One of my favorite lines: "I do think it's patriotic to tell the government, 'Hey, get out of my way, stop trying to impose on my right to shoot wolves from a helicopter!'"
Showing posts with label global warming. Show all posts
Showing posts with label global warming. Show all posts
Sunday, October 5
Thursday, July 17
Who is not an environmentalist?
18 out of 20 people in the poll here so far agreed we should take care of the environment. (For the record, one person who voted "worship it" actually wanted to vote "fear it" but that was not available so they "chose the next best thing.") We all probably suspected that would be the case. The real issue may be to what extent should we take care of the environment? This also made me wonder, am I an environmentalist?

To what extent should we take care of the environment? When do we go to far? When do we not go far enough? Should animals have rights? Are shopping malls more important than wildlife?
- I buy growth-hormone free whole milk for my son.
- I believe that we are stewards of the earth, that we should use our resources carefully, and not put the economy above our friends the tree frogs without giving it a second thought.
- I hugged a tree while I was in Hawaii.
- I think we should practice the 3 R's even when it's inconvenient.
- I eat some animals, but am mindful that their lives were sacrificed. Recently in a prayer before eating some chicken I even noted that to God and my wife and I started giggling. It just sounded funny, you know? But I am mindful, and grateful.
- I like organic food.
- I turn off the water when I brush my teeth, and try to take short showers.
- I enjoyed An Inconvenient Truth and Who Killed The Electric Car?
- I don't know how I feel about more drilling. If it would prevent wars (which is what McCain seems to insinuate) I could definitely see the use. It does however seem like giving more crack to an addict rather than dealing with the problem.
- I think we have a responsibility to take care of animals, and treat them with respect.
To what extent should we take care of the environment? When do we go to far? When do we not go far enough? Should animals have rights? Are shopping malls more important than wildlife?
Filed under:
environment,
global warming,
McCain,
politics,
war
Monday, July 14
Wall-E: Clever installment from Pixar, or leftist propaganda?
Well, yesterday I was talking to a friend about it and he asked me about the apparent liberal/political bent that the movie has that conservative radio has been buzzing about. My response: "huh?"
I didn’t notice it. Honestly I thought there were more similarities to The Matrix than An Inconvenient Truth (which it is being compared to). In the movie Wall-E is a trash-compacting, Hello Dolly-loving mini-robot trying to clean up the mountains of garbage that humanity has left behind (humans are now living on a space station, owned by the same corporation that produced most of the garbage). His only friend is a cockroach, of course.
So where is the political propaganda? I didn’t see it. Sure the movie has a pro-environment message, but really, who isn’t pro-environment? Everyone likes trees and clean water and other living things. We’re all environmentalists to some extent (please vote in the poll to the left), and I think Wall-E is a fun movie for all ages that is NOT going to make or break the election this November, or convert any of our nations youth into Al Gore worshipers.
Some quotes:
"The environment talk started to freak me out… I don't have much of a political bent, and the last thing I want to do is preach. I just went with things that I felt were logical for a possible future and supported the point of my story, which was the premise that irrational love defeats life's programming, and that the most robotic beings I've met are us." ~Andrew Stanton (Pixar)
“From the first moment of the film, my kids were bombarded with leftist propaganda about the evils of mankind.” ~Shannen Coffin
“And I just see Wally and he's on the Earth and he's cleaning stuff up and I looked at my wife and I said, it's a frickin' global warming movie…” ~Glenn Beck
“Conservative bloggers have dismissed the film's environmental bent as left-wing propaganda, while eco-lobbyists are suspicious of a pro-recycling film that will generate mountains of disposable Disney merchandise.” ~The Independent
I can see the irony of the last quote, but I don’t think Pixar is blind to the fact that they too are a big corporation, and there will be a lot of Wall-E toys in landfills in the near future.
What do you think? Did you see Wall-E and think it was propaganda? Am I more liberal than I thought?
Filed under:
Al Gore,
Glenn Beck,
global warming,
liberalism,
movies,
politics
Friday, May 18
Global Warming or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Slow Driving
There seems to be at least three groups of opinions on global warming. The first group says that it isn’t happening at all. The second group says it is happening, but most of it is due to the natural cycles of the earth. The third group says that a lot of it is due to human impact on the earth. So, who is right? Does it matter who is right? Does it matter who we believe?
We know the first group is wrong. All reputable scientists know that the earth has natural climate change. So the debate is between the next two, which comes down to the question, what is the cause of global warming? The second group believes the scientists who say at least 95% of global warming is due to natural cycles, and only a meager 5% or less is due to humans. The third group believes the scientists who say that humans are a much bigger cause, and that if we change our light bulbs, driving habits, air conditioning use, etc. then we can positively impact the earth. Both groups say the other side’s scientists are paid to confirm their theories. SCANDALOUS! LIBERAL CONSPIRACY! CONSERVATIVE HATE-MONGERING!
So let’s say, for instance, that the second group is more correct. We little earthlings have very little to do with global warming. Let’s also say that most of us decide to buy into group three’s ideas, despite the fact that group two is right. WHAT IS THE OUTCOME OF THIS? Even though we may have very little to do with global warming, we think we do so we buy hybrid cars, use less energy, pollute our precious breathing air less, watch “An Inconvenient Truth” once a month for family home evening, and buy fancy light bulbs. All this means is we will get better mileage in our cars, decrease the demand for oil (which would lower the price of gas and indirectly decrease our support of terrorism), have cleaner air to breath, and inflate Al Gore’s ego.
I am not worried about global warming or cooling or freezing or whatever. Well, actually I don’t like global warming in the summer but I like it in the winter, unless of course, I’m snowboarding… I do feel like the parade Gore and his cronies are on is good, however. And I think they sincerely believe in their cause. Whether or not they are right is not an issue for me. It’s what they inspire people (including myself) to do. I am now trying to drive slower on the freeway, trying not to run the air conditioning when I don’t need it, and pondering the thought that someday, I may be able to afford those twisty light bulbs.
And for all those people getting irked behind me in the right lane because I’m driving ONLY 60 mph, just remember that I’m lowering the price of YOUR gas.
We know the first group is wrong. All reputable scientists know that the earth has natural climate change. So the debate is between the next two, which comes down to the question, what is the cause of global warming? The second group believes the scientists who say at least 95% of global warming is due to natural cycles, and only a meager 5% or less is due to humans. The third group believes the scientists who say that humans are a much bigger cause, and that if we change our light bulbs, driving habits, air conditioning use, etc. then we can positively impact the earth. Both groups say the other side’s scientists are paid to confirm their theories. SCANDALOUS! LIBERAL CONSPIRACY! CONSERVATIVE HATE-MONGERING!
So let’s say, for instance, that the second group is more correct. We little earthlings have very little to do with global warming. Let’s also say that most of us decide to buy into group three’s ideas, despite the fact that group two is right. WHAT IS THE OUTCOME OF THIS? Even though we may have very little to do with global warming, we think we do so we buy hybrid cars, use less energy, pollute our precious breathing air less, watch “An Inconvenient Truth” once a month for family home evening, and buy fancy light bulbs. All this means is we will get better mileage in our cars, decrease the demand for oil (which would lower the price of gas and indirectly decrease our support of terrorism), have cleaner air to breath, and inflate Al Gore’s ego.
I am not worried about global warming or cooling or freezing or whatever. Well, actually I don’t like global warming in the summer but I like it in the winter, unless of course, I’m snowboarding… I do feel like the parade Gore and his cronies are on is good, however. And I think they sincerely believe in their cause. Whether or not they are right is not an issue for me. It’s what they inspire people (including myself) to do. I am now trying to drive slower on the freeway, trying not to run the air conditioning when I don’t need it, and pondering the thought that someday, I may be able to afford those twisty light bulbs.
And for all those people getting irked behind me in the right lane because I’m driving ONLY 60 mph, just remember that I’m lowering the price of YOUR gas.
Filed under:
Al Gore,
global warming,
liberalism,
politics,
science
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)