Meanwhile I quite like the response to human caused global climate change and environmental destruction featured on this website;
http://www.letterstothefuture.org

There is little doubt that 2015 will be the warmest year on record , and last year had been the previous warmest year. Records of temperature show that for many decades the trend line has been going up, more than 30 years. Fact

Greenland is melting ice from the top of its ice sheet, and being undermined where glaciers meet sea water. Fact

The relationship of CO2 and long wave infrared radiation causing CO2 to take up warmth has been proven. Fact

Glaciers in Mountain Ranges around the world are generally regressing. Fact

While denying climate change is only a couple of decades old, the science of climate change is almost 200 years old beginning with Fourier. Fact

Scientists employed by ExxonMobil in the 1970s and 1980s worked closely with other climate scientists and believed that man was damaging climate stability. Fact

Scientists working for ExxonMobil modelled the break down in Arctic ice. Fact

Oceans generally are exhibiting higher temperatures than they normally exhibit. Fact

Deforestation is part of climate change; there have been a number of droughts in the Amazon Basin in the last decade. Fact

Methane levels in the atmosphere; as with temperature, has been increasing. Fact

When the atmosphere is warmer it is able to hold much more water vapour. Fact

The very foundation stone of climate change has been proven through experimentation from quite simple experiments to exceptionally sophisticated ones set in the natural environment. Physics and Chemistry uphold climate science; as do many other scientific disciplines.
Deniers have no fundamental proven hypothesis they can provide that has been proven.

Those who deny climate change continually regurgitate the same old myths.
Between 2013 and 2014 there were 24,000 peer reviewed papers published, only a handful from climate change skeptics (Powell).

Peak Scientific Agencies support the view of anthropogenic climate change.

NASA has sent a capsule beyond Pluto, they support the view of climate change and can hardly be thought of as having no clues in relation to climate change.

It has been suggested that ExxonMobil have committed the crime of the geological epoch through their failure to support the science provided by their climate scientists. Those who deny climate change are unwittingly supporting ExxonMobil Management in their bid to undermine science.

Notice how the responses of the warming alarmists consist of NOTHING BUT:
a) personal abuse and name-calling?
b) assuming what is in issue and when challenged repeating the assumption?
c) appeal to absent authority all of whom JUST HAPPEN to have a vested interest in the matter much bigger than Big Coal has ever been?

And notice how they used fossil fuels in order to communicate their message?

That's it folks. That's what these morons are calling "science".

All you need to know about the whole belief system is that everyone else who shares it is sharing the same methodology too. This will go down in history as just another chapter in "Popular Delusions and Madness of Crowds".

They squark about how temperatures are changing - as if no natural change is legitimate any more without their permission.

Notice how none of them actually ventured to say
a) how they know what the "just right" temperature of the globe is?
b) how they know that the effects of warming would be worse rather than better, and how they worked out the distribution and abundance of species in both scenarios?
c) how they know whether the effects of policy would be net beneficial or net detrimental, how, for whom, when, where, what the discount for futurity is, if not why not; and how they took into account the all-important human evaluations?

In a word,it's bullsh!t.

BS is right JKJ

a) how they know what the "just right" temperature of the globe is?
Fool. There is no "just right" temperature for the globe. The Earth could not care less. It is US, people and all the things we cherish. Homes, beaches, ports, whole cities are at risk. That is why the temperature matters.

b) how they know that the effects of warming would be worse rather than better, and how they worked out the distribution and abundance of species in both scenarios?
Have you not been listening? How is sea level rise "better"? How are swamped cities and homes "better"? How is the spread of diseases like malaria and ross river etc "better"? How is desertification, famine, death "better"?

c) how they know whether the effects of policy would be net beneficial or net detrimental, how, for whom, when, where, what the discount for futurity is, if not why not; and how they took into account the all-important human evaluations?
What is more detrimental? Insurance for humanity's home or some some johnny come lately capitalist ideology of degradation and subjugation. With a good dose of "we just dont care" thrown in for good measure.

"In a word,it's bullsh!t."

A perfect self-description, JKJ.

Note my ad hominem response to your ad hominem rant.