‘Greta Thunberg is a nice girl, but she’s spewing unjustified panic’ – ‘anti-Greta’ Naomi Seibt to RT
by RT
‘Greta Thunberg is a nice girl, but she’s spewing unjustified panic’ – ‘anti-Greta’ Naomi Seibt to RT
The media have invented the ‘anti-Greta’ label to portray her as an “evil Right antichrist,” but it only attracted more people to her ideas, Naomi Seibt, who says the human effect on climate change is vastly exaggerated, told RT.
Seibt calls herself a “climate realist” and bluntly rejects the term “climate change denier,” which is another label, used to describe her and her supporters by the opposing side. It implies that “we’re just selfish and ignorant,” but it’s not the case, she pointed out.
“We’re about being scientific sceptics and looking into more sensible ways to improve the environment to be more in line with our values when it comes to interacting with nature,” the 19-year-old said.
It looks a much less radical stance than the one of 17-year-old environment activist and mainstream media darling Greta Thunberg, who insists that mankind must urgently cut emissions to zero to avoid a catastrophic breakdown of the climate on Earth.
Naomi says she perfectly understands why Thunberg and her are being pitted against each other.
It was the German media that started this ‘anti-Greta’ thing in the first place. It was to portray me as a kind of an evil antichrist on the Right.
She was unhappy about this at first, but then decided to “have fun” with the label and even get some advantage out of it. “You come for the anti-Greta, but you stay for Naomi Seibt,” she explained.
“I’m not against Greta… I’m sure she’s a very nice girl…. Innocent in all of this,” the teenager clarified. “It’s just that she’s not about the science.”
She [Greta] is basically just about spewing panic and telling people to change their lives entirely… It has nothing to do with science and skepticism anymore. And that’s what’s awful about it.
The famous 2013 research that Greta and her supporters usually refer to had analyzed a massive bulk of specialized literature and revealed that 97 percent of scientists believed that the cause for climate change were human activities. The authors of the paper now say that this number had passed 99 percent in the years since the publication.
But, according to Naomi, that research was “way too vague” and most of the scientists in question weren’t specialists in the field of CO2 emissions. She agrees that carbon dioxide, which primarily comes from the use of fossil fuels, affects the climate. However, its minor effect is completely blown out of proportion by those whom Seibt described as “climate alarmists.”
Naomi says she also doesn’t doubt the fact “climate change is real,” but insists that it’s nothing but a natural process. “Are CO2 emissions actually that destructive? Are they really the cause of global warming? Or are there other factors playing into this – like, for example, the effect that the sun has on the climate, water evaporation and other factors that are way stronger than the CO2 emission?” she wondered.
It’s ridiculous to believe that humans can have such a big impact on the climate.
Those stirring panic over global warning are actually distracting the public’s attention from really important issues affecting the well-being of humanity, Seibt pointed out. Among those is the need to rely only on effective energy sources, including nuclear power. “Energy poverty” now plagues many developing countries, but it may become a thing for Europe too if wrong choices are made, she warned. The danger posed by a complete blackout should also not be neglected, Naomi asserted.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
