brit girl won't go to oz xc because of CO2 - she is the anti-Sage

I wo der whether she was "home schooled" by her parents.

We've seen how easy the propaganda is absorbed by girls in 1st world countries. We also see how they vote, unmarried young women vote leftist and support leftist causes at rates that'd make even the most ambitious Socialist/Communist leader of generations past blush.

Sad this girl has been taken over by this nonsense that she'll limit herself in such a way. Bet she has no clue about all the CO2 burned to get our globalist leaders to/from Davos last week for their circle-jerk.

It's not the opportunity you imagine it to be, big guy.

The plane is going to fly without her, so her decision doesn't really accomplish anything except to deny her the opportunity to compete.

The random snipe at Sage is sad and weird, but it's crazy that travel is being shamed for it's carbon footprint.

There is a lot that humans can do to lower greenhouse gas emissions that 1) are economically positive and 2) don't disrupt quality of life.

Asking people to give up one of life's great pleasures, traveling and exploring the world's human and natural beauty, is pointless and borderline performative self-sacrifice.

Simply invest 10% of your income into green energy technology companies and you'll have much more of a positive impact on the margin -- if you care that much.

I get that it makes people feel good deny themselves pleasures for [reasons] but don't put that evil on me.

disagree with her cost and benefit analysis.

BUT, have great respect for her living her values at no cost to others and not being a hypocrite.

This post is wonderfully instructive, in that it displays a prevailing and damaging psychology: the mental sensitivity that instinctively casts one person's personal decision as an explicit indictment of anyone else who doesn't make the same decision.

Nowhere in this woman's comments does she "put the evil [of airplane-travel emissions]" on you, Harambe, or on anyone else who chooses to fly. But a certain fragile, guilt-suppressing psyche cannot help extrapolating from one person's comments a condemnation of each and every other individual who comes to different conclusions.

Look: It's fine that you still want to fly, Harambe; it's fine that you want to enjoy the pleasures of first-world prosperity without any guilt about its origins and true costs. She isn't putting any of that evil on you--unless that's what you (and many others like you) want to hear.

She isn't even saying it's "evil"--that's your word, not hers, and whether that arises from your own guilty conscience or your simmering misogyny (of course a girl would think in the reductive terms of good and evil), it's something you and a lot of Americans need to reflect on.

Why do people--usually conservatives, which is why I'm a little surprised to see this from you, H.--feel personally attacked by people simply trying to live by their principles, even inconsistently and imperfectly, in a complex world? This whole thread is basically an invitation to criticize and satirize a young woman who has made a decision based on principles, and almost all of you accepted it. Get over yourselves. When you do something notable enough that the press cares about your words, you can extol the benefits of travel and exposure and blah blah blah. In the meantime, this thread is just a circle-jerk of men trying to take a woman down a peg or two, but instead revealing their own vulnerabilities and insecurities.

It's fine that you agree with her, but don't hide your defense of her ideas behind lots of tone-policing and whatnot.

She gave a quote to the press about her moral justification for not flying. That unavoidably starts debate about the justification she gave. This is the point of the public press.

I think her justification is wrong, backwards, and likely a net-harmful way of looking at the world. I don't fault her for holding the opinion, but if she's going to voice it then vocally disagreeing is the only way to prevent these kinds of non-productive ideas from taking root in the world.

Certainly it's fine to disagree with people's personal choices when they're stated publicly! Maybe it's not the norm where you live, but vociferous public debate is still important in America. Perhaps that's one of the secrets to our success! You'd do well to learn.

I appreciate her sincere beliefs, and am impressed that she put her money where her mouth is on this issue, but it doesn't make much sense to me. The plane's going to Australia whether she's on it or not. So she would neither be contributing to nor alleviating the problem by going or staying. And it's unlikely that her statement moved the needle for anyone who has thought about the issue.

Could you be any more patronizing?

Yeah those environmentalists are totally uncritical of business leaders.

commondreams.org

Greta Thunberg Warns Davos Elite Will Throw Humanity 'Under the Bus' for Profits

https://www.facebook.com/32109457015

Swedish climate campaigner Greta Thunberg took aim at those profiting off of the climate emergency Thursday on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum's annual summit in Davos, Switzerland.

Open link

This seems to be a common sentiment. However, the planes don't fly below a certain capacity - so if a plane is 70 percent full it often gets cancelled and combined with other flights. Additionally, there may be other people who also chose not to fly - every person that doesn't take that exact plane means one less seat overall needs to fly to Australia at some point. If 300 people did this, one less plane would ultimately go. It may be a small thing, but it isn't so simple as the plane is going anyway.

One less plane will make as much difference as killing one ant in a colony and thinking you made a difference. 45,000+ flights daily in the US alone, probably over 100,000 worldwide.

faa.gov

Air Traffic By The Numbers

@USDOT

Air Traffic By The Numbers

Open link

I wonder how people would react if the US decided not to send any tanks to Ukraine because of their gas guzzling. Tanks are measured in gallons per mile rather than miles per gallon. Ukraine should make the sacrifice to help protect the world long term.

Deciding not to take your pr ok vate jet to Australia would have an impact. Deciding not to hitch a ride on a plane going with or without you makes no meaninful difference.

of course it comes down to sexism.

teenaged GIRLS. teenage GURLS oh stop. Get over the fact that young women have minds of their own, and they aren't more "easily influenced" than teenaged boys. The incel community on 4 chan is not made up of teenaged gurls.

As for this situation, yes it's silly. But young people make ridiculous decisions all the time. that's how we grow. that's how we learn. This girl's choice is dumb and won't do anything to reduce carbon emissions, but it's a step towards something. Eventually she will get older and learn about smarter ways to make change.

She is a dumb idiot. Would also be a dumb idiot if she decides she is a he.

So, I assume she doesn't use AC . She must read by candlelight. Her only mode of transportation is walking or bicycle. How does she heat her home? Her stance is a lie. As is the stance of all environmental dopes.