Please give £2 a month

[selphie]

But it's an advert on the TV!! Every charity has the right to ask for donations on the TV or in the street. You don't have to give to all of them every time you see an advert do you?? People don't feel the need to purchase everything they see from every advert they watch do they??

 

I can't believe how stupid this thread is!

 

My bold,

Stop commenting on it then :loopy:

[Bonzo77]

Luckily you don't know anything about me and so you're not really in position to judge. I know quite a bit about charity, perhaps not all the ins and outs but I do know that from giving £2 a month, approximately 80p will reach the charity and it isn't going to stop polar ice caps from melting. If I don't want to donate money I say 'I don't want to donate money'. I agree that charities need to raise money, but would prefer to support a local cause such as the children's hospital, because it's close to me and I use it. We need to take a good look at homeless and starving in our own towns and cities before sending money abroad. And if I want to donate i'll make the decision all by myself, without a pushy salesman invading my privacy and looking down his nose at me. Charity begins at home!

 

I agree with you, but aren't we talking about TV adverts for charities here?

There is nothing wrong with charities advertizing on TV and asking for £2 a month, if the Childrens Hospital could afford to advertize on TV I bet they would!

 

By the way...........I've never heard of a charity asking for donations to stop the ice caps from melting!

[selphie]

I agree with you, but aren't we talking about TV adverts for charities here?

There is nothing wrong with charities advertizing on TV and asking for £2 a month, if the Childrens Hospital could afford to advertize on TV I bet they would!

 

By the way...........I've never heard of a charity asking for donations to stop the ice caps from melting!

 

 

It was this very advert that prompted me to post this thread. It has some cute little polar bears on it. They're dying out because the polar ice caps are melting and could I give just £2 a month to help save their lives. I saw this and it suddenly dawned on me that these adverts are on all the time now.

[Bonzo77]

It was this very advert that prompted me to post this thread. It has some cute little polar bears on it. They're dying out because the polar ice caps are melting and could I give just £2 a month to help save their lives. I saw this and it suddenly dawned on me that these adverts are on all the time now.

 

So you choose to ignore the plight of the Polar Bear? Some people would rather give £2 a month to help save Polar Bears than donate to a hospital that, in an ideal world, shouldn't need donations!

[Wildcat]

So you choose to ignore the plight of the Polar Bear? Some people would rather give £2 a month to help save Polar Bears than donate to a hospital that, in an ideal world, shouldn't need donations!

 

I would certainly rather be sold on the idea of saving polar bears during commercial breaks than the usual consumer tosh they try to sell you. At least it is for a good cause.

 

Re: people on Fargate or knocking on doors. What strikes me most about them is what a pants job it must be.

[comrade juan]

I agree with Bozo, I'd give £2 a month to save polar bears if they were in danger however this is not the case.

The polar ice caps are growing so the bears will be fine.

[Wildcat]

I agree with Bozo, I'd give £2 a month to save polar bears if they were in danger however this is not the case.

The polar ice caps are growing so the bears will be fine.

 

For a first post you are remarkably wrong on both counts.

 

The Arctic (where polar bears reside) is shrinking at an alarming rate:

 

http://www.skepticalscience.com/Has-Arctic-sea-ice-recovered.htm

 

Polar bears most definitely are in danger:

 

http://www.polarbearsinternational.org/polar-bears/will-polar-bears-survive

 

http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/20/polar-scientists-discuss-polar-bears-fate/

[comrade juan]

I'm afraid not, you know very well that the sites you cite have agendas which mean there findings cannot be taken seriously by rational thinking people.

[Wildcat]

I'm afraid not, you know very well that the sites you cite have agendas which mean there findings cannot be taken seriously by rational thinking people.

 

How about a reference that clearly has an agenda opposed to Climate Change?

 

Like the Telegraph then?

 

If you hope to see Churchill's polar bears, though, don't leave it too late: scientists estimate that there will only be a handful left by 2035.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/northamerica/canada/8213763/Churchill-Canada-watching-polar-bears-in-Hudson-Bay.html

 

Are the Telegraph a credible source? Well no they fervently promote anti-global warming propoganda to the point that they knowingly publish lies. Knowingly because despite a complaint from the author of the study they were reporting complaining about the misrepresentations of their work the article remains unchanged on their website without even publishing the authors reply:

 

http://www.badscience.net/2009/01/the-telegraph-misrepresent-a-scientists-work-on-climate-and-then-refuse-to-correct-it-when-he-writes-to-them/

 

and they censor their own journalists.

http://liberalconspiracy.org/2010/06/16/is-the-telegraph-censoring-criticism-of-climate-change-deniers/

 

Any rational thinking person would look behind the agendas to the facts, fact like the declining populations of polar bears and facts like the loss of sea ice in the arctic.

[comrade juan]

Any rational thinking person would look behind the agendas to the facts, fact like the declining populations of polar bears and facts like the loss of sea ice in the arctic.

We'll just have to agree to disagree. I'm just not naive enough to swallow bullpoo when it's thrown at me.