You probably know who Greta Thunberg is: the Swedish teenager who thinks anthropogenic climate change is “killing the Earth”. She “wants you to panic” about the climate, and blames your fossil fuel usage for stealing her “dreams and childhood”.
Thunberg is the latest iteration of the left’s tactic of using children to push their radical agenda. They’ve now resorted to using autistic children because their other arguments haven’t moved the needle in years.
Thurnberg is sadly just a disposable mouthpiece for an alarmist climate change movement borne more out of ideology than science, but who exactly is behind her?
One name that pops up is Kevin Anderson, a climate scientist and professor of Energy and Climate Change at the universities of Manchester (UK) and Uppsala (Sweden).
He confessed in an interview:
“The Thunberg family approached me some time ago. Greta was already very interested in climate change. Since she started the strike, we are in regular contact.”
He further explained their relationship as frequently “discuss[ing] issues” and Greta “sends me manuscripts and asks me to check if everything is correct.”
Anderson is overly insistent that Greta is responsible for her own content and is not merely a mouthpiece, given she’s only 16: “What you hear from Greta Thunberg’s mouth is what Greta Thunberg is thinking about and what she writes down.”
How likely is that, given his admission to her reliance on his fact-checking?
Anderson is a climate change zealot. He preaches “radical change” and believes “radical action is required immediately.” In the past, he’s proposed a “rationing system” for individual carbon emissions. He’s even too radical for some of his academic counterparts:
“For many years I have been deafened by the silent roar of academics unprepared to speak out, and consequently, through their silence, [they] vociferously support the status quo; that is a deeply political position. Others have been more actively co-opted by the established system, believing that we need to keep our advice in line with current economic thinking, or we will be ignored.”
Much of his work also focuses on the dichotomy between politicians’ inaction on climate change and its perceived existential nature. He was referenced in The Times several months prior to the Copenhagen Climate Summit:
“Professor Anderson [and a colleague] expect politicians at the summit merely to pay lip service to scientific evidence that greenhouse gas emissions need to be brought under control within a decade, if not sooner.”
And even policy-backed change doesn’t satisfy him according to one of his research papers:
“Put bluntly, while the rhetoric of policy is to reduce emissions in line with avoiding dangerous climate change, most policy advice is to accept a high probability of extremely dangerous climate change rather than propose radical and immediate emission reductions.”
He also attacks the inaction of those in power:
Agree – but that talk needs to go alongside radical action to cut emissions. We’re not short of policy options, opportunities for social change, low-CO2 demand & supply technologies, etc; what we have lacked thus far has been courage & multi-level leadership. https://t.co/cnpK6oPMmq
— Kevin Anderson (@KevinClimate) August 9, 2018
This narrative: the world is ending soon because of human emissions, and those in power aren’t doing enough to stop it, is virtually identical to Thunberg’s.
But Anderson’s message was relegated to the confines of academia despite his belief that “climate change is an issue on which scientists cannot be politically neutral”.
That all changed once he met Thunberg.
Thunberg has Asperger’s, OCD, and autism, and has previously suffered from depression, eating disorders, and selective mutism. She describes having Aspergers as a “superpower” since it allows her to not “care about social codes”, making her a better activist.
Anderson noticed this:
“Greta cares little about what others think of her. It does not take into account the sensitivities of interest groups or politicians.”
Exploiting it, he uses her to amplify his message beyond his classroom and conferences, a world which he reckons “has broadly abdicated its responsibility to speak truth to power, choosing instead to care about political and economic sensibilities and fine tune its assumptions to ensure its conclusions on mitigation fit within the existing economic paradigm.”
He could use her as a puppet to advance his radical agenda and filled her head with doomsday scenarios about how the world is going to end if drastic political and cultural change was not implemented.
Greta was the missing component to Anderson’s agenda:
“She is an expert for communication. She manages to summarize vast amounts of information into concise, simple, honest messages. This expertise has been missing us so far. Greta reaches people we scientists have never met, especially children and adolescents.”
It’s sick how adults are exploiting a child suffering from a host of mental illnesses that make her especially vulnerable to such dystopian and unfounded fears about climate change and the future.
She’s become a poster child for climate change advocacy but also for how far the left is willing to go to advance their agenda – exploiting kids.