Stewart, despite your contemptuous dismissal of my original posting on this topic, in which you inaccurately accused me of being 'in denial' about Global Warning (one of today's mortal sins) and 'flippant' (to which I plead guilty, but flippancy does not equal denial), you seem to have missed my main point, which was that people can only take so much nagging, after which the nagging falls prey to the law of diminishing returns. Like probably the vast majority of people, I do accept the existence of Global Warming, and so re-cycle, leave the car at home, re-use my shopping bags, and so on. However, the extent to which GW is anthropogenic, the extent to which it can be mitigated by our actions, and the extent to which it can bring only disaster and hardship, entirely devoid of any benefits to humanity, are, it seems to me, all legitimate topics for debate which have not been conclusively proved by science. What doesn't help is the constant badgering, delivered in a high moral tone, about our failings and shortcomings - it doesn't work in any context, whether domestic, national or international. This may be a result of frailty and shortsightedness on the part of humanity, but hey, that's who we are. If you want to wear the hair shirt, that's up to you, but please stop shouting at the rest of us about it. You say, in your response to my earlier post: "If some think me patronising then if it's got some folks thinking I consider that a fair trade off."
We do, and it isn't.
|