More global warming hypocrisy. Ellen DeGeneres Defends Meghan Markle, Prince Harry from Private Jet Criticism

More global warming hypocrisy.

Whatever happened to the immediacy of all the danger?

Ellen DeGeneres Defends Meghan Markle, Prince Harry from Private Jet Criticism

WARNER TODD HUSTON

20 Aug 2019

TV talk show host Ellen DeGeneres has become the latest celebrity to defend Meghan Markle and Prince Harry amid widespread criticism over their constant use of private jets, despite being vocal environmental activists. . . .

. . . DeGeneres is the latest, high-profile celebrity to jump to support the royals who have been called on the carpet for taking four private jet trips in less than two weeks and all while claiming they are “climate change” activists.

On Monday, pop icon Elton John scolded those who would criticize the royals for flying from Britain to John’s $23 million mansion on the French Riviera. . . .

The descriptive terms used in this slanted article are amusing:

…amid widespread criticism…(how wide is that, really?)
…have been called on the carpet…(that’s something only a superior can do.)

Of course these criticisms make about as much sense as criticizing Trump for spending lavishly on his trips while claiming to be in favor of limited government. A million people driving gas guzzling pickup trucks cause more emissions than a handful of influential activists flying in a private jet.

2 Likes

LeafByNiggle . . . .

A million people driving gas guzzling pickup trucks cause more emissions than a handful of influential activists flying in a private jet.

I figured the excuse-making would come out here.

Thanks Leaf for illustrating this.

So much for the emergency talk that I frequently see from the global warming crowd.

.

I also assumed “Trump” would be brought into the story some way some how.

Leaf on the very first post (outside of my OP. A story that did not concern “Trump”) . . .

Of course these criticisms make about as much sense as criticizing Trump . . .

3 Likes

It is everywhere. Example:

Me: Oh, dude. Look at those dark clouds coming. We need to stop the golf game.

Answer: If Trump really cared about the environment, he would sell his properties.

Me: What? I forgot it was going to rain early today. How is rain related to President Tump? And what? Properties? Oy Vey! Let’s go get a coffee.

Answer: You mean Covfefe?

Me: ok at least that last one was funny. Let’s go.

…as it should when ridiculous criticisms are leveled.

You’re welcome.

No, it’s still an emergency. This changes nothing.

Just to illustrate a point by analogy. I had no comment to make about Trump himself.

LeafByNiggle . . . .

No, it’s still an emergency.

Not enough of an emergency for you to call upon leftists to change their lifestyles.

Here you are rationalizing . . .

four private jet trips in less than two weeks and all while claiming they are “climate change” activists

I guess global warming isn’t THAT worrisome from those actions and the shoulder-shrugging over it from the left.

I’ll remember that for the future.

2 Likes

“Leftists”, Really? Yes, Mr and Mrs Sussex are hypocrites and Mr Dwight, who funded the jolly is a fawning hypocrite. Please do not refer to them as “leftists” as I can only say that, as a leftist, they are not fellow travellers of mine (pun intended).

we are all hypocrites if we say this is bad, yet continue to fly , drive, use plastics, and replace our cell phones every time a new one comes out.

at least Trump wants to buy Greenland and save the glaciers, or… does he want to corner the market in pure glacier water…

Most likely, Queen Elizabeth II is the first “royal” to fly on a plane. Before that, they rode in carriages or on trains or motorcars. I think one or two had private yachts.

I think a return to that needs to be a requirement of “royals” close to the throne. After all, where do they really need to go in a hurry? And wouldn’t a specially decked out railway car be far more stately? They could put on white gloves and wave at the yeomen and croppies as they pass through a town.

I think they need to rethink their mode of travel, particularly if they’re going to tell the rest of us we have to start riding Shanks’ mare just so it will stay uncomfortably chilly at Balmoral. :slight_smile:

3 Likes

Prince Harry and Megan acting very spoiled and making a mockery of their
preaching about saving our planet.

1 Like

GiftofMercy . . .

we are all hypocrites if we say this is bad, yet continue to fly

No we are not. At least on this issue.

Your argument has the built-in (phony) presupposition that the REASON why they are bad, is their opulent travel habits are destroying the planet.

I think it is bad for other reasons.

Pretty sure they aren’t allowed to fly commercial, so what would the naysayers suggest?

1 Like

Yes, they can fly commercial if they choose to from what I have read.

from Wikipedia:

“The Royal Helicopter and the Royal Train are insufficient to meet all the travel requirements of the Royal Family, even for domestic travel. The Queen does not travel on scheduled flights, but the rest of the family does whenever possible. Members of the family are normally flown on private charters, either large fixed-wing aircraft, small fixed-wing aircraft, or helicopters, depending on the distance and the size of the official party.”

In this particular story Elton John paid for the private charter and sent a donation to a carbon neutral fund, so I really don’t understand the issue.

When it comes to people that have a much higher change of being harassed (whether intentionally, or from people that are just excited to see them) or when it comes to people for which there are higher security concerns I question the ability of commercial airlines to meet security needs and provide a reasonably safe environment for them.

I can only imagine the crowds at any international airport if they were to catch sight of any of the younger royals! Security issue for sure!

1 Like

I wouldn’t want to be on a commercial plane with someone that famous!!

1 Like

Hmmm…you point out something else that I had not considered. Their presence could be disruptive in some environments.

Speaking of which earlier this year I happen to be arriving in a Caribbean nation on the same day as someone in the royal family. Their presence there was disruptive to my trip. There were rolling roadblocks and some of the places I was there to visit closed for the day because of their presence.

I wouldn’t either! I had a coworker that was having dinner in a restaurant and George Takei (Original Star trek, Sulu) was there. People were constantly coming by the table to get autographs and pictures. The coworker, who was seated near him, found it a little bothersome to his dining experience.

1 Like

Did the second cause the jet to suck back all the CO2 it spewed?

4 Likes

apparently wide enough that Ellen and Elton John felt the need to jump in and defend them from it.

3 Likes
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.