The Forum > Article Comments > Do the young have the will to make climate change sacrifices? > Comments
Do the young have the will to make climate change sacrifices? : Comments
By Thom Woodroofe, published 15/7/2009The prevailing attitude among young people today continues to be 'do as we say, not as we do' when it comes to saving their planet.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
-
- All
Posted by Clownfish, Wednesday, 15 July 2009 11:07:55 AM
| |
Thom Woodroof should be congratulated on his achievements as an ODD young achiever. I stress for this to not be interpreted in a derogatory manner, but simply one acknowledging ones achievements, which are surprising considering the course (Bachelor of Arts) Thom is studying. Whilst making minor valid arguments, this opinion is written in such a ridiculous manner to make no firm convictions, and as such, lakes any real opinion. This piece could be written by a politician due to the ambiguous language of the terms used, specifically designed to not hold the writer to any particular point of view. The writer of this article however does not represent, by any sense, the majority or even a fraction of the 'young society'. This can easily be derived by the language used, and the tone of the article. Why would one listen to an argument put forward by a 19 year old Arts student, which is poorly written to represent someone else. Thom is the 'executive director' of Left Right Think Tank, an organization that has achieved little if anything at all. On a positive note, the organization does provide amazing job titles and thus would be beneficial for students to assist in.
Thom, before you provide the world your 'verbal diarrhea', please consider your target audience, and write your opinion to that demographic in colloquial language. Rather than pretending to represent a segment you obviously have no part in. Posted by Michael Clarks, Wednesday, 15 July 2009 11:13:52 AM
| |
Why should anyone be expected to have the "will" to make sacrifices for a nebulous, unproven, boogey man of the 21st century?
Posted by Col Rouge, Wednesday, 15 July 2009 11:32:29 AM
| |
Alas Thom,
you've hit the nail on the head. I've lost count the number of times OLO and other blogs publish op eds by far left, fundamentally back to the earth young greenies who want to either reduce our population by 13 million people, ban all immigrants, take cars off the roads and generally bring capitalism to its knees. Then I see them at airports or being driven to functions in big gas guzzling cars. 'Don't do as I do, do as I say.' Mind you as a boomer, I'm surrounded by my own age cohort who do a lot of hand wringing about 'youth' but them fume about there being a lack of shitake mushrooms for that big dinner party. Actually we can have our shitake mushrooms but not the gas guzzlers. Anyway, good article. Posted by Cheryl, Wednesday, 15 July 2009 11:46:23 AM
| |
Col Rouge, I seem to remember that you checked me concerning my philosophical comments praising the Sermon on the Mount, virtually saying that it was just a childish first attempt by the boy Jesus before he became more Christian possibly.
Further, as a historical philosopher, and as regards your comments concerning Global Warming, please read below. It is incedible how many of OLO contributors regard Global Warming as a fantasy. But from my experience as a wheat and sheep farmer combined with my later studies, I have come to the conclusion that: It is incredibly sickly how many of our Online contributors believe that apparently mankind can do little harm to our planet. Indeed, the very fact that Nature or Whatever had grown trees and forests and vegetation to make use of problematic carbon waste, any good high school student could tell us that mankind was well on the way to destroy the globe ever since the advent of modern industrialisation. Posted by bushbred, Wednesday, 15 July 2009 1:41:33 PM
| |
Further from Bushbred:
I have just been told by a retired lecturer that most of our OLOs with strong arguments against Global Warming could be backed by wealthy groups who make their dollars out of industries which need to be phased out eventually if GW becomes factual. Regards, BB, Buntine, WA. Posted by bushbred, Wednesday, 15 July 2009 1:58:35 PM
| |
Further to Bushbred:
I have just been told by a ... ("insert respected referee here" I'll go for a mate as well) Company CEO of an International Freight Group (is a lecturer better do you think, what did he/she lecture on? Basket weaving? the inference is that it has to be true because its an academic) ...that most of our OLOs with strong arguments for Global Warming could be backed by wealthy Eco/green groups who make their dollars out of industries which will make a fortune if GW becomes factual. There you go, fixed. It's just as easy to say the AGW industry is well funded, lots of grants for studying the effects of AGW on whatever as well as people attending Green Camps, like this weekend with Al Gore. I notice the ACF and Greenpeace fund lots of studies - now, the recipients wouldn't be making money and paying their mortgages would they, only skeptics do that don't they? Always with the conspiracy theories, that someone couldn't possibly disagree unless, unless they were funded by by by BIG OIL! There must be an evil group funding people to say things that are "incredible", well only to you and your co-believers. It's a good article, perhaps some of our youth realize that shouting and stamping their little feet is not having the same effect in the big wide world as it had living at home with mum and dad, it's called maturity. Posted by rpg, Wednesday, 15 July 2009 2:49:17 PM
| |
Hell, yeah, bushbred: right now, I'm rolling naked in the piles of cash Exxon Mobil have been showering on me.
... I wish ... Posted by Clownfish, Wednesday, 15 July 2009 3:03:24 PM
| |
I hope all the climate change sceptics here are right because the chances of a meaningful deal on curbing greenhouse gas emissions are low to zero and low just left town. So if you guys are wrong we are well and truly f*c*ed.
Posted by stevenlmeyer, Wednesday, 15 July 2009 3:10:20 PM
| |
To stevenlmeyer,
we're probably not all right. We're just less wrong. Posted by Cheryl, Wednesday, 15 July 2009 3:34:13 PM
| |
The earth worshipers could join PETA and dance around naked making them feel like they are really doing something useful. How much more of this fantasy do we need to tolerate. It does provide an outward cloak of righteousness for corrupt internals. Just a look at the role models.
Posted by runner, Wednesday, 15 July 2009 3:59:23 PM
| |
Now Gore has stooped to preying on impressionable kids who will jump on any band wagon and dance around wearing tight jeans and green hardhats for TV.
It’s a pity that kids couldn’t be taught a bit of cynicism as they grow up; then they might have some protection from users like Gore. Gore is still using the totally disgraceful and totally discredited ‘hockey stick’ which was used by the IPCC to bluff us into believing that the 20th. Century had the highest temperatures in history. Sometime after this diagram was revealed as a con by independent scientists (historical data had been excluded), the IPCC ceased using it. Gore’s little film, ‘An Inconvenient Truth’, claimed that there was less sea ice, and polar bears were dying while trying to find ice. But, sea ice has expanded, and a whole 4 bears were killed by a storm where the ice has been expanding. Gore exaggerated the situation in the Arctic by about 50 times! I wonder if Gore has told the kids that he has a ’green’ company called Generation Investment Management that their youthful enthusiasm will be helping along; has he told them that he is a board member of renewable energy company? Has he also told them that one of the greedy companies behind the global financial problems, Lehmann Brothers, had him as a director? Did Gore tell them about the 35 scientific errors in his film? Do his new young friends know that Gore charges $100, 000 to $150,000 for lectures while they cavort on his behalf for the price of a green hard hat? Do they know that, apart from what he gets and will get from flogging alternative energy, he netted $50 million from ‘An Inconvenient Truth’? Do they know that he offsets his personal, home energy use by buying credits from his own company, Generation Investments Management? Irrespective of what these youngsters do, they are a great advertisement for Al Gore Inc.` Posted by Leigh, Wednesday, 15 July 2009 7:43:45 PM
| |
It is always hot here in summer, cool the rest of the year. It is in the 80s and 90s in the summer. It is usually in the 60s and 70s in the winter. We moved here in 1973 and the climate has not changed at all. We do have fluctuations in climate, cycles. Like it snows here about once every 15 years. And right now we are in a La Nina weather pattern, so it is very dry. But our high temperatures are the same as usual. We set a lot of record high temperatures in 1980. We do have hot dry summers, and cooler wet summers, mostly due to La Nina and El Nino. But our high temperatures as high as they are this year, we are not breaking all time high records. And there is also the peskly little matter of thermometers. Now we have digital thermometers that measure within a fraction of a degree. A hundred years ago what did they have? And what year was the thermomter invented? Because we CAN'T go back before that year to accurately measure temperature at all.... If you don't use the same exact thermometer in the same exact location you will get different readings, even now. I have three thermometers on the back porch and one on the front porch, and they are all off about one degree from each other. You can check the temperature at www wunderground com You can check what the temperature was on any given day, in your area, going back many years and they give record highs and record lows too.
Posted by BarbieTie, Wednesday, 15 July 2009 10:59:39 PM
| |
Thom Woodroofe is a political supporter of the global warming alarmists, probably a casualty of being misinformed by green ideologues. If he had done his homework, he should be aware that the IPCC was set up to find scientific evidence to substantiate man-made global warming. After searching for over 20 years, the IPCC failed to find any irrefutable scientific evidence that global warming is man-caused. Nevertheless, as virtually all the IPCC contributors believe in man-made global warming, the IPCC continues to assert that CO2 emissions are the main driver of global warming, and has developed climate models to make alarming projections. He should be aware that none of these models has been validated by actual data. Consequently, its models cannot be relied on for prediction purposes. For example, the IPCC was unable to explain the world cooling trend evident from 1940 to 1975. Furthermore, it failed to predict the cooling trend post 1998, the El Nino and La Nina effects, and the 2008-09 northern winter being the coldest in 50 years. Further material that seriously questions the credibility and integrity of the IPCC's activities and claims may be found at http://mclean.ch/climate/IPCC.htm , which lists some 50 articles.
Consequently, when young people become aware that there is no scientific or economic justification for climate policy, it is not surprising that they lack the will to make sacrifices. They are being rational Posted by Raycom, Thursday, 16 July 2009 12:05:48 AM
| |
The vice chancellors must be getting really worried about future funding. What are they going to do, when all that global warming money dries up? It must be hard getting by, after wasting all that money, when they were one of the suckers of the last big con. You know that one, the nonexistent Y2K bug.
Full marks for thinking on their feet. They coppied the con, & even expanded on it. So now that the thing is unravelling, its a real problem, particularly when they have got used to all that extra money. This, I believe, is the reason that all these airy fairy twits, from all the arty farty disciplines have been told to rush into print, with bull dust, like this little boy. Have you noticed, it's now all those who's lack of real education, means they have no idea, who are making the running with all these articles? The others know the jigs up, & don't want any more AGW articals above their name. That will not be good for future job prospects, in just a few years. Thom, scuttle back into your own area of expertise, [academic politics seems your plan] before you do yourself any more damage. Posted by Hasbeen, Thursday, 16 July 2009 10:12:12 AM
| |
Protecting our Globe, from Bushbred?
Reply to GW non-believers Thought you buggers had your nasty replies scrubbed out by a sensible OLO chief. Indeed, going by your nasty critiques was wondering whether you have faith in the capacity of our globe to repair itself despite warnings from the world's top scientists, or you just love being different, similar to those who followed Hitler. In fact we have been wondering how much you coves really think about a future for your great, great, great grandkids, or have none of you got loving caring wives? Talk about caring for the future rather than ruining the future, as new cockies way back way in the land clearing days, we were inclined to snigger about a new farmer who in clearing the 1000 acre allotted blocks in those days, rather than making the blocks into just single paddocks, he cut each block into four 250 acre paddocks, dividing each with one quarter chain wide of uncleared trees and scrub. But over the years as tractors became bigger and more powerful, naturally the cockie's sons took notice of other smart-arse cackling young cockies, and cleared each 1000 acres as bare as a baby's bumb as was said - even joining paddocks into 3000 acres and more as seeding and ploughing rigs became wider. And so our world goes on with massive machinery easily able to clear out all our forests within the next ten years or less. And so the world goes on with younger ones not taking an atom of notice of what the older ones have experienced? It is so interesting that it was not myself who saw the need to care about nature, but my wife, who told me if I cleared any more of the beautiful salmon gums out of the front paddock, she'd be catching a train back home to Perth with our kids and all. Cheers, BB, WA. Posted by bushbred, Saturday, 18 July 2009 2:03:29 PM
|
Well, when the likes of Al Gore are manifestly unwilling to "walk the walk", is it any wonder that their acolytes behave as hypocritically as they do?
More to the point, is it any wonder that I take Al Gore's hysterical alarmism with a Siberian-scale grain of salt?
To quote the satirical "The problem with young people today is ..." blog (which like all good satire has a discomforting edge of truth):
"I’m not sure what (young people) expected to find when they popped out of the womb but it seems they were hoping for a fairy dreamland where Ipods grow on trees in fair-trade forests and smoke stacks puff out giant clouds of marijuana smoke ... The young people talk a good game but have you ever walked past a school yard? Nothing but styrofoam containers, old bongs and discarded lunch bags as far as the eye can see."