Shouldn't just all global warming believers quit convincing refusers and let whatever happens happen?

Done.

There is always the hope, no matter how impossible, that the non-believers of climate change will pull their freakin’ heads out of their butts and really do something about it. (I think the point of no return has already been reached, but I can always hope. Mankind will reap his ultimate reward, and I think we will all realize the reality of it before this century is out.)

@mazingerz88 There is something called the “tipping point”, where things don’t go back together.

In other words, let’s all sign on to collective slow suicide?

I think the key phrase is in your first sentence: “you care about the future of children around the world and the whole planet.”

That’s why.

(Never mind the fact that the stronger and more frequent current weather costing lives, homes, livelihoods, etc., is also linked to anthropomorphic climate change, so it really is affecting the here-and-now, too—another thing people care about.)

They should quit trying to convince non-believers there is human influence over global warming and start talking again about how pollution will give us cancer and autimmune disease and asthma. Something that feels more immediate and less explained away as just a cyclical change in weather. Throw in God created the earth and sky and we should eat giver God’s creation. Speak to your audience!

Not everything is as it seems, I thought this might help add perspective.

https://www.iceagenow.info/lack-of-sunspots-to-bring-record-cold-warns-nasa-scientist/

The fright wing are totally convinced there is no such thing, so they must be right after all who are you going to believe a world scientist or a fright wing politician who’s only goal is to get as much wealth as humanly possible and screw everyone else?

Eat giver should be take care of. Sigh.

I feel bad enough that when my kids are my age, this planet will be a horrible place.

“Shouldn’t just all global warming believers quit convincing refusers and let whatever happens happen?”
NO

“Why waste time and energy showing how much you care about the future of children around the world and the whole planet when knucklehead humans keep fighting and ridiculing you off?”
What? What is your problem?

“Why not just forget about the future generations, let corporations and moronic people pollute the planet to their hearts content until everyone’s dead if not suffering?”
Um… because that’s a terrible idea. About on par with, “why don’t you just jump off a tall building, or eat bacon and not bother to bathe until you die?”

“Those who want to slow down global warming would be dead anyway before all the really HUGE cataclysmic events take place.”
Don’t count on it, fool.

“Why bother?”
Because they aren’t jaded scumbags who don’t care about anything?

Just ship them all to a nice, flat, ocean-bound island.
Not like they have anything to worry about, eyyyyyy?

I believe if something is wrong then someone needs to be blamed. I always believe in “no smoke without fire” policy. Of course those who contribute to destruction of Planet Earth need to be reprimanded of their action, and made responsible if possible. The thing is, what is caused by one country can be suffered by other countries. Take China for example, as one of the biggest air pollutant producer it has caused other countries like Japan and South Korea to suffer from such issue even though they have nothing to do with it. Should they just let China do whatever they want without suffering the consequences? Of course not, somebody needs to pay for their own action, to the people, and to Earth. It’s also worth-noting that some major companies actually use global warming issue just to get publicity and as marketing strategy while contributing little to nothing to Earth.

Relating to individual countries may be one way to effect some changes, but it’s not really the shape of the situation.

What ultimately needs to change are the ways we think and talk about industry and the health of our planet’s ecosystems.

But the Right will deny it till they die, mainly because it gets in the way of profits and that is more important than air to breath or water to drink, or at least they think so.

@SQUEEKY2 You make a fine point. There have been countless examples throughout the years of how some failure of design, or other, that money is more important that people’s lives. They call it being “cost effective.” Once enough people die, things change. Of course, people getting on the band wagon to stop climate change will be way too late. But at least it will then be cost effective. Maybe bitching about what should have been done, and by whom, will also be cost effective. Or not…

I was one of those who thought it was natural, cyclic climate change. I became convinced otherwise by some smart people, and now I put a lot of thought into things that I didn’t before. We have to keep talking.