"Rory McIlroy pays thousands to offset carbon footprint of flying to golf events"

by McLaren Wed 17 Nov 2021, 1:41 pm

Ian Carter (BBC golf) wrote:Rory McIlroy says the environmental "guilt" he feels for traversing the golfing globe in private jets has caused him to spend tens of thousands of pounds to offset his carbon footprint.

The four times major champion was speaking after travelling from his Florida home for this week's DP World Tour Championship in Dubai.

When asked by BBC Sport whether sustainability is something that bothers him, McIlroy said that the issue first came into his conscience after winning in Shanghai two years ago.

"I flew back home privately, and it was just me on the plane," he said. "And I just got this massive sense of guilt come over me, just because this can't be good and all that sort of stuff.

"So we ended up reaching out to the GEO Foundation who do a lot of great sustainability things in golf."

McIlroy now pays extra fees, thought to be around $150,000 (£110,000) a year, to offset his carbon footprint.

"I wouldn't self-profess to be an eco-warrior," he added. "But I'm someone that doesn't want to damage the environment. So how can I make my travel around the world neutral? How can I neutralise what I do?

"And they came up with a few different ways that I can do that. So on top of what I pay to fly private, I pay quite a bit more on top of that to make sure I'm carbon neutral by the end of the year."

McIlroy, the former world number one from Northern Ireland, says he recognises the importance of environmental issues. "It's something that I have a conscience about," he said.

"I take it seriously, especially when you see some of these weather events that are happening. And I live in a part of the world where hurricanes are very prevalent and becoming more and more prevalent as the years go on.

"I think we can all play our part in some way or another."

McIlroy was speaking in the same week that BBC Radio 5 Live airs a special programme on golf's environmental impact - on Thursday, 18 November from 22:00 GMT. The show looks at ways the game is trying to make itself more eco-friendly.

But golf still attracts criticism. Environmental scientist and campaigner Abbie Richards has gathered a large TikTok following with her anti-golf stance.

The 24-year-old American describes courses as "a terrible waste of space and the worst fake sport on the face of this planet".

Speaking on 5Live, Richards added: "Golf seems to be under the impression that it is somehow good for the environment or somehow natural when in reality it is very wasteful."

She argues that the building and maintenance of golf courses harms the environment. "The building phase is extremely damaging to what was there before it," she said.

"In the US I think it is over two billion gallons of water are used each day on golf courses, which is truly an egregious amount of water when other people don't have drinking water."

But the golf industry insists steps to make the game more environmentally friendly are occurring at an increasing rate.

The United Arab Emirates is the centre of golfing attention with this week's finale to the European Tour season. Its courses are irrigated using recycled effluent water rather than desalinated supplies, as was the case when desert golf first emerged.

"In this part of the world we have been working very hard for at least the best part of the past decade in making sure that we are as environmentally friendly as we can be," said Chris May, chief executive of Dubai Golf.

"We have looked at reducing unnecessary turfed grass areas that require irrigation and also being more efficient with the systems we use."

May says a new watering system on the Majlis Course at the Emirates club, which stages the Dubai Desert Classic, has reduced consumption by around 40%.

Like McIlroy, Dubai Golf has partnered with the GEO Foundation for Sustainability in Golf. "Golf is the one sport that is probably as close to nature as any sport," said spokesman Roddy Williams.

"I think golf has a real opportunity to be a part of the solutions for climate change and not part of the problem."

The foundation ran a Drive for Net Zero event at the recent COP 26 in Glasgow. "Golf's got some wonderful opportunities, great eco-systems, great natural environments," Williams added.

"It's fantastic for health and for communities and there's a real opportunity to step forward."

From the professional game, McIlroy provides a lead but other players are more reticent.

"I think we need to look at all scenarios and cases before we make a decision," said American Billy Horschel.

"We're never going to always agree on the right direction. But at the end of the day, travel is what I do for my job.

"I try and do it responsibly, I try and do it smart. But for me to do what I want to do, I have to travel. Simple as that."

A similar message came from Britain's Matt Fitzpatrick, who says he does think about the environment and drives an electric car, but claims there is little he can do regarding the global footprint of his chosen profession.

"It's my job," he told me. "I've got to get on a flight and go from Miami to Bermuda or wherever it is, or Miami to Mexico, Miami to Dubai, wherever it is, just part of it, really.

"It's not something that I've ever really thought about purely because I'm doing it for a living. If I couldn't get on planes, I probably only play about five tournaments a year."

Rory is done, his head is gone. Do you think Tiger was crying over spilt milk while flying back from winning another major?

by super_realist Wed 17 Nov 2021, 3:01 pm

He is indeed an idiot. Carbon offsetting by the rich is a massive con. I remember when that man sausage Harry and his repulsive human being of a wife said Elton John had done it for them.

Laughable stuff, almost as bad as Lewis Hamilton

by **JuliusHMarx** Wed 17 Nov 2021, 3:22 pm

McIlroy is a effing socialist! Nay, a tree-hugging, granola-crunching, bleeding-heart communist! It wouldn't surprise me if he is literally one of the stupidest men on the planet.

by super_realist Wed 17 Nov 2021, 3:42 pm

If youre an actor, sports star or celebrity in anyway its probably best you just dont express a view on transport, CO2 or any climate related issue.

by JAS Thu 18 Nov 2021, 8:25 am

So let me get this right...some people actually think they can pay to save the planet? I'd be interested to hear where he (and indeed anyone else who indulges in this kind of guilt assuaging) thinks the offsetting money ACTUALLY goes.

Think the wee fella needs a new PR man. I agree with Super here, it's probably best that high profile sports stars & celebrities keep their heads below the parapet on this subject.

by super_realist Thu 18 Nov 2021, 8:56 am

Reminds me of Coldplay Jas. They thought they were being really eco friendly by planting a forest somewhere to "offset" their concerts, but they planted the wrong trees for the environment and didnt pay amyone to take care of them so they all died.

I might set up a carbon offset company to tempt gullible celebrities. I'd be richer than Croesus

These celebrities just embarrass themselves. I heard Emma Thompson talking about Tsunamis in relation to Climate Change, thats how little they know.

by McLaren Thu 18 Nov 2021, 12:24 pm

Super

I agree that carbon offsetting is a con but it is good to see that McIlroy is at least starting to think about these issues. This is his first attempt at "going green", hopefully in the future he will make some more effective choices and become an important voice in the movement.

It cannot hurt to have celebrities get on board with the cause.

by super_realist Thu 18 Nov 2021, 12:45 pm

Mac, i dont see it that way. Being lectured to by hypocrites like Thundberg, Attenborough, Scwharznegger, Emma Thompon, Di Caprio, the repulsive Harty and meghan etc is no way to get people on your side.

People dont like to be told "do what I say, not what I do" They're far more likely to stick two fingers up to such rank hypocrisy.

If you're a celebrity, dont pretend you care when your actions prove that you don't. People like McIlroy and Hamilton dont need to work another day in their life. If they really care, retire.

by Soul Requiem Thu 18 Nov 2021, 12:55 pm

McLaren wrote:Super

I agree that carbon offsetting is a con but it is good to see that McIlroy is at least starting to think about these issues. This is his first attempt at "going green", hopefully in the future he will make some more effective choices and become an important voice in the movement.

It cannot hurt to have celebrities get on board with the cause.

Oh but it does for the reasons S_r highlights. I don't think it applies to Attenborough myself but certainly does with regards to people like Emma Thompson or Lewis Hamilton.

by McLaren Thu 18 Nov 2021, 12:59 pm

Hard to believe that Soul. If you had said that some fragile minded middle aged white men were turned off by Hamilton and Thompson, then I might have agreed with you.

by super_realist Thu 18 Nov 2021, 1:08 pm

Soul Requiem wrote:
McLaren wrote:Super

I agree that carbon offsetting is a con but it is good to see that McIlroy is at least starting to think about these issues. This is his first attempt at "going green", hopefully in the future he will make some more effective choices and become an important voice in the movement.

It cannot hurt to have celebrities get on board with the cause.

Oh but it does for the reasons S_r highlights. I don't think it applies to Attenborough myself but certainly does with regards to people like Emma Thompson or Lewis Hamilton.

How many times has Attenborough been around the globe? His carbon footprint is 100x bigger than any of us.

by super_realist Thu 18 Nov 2021, 1:08 pm

McLaren wrote:Hard to believe that Soul. If you had said that some fragile minded middle aged white men were turned off by Hamilton and Thompson, then I might have agreed with you.

Thompson is vile Mac amd Hamilton is just a moron.

From someone who pretends to be a socialist, is there anything less socialist than the "you plebs cant do what we do" attitude that these celebrity c***s peddle?
Its Mary Antoinette stuff

by McLaren Thu 18 Nov 2021, 1:19 pm

Super

Depends if you are dumb enough to think climate change will be tackled by individuals lifestyle choices.

For me the pressure they put on governments is far more important whether they recycle or have an electric car.

by super_realist Thu 18 Nov 2021, 1:42 pm

McLaren wrote:Super

Depends if you are dumb enough to think climate change will be tackled by individuals lifestyle choices.

For me the pressure they put on governments is far more important whether they recycle or have an electric car.

Your demand as an individual drives supply. No demand, no supply.

If one person stops using plastics or diesel for example, nothing happens, if 1,000,000 stop then this is reflected in a lowered supply.
The trouble is that climate zealots and doomsday cults don't practice what they preach because the alternative in the near term is a catastrophic reduction in standards of living.

These morons cannot get it into their thick heads that the energy transition is necessarily considerably longer than they would like unless they accept poverty for a couple of decades.

Wasnt that long ago that one of the XR founders got caught out because they'd been to Costa Roca on holiday and drove a diesel car. They dont care, theyre just professional anarchists.

On a similar note, it was brilliant to see Insulate Britain get sent down yesterday, absolute idiots.

by Soul Requiem Thu 18 Nov 2021, 1:49 pm

McLaren wrote:Hard to believe that Soul. If you had said that some fragile minded middle aged white men were turned off by Hamilton and Thompson, then I might have agreed with you.

That is a fair chunk of the population.

by Soul Requiem Thu 18 Nov 2021, 1:50 pm

super_realist wrote:
Soul Requiem wrote:
McLaren wrote:Super

I agree that carbon offsetting is a con but it is good to see that McIlroy is at least starting to think about these issues. This is his first attempt at "going green", hopefully in the future he will make some more effective choices and become an important voice in the movement.

It cannot hurt to have celebrities get on board with the cause.

Oh but it does for the reasons S_r highlights. I don't think it applies to Attenborough myself but certainly does with regards to people like Emma Thompson or Lewis Hamilton.

How many times has Attenborough been around the globe? His carbon footprint is 100x bigger than any of us.

That doesn't make him a hypocrite, you have to break a few eggs to make an omelette so to speak.

by super_realist Thu 18 Nov 2021, 1:55 pm

Soul Requiem wrote:
super_realist wrote:
Soul Requiem wrote:
McLaren wrote:Super

I agree that carbon offsetting is a con but it is good to see that McIlroy is at least starting to think about these issues. This is his first attempt at "going green", hopefully in the future he will make some more effective choices and become an important voice in the movement.

It cannot hurt to have celebrities get on board with the cause.

Oh but it does for the reasons S_r highlights. I don't think it applies to Attenborough myself but certainly does with regards to people like Emma Thompson or Lewis Hamilton.

How many times has Attenborough been around the globe? His carbon footprint is 100x bigger than any of us.

That doesn't make him a hypocrite, you have to break a few eggs to make an omelette so to speak.

Thats exactly what being a hypocrite is, doing something, then telling others they can't.
Its like industrialised developed western nations telling third world countries they cant develop their economies using the same energy sources we used.

by Soul Requiem Thu 18 Nov 2021, 2:18 pm

That is a simpletons view of what hypocrisy is. An individuals carbon footprint is inconsequential, the industry they are involved in however is important. David Attenborough in promoting sustainability and environmental issues is not a hypocrite for simply having a high individual carbon footprint.

by **JuliusHMarx** Thu 18 Nov 2021, 3:10 pm

Soul Requiem wrote:
McLaren wrote:Hard to believe that Soul. If you had said that some fragile minded middle aged white men were turned off by Hamilton and Thompson, then I might have agreed with you.

That is a fair chunk of the population.

Certainly on this forum.

by dynamark Thu 18 Nov 2021, 3:14 pm

On insulation in 1978 the then gov introduced a Home Insulation Act giving grants to insulate homes -1978.That has been running in many forms since along with massive spend by housing authourities EPCs big building regs changes,air tests,solar panels,all manner of stuff .Only last week my EPC man said he could get me a free boiler if I needed one on some govt scheme (im all elec). We are doing it- amazing how noone ever asks what they do for a job or where do they live in interviews.BBC gave them a platform this morning and barely questioned the nutcase lasy .She seemed that every pound spent on insulation gets 3 pounds back which is so very wrong in any meaningful timescale

by JAS Thu 18 Nov 2021, 5:34 pm

super_realist wrote:
Thats exactly what being a hypocrite is, doing something, then telling others they can't.
Its like industrialised developed western nations telling third world countries they cant develop their economies using the same energy sources we used.

So is becoming a member at a highly private golf course being a hypocrite?

Or are we talking more Dominic Cummings site test scenarios?

by pedro Thu 18 Nov 2021, 10:52 pm

super_realist wrote:He is indeed an idiot. Carbon offsetting by the rich is a massive con. I remember when that man sausage Harry and his repulsive human being of a wife said Elton John had done it for them.

Laughable stuff, almost as bad as Lewis Hamilton

It’s a proven concept. It used to be called tithe.

by McLaren Fri 19 Nov 2021, 1:29 am

pedro wrote:
super_realist wrote:He is indeed an idiot. Carbon offsetting by the rich is a massive con. I remember when that man sausage Harry and his repulsive human being of a wife said Elton John had done it for them.

Laughable stuff, almost as bad as Lewis Hamilton
It’s a proven concept. It used to be called tithe.

I thought that was giving a proportion of your earnings to the church?

by super_realist Fri 19 Nov 2021, 6:47 am

JAS wrote:
super_realist wrote:
Thats exactly what being a hypocrite is, doing something, then telling others they can't.
Its like industrialised developed western nations telling third world countries they cant develop their economies using the same energy sources we used.

So is becoming a member at a highly private golf course being a hypocrite?

Or are we talking more Dominic Cummings site test scenarios?

Who is a member of a highly private golf club and how would it make you a hypocrite?
It might make a socialist like you a hypocrite, but im not a hypocrite because im not a member of any highly private clubs.
If anything The Links trust is socialist because it is owned by the town.

by super_realist Fri 19 Nov 2021, 6:47 am

McLaren wrote:
pedro wrote:
super_realist wrote:He is indeed an idiot. Carbon offsetting by the rich is a massive con. I remember when that man sausage Harry and his repulsive human being of a wife said Elton John had done it for them.

Laughable stuff, almost as bad as Lewis Hamilton
It’s a proven concept. It used to be called tithe.

I thought that was giving a proportion of your earnings to the church?

Well climate change is the new religion Mac and Greta is its patron Saint

by super_realist Fri 19 Nov 2021, 6:48 am

Soul Requiem wrote:That is a simpletons view of what hypocrisy is. An individuals carbon footprint is inconsequential, the industry they are involved in however is important. David Attenborough in promoting sustainability and environmental issues is not a hypocrite for simply having a high individual carbon footprint.

Hes a hypocrite for telling us not to fly when hes flown around the world dozens of times.

by super_realist Fri 19 Nov 2021, 6:50 am

dynamark wrote:On insulation in 1978 the then gov introduced a Home Insulation Act giving grants to insulate homes -1978.That has been running in many forms since along with massive spend by housing authourities EPCs big building regs changes,air tests,solar panels,all manner of stuff .Only last week my EPC man said he could get me a free boiler if I needed one on some govt scheme (im all elec). We are doing it- amazing how noone ever asks what they do for a job or where do they live in interviews.BBC gave them a platform this morning and barely questioned the nutcase lasy .She seemed that every pound spent on insulation gets 3 pounds back which is so very wrong in any meaningful timescale

BBC journalism standards are pi$$ poor. They rarely give anyone a hard time these days

by Soul Requiem Fri 19 Nov 2021, 6:56 am

super_realist wrote:
Soul Requiem wrote:That is a simpletons view of what hypocrisy is. An individuals carbon footprint is inconsequential, the industry they are involved in however is important. David Attenborough in promoting sustainability and environmental issues is not a hypocrite for simply having a high individual carbon footprint.

Hes a hypocrite for telling us not to fly when hes flown around the world dozens of times.

That's not quite how it works is it.

by super_realist Fri 19 Nov 2021, 7:09 am

Soul Requiem wrote:
super_realist wrote:
Soul Requiem wrote:That is a simpletons view of what hypocrisy is. An individuals carbon footprint is inconsequential, the industry they are involved in however is important. David Attenborough in promoting sustainability and environmental issues is not a hypocrite for simply having a high individual carbon footprint.

Hes a hypocrite for telling us not to fly when hes flown around the world dozens of times.

That's not quite how it works is it.

Thats what being a hypocrite is, do what i say, not what i do.

Changing from a tv pesenter to a climate zealot doesnt mean he isnt a hypocrite when it comes to carbon footprints.

I

by Soul Requiem Fri 19 Nov 2021, 7:52 am

Hypocrisy;

'The practice of claiming to have higher standards or more noble beliefs than is the case.'

From the Oxford English dictionary.

by JAS Fri 19 Nov 2021, 9:58 am

super_realist wrote:
JAS wrote:
super_realist wrote:
Thats exactly what being a hypocrite is, doing something, then telling others they can't.
Its like industrialised developed western nations telling third world countries they cant develop their economies using the same energy sources we used.

So is becoming a member at a highly private golf course being a hypocrite?

Or are we talking more Dominic Cummings site test scenarios?

Who is a member of a highly private golf club and how would it make you a hypocrite?
It might make a socialist like you a hypocrite, but im not a hypocrite because im not a member of any highly private clubs.
If anything The Links trust is socialist because it is owned by the town.

I was trying to understand your supposed definition of a hypocrite doing something, then telling others they can't. So...does that mean say for example someone joining Augusta and telling others they cant?

Point of order, I am NOT a Socialist, I will sometimes defend a more economically left of centre stance, I will sometimes knock the stupidity of some of the more outlandish ideas of free market capitalism that in my view are likely to cause harm to society as a whole. I do however also believe in having the opportunity to pursue prosperity for me and my family. That does not make me a Socialist any more than it makes me a Capitalist. On the other hand you are free to label away if it makes you feel better.

by McLaren Fri 19 Nov 2021, 12:17 pm

Super

You can't seriously think Attenborough is not a suitable person to front climate activism?

If not him then who would you choose as an appropriate face of climate activism?

by JAS Fri 19 Nov 2021, 3:11 pm

McLaren wrote:Super

You can't seriously think Attenborough is not a suitable person to front climate activism?

If not him then who would you choose as an appropriate face of climate activism?

I guess working in the fossil fuel industry Supes maybe has the view that nobody should be fronting climate activism.

Also, isn't there a difference between actual activism and say awareness raising? Attenborough to me has done more on the latter than anyone else I can think of.

by McLaren Fri 19 Nov 2021, 11:51 pm

Jas I think you are probably right about activists being a bit different. Don't know about you but I guess activism would be more like lobbying, protesting, charity work etc.

But as nike or other big brands will attest to (and pay handsomely for) you can't underestimate the power of celebrity in persuading the public to endorse your product. Hamilton or Attenborough might not work for super but we know from their other endorsements (especially hamilton) that some serious brands think they will sell the product.

It would be crazy for climate activism to not tap into the wonders of brand ambassadors.

by super_realist Sat 20 Nov 2021, 7:32 am

McLaren wrote:Super

You can't seriously think Attenborough is not a suitable person to front climate activism?

If not him then who would you choose as an appropriate face of climate activism?

If you want to be a spokesman for something, probably best you practice what you preach, just ask that Yorkshire cricketer

Would you ask Fred West for patio advice? Would you ask Harold Shipman on advice for geriatrics?

by super_realist Sat 20 Nov 2021, 7:34 am

Soul Requiem wrote:Hypocrisy;

'The practice of claiming to have higher standards or more noble beliefs than is the case.'

From the Oxford English dictionary.

Exactly Attenboroughs position.

by super_realist Sat 20 Nov 2021, 7:36 am

McLaren wrote:Jas I think you are probably right about activists being a bit different. Don't know about you but I guess activism would be more like lobbying, protesting, charity work etc.

But as nike or other big brands will attest to (and pay handsomely for) you can't underestimate the power of celebrity in persuading the public to endorse your product. Hamilton or Attenborough might not work for super but we know from their other endorsements (especially hamilton) that some serious brands think they will sell the product.

It would be crazy for climate activism to not tap into the wonders of brand ambassadors.

Hamilton, the self proclaimed Anti racist activist who is sponsored by Mercedes and Hugo Boss?

Sportsmen arent known for intellect consistency of their beliefs are they?

by McLaren Sat 20 Nov 2021, 6:06 pm

Super

I don't think you understand how athlete/celebrity endorsements work. It has nothing to do with what the personality knows or says about the topic. Do you think Jordan knew how to engineer a basketball shoe or actresses how to brew a perfume? Oddly enough, that might not be the expertise they were bringing to the table.

by Soul Requiem Sat 20 Nov 2021, 6:08 pm

super_realist wrote:
McLaren wrote:Jas I think you are probably right about activists being a bit different. Don't know about you but I guess activism would be more like lobbying, protesting, charity work etc.

But as nike or other big brands will attest to (and pay handsomely for) you can't underestimate the power of celebrity in persuading the public to endorse your product. Hamilton or Attenborough might not work for super but we know from their other endorsements (especially hamilton) that some serious brands think they will sell the product.

It would be crazy for climate activism to not tap into the wonders of brand ambassadors.

Hamilton, the self proclaimed Anti racist activist who is sponsored by Mercedes and Hugo Boss?
Sportsmen arent known for intellect consistency of their beliefs are they?

Oh yes, Hugo Boss back in the 1940's. You need to come up with a more intelligent argument instead of these ad hominems.

by Soul Requiem Sat 20 Nov 2021, 6:10 pm

super_realist wrote:
Soul Requiem wrote:Hypocrisy;

'The practice of claiming to have higher standards or more noble beliefs than is the case.'

From the Oxford English dictionary.

Exactly Attenboroughs position.

Nope because Attenborough doesn't claim to have higher standards. It's not difficult to understand especially for an intellectual heavyweight like you.

by super_realist Mon 22 Nov 2021, 6:25 am

Soul Requiem wrote:
super_realist wrote:
Soul Requiem wrote:Hypocrisy;

'The practice of claiming to have higher standards or more noble beliefs than is the case.'

From the Oxford English dictionary.

Exactly Attenboroughs position.

Nope because Attenborough doesn't claim to have higher standards. It's not difficult to understand especially for an intellectual heavyweight like you.

It doesnt matter what he claims, it matters what he does. If hes telling us to take less fligjts, it probbaly doesnt help his cause that he has enough air miles to get to the sun

Its fine if you dont recognise him as a hypocrite, i do

by super_realist Mon 22 Nov 2021, 6:29 am

Soul Requiem wrote:
super_realist wrote:
McLaren wrote:Jas I think you are probably right about activists being a bit different. Don't know about you but I guess activism would be more like lobbying, protesting, charity work etc.

But as nike or other big brands will attest to (and pay handsomely for) you can't underestimate the power of celebrity in persuading the public to endorse your product. Hamilton or Attenborough might not work for super but we know from their other endorsements (especially hamilton) that some serious brands think they will sell the product.

It would be crazy for climate activism to not tap into the wonders of brand ambassadors.

Hamilton, the self proclaimed Anti racist activist who is sponsored by Mercedes and Hugo Boss?
Sportsmen arent known for intellect consistency of their beliefs are they?

Oh yes, Hugo Boss back in the 1940's. You need to come up with a more intelligent argument instead of these ad hominems.

Its not an ad hom attack. Hes the sort of guy who wants history erased in regards to statues, street names, institutional sponsorship, but doesnt want to recognise the harm done ny comoanies that pay his wages.
Selective outrage.
If youbwant to erase history, probably best you dont represent companies with links to the worst atrocity in history and then pretend youre bothered about something far more trivial.

by super_realist Mon 22 Nov 2021, 6:33 am

McLaren wrote:Super

I don't think you understand how athlete/celebrity endorsements work. It has nothing to do with what the personality knows or says about the topic. Do you think Jordan knew how to engineer a basketball shoe or actresses how to brew a perfume? Oddly enough, that might not be the expertise they were bringing to the table.

It doesnt matter if Jordan knew anything about how to make a shoe does it? Hes not lecruring me that i have to wear them.

Wjy woyld anyone take notice of Prince Harry, Arnie, Emma Thompson, Prince William, Greeting Greta and the rest of the hypocrite brigade on climate? They dont exactly live the life they are commanding us to live, so why should anyone do as they ask?

Would you take diet advice from Shane Lowry? No, so why listen to those pr1cjs on climate.

by Soul Requiem Mon 22 Nov 2021, 7:20 am

super_realist wrote:
Soul Requiem wrote:
super_realist wrote:
Soul Requiem wrote:Hypocrisy;

'The practice of claiming to have higher standards or more noble beliefs than is the case.'

From the Oxford English dictionary.

Exactly Attenboroughs position.

Nope because Attenborough doesn't claim to have higher standards. It's not difficult to understand especially for an intellectual heavyweight like you.

It doesnt matter what he claims, it matters what he does. If hes telling us to take less fligjts, it probbaly doesnt help his cause that he has enough air miles to get to the sun

Its fine if you dont recognise him as a hypocrite, i do

In which case you aren't talking about hypocrisy, it's fine that you don't know what it means.

by beninho Mon 22 Nov 2021, 8:09 am

https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/we-should-improve-society-somewhat

This meme is very super Realist

by McLaren Tue 23 Nov 2021, 2:16 pm

the meme from above.

"Rory McIlroy pays thousands to offset carbon footprint of flying to golf events" Screen_Shot_2021-03-01_at_2.28.39_PM

by McLaren Tue 23 Nov 2021, 2:18 pm

Super

Lewis Hamilton spoke out about the treatment of gay people in Qatar, while he was in Qatar competing in the grand prix. I don't think he bummed anyone while there, is this hypocrisy?

by **JuliusHMarx** Tue 23 Nov 2021, 3:14 pm

If he really cared about gay people he would give up his job and give all his money to them.
No, wait, he could carry on working to earn more money to give to them. But he would only work in perfect countries so that he wouldn't be able to criticise them in a hypocritical manner whilst working there. And only work for companies that have unblemished ethical records throughout their entire history.

by JAS Tue 23 Nov 2021, 4:23 pm

Soul Requiem wrote:
super_realist wrote:
McLaren wrote:Jas I think you are probably right about activists being a bit different. Don't know about you but I guess activism would be more like lobbying, protesting, charity work etc.

But as nike or other big brands will attest to (and pay handsomely for) you can't underestimate the power of celebrity in persuading the public to endorse your product. Hamilton or Attenborough might not work for super but we know from their other endorsements (especially hamilton) that some serious brands think they will sell the product.

It would be crazy for climate activism to not tap into the wonders of brand ambassadors.

Hamilton, the self proclaimed Anti racist activist who is sponsored by Mercedes and Hugo Boss?
Sportsmen arent known for intellect consistency of their beliefs are they?

Oh yes, Hugo Boss back in the 1940's. You need to come up with a more intelligent argument instead of these ad hominems.

Boss..Ad hominems? or Pour Homme...inems I'll get my coat!!

by Sponsored content