Spoon-fed liberal mush in college.
On this evening's news broadcast, the "Stop Global Warming College Tour" was profiled, so I checked out their web site. It seems like the only things they are against are cars and factories and power plants, which they say have "overloaded the atmosphere with heat-trapping gasses."
They think the oceans are going to rise six feet in the next 100 years, which I think is a ludicrous notion, like saying we can stop the rain by turning off a light. And their list of "action items" is even sillier. Try these:
1. (TOP OF THE LIST) Use compact fluorescent bulbs. But what of the dangers of murcury poisoning? http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55213 No mention.
* Buy Products Locally. How can you when practically everything is made in China?
* Buy Minimally Packaged Goods. Have you seen the way stores are packaging toys and electronics these days? There are multiple nested boxes, tiedowns, and you almost have to take a chainsaw to get into it. This is probably to reduce theft, but how do you get companies to go back to the way they used to package things?
* Unplug Un-Used Electronics. This is a ludicrous notion when you consider all the things we plug in.
Other dumb things on the list include
* Insulate your home (Duh! Who doesn't?)
* Wear a sweater (Necessary for the people who keep their thermostat on 82 in the wintertime, I suppose.)
* Take shorter showers (Compared to what?)
* Buy Energy Certificates (The new indulgence of the Environmental Church)
Of course, the reporter this evening gave the obligatory "Critics challenge the belief that humans are responsible" blurb, but no one from the other side was given any serious face time.
You can tell what side the news people are on.
They think the oceans are going to rise six feet in the next 100 years, which I think is a ludicrous notion, like saying we can stop the rain by turning off a light. And their list of "action items" is even sillier. Try these:
1. (TOP OF THE LIST) Use compact fluorescent bulbs. But what of the dangers of murcury poisoning? http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55213 No mention.
* Buy Products Locally. How can you when practically everything is made in China?
* Buy Minimally Packaged Goods. Have you seen the way stores are packaging toys and electronics these days? There are multiple nested boxes, tiedowns, and you almost have to take a chainsaw to get into it. This is probably to reduce theft, but how do you get companies to go back to the way they used to package things?
* Unplug Un-Used Electronics. This is a ludicrous notion when you consider all the things we plug in.
Other dumb things on the list include
* Insulate your home (Duh! Who doesn't?)
* Wear a sweater (Necessary for the people who keep their thermostat on 82 in the wintertime, I suppose.)
* Take shorter showers (Compared to what?)
* Buy Energy Certificates (The new indulgence of the Environmental Church)
Of course, the reporter this evening gave the obligatory "Critics challenge the belief that humans are responsible" blurb, but no one from the other side was given any serious face time.
You can tell what side the news people are on.
Carrie,
Are you saying that you don't care about God's creation? I mean, lets be real. It's getting pretty hot around here and things seems to be getting pretty bad. Evangelical Christians in the "Creation Care" movement are taking global warming seriously. Why don't you?
What would Jesus do if he was here and knew about global warming?
http://www.christiantoday.com/article/evangelical.christians.urged.to.tackle.global.warming/7758.htm
see also:
http://whatwouldjesusdrive.org/intro.php
or:
http://creationcare.org/
See also
Isa. 24: 5-6
Hos 4:1-3
Jer 4: 18-28
Isn't it time we repented for our failure in our stewardship of creation? We must repent of the way we polluted and destroyed God's sacred creation. "There is no faithfulness, no love, no acknowledgment of God in the land...Because of this the land mourns, and all who live in it waste away (Hos 4: 1, 3)."
Reply to this
I see a distinct difference between the scattered instances of real pollution which undoubtedly exist, and the illusory belief that people living their lives will destroy the planet.
Reading those links, I see the same nonsense about how we should all drive more fuel efficient cars, for example. Just think about this. If cars were magically made 50% more fuel efficient, and car companies sold four times as many, we would STILL be using twice as much fuel then as now. Conservation is a good thing, but if this problem is real, that's not the answer.
It's like dieting. If you cut your meal portions in half, but ate six times as many meals in a day, do you think you'd lose weight? Of course not. But this analogy breaks down if you try to extrapolate it into humanity vis-a-vis the planet.
Simply speaking, people have to live their lives. Al Gore isn't going to give up his private jets, John Edwards isn't going to give up his four homes, Cheryl Crow is not going to give up her Grolsch Beer (imported from Holland) in order to save the planet. And I maintain they don't have to, because the science about humanity's impact on so-called global warming is not settled. Volcanoes spew out tons and tons more carbon dioxide (and other so-called greenhouse gasses) than all of industrialization is said to have done.
Certainly we are to be good stewards. At the same time we need to maintain our God-given liberty to live our lives. We're not going to destroy the planet, don't worry.
Reply to this
Hello. Actually, if one is eating McDonalds 6 times a day versus fruit and vegetables 10 times a day, there would definately be a difference in weight reduction. It doesn't take a degree in medicine to realize that.
Fuel efficient cars that run on electricity or solar power would be a great idea and it wouldnt matter how many cars one owns. Your analogy doens't make sense, Carrie. The reason why we will never have fuel efficient cars is because people like President Bush and his buddies in the oil industry are making sure that doesn't happen.
Reply to this
You are making an inaccurate comparison. It would be better to imagine McDonald's cutting the calorie count of their regular meals by 50%, and then people deciding to eat those meals six times a day. Changing to a fruit and vegetable diet is analagous to changing from gas-powered to solar-powered cars.
Saying of which, solar power is another illusion. It's simply not practical because there's simply not the quantity of useable energy available from it.
"[Here is] the trouble with solar power. It is diffuse and, like the fleas, it is difficult and expensive to organize and concentrate.
"At best—that is, at noon on a sunny day—sunlight strikes the earth with an energy of about one kilowatt per square meter. There is no way to make the sun shine hotter or to collect more energy from sunlight, except to capture the one kilowatt per square meter from a very large area.
"Solar collectors, therefore, are necessary. They can be built using mirrors or lenses, but these must be installed with small motors so they can tilt and rotate and be kept in position with relation to the sun as the earth turns on its axis. They must also be programmed to follow the sun in its seasonal cycle. Such a solar plant has been built, largely with taxpayers' dollars, of course, by Southern California Edison at Barstow, California. Called Solar One, it covers 75 acres with one million square feet of mirrors, 11,818 mirrors in all, each computer-driven to reflect sunlight onto a water tower 300 feet tall. With some storage devices, Solar One can generate ten megawatts at a cost of $14,000 per installed kilowatt. This is about five times more costly than the most expensive nuclear plant....
"Moreover, photovoltaic cells are truly high-tech, and considerable energy is required for their manufacture; their construction also requires toxic [p.131]materials from cadmium to hydrofluoric acid. This, together with the large maintenance problem involved in keeping the collectors, mirrors, lenses, and solar cells free from dust, greasy films, and snow, combines to make solar power one of the least safe ways to generate electricity."
Source: Dixy Lee Ray and Lou Guzzo, Trashing the Planet, p.129
Have you ever seen the concept cars that run on solar power? They can't go very fast, they can't hold very many people, and they have to have a huge, ugly flattops with all the collectors. It's not that Bush doesn't want them produced for the general population, it's that the general population doesn't want them yet.
Reply to this