1. 

There are two issues. Climate change and change caused by humans. The climate has been in a warming cycle ever since the last Ice Age so to say that there is climate change is a no brainer. Many different natural causes are included in climate change for instance after Krakatoa erupted in the 19th century there was so much ash in the atmosphere that it blocked the sun and caused what is known as the year without a summer.

Which brings up to human climate change. This is where there is a conflict. People on the side of humans causing all of the global warmer over stated their case and were proven to have even falsified data which has hurt their argument. Other people think warming is basically a natural occurrence which human have little or no effect.

Giving money to charities is useless. Doing something about the climate change (no matter what the cause) is being slowed by political arguments one way or another. Just live responsibly and if we all did it is bound to help.

Depends on what the charities are doing with the money. Some charities like United Way, more than half the donations go to the administrators. One of the best is a Marine Scholarship Fund for children of veterans.

What Global Warming Scientists and Governments are saying and peddling through the media is indeed a scam

CO2 as these people would like to have us believe and pay them money to reduce isn't attributed to what they now call Climate change

We've seen how they've fiddled the statistics and connived to keep the money robbing machine going. Their theories may have changed after decades but they still don't fit the facts

I've yet to hear anyone that can accurately predict the weather so how could anybody be taken seriously when they say they can explain climate change?

1. You can't "stop" global warming by "living responsibly". Turning off your light when you leave the room and using your AC less frequently won't do very much. Effectively reducing the effects of climate change can only be achieved by reducing emissions, which can only really be achieved by switching to cleaner energy sources. There are a lot of gains to be made by increasing efficiency, but primarily these will come with big industries like manufacturing, construction, power generation and agriculture, not much from you and me making small changes to our daily lives.



Big changes require big forces, which is why you are right that governments are the logical places where action should come from. And in many places, governments have already done quite a lot, just not really enough to make much of a difference yet.

As for charities asking for money, it depends on the individual charity. Some of the ones I've seen use the money to provide solar ovens to people in poor regions that normally use dirty oil for cooking, or provide direct research for clean energy technologies, or plant trees / try to protect existing trees, or pay to subsidize wind or tidal energy, etc. Each charity is different, so you really have to look at each specific one to figure out what your money is going to be used for.

Climate change is happening, as predicted by James Lovelock. If everything is left to politicians, they mostly only are interested in keeping power. Powerful charities (Greenpeace, Rainforest Alliance, World Wildlife Fund) have powerful lobbying powers to influence the politicians, and voters to actually do things that will make a positive effect on climate change. If you can't see how they make a difference, visit their websites and see their enormous achievements in gaining positive environmental change. This is where the smart charity contributions go.

I think global warming is occurring, it is caused by man, BUT its not going to cause catastrophe.

As for the charities, you are correct that the major changes need to be at the gov't level. At our level, there is only small changes we can actually do, and they will not have any measurable effect. The charities are however, doing things like giving money to research and petitioning the governments.

The goverment plan is a value added tax or carbon tax .

It will not affect the climate . Goldman Saks is in on it .

Its a wealth redistrubution sheme . Poor people will suffer or die . Liberals wont care .

Eugenics , Genocide death , starvation like North Korea.

The climate change industry has been caught with their pants down so many times they look like monkeys. CO2 is the friendliest waste possible. In fact to advocate CO2 taxes is essentially taxing life itself. Just imagine every family with a cow and a horse. The CO2 people are as incredulous as their leader. With warming there is evaporation of the ocean surfaces. This is where real rain comes from. Look at all the people on this question who realize War on CO2 emissions is a war on humanity. It is a totally dishonest pursuit!

Charities like Greenpeace, and WWF have become too big and too political, they see climate change as a chance to build up their power base, the same with governments an opportunity to increase control.

If you think about it, carbon tax and cap and trade policies are never going to alter our climate, but they are great for imposing rules and regulations,

we know global warming isn't a scam because last year Earth's average temperature rose by 0.8*C

We hear a lot about climate change and charities are often saying two main things; 1) you can stop it by living responsibly and 2) give us money.

I struggle to understand why giving money to charities helps to change anything? And I am beginning to wonder if this is just another way of making money!

If change/stopping is possible, then it needs to come at government level...so not sure why giving millions to charities is somehow linked to making a difference.

Any thoughts?

I don't know why you think charities have anything to do with GW. AGW is very real and some countries are already feeling it's effects. 97% of climatologists are convinced that humans are the cause.

http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/20...

Climate change is real BUT there are organizations who use it against us...Look up Agenda 21