Teens For Climate: Swedish Student Leader Wins EU Pledge To Spend Billions On Climate

The European Union should spend hundreds of billions of euros combating climate change during the next decade, its chief executive said on Thursday, responding to a Swedish teen who has inspired a global movement of children against global warming.In a speech alongside 16-year-old Greta Thunberg in Brussels, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker also criticized U.S. President Donald Trump for suggesting climate change was “invented” and “ideological”. “In the next financial period from 2021 to 2027, every fourth euro spent within the EU budget will go towards action to mitigate climate change,” Juncker said of his proposal for the EU budget, which is typically 1 percent of the bloc’s economic output, or 1 trillion euros ($1.13 trillion) over seven years. “Mr. Trump and his friends believe that climate change is something that has just been invented and its an ideological concept, but ... something dangerous is already underway,” Juncker said. Thunberg was in Brussels to join a seventh week of demonstrations by Belgian children skipping school to protest against global warming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In politics, like in a life, there is a time for facts and there is a time for emotions. The facts were long on the table. I guess it was time to stir up some emotions.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Evidence suggests the climate is always changing, agreed, but these changes tend to be relatively slow and from natural inputs to the climate system. Impact of human activity has resulted in levels of change the timescales never seen before, and natural systems cannot deal with them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meanwhile, Russia will spend the same amount on weapon systems...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, damirUSBiH said:

Meanwhile, Russia will spend the same amount on weapon systems...

Next generations don't deserve a clean planet, do they?

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, rainman said:

but ... something dangerous is already underway,” Juncker said

Yup and it ain't the weather. If they don't worry about more pressing issues like the Muslim invasion of their country they won't live long enough to have to worry about any negative effects of climate change.

Typical Swedes.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, rainman said:

The European Union should spend hundreds of billions of euros combating climate change during the next decade, its chief executive said on Thursday, responding to a Swedish teen who has inspired a global movement of children against global warming.In a speech alongside 16-year-old Greta Thunberg in Brussels, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker also criticized U.S. President Donald Trump for suggesting climate change was “invented” and “ideological”. “In the next financial period from 2021 to 2027, every fourth euro spent within the EU budget will go towards action to mitigate climate change,” Juncker said of his proposal for the EU budget, which is typically 1 percent of the bloc’s economic output, or 1 trillion euros ($1.13 trillion) over seven years. “Mr. Trump and his friends believe that climate change is something that has just been invented and its an ideological concept, but ... something dangerous is already underway,” Juncker said. Thunberg was in Brussels to join a seventh week of demonstrations by Belgian children skipping school to protest against global warming.

Indoctrinating children and creating children's groups is a favorite technique of dictatorships. The European Union wishes to be strong enough to tell the people what they can do and what they cannot do. It is crumbling because it does not have the support of the people any longer. Climate Change Alarmism is just one of their scare tactics to try to attain their goals. 

I am for reducing air pollution and CO2 by replacing coal with natural gas.  Solar, wind etc. are becoming more popular but need a base load from natural gas, coal, or nuclear power. Hopefully new energy storage technology will be here soon. 

Good decisions are rarely made when people are indoctrinated and reacting to alarmists. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WANT A GREAT LAUGH? ? ? ? 

I give little to no opinion, simply note that if one goes back to global warming predictions published via the IPCC (widely considered THE worldwide leader in publishing clinate change studies) they'd see practically 3-4% of real temps fall within the margin of error. The vast majority are below. Do the same for years 1990-1995 and there are 0%.

THE KICKER....

Once you get ahold of yourself, go to IPCC published claims (studies) from 1990-2000 that were mainstream and your jaw will drop in disbelief. Such gem as;

"In 20 years downtown Miami will be 1 meter under water" made in 1993, or

"Within the next 25 years, New York City will be between 2-3 meters under water" made in 1994.

As noted, I give no opinion, i simply ask those fearing catastrophic events to look at the quality & validity of the "facts" surrounding the future. 

NOTE: Please dont respond with selective facts. I challenge people all the time to study mainstream publushed 'FACTS' from 1990-2010 and the only ones that change their mindset on the global warming movement coincidentally are the only ones that honestly looked at the quality & veracity of what they've been told. 

  • Like 2
  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

1 hour ago, Will Hanner said:

WANT A GREAT LAUGH? ? ? ? 

I give little to no opinion, simply note that if one goes back to global warming predictions published via the IPCC (widely considered THE worldwide leader in publishing clinate change studies) they'd see practically 3-4% of real temps fall within the margin of error. The vast majority are below. Do the same for years 1990-1995 and there are 0%.

THE KICKER....

Once you get ahold of yourself, go to IPCC published claims (studies) from 1990-2000 that were mainstream and your jaw will drop in disbelief. Such gem as;

"In 20 years downtown Miami will be 1 meter under water" made in 1993, or

"Within the next 25 years, New York City will be between 2-3 meters under water" made in 1994.

As noted, I give no opinion, i simply ask those fearing catastrophic events to look at the quality & validity of the "facts" surrounding the future. 

NOTE: Please dont respond with selective facts. I challenge people all the time to study mainstream publushed 'FACTS' from 1990-2010 and the only ones that change their mindset on the global warming movement coincidentally are the only ones that honestly looked at the quality & veracity of what they've been told. 

Linky please. IPCC reports are public so you shouldn't have too much trouble tracking down the publication🙄

WUWT website doesn't count unless it provides a link direct to the IPCC report.  

 

Edited by NickW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On ‎2‎/‎22‎/‎2019 at 3:08 AM, pinto said:

Evidence suggests the climate is always changing, agreed, but these changes tend to be relatively slow and from natural inputs to the climate system. Impact of human activity has resulted in levels of change the timescales never seen before, and natural systems cannot deal with them.

Pinto - sorry but there's no evidence that the climate change of recent years has been unusual or accelerated. The problem is that we can measure the changes of the past few decades or so with comparatively high accuracy, although the further back you go the fuzzier the measurements become and the present day measurements leave much to be desired. But the further back we go the more we have to rely on forensic reconstructions of one sort of another. That aside is it possible to point to the past few decades and say that the rate of change exceeds anything that can be inferred from those reconstructions? Never seen any such analysis - CO2 increases maybe, but that's a different story. If anyone has seen such an analysis for temperatures I'd be interested to hear about it. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, markslawson said:

Pinto - sorry but there's no evidence that the climate change of recent years has been unusual or accelerated. The problem is that we can measure the changes of the past few decades or so with comparatively high accuracy, although the further back you go the fuzzier the measurements become and the present day measurements leave much to be desired. But the further back we go the more we have to rely on forensic reconstructions of one sort of another. That aside is it possible to point to the past few decades and say that the rate of change exceeds anything that can be inferred from those reconstructions? Never seen any such analysis - CO2 increases maybe, but that's a different story. If anyone has seen such an analysis for temperatures I'd be interested to hear about it. 

Reliable, accurate thermometers have been around since the 18th Century which has enabled a huge accumulation of ground based readings across the globe for the past couple of hundred years. The Naval and Armed forces of the Colonial powers were particularly good at accumulating this data. Given the spread of the British, Dutch and French empires this gives us a fairly good picture of global temperatures across the globe. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, NickW said:

Reliable, accurate thermometers have been around since the 18th Century which has enabled a huge accumulation of ground based readings across the globe for the past couple of hundred years. The Naval and Armed forces of the Colonial powers were particularly good at accumulating this data. Given the spread of the British, Dutch and French empires this gives us a fairly good picture of global temperatures across the globe.

Maybe in your spare time you can get us posters here a decent graph showing in last 200+ years temperatures around the globe. Remember that in the industrial revolution that the pollution was fairly bad and just wondering if there was climate change then. Inquiring minds want to know.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Old-Ruffneck said:

Maybe in your spare time you can get us posters here a decent graph showing in last 200+ years temperatures around the globe. Remember that in the industrial revolution that the pollution was fairly bad and just wondering if there was climate change then. Inquiring minds want to know.

This contains some reasonable graphs. Its Wiki but the references check out. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_temperature_record

The 19th century industrial revolution was limited to parts of Europe and small parts of North America -it simply wasn't widespread enough to have anything beyond localised effects. You don't see the global impact in terms of aerosols affecting climate until post WW2 when global aerosol emissions flatten out the warming trend until CO2 levels outweigh aerosol effects and more efforts are made to clean up industrial emissions (Flue gas desulphurisation etc) 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, NickW said:

Reliable, accurate thermometers have been around since the 18th Century which has enabled a huge accumulation of ground based readings across the globe for the past couple of hundred years. The Naval and Armed forces of the Colonial powers were particularly good at accumulating this data. Given the spread of the British, Dutch and French empires this gives us a fairly good picture of global temperatures across the globe. 

NickW - you've completely missed my main point. While what you say is right up to a point, and it is possible to reconstruct good temperature records for certain areas and from that a tolerable global temperature record these are still nothing like present temperature records (satellites, remember) and you'll find that there are substantial measurement errors in global readings. The graph in Wikipedia might be a good approximation. However, my basic point still stands. You cannot point to any past era and say with certainty that present trends are in any way unusual - the fact that past temperature are less certain is not important, although I see when I pointed this out as an additional complication I confused you. Anyway, leave it with you.. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reminds me of "Lord of the Flies".   Except that these teens are being used by adults who know exactly what they are doing, and most likely are positioned to profit from the transfer of euros to the government to "solve" climate change.  World's greatest hoax since penance to the Catholic Church in the 1400s.   The first rule should be:  those not currently paying for a tax proposal should have no sway over policy.  PERIOD

  • Like 2
  • Great Response! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The EU leadership is promising the savings and sweat equity of it's subjects.  Good job Europe.  You are owned by unaccountable b-crats.

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 2/22/2019 at 5:20 AM, Will Hanner said:

WANT A GREAT LAUGH? ? ? ? 

I give little to no opinion, simply note that if one goes back to global warming predictions published via the IPCC (widely considered THE worldwide leader in publishing clinate change studies) they'd see practically 3-4% of real temps fall within the margin of error. The vast majority are below. Do the same for years 1990-1995 and there are 0%.

THE KICKER....

Once you get ahold of yourself, go to IPCC published claims (studies) from 1990-2000 that were mainstream and your jaw will drop in disbelief. Such gem as;

"In 20 years downtown Miami will be 1 meter under water" made in 1993, or

"Within the next 25 years, New York City will be between 2-3 meters under water" made in 1994.

As noted, I give no opinion, i simply ask those fearing catastrophic events to look at the quality & validity of the "facts" surrounding the future. 

NOTE: Please dont respond with selective facts. I challenge people all the time to study mainstream publushed 'FACTS' from 1990-2010 and the only ones that change their mindset on the global warming movement coincidentally are the only ones that honestly looked at the quality & veracity of what they've been told. 

Even worse than I was aware of. If you have any good references, I would love them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

On ‎2‎/‎23‎/‎2019 at 11:36 PM, markslawson said:

NickW - you've completely missed my main point. While what you say is right up to a point, and it is possible to reconstruct good temperature records for certain areas and from that a tolerable global temperature record these are still nothing like present temperature records (satellites, remember) and you'll find that there are substantial measurement errors in global readings. The graph in Wikipedia might be a good approximation. However, my basic point still stands. You cannot point to any past era and say with certainty that present trends are in any way unusual - the fact that past temperature are less certain is not important, although I see when I pointed this out as an additional complication I confused you. Anyway, leave it with you.. 

Given the scale of measurements the variation causes by error is likely to be extremely limited unless you are claiming that pre a certain date most thermometers were over or under reading but not a mix of both. Furthermore if this was know then could be factored into correction calculations.

Furthermore other evidence can support the position as regards climate such as  pollen records and  tree growth rings.

Do you actually have any evidence that data collection in the 18th / 19th Century was fundamentally inaccurate? We know the accuracy of mercury thermometers from the mid to late 18th century is very good.

Edited by NickW
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, ronwagn said:

Even worse than I was aware of. If you have any good references, I would love them. 

If you are lucky to get any it will be a reference to a Media interview James Hansen gave in the early 1990's where he was asked the following question

If CO2 levels doubled today from the pre industrial level (so basically to 560ppm) where would we be in 20 years?

His answer was the West Side Highway will be 2-3 feet underwater.

Now this was purely hypothetical because we probably won't reach 560ppm until the late 21st Century however this has been misquoted countless times by the Church of Climate Disinfomation to their audience of simpletons.

What Hansen should have said is when global CO2 levels hit 560ppm the West Side Highway will be 2-3 ft underwater within 20 years so as to not confuse the simpletons.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 2/21/2019 at 11:03 AM, rainman said:

.... a Swedish teen who has inspired a global movement of children against global warming.In a speech alongside 16-year-old Greta Thunberg in Brussels, 

No offense,  but THIS GIRL OBVIOUSLY NEEDS A BOYFRIEND "REAL BAD".........  9_9

Once she has a boyfriend,   "global warming"  will be the last thing on her mind.......... 9_9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Illurion said:

No offense,  but THIS GIRL OBVIOUSLY NEEDS A BOYFRIEND "REAL BAD".........  9_9

Once she has a boyfriend,   "global warming"  will be the last thing on her mind.......... 9_9

Not if her boyfriend is her age....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

58 minutes ago, Dan Warnick said:

Not if her boyfriend is her age....

 

I disagree....   Right now they are thinking with their brain.......

Once they are boyfriend and girlfriend they will be occupied with the other parts of their bodies,   and their brain will be non-functioning for a while.....

As the old saying goes.........  "There are TWO types of kids,  those with a central personality between their EARS,   and those with a central personality between their LEGS."

Edited by Illurion
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Illurion said:

I disagree....   Right now they are thinking with their brain.......

Once they are boyfriend and girlfriend they will be occupied with the other parts of their bodies,   and their brain will be non-functioning for a while.....

As the old saying goes.........  "There are TWO types of kids,  those with a central personality between the EARS,   and those with a central personality between their LEGS."

Ha-ha!  You'd better be careful there, young man, or a certain @Rodent will come along and bop you on both your ears!

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

24 minutes ago, Dan Warnick said:

Ha-ha!  You'd better be careful there, young man, or a certain @Rodent will come along and bop you on both your ears!

Maybe so...

BUT.....

Empress Rodent was once a teenager TOO .......!!!!!!!!!  9_9

Edited by Illurion
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites