On 22/11/2020 10:24, T i m wrote:

There is some
genuine philanthropy in business I grant you, but there is far more
virtue signaling, publicity gaining, tax avoidance,

Yes, I'm sure there is some of that.

and green-washing.

Lots of green washing. Total hypocrisy.


So can we at least agree that millions of people around the world are
dying from pollution that weren't say 200 years ago?

Pollution is collateral damage from modern science, technology, and
industry. These have done massively more for the good of humanity than
pollution has done harm. By your logic lifespans should have reduced
because of pollution but in fact they have tripled thanks to modern
science, technology, and industry.


Can we agree that people living *with* nature are likely to have a
lower carbon footprint (and the demonstrable results stated above)
than say you?


Carbon footprint is irrelevant to the well-being of humanity because it
has very little bearing on atmospheric temperatures and that doesn't
matter anyway, because thanks to modern science, technology, and
industry we can adapt.


If you can concede such things then I would be interested to hear what
you think we should do (if anything) to try to combat a further
escalation?

Of global temperatures? Instead of wasting money on ridiculous schemes
like windmills and battery cars, and causing fuel poverty and a general
reduction in standards of living, use the money to fix anything that
happens as a result of natural temperature changes.



And I did
freebies for hospices and dogs' homes.


That wasn't just virtue signaling and publicity gaining then?

Since no-one knew about it, no.

Bill