Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Will The Global Warming Hysterics Never Tire Of Being Wrong?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    This action doesn't reveal anything of the sort. You can't put two of the most poular royals in the last two decades and their baby on public transportation without creating a massive specticle along with a long list security concerns and inconvenience to their fellow travelers.

    Jim
    Jim, the guy promised to reduce their carbon footprint, then goes on this wildly expensive private jet for what purpose? He has made himself a player in the climate debate, so he should live by example.
    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
      Was this a necessary trip? Do you know why they were going? Harry had just promised to cut their carbon footprint.
      I believe it is not valid to claim this proves they are insincere or hypocritical. Global warming is a problem and it is good they are advocates for change. But they have not taken a vow of poverty nor can they travel in obscurity like the rest of us.



      Jim
      My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

      If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

      This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

      Comment


      • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
        I believe it is not valid to claim this proves they are insincere or hypocritical. Global warming is a problem and it is good they are advocates for change. But they have not taken a vow of poverty nor can they travel in obscurity like the rest of us.



        Jim
        So, if they are preaching the necessity for drastic measures the rest of us must make, do you think it's a good idea for them to....

        A) take a private Jet to a resort in Italy to celebrate her birthday?
        2) for her to take a private jet to New York to go shopping?

        Would you defend those actions?
        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
          This action doesn't reveal anything of the sort. You can't put two of the most poular royals in the last two decades and their baby on public transportation without creating a massive specticle along with a long list security concerns and inconvenience to their fellow travelers.

          Jim
          Jim, I'm genuinely surprised that you're defending the actions of these spoiled brats.... What purpose do they serve? The "Royals" live lavishly on the backs of the UK's taxpayers.

          Harry and Meghan's Wedding Is a Reminder That Britain Doesn't Need the Royals

          They blow money like crazy, living in extreme luxury, and this whole 'jet-set' thing is just part of that "we're special, we can spend tax payer money on anything we want", and the Brits eat it up.

          Who are they to lecture anybody on making sacrifices? And why are you defending that crap?
          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
            So, if they are preaching the necessity for drastic measures the rest of us must make, do you think it's a good idea for them to....

            A) take a private Jet to a resort in Italy to celebrate her birthday?
            2) for her to take a private jet to New York to go shopping?

            Would you defend those actions?
            1) my reply is talking about the criticism they didn't take a commercial airliner to their destination. That would be impractical and enormously expensive (security) and inconvenient to their fellow travelers (security).

            2) No - they should probably tone it down a bit if they are advocating for any sort of significant sacrifice from others.

            3) Government programs to encourage the development of clean energy from renewables or simply recognizing there is a problem and putting measures in place that keep us moving in a direction that can make a difference in the rising CO2 levels does not require the sort of 'self-sacrifice' that would require people like the royals to suddenly start living like the guy down the street for us to be able to believe they are sincere in their advocacy for change as it relates to AGW.

            Jim
            My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

            If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

            This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
              Jim, I'm genuinely surprised that you're defending the actions of these spoiled brats.... What purpose do they serve? The "Royals" live lavishly on the backs of the UK's taxpayers.

              Harry and Meghan's Wedding Is a Reminder That Britain Doesn't Need the Royals

              They blow money like crazy, living in extreme luxury, and this whole 'jet-set' thing is just part of that "we're special, we can spend tax payer money on anything we want", and the Brits eat it up.

              Who are they to lecture anybody on making sacrifices? And why are you defending that crap?
              I'm not 'defending the actions of these spoiled brats'. I'm saying your criticism they should have taken a commercial jet to their destination is unfounded. They have security concerns others do not have and for them to travel by commercial jet is not practical.

              And I could turn it around and ask why you are not critical of the excess of some other 'spoiled brats' I'm aware of - but I wont - at least not today.

              But to get a bit more real. Could you clarify the part that actually annoys you. It it that they are spoiled brats spending boo-coodles of money, or is it more that you think AGW is a farce and these guys advocating for change while living like kings (or at least prince and princess) is just more proof it's all a farce?

              Jim
              Last edited by oxmixmudd; 08-18-2019, 06:02 PM.
              My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

              If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

              This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

              Comment


              • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                I'm not 'defending the actions of these spoiled brats'. I'm saying your criticism they should have taken a commercial jet to their destination is unfounded.
                Can you please show me where I ever claimed they should have take a commercial jet?

                Let's deal with that first, while I ride my moped to pick up my $7.00 pizza to share with Mrs CP tonight.
                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                  Can you please show me where I ever claimed they should have take a commercial jet?

                  Let's deal with that first, while I ride my moped to pick up my $7.00 pizza to share with Mrs CP tonight.
                  Um, wasn't the conference in Italy? It's actually possible to drive from Britain to Italy - even with secure vehicles, that's gonna be a lot less 'carbon costly'.

                  But really, why travel at all? The whole thing could be video conferenced - and no nasty fossil fuels* required!








                  *depending on where the person's electricity comes from and other things... Still, less wasteful than a jet!



                  I want pizza...
                  "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

                  "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

                  My Personal Blog

                  My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

                  Quill Sword

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                    Can you please show me where I ever claimed they should have take a commercial jet?

                    Let's deal with that first, while I ride my moped to pick up my $7.00 pizza to share with Mrs CP tonight.
                    That would be the big bolded part:

                    Originally posted by CP
                    ECO-WARRIOR royals Harry and Meghan left a huge carbon footprint when they took a private jet to the South of France two days after their flight to Ibiza.
                    The trip to Nice created seven times more carbon emissions per person than a commercial flight.
                    The primary criticism in that phrase (which is nearly the whole of your commentary on the article linked below it) is the use of a private jet over a commercial one.

                    Jim
                    Last edited by oxmixmudd; 08-18-2019, 06:15 PM.
                    My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                    If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                    This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                      It truly is amazing how many of the loudest environmental champions are "do as I say, not as I do" types.
                      Because they know as well as the rest of us that it's a hoax.
                      Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                      But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                      Than a fool in the eyes of God


                      From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                        That would be the big bolded part:

                        Originally posted by CP
                        ECO-WARRIOR royals Harry and Meghan left a huge carbon footprint when they took a private jet to the South of France two days after their flight to Ibiza.
                        The trip to Nice created seven times more carbon emissions per person than a commercial flight.
                        The primary criticism in that phrase (which is nearly the whole of your commentary on the article linked below it) is the use of a private jet over a commercial one.

                        Jim
                        Jim, it's not nice to doctor or manufacture a quote in such a way as to make it look like I said what Seer posted. I'm going to be charitable and assume that was an accident - but please be more careful in the future, OK?

                        And I have NOT proposed or defended the use of a commercial jet as an alternative --- I have been asking the PURPOSE of this lavish trip - the necessity of it. Why these spoiled brats had to go at all.

                        Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                        Was this a necessary trip? Do you know why they were going? Harry had just promised to cut their carbon footprint.
                        THAT was my argument.
                        Last edited by Cow Poke; 08-18-2019, 07:21 PM.
                        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                          I'm not 'defending the actions of these spoiled brats'. I'm saying your criticism they should have taken a commercial jet to their destination is unfounded. They have security concerns others do not have and for them to travel by commercial jet is not practical.
                          Already dealt with that false claim.

                          And I could turn it around and ask why you are not critical of the excess of some other 'spoiled brats' I'm aware of - but I wont - at least not today.
                          I'm game - bring it! But note that I'm referencing spoiled brats living the lifestyle of the rich and famous on the back of the taxpayers, while lecturing others on sacrifice.

                          But to get a bit more real. Could you clarify the part that actually annoys you. It it that they are spoiled brats spending boo-coodles of money,
                          It is EGGzackly what I've been saying all along. Just read what I actually wrote instead of making something up.

                          or is it more that you think AGW is a farce and these guys advocating for change while living like kings (or at least prince and princess) is just more proof it's all a farce?

                          Jim
                          And, see... I think this has been your problem all along - you did an Olympic style 'jump to conclusion' that I was commenting in any way, shape or form on the validity of climate change. I was not. But the mere thought of that sent you on this silly "defend the Royals" mission.
                          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                            Jim, it's not nice to doctor or manufacture a quote in such a way as to make it look like I said what Seer posted. I'm going to be charitable and assume that was an accident - but please be more careful in the future, OK?

                            And I have NOT proposed or defended the use of a commercial jet as an alternative --- I have been asking the PURPOSE of this lavish trip - the necessity of it. Why these spoiled brats had to go at all.



                            THAT was my argument.
                            First I would never, nor have I ever. manufactured something like that.

                            So, yes I was responding to that quote of seers from the beginning of our exchange.My mistake was grabbing your post instead of seers to reply to, doesnt happen too often fortunately. So sorry for the confusion on that.

                            Jim
                            My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                            If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                            This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                              First I would never, nor have I ever. manufactured something like that.
                              I wouldn't think you would do that on purpose, no.

                              So, yes I was responding to that quote of seers from the beginning of our exchange.My mistake was grabbing your post instead of seers to reply to, doesnt happen too often fortunately. So sorry for the confusion on that.

                              Jim
                              OK, apology accepted - we're good.
                              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                                Already dealt with that false claim.



                                I'm game - bring it! But note that I'm referencing spoiled brats living the lifestyle of the rich and famous on the back of the taxpayers, while lecturing others on sacrifice.



                                It is EGGzackly what I've been saying all along. Just read what I actually wrote instead of making something up.



                                And, see... I think this has been your problem all along - you did an Olympic style 'jump to conclusion' that I was commenting in any way, shape or form on the validity of climate change. I was not. But the mere thought of that sent you on this silly "defend the Royals" mission.
                                You said we are good, but this response would indicate that is at best a fragile state. Is there any way to dial it back a notch and increase the probability poor wording or an honest mistake can be non fatal in a conversation?

                                Jim
                                My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                                If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                                This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                6 responses
                                45 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                42 responses
                                230 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                24 responses
                                104 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                32 responses
                                173 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                73 responses
                                284 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X