Re: Angus is ignored
- From: "John M." <john_howard_morgan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 21 May 2007 05:17:42 -0700
On May 12, 11:14 pm, amacmil...@xxxxxxx wrote:
On 12 May 2007 13:24:33 -0700, "John M."
<john_howard_mor...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On May 9, 6:08 pm, Malcolm <Malc...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <1178720693.2790...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, BAC
<cassw...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes
"Malcolm" <Malc...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:o6zwqQIXubQGFwVk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Angus is ignored and then whinges about it.
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/letters.cfm?id=717162007
At least he won't have to compose an "A letter I agree with" e-mail on this
occasion.
Personally, I think he has a point on this occasion - if people are
concerned about climate change attributed to global carbon emissions, the
geographical locations of the various sources of those emissions are largely
irrelevant, it's the sum total of emissions which counts.
A sum which includes his own, of course, about which he seems not to
care :-(
It is possible, even likely, that Angus is worried by CC from AGW.
CC from AGW? Please explain.
CC = "climate change" AGW = "anthropogenic global warming"
But
like most Nimby-types he prefers to salve any conscience he may have
by shifting blame elsewhere. The argument runs something like this -
'if the Prime Minister is using a big car and flying around in jumbo
jets then I can too and not feel any guilt.'
I don't care or criticise what anyone drives. It's up to them.
Exactly my point. By adopting this position you will feel no guilt
about your personal activities however badly the environment suffers
from them.
The same tactic works for failure to accept blame for environmental
degradation affecting nature. Here the argument goes - 'The
conservation organisations are less than perfect so I can reject any
personal responsibility for biodiversity loss.'
No. I'm not a conservationist or an environmentalist but I expect
those who say they are to be honest about it.
Because they are imperfect you are not obligated to associate yourself
with them or their activities in any way. Perfect. I knew I had your
number and you have confirmed this. Thanks!
Nothing complicated.
True. The trait you are displaying is a very common condition among
the hoi-polloi.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Angus is ignored
- From: amacmil304
- Re: Angus is ignored
- References:
- Angus is ignored
- From: Malcolm
- Re: Angus is ignored
- From: BAC
- Re: Angus is ignored
- From: John M.
- Re: Angus is ignored
- From: amacmil304
- Angus is ignored
- Prev by Date: Re: Suirrel pox in Scotland
- Next by Date: Re: Angus is ignored
- Previous by thread: Re: Angus is ignored
- Next by thread: Re: Angus is ignored
- Index(es):