imajulianutter,

sorry about the misspelling above; it should have been "minimifidianist". I felt denialists deserved a more impressive title to cover for their unimpressive credentials.
I'm a big fan of Diogenes btw, I even have an illustrated and annotated edition of his anecdotes, signed by the artist/compiler. But since Diogenes delighted in mocking human folly, I doubt he'd agree to be the patron saint of minimifidianists. Indeed, Diogenes was much more akin to the modern Greenie, advocating a return to nature and renunciation of material goods. He was also the first cosmopolitan, seeing national borders as the abstractions they are--which serve at the current juncture to preserve inequalities, to "export" emissions, and to forestall action on anthropogenic environmental devastation.
Indeed, I might claim Diogenes for "my" patron saint; like him, I see fault on all sides.
Diogenes had the unpalatable solution to our current ills: the renunciation of worldly things. Or in current parlance: cutting consumption.

Sadly Diogenes would reject you and mock you.

Diogenes main point was he didn't claim to know all the answers and that he always kept an open mind. He was a cynic and he never really settled on or held onto any great opinion except that he could always change his position.

Can you in the face of the mounting evidence against your warmist creed?

You see I've always believed there was global warming. I always believed it was as a result of natural cycles and events. But you see I also always believed there could come a period of global cooling. As I believe there will also be another warming in the future.

So I like Diogenes can easily reverse my position without losing any credibility or suffering the ignomany of having to admit to the wrongness of my opinions when not borne out by the displayed facts.

You are so welded to the faith of global warming your world will crumble as you discover that climate changes are naturally occurring events quite beyond the control of man.

Do you really think Diogenes wouldn't utterly mock your belief you can change the climate? He'd have a complete field day at your expense.

You'd be aware he reckoned if ever he woke up in a palace while everybody else was living in bathtubs, he'd be really worried.

You making him a Saint would utterly frighten the c..p out of him!

Minimifidianist still leaves me scratching my head ... is something frozen? ... have another go.

imajulianutter,
everything I said about Diogenes is valid: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diogenes_of_Sinope Look at the philosophy heading. Though I have no interest in patron saints.

You say:

<You see I've always believed there was global warming. I always believed it was as a result of natural cycles and events. But you see I also always believed there could come a period of global cooling. As I believe there will also be another warming in the future>

I, on the other hand, have no truck with belief whatsoever and mistrust even my most intuitive ideas.
For me, however, there is no need to nit-pick or agonise over the extent that climate change is anthropogenic. A warming planet due to greenhouse gas emissions is only one instance of the ongoing devastation caused by humans. We need to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels, and all the other finite resources we consume so voraciously, whether their profligate use causes global warming or not. For me there are ample ethical reasons for humanity to take stock (as only the human animal can) of its mad career and mend its ways. The fact that, like other species, we're also threatened, ought to be redundant; but if pragmatics is all the mean-minded minimifidianists can understand, that ought to suffice on its own.
But puerile prevarication--like a seasoned alcoholic feigning dignity, rationalising his contemptible excuses endlessly, even in high dudgeon!--is all the minimifidianist has.

As previous link does not work,

http://www.forbes.com/2008/07/03/energy-efficiency-china-biz-energy_cx_bw_0707efficiency_china.html

It states "China lags far behind Western industrialized countries when it comes to energy efficiency. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, the energy intensity of China in 2005, the most recent year for which data are available, was 35,766 British thermal units per U.S. dollar. In the U.S., the Btu/dollar ratio was 9,113. In the U.K. and Japan, the figures were even lower, 6,145 and 4,519 respectively".

Candide, yes I think you make very some good points.

Whether they come to fruition remains to be seen, but I hardly think we can keep going the way we are as today's policy tokenism must give way in time to sensible policies that transcend a number of policy domains, albeit how we achieve the right balance to appease all nations in this competitive world remains to be seen.

Squeers,

lowbrow abuse is quite typical of bad manners when losing a debate.

It is very common among the warming alarmist community or I should say the denialist alarmist 'rump' that remains.

'minimifidianists' . In the faith of global warming I don't believe it means anything.