She's 12 in this clip.

Exactly. She has no idea what she's talking about.

She's 32 now and has spent 23 of those 32 years doing tremendous work in the field of environmentalism.

Link? I have no idea who she is. Has she fixed actual problems (IE things that effect human kind) or has she moved suffering around (IE made humans suffer to prevent "environmental" suffering)?

This girl has some serious emotional attachment to her work, and was clearly shoving her own political point forward using the tools she had at the ready, which included her age and her emotions.

I'm saying those tools cannot make a valid argument on their own, and they did not.

What you're looking at is passion for a cause being vocalized effectively, and that should be applauded.

<Insert Godwin Here>

. In many cases your argument might be valid, but in this case your argument seems to be at the same time proving and disproving itself.

How so? My only argument is that she essentially said nothing at all.

You seem a little too emotionally attached to your point, so much so that you can't see what's actually going on.

...What?

You have not addressed my argument at all, you've merely asserted that the girl should be applauded because she said something. Saying something is not worth praise if the something is mostly if not entirely wrong or meaningless, as it was in this case.