Are the acts involved in Live Earth or the other "worthy causes" really being charitable?

Or are they just a bunch of wannabes trying to raise their profile? Are you going to be more environmentally friendly sitting watching tv with your heating on?

Have you noticed that it is the same old "stars" that are eager to take part in these charitable events. I would not mind so much but they all hypocrites have probably gobbled more resources than I ever will in my life-time with their jets, fast cars, luxury homes, swimming pools and generally excessive lifestyles. These events are about supporting the fashionable causes and raising their profiles. It is about money.

I was very environmentally friendly and switched off the TV when this was on! LOL
ah its all just complete rubbish, i hate this Global Warming crap. To me they are all hypocrites.
The idea is to make you think before you put a light on, or turn the heating up.

Most of the acts are here for the publicity that will follow. Notice how the acts are not giving 100%?
Quite Charitable as global warming is the biggest issue of the 21st century and the entire worlds ecology is on the line.

Global warming is the increase in the average temperature of the Earth's near-surface air and oceans in recent decades and its projected continuation.

Global average air temperature near the Earth's surface rose 0.74 ± 0.18 °C (1.3 ± 0.32 °F) during the past century. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concludes, "most of the observed increase in globally averaged temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations," which leads to warming of the surface and lower atmosphere by increasing the greenhouse effect. Natural phenomena such as solar variation combined with volcanoes have probably had a small warming effect from pre-industrial times to 1950, but a small cooling effect since 1950. These basic conclusions have been endorsed by at least 30 scientific societies and academies of science, including all of the national academies of science of the major industrialized countries. The American Association of Petroleum Geologists is the only scientific society that rejects these conclusions. A few individual scientists disagree with some of the main conclusions of the IPCC.

Climate models referenced by the IPCC project that global surface temperatures are likely to increase by 1.1 to 6.4 °C (2.0 to 11.5 °F) between 1990 and 2100. The range of values reflects the use of differing scenarios of future greenhouse gas emissions and results of models with differences in climate sensitivity. Although most studies focus on the period up to 2100, warming and sea level rise are expected to continue for more than a millennium even if greenhouse gas levels are stabilized. This reflects the large heat capacity of the oceans.

The climate system varies through natural, internal processes and in response to variations in external forcing factors including solar activity, volcanic emissions, variations in the earth's orbit (orbital forcing) and greenhouse gases. The detailed causes of the recent warming remain an active field of research, but the scientific consensus identifies increased levels of greenhouse gases due to human activity as the main influence. This attribution is clearest for the most recent 50 years, for which the most detailed data are available. Contrasting with the scientific consensus, other hypotheses have been proposed to explain most of the observed increase in global temperatures. One such hypothesis is that the warming is caused by natural fluctuations in the climate or that warming is mainly a result of variations in solar radiation.
None of the effects of forcing are instantaneous. Due to the thermal inertia of the Earth's oceans and slow responses of other indirect effects, the Earth's current climate is not in equilibrium with the forcing imposed. Climate commitment studies indicate that even if greenhouse gases were stabilized at present day levels, a further warming of about 0.5 °C (0.9 °F) would still occur
It depends where you live.

Here is a map of the world showing how climate change will affect particular areas considering continuation of current contributions.

This chart shows the anomaly temperature projections in the future. Considering carbon emmissions in America and other countries continue to rise at current rate.

Now I will show you what you can do to save your children, your community, and your earth.

Here are some steps that show you how to lower your emmissions and those close to you.

Here is a worldwide organization whose mission is to,

"Our mission is to persuade the American people — and people elsewhere in the world – of the importance and urgency of adopting and implementing effective and comprehensive solutions for the climate crisis. "
yes would be if it was cold but luckily for them its warm and dry
Well I've never heard of them, but then again I dont watch alot of tv, either, so..But, I did see a commercial the other day when I did happen to overlook at what my kids were watching, and this lady was talking about if every single person on around bought one of those spiral light bulbs, that help are ecologically safe for our environment, that it would be the same as if they took so many thousands of cars off of the streets forever!! Especially if they use them faithfully!! I now have about half of my 3 bdrm. apartment, full of those very same lightbulbs, so it makes me feel good that I have taken a few cars off of road, ecologically speaking.. So, everyone needs to run out and replace your regular light bulbs with these a tad (costly) lightbulbs, and keep doing so until your whole house and porch lights are replaced with these lightbulbs! This is one means of helping to change or environment for our Granchildren's Future's! My GrandChildren's future's mean so much to me, I'm ready to do anything to help, even if it means walking everywhere I go! SMILE! Great Question, hun!
I agree with Anti 427.
Although I was really looking foreward to this concert, I must say that I am disappointed in the performances of most of the bands so far...
So my answer to your question is probably not, they are just trying to milk as much as they can from this "enviromental" trend.
I dont think it is doing much good. There have been too many of these causes people switch off... it is "our" money.. instead of using tax payers money who dont have much to spare why dont the acts involved donate money instead of spending lots of money in putting on a show. Most of the acts featured arnt very interesting anyway and its contradicting itself using more energy on the concert that would probably be used in a month (maybe an exaduation but you get my point). GET THE CELEBS TO DONATE A THOUSAND EACH!! then they would have alot more... most of us dont give because we dont care but because we dont have enough to spare with inflation and all...
They are a bunch of "has beens" trying to get some notice. And they aren't doing this for free either. They are all being paid. They came in on private jets and will leave on private jets. The vehicles coming to the concerts used a ton of fuel. It would have made more sense to have a FREE concert on the internet promoting this cause. But this isn't the real cause. It's all about money.
A Little of Both ------------ i've already changed my light bulbs, it knocked my bill in Half!! does that mean i Have to get off the couch & wash & recycle glass, plastic, bags, i already carry a cloth one,
I think that is hypocritical that all these people are trying to warn us of climate change, but then drive around in their cars and fly round the world on the daily basis. Most people who are screaming and shouting about any charitable course tend to do it to increase their profile. They want people to like them and say ''look I care, there is more to my superstar life''. Surely by watching live earth yesterday, we were doing more to harm the environment, by using 6+ hours of electric power.!!
Some mean well other are just using it to promote themselves.
Why was your heating on? It was warm enough in the UK.
I doubt it, did not even watch it, don't like that sort of music, so it missed me, but I did enjoy the programmes on TV, about the animals, and feel quite happy to contribute towards their rescue and making them safer habitats etc.

I am choosy what I watch on TV, and the CH has been turned off since March..bit chilly, but wear more clothing, and don't sit around watching TV.

The answers post by the user, for information only, does not guarantee the right.

More Questions and Answers:
  • Can anyone here prove global warming?
  • If global warming is true, will bipolar bears become a dominant species on the planet?
  • What next?
  • How can we live better with less?
  • Who hates mondays and why ?!?!? what makes it that littel bit better ?
  • My neighbor released his Giant African Land Snails and they are destroying the wetlands out in my yard?
  • I have an idea for decreasing the temp of earth.?
  • Is there a way to link multiple car batteries together, to make an electric car?
  • How does the greenhouse analogy distort the global warming discussion and allow misuse of data?