Usual disclaimer, from the leader of the silent majority , in my own home & RV
Greta Thunberg, I dips my lid to you
After doing my own research, err, surfing the net concerning climate change/global warming/climate change hoax/fake news/etc Using only my layman gut feeling I would rather believe Greta Thunberg, before I believed many of our leaders/spin doctors/number manipulators/dodgy accountant practice of using buying/selling carbon credits etc
The snip below is from the link above, kindly put up by Iva Biggin Which in my honest opinion, has nothing to do with Herr Hitler
For those who may be upset, that Time Magazine has got this wrong, or that children should be seen, and not heard
Greta is a brilliant young Lady in my books having the courage to get up time and time again, after being attacked on several fronts at a time is a strength of character that few if any of the Noisy Minority have. Attacting her the way some do, is a trait of someone who is deficient in their thought processes, can't accept that there is maybe another choice in the way we can do something.
Wether or not we support the actions of Greta, her parents and her supporters, my post was more to question the judgement of Time Magazine in having Hitler on their cover in 1938 when within a year he became responsible for the worst atrocities the world has seen.
My other query was that was it true that they actually did put Hitler on their magazine cover.?
After all at times we may not believe all we see on the internet.
The criteria for selection do not preclude bad guys from being selected. Apparently Osama bin Laden was a hot favourite in 2001, but was rejected on political grounds.
"The selections were ultimately based on what the magazine describes as who they believed had a stronger influence on history and who represented either the year or the century the most."
__________________
"No friend ever served me, and no enemy ever wronged me, whom I have not repaid in full."
I've been sitting on the fence for a long time on this climate change stuff.
What disappoints me is the entries in social media belittling Greta. She is still a child and blaming her (facebook) for being on the Time magasine cover because it uses wood for paper that printed her image is ridiculous. How can that be her fault?
On the other hand the ABC ran a story a few days ago saying that the toxins from the NSW bushfires are unlikely to be absorbed by the planet as they are of vast quantities. Crap! Firstly these acedemics/scientists did not provide any evidence for the story something they slam the deniers for all the time, secondly indigenous peoples created many fires in their time to manage the land.
That is two reasons alone as to why I wont commit to any side.
Tony
__________________
Be nice... if I wanted my school teacher here I would have invited him...
Tony can you give a link for the ABC story, Indigenous people use what is referred as a mosaic method burning numerous smaller fires so a large scale catastrophe like we are having in NSW doesn't take hold.
So in short absolutely no similarity between burning 2.7 million hectares in NSW and indigenous people burning mainly grassland.
Tony can you give a link for the ABC story, Indigenous people use what is referred as a mosaic method burning numerous smaller fires so a large scale catastrophe like we are having in NSW doesn't take hold. So in short absolutely no similarity between burning 2.7 million hectares in NSW and indigenous people burning mainly grassland.
