WaPo showcases the “Anti-Greta” Thunberg

In an interesting turn of events, the Washington Post has done a front-page feature on Naomi Seibt, a German climate skeptic and YouTuber that WaPo describes as “… 19-year-old German who, like Greta, is blond, eloquent and European.”

Some excerpts:

But Naomi denounces “climate alarmism,” calls climate consciousness “a despicably anti-human ideology,” and has even deployed Greta’s now famous “How dare you?” line to take on the mainstream German media.

“She’s a fantastic voice for free markets and for climate realism,” said James Taylor, director of the Arthur B. Robinson Center for Climate and Environmental Policy at the Heartland Institute, an influential libertarian think tank in suburban Chicago that has the ear of the Trump administration.

Later this week, Naomi is set to make her American debut at the Conservative Political Action Conference, or CPAC, a high-profile annual gathering just outside Washington of right-leaning activists.

Full article here.

Here is a video worth watching:

177 thoughts on “WaPo showcases the “Anti-Greta” Thunberg

    • Then they and their handlers need to leave us adults alone and keep out of politics and science, both of which are far above their understanding. However, on balance, I’d rather listen to Naomi.

      • You’re trying to make excuses for your own immoral actions by blaming “their handlers” for what you do publicly insult or support publicly insulting a child.

        • Cannie, Greta has been thrust onto the world stage, her parents encouraged and tutored her. Her mother is a famous opera singer and her father an actor. Both are strong and committed climate activists with famous connections. She is following a script, she has had no scientific education and her parents encourage her activism because it makes her feel better, never mind the very real damage that she is doing to young people globally with the emotional propaganda that she parrots.

          She knows nothing about true science. She is simply a very effective marketing tool, and she does not belong on the world stage.

          She is being used, and at the moment she is enjoying the limelight but her world will come crashing down when she learns the truth.

          • I’m pretty convinced these days that ALL the “actors” out there bloviating about everything from “climate change action” to “consent issues for cows” are bought and paid for by activist groups like Sierra Club, PETA, Greenpeace, et al. ACTING, after all, is what they do, for money, and most are way to under-educated and shallow to have these “burning issues” at the top of their minds in actuality.

            It’s all an ACT–100% astroturf. Follow the money . . .

        • Cannie, normally you’re right and it’s hands off minors even when they are brought to the publics attention by something out of their control (as an example children of politicians or famous people). Once they willingly enter the public arena to support causes and political change they lose their minor protection status and they best be prepared for it because the gloves will come off. It’s a rough and tumble world out there, if you want your children to maintain their innocence for as long as possible, neither throw them to the wolves or allow them to climb into the wolf pen on their own.

        • One is allowed to point out errors in a child’s thinking without necessarily insulting the child. Your stance is unreasonable.

        • Like Saddam Hussein and Baghdad Bob who used to take cover in schools or hospitals during air raids, Greta is being used as a human shield by the movement as offered up by her handlers. Another despicable tactic by cowards that wont debate the science.

      • Naomi is of age from a US perspective, too. She can enter into contracts, marry without her parents’ consent, join the military without her parents consent, and vote in state and national elections. Her parents have no legal control over her. Greta is not of age for all those things – were she an American.

        I don’t think Naomi is a child, and to characterize her as such is to belittle her. Greta on the other hand is a nice financial asset for her family, which is what they use her for.

        • I’m 66 and I do not consider myself to be “normal.” Normal is an insult. What is important that critical thinking is used to come to conclusions and not simple parroting. This new girl is much more pleasing to look at and seems to be more cheerful.

          The messenger is not important, it is what they have that backs up what they say and how true the message is.

          • Jeff, I am with you there. Before accepting that one is “normal” one should assess the “norm”.

            Normal, in another sense, means “perpendicular to” – the exact opposite of consonant or parallel. So one way or another we are all normal.

    • Naomi finished school after 13 years able to study.
      She is well reflected , with knowledge of science.

      • Naomi graduated German high school (Gymnasium) with the perfect score being 16 years old. She has won German youth research competition in physics and finished second in math.

    • Naomi is NOT a child. Greta was abused by her parents indulging her delusions and inappropriate behavior, not due to using her as a pawn for climate change. Rather than deal with the delusions, they reinforced them. Plus, they made a pile of cash off this and possibly a nobel prize. That’s the abuse.

      • I don’t consider Greta a child either. When you act like an adult and enter the spotlight you give up that designation.

    • Some people want to give 16 years olds the vote. This lady is refreshing considering that most of her age has been brainwashed by the education system on what to think, not how to think.

      • I’m all for taking away the vote from “teenagers”. And someday I will find Neal Boortz’s “rant” about what happens when you let women vote. The coincidences are factual and hilarious. I believe it starts with maybe some mid-West state/territory in the 1890s through to the “handsome” Warren Harding (Who? Did I get that right? The first Presidential election women had the vote.) etc.

        • My Dad told me that “so-n-so” would be elected Governor by a landside, cause he is quite handsome and most all the women will vote for him.

          And Dad was right.

      • You give no proper credit to young people today. They are no more “brainwashed” than you are. They think critically, indeed humans from a very young age learn to think and act independently (ever heard of the “terrible twos”?).

        Agree or disagree with either of these teenagers, you must not demean and belittle them because they disagree with you.

        The perspective of very young adults certainly is subject to evolution due to maturing and life learning.

        But there are gazillions of middle aged and the elderly who think no more critically than the average teenager. They just believe they’re smarter.

        • Duane, are you saying that young people today, many of whom believe they can change their gender at will and that Socialism is good and desirable goal, are “no more brainwashed” than I and other skeptics? You use that word but I do not think you know what it means!

          • Abolition Man. If you think young people today believe they can change their gender at will you’re easily duped by activists. Most are just as astute as we were. Many are naive on some issues, like socialism, but they grow up, like we did. Most are reasonable and sensible when you talk to them, and I have faith in their abilty to sort out out the truth.

        • Duane,

          Nice post! Many here evidently don’t know Greta’s story. Suggesting she was brainwashed, or that her parents pushed her into her activism, is ridiculous – at least according to Greta and her parents and I see no reason to doubt what they say. Her parents were concerned by her obsession, but since it seemed to help her depression, they allowed it to continue. Apparently she got her parents to stop flying. That’s such an easy assertion to falsify that I bet someone would have by now if it weren’t true. The young woman has guts.

          Ah…Naomi is a paid spokesman. That’s interesting. And she doesn’t deny AGW, she just says it’s “ridiculous” to think CO2 emissions have “that much impact,” whatever that means. And she’s not just a “skeptic,” she’s a conservative about other issues; its seems even from her own account that her stance is based more on politics than a deep knowledge of the science.

          “The reason I don’t like the term anti-Greta is that it suggests I myself am an indoctrinated puppet, I guess, for the other side,” she says in one video. Asked if she meant that as a criticism of Greta, Naomi says: “That sounds kind of mean, actually.” She added: “I don’t want to shame her in any way.” …How sweet of her.

          “Graham Brookie directs the Digital Forensic Research Lab, an arm of the nonprofit Atlantic Council that works to identify and expose disinformation. While the campaign “is not outright disinformation,” Brookie said in an email, it “does bear resemblance to a model we use called the 4d’s — dismiss the message, distort the facts, distract the audience, and express dismay at the whole thing….The tactic is intended to create an equivalency in spokespeople and message. In this case, it is a false equivalency between a message based in climate science that went viral organically and a message based in climate skepticism trying to catch up using paid promotion.”

          • Her parents and her grandfather were activists, would you say its irresponsible for a child which Greta is ,to follow a activists philosophy before she can understand ,politics ,science and how a activist at such a young age will be labelled for life.

            Any parent who allows their child to become a activist, particularly when they have been put in the worlds spot light, is irresponsible, and damming that child for life. That’s ok with you is it? Because you happen to agree with the lies she has been fed,

            Greta is a pawn of desperation ,one tool in a box to manipulate the worlds population into agreeing with,which otherwise would never gain a mandate from the people, she has no idea of the science,she can not answer a question “she just knows she right” I hope you and your kind take responsibility for this kid when her world comes crashing down, but you wont will you ,youl just fade off into the crowd licking your wounds after backing a lost cause.

          • Greta’s message is one of anti-growth, anti-free enterprise, pro-socialism, pro-communism and full government control of everything. It is entirely political and of the kind that always yields death and destruction.

          • “In this case(Naomi), it is a false equivalency between a message based in climate science that went viral organically and a message based in climate skepticism trying to catch up using paid promotion.”

            “Disinformation”- just exactly is it? Greta’s message is mostly about her feelings. Very little science is involved- just as most published work on climate is badly planned, badly executed, filled with errors, and often only published by being shopped around or becoming a paid for publication.

            Naomi seems more involved with the background information and why a conservative outlook is more appropriate than the often propaganda-like presentation of most climate papers and new releases. There are many problems in climate science, mostly from poor quality papers caused by very misguided, or even deceitful use of statistics.

            A simple experiment- dig deep enough and you can find high/low temperatures for every day in the record over many years. Their utility depends on whether they are actual highs and lows or merely taken in the morning and afternoon. That is the Data we have, supplemented a lot by satellite data since 9979. Average the high/low temperatures as almost all climate research does and you have a number not a data point. It does not have much applicability anywhere even in the local weather report because the weather and climate don’t respond to averages. They primarily respond to differences and changes- in air pressure, temperature, wind speed, moisture in the air, and sunlight.

            BTW, Greta’s message did not go viral organically. Her original post was carefully orchestrated and guided by her parents. It was released and promoted too, as I imagine Naomi’s was. Greta too got paid, in spades, with catered travel to climate conferences, ocean voyages, and scads of free publicity from news organizations.

          • Kristi, do you know how wind and solar renewables come about? Do you know that the toxic black sludge, a byproduct of their production, in only one of the mines in China once filled a lake of 10 square kilometres. Some of it has been transferred into huge vats, hidden away somewhere as they simply don’t know what to do with it, partly because it’s also radioactive. People and animals in surrounding farms near this lake have died here.

            Children as young as five are involved in mining copper and lithium in Africa and South America for long days without protection against toxic exposure.

            The mining necessary for rare earth materials are vast and open cut. Acids and other chemicals are necessary to extract the required small amounts of materials per tons of ore which is where the black sludge comes in. If you haven’t seen mining trucks I suggest you do some research. These trucks cost upward of one and a half million dollars. They do not run on renewable energy, the tyres are huge and are made from oil based products. The manufacturing plants don’t run on renewable energy either, neither does the global transport including shipping. These involve oil and fossil fuels.

            Wind and solar renewables might be called ‘farms’, but these industrial plants do not grow magically.

            At the end of renewables life you will hear talk of recycling. Do you know that there is very little recycling anywhere in the world? What there is only partially recycled. Recycling plants are extremely costly to set up and are not cost effective and the process also creates toxic waste as acids and other chemicals are used in this process too, to recover the rare earth materials. The blades from wind turbines cannot be recycled at all, do some research there too and ask how big these blades are and what materials are used.

            Did you know that there are many different types of solar panels and that some of them leach cadmium and lead into the soil and waterways when damaged by hail, storm events or fire. Here in Australia we have recently had fires, as I’m sure you are aware. We have also had hailstorms. These events are not unusual or unprecedented but at the same time, many solar panels have been damaged. No one will tell us what has happened to these damaged panels. One of our state’s, Victoria, has declared damaged panels as toxic waste, which means they cannot be sent to landfill.

            We have a solar farm a couple of kilometers from us that covers 310 hectares, if you don’t know how much land that is then please do some practical research. The government bodies here are looking to put in an additional 816 hectares, also just a few kilometers away. We have no say in this! The existing solar farm was built over two waterways, at least on of the proposed will be next to a lagoon, with wildlife and waterbirds. That one would also be across the road from the town’s water treatment plant, we live in the country.

            All we see is a potential future instu waste dump the first time we have a severe weather event, our panels are the thin film type that release the toxins more easily. Our water comes primarily from bores and is then treated, we have vast aquifers under our entire region. Another concern for us is that before we had done so much research into solar panels, we put them on our shed roof which feeds the tanks that supply our drinking water! If they too are damaged by fire or storms we potentially have 130,000 litres of contaminated water!

            FS6 is a necessary gas used in all electricity installations, primarily as a fire retardant. It definitely has it’s use worldwide, but it is being added to atmosphere unnecessarily by the use of wind and solar renewables. FS6 is 22,500 more potent than CO2 as a promoter of green house gases. FS6 is manmade and is not taken up naturally as with CO2 and trees etc. FS6 is also globally mandated to be declared in the case of an accidental leak. FS6 has increased significantly in the atmosphere in recent decades and there are many people who do not follow the rules.

            You are being lied to, Greta is being lied to and she is unwittingly promoting these lies and being rewarded for doing so! The truth has been systematically shut down and the only danger to the planet is being perpetrated by climate alarmists, and they are in fact adding to it.

            You can believe all the theories you like. I am only seeking to tell the truth, my truth, this comment has nothing to do with ‘disinformation’, I am simply fed up with being walked all over by people who really don’t give a damn and the treat me like a lesser human being.

            As a climate alarmist you need to take responsibility for the damage you are actively promoting on a global level, without regard to the ecology, economy or to your fellow human being! You don’t even understand that none of this is really even about the climate yet you are creating a huge ecological disaster.

            Only the elite socialists will benefit in the end and trust me they will not alter their lifestyles in any way. You are being taken for fools and you cannot even comprehend the future you are heading for, loss of freedom of speech will apply to you too, as with freedom of choice. Like Greta you are unwittingly promoting their propaganda.

          • B d Clark – February 24, 2020 at 5:28 pm

            Her (Greta) parents and her grandfather were activists,

            Then tis no wonder that Greta’s early childhood nurturing screwed up her mind and is now diagnosed as being autistic, obsessive and weird as a $3 bill.

            Greta is, …… what Greta’s environment nurtured Greta to be.

          • Kristi, Naomi is a skeptic and a conservative on most issues, like all climate change skeptics. Conservatives live in the real world, are not anti-human, and check the accuracy of theories and claims, needing actual verification and real evidence. Conservatives like Naomi, also listen to opposing views, not just one narrative. She is also strong in science (top of her class in physics and math), as many skeptics are, because science is a practise of skeptism, not false consensus. Climate change believers and alarmists are invariably on the far left political spectrum, and have education in humanities, political science, literature, women’s studies, economics etc, NOT science. The scientists who promote ‘climate change’ are activists who believe the Globalist agenda is the way forward. Globalism is just an emerging tyranny, conceived by UN elitists and academics, to control humanity and save a planet that doesn’t need saving.
            Naomi threatens the legitamacy of ‘the climate change ‘ narrative that you chose to hitch your wagon to, not because you have checked it’s accuracy or because you have listened to skeptical scientists and other opposing voices, but because it gives you a sense of moral superiority over others, and lets you think you care more about the environment than skeptics. I suggest you look up Agenda 21, which is the Globalist Agenda, and then maybe you will understand it’s link to so-called ‘climate change’. In the meantime, explain to me how our climate changed on a scale of decades, centuries and millenia, in the past thousand years, because it isn’t taught in grade school or university, it isn’t remotely undestood, involves a multitude of variables, and their are no experts on this subject. As with all ‘climate change’ promoters, instead of supporting your views with scientific facts, you demean and degrade people who disagree with the climate change narrative, instead of checking the accuracy of she and other skeptics, are saying.

        • Duane – February 24, 2020 at 12:47 pm

          You give no proper credit to young people today. They are no more “brainwashed” than you are.

          Duane, ….. it appears your problem is, ….. “you can’t see the forest for the trees”.

          My guess is, you are one of said “teenagers”, …… or a “twentyish” adult, maybe still in college, …..or an employee of the Public Education System and thus forced to defend against any and all “brainwashing” claims that all students are now being subjected too.

        • Duane

          “But there are gazillions of middle aged and the elderly who think no more critically than the average teenager. They just believe they’re smarter.”

          Experience is a far better educator than schooling can be. Being well-schooled is nothing compared with being well-educated.

          • Holly, there are aspects of what Duane said that are fair comments.

            It does however come across as the comments of someone young. I was a married mother and working full time at Greta’s age. I had to grow up very quickly and indeed I felt like a grownup having taken full responsibility for caring for my family and going out to work. I missed out on the rebellious student stage, I was busy focussing on living life, paying bills. That was this side of fifty years ago.

            Two points here, the first is that in our youth we believe that we know better than people of mature age. Likely anyone older than us, more so if we are smart. There used to be a word used for older people who had accumulated a wealth of information and knowledge from their life experience, wisdom. And these people were once respected for their life experience and for their wisdom. Some young people even turned to them for advice! Sadly respect has disappeared almost completely from today’s society.

            My second point is that today, the education system globally, primes children to think in leftist, or socialist terms. Climate change is taught as though it is 100% true, children are taught that the science is settled. Children trust their parents and their teachers, as you would expect. That which is taught is perpetuated, passed on.

            University graduates would find it difficult in this day and age to find a career in science that didn’t follow the climate change theory. That is where the money is, that it what they have been primed for their entire lives.

            The ‘older’ people that Duane refers to were lucky in many regards, they had more freedom as children. Freedom to explore nature and their surroundings, freedom to make small mistakes, but the most important freedom they had was the balance in their education, the opportunities to question what they were taught. In the subject of science especially this would have been encouraged.

            Young people these days are no less smart, but they really need to ask questions. They cannot simply believe everything they’re told. Does is not strike them as odd that anyone with a different opinion to them has been shut down by social and MSM? If they let go of their egos just a little they would find that there is a wealth of information out there, that can be verified. This forum has so many highly educated and experienced people who would love more young people to make respectful enquiries.

          • A question for Holly Elizabeth and Duane.

            Did either one of you have to work for the money to purchase your first PC and/or Cell phone and also pay the monthly IP and telephone provider fees?

            My guess is, all those things, plus many, many others, were provided for you “free-of-charge” until long past your teenage years.

    • Aaron Watters

      Unlike Greta, Naomi is an extremely bright and articulate young lady who does this because she wants to. Not because she has attention seeking celebrity parents stage managing her every move.

      I’ve seen her a few times over the last couple of years. She doesn’t need scripts, she knows her subject matter, she’s natural and relaxed, and doesn’t hide behind a disability.

      Good luck to her.

    • One under 17 and is propagandized into being neurotic and demanding the destruction of her future prosperity in order to fight a make believe demon.
      The other is an adult who is educated and is demanding that her future be prosperous.
      One had a normal childhood, the other is a nutcase and nothing could have provided her with one. But what her parents have done to her is nothing less than child abuse.

    • my thoughts exactly. Why are we listening to children who’ve had these ideas planted in their tiny brains?

    • We’ve got our own Greta here in Oregon – a South Salem high school senior named Angelique Prater, who is acting in the interests of the PERS benefit receptors – i.e. the teachers – trying to help ram through the latest Cap and Trade effort – which the legislators refuse to allow to go to a vote (even in Oregon) – basically a bunch of tax-payer-funded activists acting against the interests of the state.

      This young woman apparently wants to be a lawyer (GOD forbid) and is sold on AOC’s lies about twelve years to the end – apparently being one of the ‘idiots’ AOC chided for believing her.


    • Naomi is an adult who did her own research and reached her own conclusions about this issue, not an emotionally disabled child being exploited.

      Apples and Oranges

    • Beginning in 2014, Thunberg — who is diagnosed with Asperger’s, high-functioning autism, and obsessive-compulsive disorder — struggled to eat, play, laugh, or talk with others as she entered the fifth grade. She’s now a high school dropout and being manipulated by adults.

  1. What interesting turn of events is this exactly?

    “How a group allied with the Trump administration is paying a German teen to question established climate science.”

    Seems like pretty standard leftist mainstream media propaganda to me.

    • Craig “question established climate science.”? Like climate science should never be questioned? You might as well use 97% as a false base to proclaim we only have (fill in the years here) to do (fill in the solution here) or we will all die. You are perpetrating propaganda without thought. I’m glad you posted as I’m sure in the future you will be quoting Skeptical Science or WWF to the amusement or dismay of people that actually read scientific research with a scientific skeptical eye. Greta was hailed as the voice of our youth while any opposing view was dismissed. Shameful at best. I believe you support the first amendment as long as no one else is allowed to do the same.

      • Richard, you say that I’m perpetrating propaganda without thought? Maybe you are responding without a thought? That was the subtitle of the article that I quoted, and I wrote that it seems like standard leftist mainstream media propaganda. Not sure what it is that you’re all worked up about.

    • Craig,

      What part of it is propaganda? Is Heartland not allied with Trump?

      ” Heartland has increasingly focused on climate change over the past decade. Its staff and researchers enjoy ready access to the Trump administration, and one of its senior fellows, William Happer, served as a senior director on the White House National Security Council between September 2018 and 2019.”

      Perhaps you’d like to demonstrate that this is false?

      And yes, Heartland is paying Naomi. She’s their spokesperson. She questioned climate science before being hired by Heartland, but seems to have made money off it then, too.

      • Is not the IPCC the propaganda arm of the un ,paid for by world governments through taxes with no mandate from the people to pay such institutions,

        Seems to me you just dont like a open debate do you ,like the BBC refuses to show a unbiased view on climate,because they decided ( the debate is settled) .

      • How much money has Greta made? hows the organisations and trade Mark’s shes setting up worth? Which organisations are pulling the strings and financing HER? but that’s alright because you agree with her right! But you criticise naomi because shes being financed ,

        Do you see how hypocritical you are,

      • Like the abortion industry, the climate industrial complex involves annual spending in the many billions of dollars. If global carbon taxes are enacted, it will be in the trillions.

        One can play on either side, but the greatest amount of money and revenue is going to the climate fear mongers. That is the side that values money over human life.

      • …but seems to have made money off it

        Oh, only marxists psychopats, new prists of AGW can deal with money? All the deplorable servs must eat locusts and pray to the God of Sunpower. We, Untermenschen, Need to learn natural order.

        Than you for the ohnesty.

      • Everyone should go and read Sheryl Atkisson’s THE SMEAR. Then you’ll know exactly how often you are reading bought-and-paid-for content from activist groups, political parties or shadowy NGO’s when you think you’re reading “news” or the opinions of real individuals.

        Boiler-plate carpet-bombing with repetitive content is one of the “tells.” Isn’t it, Kristi?

      • Kristi Silber,

        Juliet Eilperin is an indoctrinator for global warming alarmism with a long record:


        Read her article for signs of her “slant” on Ms. Seibert. It sure isn’t news – it is, as Craig say, propagandizing, editorializing. Somehow Seibert is inauthentic, whereas Gretta Thunberg is the real deal.

        What interests me here is how Washington Post echoes the values of its new owner and how his record 10 billion dollar gift breathes new life into the flagging voices of climate activists like yourself.

        Oh no, it isn’t propaganda at all.

      • President Trump gets it Kristi, that’s why he ran for President, and WON. He understands the Globalist threat and its link to ‘climate change’, and it’s goal to abolish sovereign nations and rule from a central world government, intead of rule by citizens of their own countries. He is a conservative, a staunch constitutionalist, and a rare ‘true man of the people’. He agrees with conservative thinkers, like the Heartland Institute, William Happer, Willie Soon (Solar Physicist), Judith Curry (ATmospheric Scientist), Richard Lindzen (Atmospheric Scientist), Anthony Watt (Meteorologist), Patrick Moore (Co-Founder of Greenpeace), Roy Spencer(Atmospheric Scientist), Donna Laframboise (Investigative Journalist), Ross McKitirick (Mathametician), Steve MacIntyre (Economics Professor), Peter Ridd (Professor and Great Barrier Reef expert) and 100’s of others, all being persecuted by the climate change cabal, of which you are part. In contrast, none of these people attack climate change promoters. Of course skeptics and conservative thinkers support each other and other skeptics and people who can critically think, who understand the threat of ‘climate change’ to Individual Freedom and Rule by the People, not the State, and who understand the Globalist ideology (Marxism and Anti-Human Environmentalism) and it’s tyrannical aims.
        Have you read Agenda 21?

    • For the most part, it seemed to be even-handed, but they did have to get their digs in. For instance, saying Heartland is “mostly funded by anonymous sources” as if anonymous sources are automatically evil. Many of the left wing ‘think’ tanks are funded anonymously also.

  2. I don’t know what to think. I’m agin manipulation of children but perhaps to fight fire with fire we need a blonde tweenie as well. Now if she could be given a quick course on the science and be able to extrude facts and figures and sceptical argument, it might be tolerable.

    • In contrast to Greta she is aware of science and arguments, able to argument as well in German as in English showing her knowledge.

    • Naiomi is not a tweeni, she is legally an adult. Neither is Greta. A tweeni is (in the English language) a person between the ages of 10-and and 12 (inclusive).

    • fretslider


      I have just had two debates with two separate climate loonies online and no matter how many times I knock down their predictable nonsense, they just keep coming back for more until they eventually flounce off leaving me with the ‘withering’ phrase“You don’t know what you’re talking about.”

      The difference is, of course, I frequent WUWT where topics are discussed, unlike skepticalcsience (other alarmist sites are available) where it’s all scripted.

      To any question one poses, they all come back with the same copy and past crap lifted from skepticalscience, and don’t even have the common courtesy to acknowledge where it’s from.

      It really is like shooting fish in a barrel.

  3. At least Naomi is an adult, who graduated from their version of high school. St. Greta is a child, is not learning, and will always be a Useful Idiot for the Cult of Climastrology.

  4. Don’t for a minute think the WaPo has gone all righty. Read the article and you’ll see it’s anything but positive towards Naomi and the Heritage Foundation.

    Here’s a key paragraph about Naomi:

    Graham Brookie directs the Digital Forensic Research Lab, an arm of the nonprofit Atlantic Council that works to identify and expose disinformation. While the campaign “is not outright disinformation,” Brookie said in an email, it “does bear resemblance to a model we use called the 4d’s — dismiss the message, distort the facts, distract the audience, and express dismay at the whole thing.”

    In other words they’re calling her a liar. Of course that description applies to Greta in spades.

  5. When there’s an action, there’s a reaction.

    Our kids are saturated ad nauseaum while desperate teachers try each and every way to coerce them in the canonical climate orthodoxy.

    The protest notes we get when our kid argues that the sky is not burning “because dad has been there yesterday” or alike, are a creative evidence on how desperate teachers are to hit buttons, any buttons.

    First they tried to invoke parent’s lack of responsibility and now, they clearly state that our “socially outcast child rising methods” should be closer looked at by the youth protection social services.

    Talk about democracy….

  6. I would like to see an Epic Rap Battle between these two.
    It could be as fun Chuck Norris versus Abe Lincoln.

  7. Well, the msm is behaving true to form – as soon as they noticed the Kardashians were getting lots of attention on social media with stories of no real substance (just like Greta’s), they piled on with with their own “influencers” to look like they were up with the times.

    And while I’m on the topic of msm, has anyone noticed that climate ‘science’ these days produces its revelations packaged ready for msm distribution, rather than for consideration by other specialists in the fields, or the established academic body of knowledge on the subject.

    Msm and climate ‘science’ – a marriage made in heaven hell.

  8. It matters not. David Attenborough, the UN, COP nor the filthy-rich in Davos are liable to embrace Naomi or call on her to speak to power. But we know where truth lies….and lies are truth (to them).

  9. I was somewhat surprised to see that the WaPo actually acknowledged her existence, but not that they lied about her and her opinions.

    So she’s coming to the US. Will she get the same reception as Greta? Yeah, I know. Dumb question, of course she won’t. She’ll be ignored. Most people won’t even hear about her beyond the WaPo propaganda piece.

    • Perhaps something has been organised. There is after all quite some interest in debunking the Green New Deal in an election year.

    • “So she’s coming to the US. Will she get the same reception as Greta? Yeah, I know. Dumb question, of course she won’t.”

      Well, Naomi will probably be ignored by the Leftwing Media, but then again, she may get some coverage. She is due to speak at CPAC (see below) where she will get a rousing reception from all the conservatives there, and that might make the Leftwing news. Trump might tweet about her.

      From the artcle: “Later this week, Naomi is set to make her American debut at the Conservative Political Action Conference, or CPAC, a high-profile annual gathering just outside Washington of right-leaning activists.”

      end excerpt

      It should be noted that CPAC blacklisted Senator Mitt Romney from this event after Romney voted in favor on one count which would lead to removing the president from office. So Mitt lost his invitation. It’s probably a good thing. If he spoke there you wouldn’t be able to tell what he was saying for all the booing going on.

  10. Tell you the truth, I doubt that Greta has Asperger Syndrome. She was in Edmonton, where she was ambushed by a hostile Rebel journalist in a hotel corridor, and the ambush was recorded on videotape. She answered the questions with her standard boilerplate, but she did it gracefully, showing no signs of social anxiety. She even made a joke. She seemed pretty neurotypical to me. So maybe she’s using a fake Asperger diagnosis to avoid having to give interviews, which would expose her ignorance. That’s my guess.

    And why is this girl so short? She’s about a half-an-inch taller than the official ceiling for dwarfism, yet her parents are of normal heights. We have been told that her small size was caused by a bout with anorexia nervosa. Her anorexia was caused by fear of an imminent climate catastrophe, and cured by her decision to become an activist? I would dearly love to hear a specialist in the treatment of eating disorders assess the credibility of that one.

  11. Those of us that understand how propaganda is executed are not surprised that they have dragged out another young tool to provide counterpoint to their other young tool. It was expected. Once all of us fall on one young tool’s side or the other, they’ve got us, or at least our minds. We will now accept young tools as spokespersons for this, and whatever future scams they come up with. “But, but, my tool says…”

    It’s like how they use the word “carbon” as the trigger word in their “Climate Change” scam, and then put up shills for and against carbon as a “pollutant.” The result is all of us debating carbon as a cause of the “Climate Change” scam instead of pointing out the failures of their “predictions,” and calling out their scam as a scam. They’re in our heads and halfway home with us doing some of the driving.

    “Climate Change” is but another money and power plundering scam, regardless of whatever young, or old, tools they put out in front.

    • Jay –

      Counter-propaganda is occasionally useful. Especially when most, if not all, of it is truth.

    • Jay, ‘climate change’ is the main tool for instituting Globalism, an emerging tyranny, with a Marxist and anti-human radical environmentalist ideology, whose followers aim is to rule humanity from a central world government, by dismantling Capitalism, Individual Freedom and Liberty, all in the name of ‘saving the planet’ from humanity. People will put up with the rhetoric until they are actually economically affected by it, then it will be exposed and expunged. At least in Western Nations it will be. Most of the rest of the world’s nations are governed by corrupt dictatorships, and they are willing dupes for Globalism. Developing nations are main targets for the Globalist Agenda, in order to keep them from actually developing. ‘Too many people in the world’ Globalists and environmentalists will tell you, people in developing nations are disposable to Globalists. Globalism and climate change are inventions of the UN, about 38 years ago, and it has mestastisized in the years since. Note how the UN is discouraging the use of pesticides that can save invaluable crops in Africa’s nations stricken with locusts, putting people in danger of famine and disease. I hope President Trump and America steps in to help, and to feed the nations if necessary.

      • “in order to keep them from actually developing.”

        This claim has credibility, Miss Birtwistle, since “not developing” has been the result of the globalists shutting down the use of DDT to eradicate malaria in Africa. European Greens extorted the ban by threatening to cease buying African products (flowers, even) if they didn’t ban DDT. How do you constrain development? Kill 500,000 children every year.

  12. The comments are horrific. Thousands of AlarmLemmings on the attack, all memes firing. I suggest this is why WaPo mounted this thing — to let loose the dogs of war. I actually think WaPo did this to hurt Naomi’s feelings.

    Also to claim a dim form of ‘fairness.’ (See, we write stories about other positions.) However, as others here point out, the piece slams her with twisted attitude (and the concept of her “getting paid”) in more than one paragraph. Those are triggering sentences for the hordes of haters.

  13. Level headed and fact checking is in short supply in the era of the Climate Crusades. We need a life coach at this point.

  14. Naomi makes a very effective “anti-Greta”, not only because she disagrees with Greta, but she makes her points in a calm and rational manner, and makes an impression as a mature and thoughtful young woman, not a petulant dropout child. Naomi’s only real expression of emotion is being offended at being called a “denier” and associated with those who denied the Holocaust, which would certainly be offensive to any young German woman. Other than that, she sticks to the facts, and leaves the hysterics to Greta and others.
    I’m sure Naomi has every intention of living long beyond the next 12 years!

    I liked “leitmotif’s” video of Greta off-script, taking nearly a minute to say something like “I’ve had enough. Could someone else answer this question?”

    Greta is right about one thing, though. She should be back in school, possibly learning some science before spouting off about how those with far more life experience have failed.

  15. Common boys, this is too cheep,
    do not fall for it… or at least try the best not to.

    Both these girls, regardless of all rest out there, in their own merit are brilliant… really brilliant!

    Stop getting tricked in taking sides… especially in this one.

    For whatever sake, is a matter of two young females, both very good at what trying a do and achieve, by their own approach and endeavor, especially in the consideration of their age.

    It is not a football match or some other sport competition or a game,
    it is life there, for best or worse… Both these girls are still too young to be blamed.

    Please try to be respectful.

    Is not like considering how you deal or treat some one like Bob Ward here,
    very far way and clearly removed from it.
    Please keep going as deep as you can in such a consideration, as that may be the only remedy there… in consideration of the Ward and the Wardish lango or lingo there,
    but still none of these two young ones do deserve such as a cynical treatment or addressing. 🙂

    Let these two be…
    and don’t loose the focus or the aim on the Wardish or Lewdonkish, or the Cookish lingo… the SS guys language… the very weird and out of place schist there, technically the worst there.


    • Soph on Bitchute has done Greta Satire that is utterly brilliant. I marvel at her talent, though her language is very coarse to say the least.

    • Whiten, we didn’t ask for Greta, she has caused enormous damage to young people globally. She was thrust onto the world stage as a marketing tool and has no scientific knowledge whatsoever, she has simply been coached to follow a script. That is evident when she has been caught off script and cannot find the words.

      What has been done to her, a child is disgusting and the affect of the dramatic propaganda she delivers so well is causing serious physiological harm to children around the world who have already been primed in the education system.

      • Megs
        February 25, 2020 at 2:35 am

        Megs, I am really sorry for posing this question to you.
        Please do not take it the wrong way, just simply the world we live in is quite large,
        and I have no means or even the will or time to check every little detail there…

        So please to find kindness to allow this question put to you without the proposition of you being offended.

        Do you work or not for the Guardian in UK???
        Or you being significantly, in one way or another, affiliated with the UK Guardian activity???



        • Work for the guardian the paper that spreads lies about climate change who hold Greta in high regard ,and you pose your question to some one who holds Greta responsible for damaging /fearmongering children , and has been minipulated by climate terrorists,

          Your aving a laugh son

        • Whiten, I too find your question extremely odd. What was it that I said that could possibly link me to The Guardian? I believe in free speech, The Guardian would not publish anything I have to say, there is no balance in their reporting, only extreme rhetoric.

          I responded to Kristi near the top of this thread, it’s quite an extensive post and should give you some insight as to where I’m coming from.

          • February 25, 2020 at 5:53 pm

            really sorry for this continuing engagement to be so late in the day.

            Your interest and effort very much appreciated… honestly.

            Your point made and proposed also accepted as valid, in general, even when the initial point proposition there still considered as 50/50, in the clause of most probably just it been an odd coincidence.

            Never the less, much appreciated… and thank you very much for answering my direct question posed to you.

            Also if I may add to this, in consideration of the very much appreciated proposed advice by B d Clark towards me and my stand.
            Very clever one. (hopefully B d Clark reading this)

            But in the end of this all, Megs;
            what would or could you actually propose as the next step or the most affordable and safe forward approach in addressing such as a condition there?

            Please take your time and let me know… if that not much to be asking of you.

            (Also in consideration of B d Clark reading this;
            boy please do not even flirt with the idea of you aving a laugh…. 🙂 )


          • Nice to see I really got to you,🤪

            As for the rest of your post, how often do they allow you to use a keyboard?

          • Megs
            February 26, 2020 at 2:11 pm
            Yes indeed, very fanny 🙂 .

            Still standing by for a proper follow up by You, if that again, is not much to expect… 🙂


          • You have been answered fully to your question, what’s wrong troll dont like another player on the field.

          • B d Clark
            February 27, 2020 at 2:12 am

            Nice to see I really got to you,🤪

            As for the rest of your post, how often do they allow you to use a keyboard?
            Silly boy B d Clark!

            You were clearly told not to flirt even with idea of aving a laugh!
            But you still do.

            See, anything about you as addressing and engaging with me in this conversation wholly consist with the position or the proposition of Megs.

            Megs at this point in time really failing to follow up as required, therefor what next comes wholly up to Megs, not you.

            Only 30 mins or half an hour tolerance given at this point, you too fail, regardless,
            if Megs fails.

            Yes, haaa….haaa I think I really got her… 🙂

            She or whatever, really knows that. As it stands, a huge bollocks.

            Let’s see if Megs have the guts to do it….

            Failed or failing to follow up, technically subjects her and you to a very very harsh outcome from me, so you too got to reconsider you schist there mate…

            Still only half an hour given here.


          • Megs
            February 26, 2020 at 2:11 pm

            with all do respect, you failed to follow up and explain your mess there, therefor I got to tell you that if you not attempting a give it a go, you got to face the pain of my words towards you, ain’t going a be pretty… and I think you know it!


          • Megs


            Really sorry to put it this way, also same goes for the toy boy.
            Megs, I was really taken from your first point of proposition there, in your first reply to me, the point of “we”.

            You see what followed next from you, it showed to me that you no any where near of even meaning that, and still I tried to be as kind as I could in giving the benefit of the doubt.

            But still you failed to follow and amend.

            In consideration of my own life experience what you spouted out about the Guarding UK is not real, only a lie or a fake claim.
            If that what you were out to get stated by me, you just had simply got to ask.

            Then, in my consideration, a proposition that simply based and forwarded in the means of deception and trickery, ones rejected will be in the clause of the consideration as it coming from characters that will simply be seen as 100 carat whores or 100 carat prostitutes, also the same for any toy boys there.
            Sad to say this, but that is where you stand dear.

            Hopefully this being as clearly as possibly put.

            You see, I too once upon a time happen to be affiliated with the Guardian UK, as a regular commenter in their climate change section.
            I will not have being offended or pretending to, if some one asked me about some like that!

            But hey, no way that I will ever consider a proposition of belonging to a “we” in such as way that you attempted to get through… dear.

            (and it does not really matter if this whole affair simply unintentional or intentional… even in one little bit.)

            good luck


  16. Well a fight fire with fire, battle ,naomi verse Greta, this should prove interesting, are the media if they dont boycott her going to pick up on the content of her upcoming speeches? Is she going to get ripped apart,? she is just about taking on every establishment on the planet.

    You know what would really have helped,if some of our learned members on this site stood in the spot light with her,

    When Greta was taken apart for being a asperger’s suffer, a manipulated child ,a pawn of climate terrorists (which I dont disagree with) will the same voices who condemed criticism of Greta stand up and defend Naomi right to defend what she believes in, I some how doubt it, she will be at the front of the battle field, I also think she will have her protectors ,any organisation linked with naomi will feel the full force of the climate terrorists and the lies that shall surely follow.

      • Yes you can see English is not there first language, nonsensical question, even after answering they still insist you answer again, from the first question posed, they did not even understand the guardians stance on Greta and climate change,, I should not reply to them again ,their baiting you and trying to bring the thread into disrepute, typical child activist ploys.

      • Megs
        February 27, 2020 at 2:38 am

        For the clarity of the matter… is whiten and not Whiten….

  17. Part of me is happy to see the arrival of Naomi Seibt (the anti-Greta) on the “climate change” scene but another part of me wishes that adults with outstanding scientific credentials were being given the spotlight in which to challenge Global Warming Alarmism (GWA), more so than this young lady, even though she does sound reasonable. To those who have created this campaign against C02, GWA really means Getting Wealthy by Alarmism.

    Picture 1 million air molecules. Of those air molecules no more than 400 (.04% or .0004) are CO2 molecules. Of those CO2 molecules only 12 (3% or .03) are man-made. That is, amongst every million air molecules in our atmosphere only 12 (.03 x .0004 x 1,000,000) are man-made CO2 molecules while 388 are produced by nature. Greta believes those 12 in a million will bring catastrophic heating to the planet and that she can actually see these invisible planet wreckers at work. I’d say this young lady needs to go back to school but sadly the education system is part of the problem too.

  18. Greta.
    A kid who dropped out of school to preach the the conclusions of the “Settled Science” while she never learned enough to evaluate said “settled science”.
    A kid who stayed in school. Learned science. Thought on her own and evaluated the “Settled Science” behind this BS was anything but “Settled”. And took the further step to see the politics behind it.
    Hmmm … Which one is honest and which one is a deluded pawn of others?
    (That shouldn’t be a tough question.)
    PS Which one is “cuter” has nothing to do with what they’ve said.
    (Though, hands down, that would be Naomi!)
    (Will I get a “snarl” or “How dare you!” from Greta for that? Maybe someone should be keeping track of those and who she directs them at? I smell a new “award”!!

    • In Greta, you can see what fear and disdain will do to a person’s looks. (As an aside, I have noticed that a woman’s looks are more impacted by her attitude to life and hard life in general than a man’s looks.)

  19. I hope Naomi Seibt will be at the Climate CONFERENCE on MAY 7-8, 2020 at
    She would give a good heartfelt talk I am sure . . . She’s not a scientist but understands the issues…
    Probably more than CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBS, CBS, PBS, etc… the MSM. . .


    • Where and when was this ? I think this should be the foundation of her talk at the heartland Climate Conference on MAY 7-8, 2020 at
      She might want to insert some more factual data points in her talk But to expand on this would be great !


  20. Rare Kudos to WaPo for mentioning another view.

    On a related note, I see the “sane” Oregon Senators have again stymied the idiotic left re: fictitious “Climate disaster” destructive legislation. You go guys!!!!

      • She supposedly writes her own material in collaboration with another teen. There are unscripted interviews of Soph and she demonstrates a sharp wit and intelligence in all of them. I wince at some of the things she says but am coming around to again realize that free speech protects the right to offend.

    • I like her Scissor! She is so direct, and at the same time succinct. The mod must let her get away with saying what we want to say because she is so young?

      • You may be right; prerogative is good to have.

        She is highly censored. She crosses the line again and again. It’s interesting that her conservative narrative is the epitome of counter culture today.

  21. Unfortunately the angle of the WAPO is to make the case that Naomi is paid stooge to parrot anti science scepticism whereas Greta is a natural spokesperson for the green movement.

    The truth is more like the opposite but that is the angle of their piece.


  22. Oh wow, they should set up a debate between the two, with no advisors on either side. I wonder which side would blink first. I can almost hear the reasons why Greta’s team would be looking to not have any debate on the subject.

    • Yes, it’s Naomi’s logos versus Greta’s pathos. Unfortunately, many people these days are responding to pathos (appeal to emotion) rather than logos (appeal to logic). Then there is ethos (appeal to ethics) which requires that the person presenting an argument be of high moral character but sadly the parameters of morality have become blurred and deception creeps in with ease. How many times have we thought highly of a person, believed what they told us was the truth, only to discover later that they were not as they appeared to be? All we can do is search for truth but be constantly aware that lies often come disquised by a veil of truthiness.

  23. Well, she’s an answer to the fraudulent ploy. And a good reminder that, when it comes to culture and politics it’s not about the science.

  24. As so often is the case with leftists, climate change activists accuse their opponents of being climate change deniers when they are the real climate change deniers themselves. The climate has continuously changed since the earth was formed. It is the activists who believe that the climate was static until humans started changing it. The current warming cycle started before humans emitted significant CO2, and follows many previous warming cycles. Trying to stop climate change is impossible, and only provides a pretext for expanding government power.

  25. Great! Now if we can get these two girls to fight to the death in a cage match we can all completely lose our souls. The problem with Greta Thunberg had nothing to do with her opinions or what she believes. It’s the idea of sending a 16 year old with Asperger’s to fight your battles for you. Sending another 16 year old to fight the first one is beyond shameful. It’s literally sick. Why don’t we send 16 year old girls to fight ISIS while we’re at it. I don’t care whAt your opinions are on Climate Change, this all feels so gross. I’m not looking to trade the rational high ground for a gimmick. Or to send a young girl to fight my battles for me. This is so wrong and does nothing to the end of bringing sanity to a debate that is already knee deep in the insane. No thanks.

Comments are closed.