Do as I say, not as I do...................

[FarBeyondDriven]

Climate change skeptics call out marchers? ?hypocrisies? | New York Post

[spindoc]

This protester has it right, ironically.

 

[Ram]

Everyone needs a cause I guess.

[cammando]

DiCaprio being one the worst hypocrites of the bunch...

[B-Ball-fan]

It might be a bit of a stretch and misleading to suggest that the all the marchers are hypocrites all for the sake of taking the light off and diluting their cause.

 

I would tend more so to question the tactic of those objecting as to why they would ignore the particulars of the cause, and try to mock it by calling foul on the entire bunch when doing so might be as much, if not a million times more subjective than the subjectivity of that they are knocking.

 

With the thousands involved in the march I can't say that I'm on each an everyone of their pages, but in general they were there for the common cause of caring about the planet and sending a message for us as humanity to respect it.

 

Neither side truly has all the answers or concrete evidence that states with certainty just what humanity's effect on the planet has been, but it's not too hard to see that since the Industrial Revolution we've certainly had an effect, and to ignore, and not believe that it's all worthy of an honest discussion (IMO) would suggest that one is blind, uncaring, and irresponsible. In doing so does not mean one has to jump on the train of the marchers and model completely their stance, but diluting and mocking it sounds infantile, sophomoric and irresponsible.

 

So from this reaction should we take that the objectors don't care about planet earth enough to investigate humanity's effect on it, and we should all just carry on as we wish, free to do whatever we want with no regard or concern with how it might damage the earth?

 

If that's the case then the bigger question here just might be "What's your trip?" Should we not recycle, keep unnecessarily using resources that could easily be reused, and just go ahead and keep polluting? You're certainly free to feel that way if that's how you feel, but judging by the attendance of the march there are many who don't care to be riding on your coal burning air polluting train.

[Bert]

I just hope Leonardo DiCaprio atleast did not take a private jet to the event. That would by hypocrisy.

[B-Ball-fan]

Traditionally environmentalist types (thinkers) have been in the social minority and historically have been ridiculed, and often been given names in attempts to devalue their cause such as tree-huggers, hippies, beatniks, fruits, and nuts etc...

 

Throughout the Industrial Revolution while large corporations gained riches using massive amounts of raw materials, polluting the air from factories, and exercised an all around lack of responsibility to the earth and it's natural resources leading to product waste that ended up in landfills without policies in place to control the issues that arose as a byproduct of the Industrial Revolution, it was the concerned environmentally conscious types that spoke up demanding better policies.

 

In year's past when these types spoke up they were usually considered by the majority of society as being bleeding liberal hearts and freaks, and weren't taken seriously.

 

Little by little what these environmentalists had to say was proven to be sensible and accurate, and over time our culture has slowly taken heed to these demands for better policies, and although throughout our history and the ridicule from the ever present nay-sayers which sadly seems to be the majority of society, we've evolved to better understand that indeed better policies needed to be in effect.

 

We are now living in a time where the average citizen has become more conscious about the benefits of controlling pollution, recycling etc... and it's become the new normal, but all the while the average citizen seems to forget who it was in our history that lead the cause for these changes.

 

Even your typical nay-sayer now sees things like recycling as normal and beneficial, but they're still the first to shoot down anything that today's environmentally conscious types have to say, and are quick to box these folks into categories and continue ridiculing them just as they always have.

 

Have we not learned anything from our history, and that when thinkers stand up to speak, that although we might not at first grasp what their concerns are, that at least it might be worth listening to rather than just writing them off as tree-huggin' fruits, nuts, freaks, and hippies?

 

In the past their screams had eventually been proven to have merit. It's entirely possible that their present day screams do to.

 

We can look back in history and plainly see where many people didn't quite "Get It".

 

It seems so painfully obvious that years from now people will look back to today and plainly see where so many of us too just didn't "Get it".

[All Tell]

Then all the dirty footed tree hugging hippie liberal warmers should set the example and completely eliminate as much of their carbon footprint as they can. Al Gore are you listening?

[All Tell]

And someone PLEASE tell me the man made cause of the global warming the ended the ice age.

[B-Ball-fan]

Personally when it comes to the Global Warming issue I've never taken sides with either side of the argument as I am not a scientist myself and am only at the mercy of the various theories given by both sides.

 

On the topic itself I find it peculiar that it tends to be believed by one "political" side versus being disbelieved by another "political" side and wonder why with such a topic how politics even has any effect on how some come to their mostly subjective conclusions on either side.

 

I'll inject here that I'm not a supporter of either one of the two significant political parties in the U.S.

 

The idea that since the Industrial Revolution mankind has had in a short period of time a damaging effect on the environment does sound logical and does resonate with me, however I can't know with any certainty how grave the effect has been and if it's even possible that it would effect the weather, however if some scientists have any sound evidence of that I think that it would be worthy enough to evaluate.

 

Thinking that it's worthy of evaluation does not instantly make be believe that it's true with any certainty, but I'm open to hear what their findings are.

 

I'm not sure exactly what theories available either way can provide me with any confidence in saying for sure anything, but one thing is for sure is that my conclusions, or lack there of will not be encouraged by either side of the political spectrum.

 

I'll leave that to the knee-jerk political types who seem to find their party's stance on everything important when concluding how they feel on just about anything. Somehow thinking rationally for themselves eludes them and they tend always to be at the mercy of their almighty political deity before they themselves can form and then divulge their conclusions or stance.

Edited September 23, 2014 by B-Ball-fan

[All Tell]

I have no problem at all with those that want to be socially aware and do what they feel is in the best interest of the environment. Heck I've been known to use a recycling bin. :eek:

 

I have a HUGE problem with people like diCaprio and Gore and Moore and Obama and all the other warmers who want to belittle and shame people for acting in ways they see as wrong while doing as much or more to contribute to what they see as a problem.

[Jumper_Dad]

Jetsetting Leonardo DiCaprio Joins People's Climate March | The Daily Caller

[hidinout]

There is no such thing as man made global warming. The earth's climate has cycles . It warms a bit , it cools a bit . really frightening that so many other wise intelligent people can be misled so entirely.

[Twotoplace]

I always have a good laff when good ol' boys claim to know more about climate change than scientists.

[Run To State]

I always have a good laff when good ol' boys claim to know more about climate change than scientists.

What's a laff, oh lofty one?