expand background checks except for invaders & climate hysterics, &…

    I found an ACE graph (storm energy over time) that struck me as very powerful evidence of a lack of storm severity worsening, catastrophic global warming… so I forwarded image & link to a warmist hysteric acquaintance because he had last week been claiming severe worsening of storms.

    Now, I’m not a “climate scientist”, though I do take care to try to follow the scientific method, and am not much of a statistician nor mathematician (it’s not my first impulse to apply them), though we both have helped numerous grad students & profs crunch their data, and I once ported a statistics app, but he is far more of a mathematician than I. We both have known academic meteorologists, hurricane predictors & chasers, oceanographers, geo-physical fluid dynamics people.

    So, he responds, “I don’t believe it. The graph must not mean what you think. It doesn’t agree with what I know.” So, I pressed for a more concrete argument…and he sent me a URL from a power-mad watermelon site, with pictures of “beautiful people”, and text merely asserting in essence, “The sky is falling!!! …severe storms…catastrophic… real soon, now! End of the world! Please donate! Donate! Donate!”

    No data tables, no graphs, no links to data or graphs, nothing about methodology or design of models, no discussion of instruments/transducers/gauges or Stephens shelters or proper location, no analyses & logical arguments over adjustments, homogenization, aggregation, no factor analysis, Maunder minimum, Roman warm period, Little Ice Age…

    Just pretty people, snow, catastrophe, donate.

    OTOH, here & on other climate web-logs, there are data, graphs, debates over methodology, solar activity, water vapor, methane, CO2, history, chemistry, problems interpreting tree rings from various places (because of soil nutrients, rain/drought, fire…), compensation for sensor satellite orbit wobbles… nuts & bolts. Their marketing/ propaganda techniques are far more sophisticated than our presentations.

    We need more pretty pictures of beautiful people in stylish (but not too stylish) outfits (playing out-doors?, standing on mountain peaks, on flowered prairies, sorghum fields, scenic forest), posed smiling (or in consternation of imminent doom) into the camera to convince certain audiences.

    • “I found an ACE graph (storm energy over time) that struck me as very powerful evidence of a lack of storm severity worsening, catastrophic global warming… so I forwarded image & link to a warmist hysteric acquaintance because he had last week been claiming severe worsening of storms.

      Now, I’m not a “climate scientist”, though I do take care to try to follow the scientific method”

      Scientific method.
      Find a graph.
      dont check the source data
      dont check the literature on the limitations of ACE as a metric
      Decide the graph is EVIDENCE
      send to someone else, equally unqualified to understand it.

      SCIENCE!

      • Steven Mosher

        And you would know what about science? Your a salesman!

        Oh, I forgot, your employer handed you the title of scientist, so now you understand the scientific method.

        Give it a rest mate.

      • SCIENCE is science shouted together by all 7 groupthink members, S,C,I,E,N,C and E.

        I expect a lot of shouting, harrumphing at Trump’s Climate Commission. The Pentagon might label it a national security threat, and blame it on the Russians – casus-beli!

  33. This young lady is exceedingly blessed. In earlier epochs, people fell for the story that burning witches at the stake would improve the weather and save their crops. Aspergers or autistic young girls for miles around were incinerated. Today they can declare CAGW and be deified.

  34. When we were growing up we were all told that nuclear war was the greatest threat facing humanity.

    Well, guess what. The nuclear weapons are still out there. Older, more unstable, but still out there. And they are spreading.

    And a single miscalculation could do more damage in a single day than the very worst forecasts for global warming over the next 100 years.

    So why is everyone worried about global warming and almost no one is worried about nuclear war?

    And let’s not pretend nuclear war is something remote or unlikely. The risk is very real. NK has a working hydrogen boosted soviet layer cake device, capable of destroying the US power grid via an EMP pulse. As such, there is tremendous pressure on the US to launch a first strike on NK, which has a very real potential to spread to a nuclear exchange with China, with the Russians the big winners. Because if the NK launches first, the US is done as a world power.

    And this doesn’t even begin to address the potential for technology transfer to Iran. The likely outcome dwarfs even the worst imaginings of climate science. So where are the school strikes.

    Where are the movie stars heading to NK and Iran? Why do we only see them in Canada, for a photo shoot with oil sands and polar bears.

    • The movie stars and the other Lefties are afraid of murderous dictators. They don’t know how to deal with them, so they pretend they are not the problem but rather the United States is the problem. They do this because they think it is possible for them to control the behavior of the U.S. but they don’t think they can control the behavior of the murderous dictators, so they focus on the U.S. and any Republican president that might be in Office.

      Fear is also the reason the Left won’t criticize radical Islam. They know there are lots of things to criticize about radical Islam, but they keep their mouths shut about it, even though some of the issues are “life and death” and women’s rights issues. Silence from them.

      The radical Left are basically cowards. They are tough on their domestic opponents, mainly because Republicans won’t fight back (yet), but they want no part of taking on foreign opponents. They don’t know how to do it (witness the failure to defend the US southern border) and they don’t want any part of it. Which makes them incapable of defending the United States and should make them ineligible for elected office.

      Democrat presidents get the US into international jams, and Repubican presidents have to go in and fix things.

      Let’s keep the Democrats out of Office in the future and we will have a lot fewer problems. Electing Democrats is like allowing the inmates to run the asylum.

    • ferd berple

      Give it a rest mate, you’re scaring the horses.

      A single hurricane has the destructive energy of tens of thousand of nuclear weapons.

  35. What a lovely young girl. She has the countenance of Mona Lisa and visage similar to portraits by other masters.
    That is appropriate, I suppose, for one of those whose numbers are growing, so mysterious to us and created by The Master.

      • saveenergy

        It must be a full moon. Read this whole thread and even some you wouldn’t expect it from are dribbling the most wacky stuff.

        Peta, on the other hand, has been heading in that direction for a while now.

          • You came in here to make rude comments about afflicted children and any who might say something nice about them, didn’t you?

            Did it help you feel better?

  36. Jean-Pascal van Ypersele, the Belgian climate expert, an AGW believer and former vice-president of the IPCC, congratulated Greta Thunberg. Why am I not surprised?

  37. I’m Asperger’s-like and really high-functioning autistic now, though I started out with classic autism as a little kid, and I’m a strong skeptic of CAGW alarmism!

  38. There is a difference between education and indoctrination. Some people fail to recognize that, others take advantage of that. Kids are to young to recognize the difference.

  39. And today I read in a Belgian newspaper that somebody proposes Greta Thunberg to receive the Nobel
    Prize of Peace.
    The world becomes crazy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *