Environmentalist Murderers

[Danoff]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,95260,00.html

 

[milefile]

Murderers? That might be a stretch. But I was thinking this same thing yesterday as I listened to the news on my way home. They went on and on about the dead, and never mentioned air conditioning once.

Now their clean evironmentalist consciences will be righteously stained.

I lived in Chigago during it's last heat wave, 110 degrees at 100% humidity. And I had no air conditioning in my apartment, most people don't.

 

[Kent]

Well I've gotta admit that the two subjects are a bit off of one another, but at the same time, very much related.

Its just a matter of how you look at it.

I personally think enviromentalist are responsible for problems, especially energy problems, but I would not hold them accountable for murder.

From a journalistic approach, I must give the fox rep who wrote that credit...

In writing, you can just about say what ever you wish (during a persuasive essay) as long as you supply reasoning for your views.

This makes it perfectly acceptable to suggest a connection between these two.

Plus, if you ask me, I think the writer did this more in an attempt to get "leftist" mad, rather than express an opinion he really does believe in.

But hey, if you guys get into it, this could be a good subject for discussion.

 

[Danoff]

I think it's pretty clear. The french hiked up electricity taxes to protect the environment. In doing so, they prevented many people from being able to afford A/C (thus they didn't buy an A/C) and voila 10,000 dead french people.

I don't really see a stretch. Overtaxed electricity brings the country to a third world state.

 

[Danoff]

From a journalistic approach, I must give the fox rep who wrote that credit...

It was written at the Cato Institute. www.cato.org

Good folks.

 

[ledhed]

So whats the problem about the dead French ?

 

[Danoff]

I'm surprised I haven't seen any French Fry jokes about this yet. It seems like a perfect setup.

Far be it from me to protect the french. But when I hear numbers like 10,000 dying I stand up and take notice. I tend to ignore the smaller statistics because lots of things can happen by random chance. But 10,000 people is a problem. What is it like 50 times the number of people we've lost in Iraq?

And why did they die? To defend their country? To preserve their way of life? To free an oppressed people?

They died because France went about protecting the environment by forcing horrible living conditions on their people. If you ask me, that's the wrong way to go about doing things.

I don't mind joking about dead people... especially not french or canadian people (they're so friendly)... but 10,000 is a huge loss of life.

If it were america heads would roll... the president would be impeached... all 50 governors would be recalled... riots would ensue. We would have 15 new phonebooks of legislation enacting all kinds of energy laws (that would accidently do the opposite of what they were supposed to do). Who cares if it's the french? I do, because I don't want to become them.

 

[Klostrophobic]

I've lived my entire life without airconditioning. in the summer it can reach 100 on a good day and the huidity is ALWAYS above 90 percent. I haven't died yet.

There are ways to cool without air conditioning. Like swimming in cold water for instance. Or taking a shower. I think that explains why they died.

 

[Sage]

I know that this has no direct connection at all with the news story, but I'd like to talk about something else some environmentalists have been doing lately that's pretty damn stupid...

A number of you are probably aware of the attacks that some environmentalists have been launching in the eastern-U.S. by setting SUVs on fire. Much as I detest SUVs, it's blatantly stupid to be doing this - It's vandalism for friggin' pete's sake!

Anyway, I didn't really pay attention until this morning, on the 5AM news... a Hummer/Dodge dealer was up in flames in three separate spots - The main building, one part of the parking lot, and the outer edge of the parking lot. The flames were absolutely gigantic, and the whole place was full of explosions (full tanks and oil barrels in the building)... it was utter chaos, and the poor firefighters were put through that mess. It's pretty obvious that it was a work of an extreme environmentalist group, since it matches the eastern attacks, and considering that the Hummers were the first to light up. Now, in addition to the fact that the idiots are breaking the law and destroying property belonging to other people, property that they put money into making to help support a capitalist country - There's also the fact that it was spewing tons and tons and tons of smoke into the air, especially with the oil going up in flames.

Heeeeeelllllooooooo?!?

 

[Sage]

BTW, just wanted to add - It gets up to 120 degrees in the summer here (during the last 2 months, it has been upwards of 95 degrees every single day), and we have no air conditioning, no swamp coolers, nothing... there's really no reason people should be dying.

 

[Klostrophobic]

But is it humid? If not, 120 is nothing.

 

[Klostrophobic]

Originally posted by Sage
A number of you are probably aware of the attacks that some environmentalists have been launching in the eastern-U.S. by setting SUVs on fire. Much as I detest SUVs, it's blatantly stupid to be doing this - It's vandalism for friggin' pete's sake!

Also, I can't imagine blowing cars up with gasoline in them is good for the environment. Though, I'm just speculating.

Maybe it is good for the environment.

 

[1X83Z]

Originally posted by Sage

Anyway, I didn't really pay attention until this morning, on the 5AM news... a Hummer/Dodge dealer was up in flames in three separate spot

Well, the ****ers who are doing this simply have no idea what they're talking about. They torched mostly H2s but also some non-offensive SUVs like Chevy Blazers, which get better gas mileage than whatever they're driving (though they probably use a bike).

They're willing to scream and yell when they try to force the pledge of allegiance on schoolkids ('you can't tell me what to do!'), but they're simply hypocrites - they're telling us what we can and can't buy. For jackasses like that, I'm happy that SUVs continue to gain popularity in the US - to be perfectly honest I would be very happy to burn them within an inch of their life because of their complete stupidity.

Same for abortion-clinic bombers. Normally, I take anti-abortion activists seriously, but as soon as somebody blows up a clinic or kills a doctor, their position gets a lot more stupid - after that they aren't worth listening to at all. They don't realise that their actions give a bad name to their cause - the meaning of a radical.

 

[Talentless]

We're too soft on these groups. It's time for a serious crackdown. Get these ^@&%()%$ and make them pay. For every truck, every building, every construction site that groups like the EDF attack, the fine should be a million dollars or more. if the truck was worth $18,000, it's still a million dollar minimum.

 

[1X83Z]

It's funny - the ones that they spray paint on just helps out potential buyers. All they do with those is deal them a salvage title, paint over it, and mark it down 30%. If you couldn't afford an H2 before their vandalism, you probably can now!

 

[TAFJonathan]

"Environmental muderers"? It's funny, ya know . . . the environmental movement will be one of those things which, in about 100 years, the history textbooks will have recognized as a right and just movement which may have saved the human future from a dismal destiny and fought in the face of extreme opposition and repression. It will be, inevitably, just like all other liberal movements which were, at one point, considered fringy or outrageous. How about the poor man's right to vote? The black man's right to vote? Let's go back even further...abolition! Then we can talk about the civil rights and women's movements which still face opposition today.

I'm not defending the actions of those who burn SUV's, I think that's WAY out of line, and they should be locked up for it. But eventually even the most closed-minded conservative nuts of today will be FORCED to admit that they were wrong and that the environmental movement was right and necessary. My favorites are the one who say, "Global warming is an illusion, a leftist plot to..." To do what? Yeah, and the holocaust never happened, either.

 

[1X83Z]

Heh - if you actually think conservatives believe the liberals are wrong about the environment you're as naively left as I thought you were. The disagreement is about the solution both in the future and the present. Everybody recognises it's a problem.

 

[Talentless]

Global warming might be true. I've no idea, all I know is that the major contention against the validity of global warming, or man's culpability in it, is that the computers and/or methods used are insufficient to base a conclusion on. I think that's the contention. It might be an easy argument to make, if not sustain, but it can't be dismissed with another more liberal response (it seems) of calling others naive.

 

[TAFJonathan]

Originally posted by M5Power
Heh - if you actually think conservatives believe the liberals are wrong about the environment you're as naively left as I thought you were. The disagreement is about the solution both in the future and the present. Everybody recognises it's a problem.

Once again, you feel the urge to turn this into a personal argument. Do I need to find you dozens of conservative pundits and media personalities, as well as regular conservatives on the street, who claim that global warming is a "liberal invention"? I can, if you want. In fact, I hear Neil Boortz saying that just yesterday.

 

[1X83Z]

Originally posted by TAFJonathan
Once again, you feel the urge to turn this into a personal argument. Do I need to find you dozens of conservative pundits and media personalities, as well as regular conservatives on the street, who claim that global warming is a "liberal invention"? I can, if you want. In fact, I hear Neil Boortz saying that just yesterday.

I'm not talking about global warming, which is so obviously not at issue here. I'm talking about the depleting supplies of oil on Earth. As I say - everybody recognises it's a problem.

 

[TAFJonathan]

Okay, let's review the conversation, M5Power.

What I said:

My favorites are the one who say, "Global warming is an illusion, a leftist plot to..." To do what?

YOUR reply:

if you actually think conservatives believe the liberals are wrong about the environment you're as naively left as I thought you were. . . . Everybody recognises it's a problem.

MY reply:

Do I need to find you dozens of conservative pundits and media personalities, as well as regular conservatives on the street, who claim that global warming is a "liberal invention"? I can, if you want. In fact, I hear Neil Boortz saying that just yesterday.

YOUR rebuttal:

I'm not talking about global warming, which is so obviously not at issue here.

Now let me translate this:

I said that I hated it when conservatives say global warming isn't a problem.

You said it shows how ignorant I am if I think conservatives don't agree with liberals on the environment.

I said I can find plenty of instances of conservatives calling global warming false, as was my initial statement.

You said we were never talking about global warming, but resource depletion.

Hmm . . .

 

[1X83Z]

Originally posted by TAFJonathan

Now let me translate this:

For who?

I said that I hated it when conservatives say global warming isn't a problem.

Cool! Brilliantly accurate. 👍 Exactly one sentence in your original post was about global warming, but even you admit that was the only one that counts.

You said it shows how ignorant I am if I think conservatives don't agree with liberals on the environment.

Cool! Except that isn't what I said. But hey - who's keeping track? Certainly not you!

I said I can find plenty of instances of conservatives calling global warming false, as was my initial statement.

Not good enough! I want the exact words FROM your initial statement:

"My favorites are the one who say, 'Global warming is an illusion, a leftist plot to...'"

Since those are your favourites, I bet you've got loads of credible quotes in which that is said!!!

You said we were never talking about global warming, but resource depletion.

Yeah - considering I was replying to your statements about SUV burning.

 

[Timmotheus]

Originally posted by TAFJonathan

I said that I hated it when conservatives say global warming isn't a problem.

In all honesty, it really isn't. Try and fine substantial evidence that it is. The average global temperature is well within estimated fluctuations, gathered from rock samples and fossils and what not. An interesting point of view is that life on our planet is a climate control system. Trees, for example, slow down their metabolism at lower temperatures, such as winter. This allows carbon dioxide exhaled from animals to build up, and raise the temperature again. As the temperature rises, the trees restart their activities, and the carbon dioxide drops, stabalizing, and eventually unbalancing in the other direction, the global temperature. When we raise the earth's temperature with the greenhouse gases, nature will correct itself, but some species may die out. For an extreme environmentalist, the death of a few speices of frogs and flowers might be considered a problem, but, to the majority of the population, it isn't.

 

[milefile]

Wonderful. When a thread turns into a series of tedious posts picking apart other posts, a thread is soon to die.

Doug is right. No rational person believes humanity can go on naively treating their environment as they have. The reasons to change are manifold and appeal to just about everybody in one way or another. The "conservatives" (yeah, that means environment-wrecker) TAFJohnathan is talking about are as stupid and fringe as the liberals he disapproves of. There are useless extremes on both sides.

The bumper stickers say "Save the Earth" (sometimes even personifying it and giving it a gender). Everybody interprets that literally, and it's probably not their fault. The real message is "Save Ourselves". There are many ways to do that. People who don't own cars and who live in studio apartments or tents in national forests are the first ones who say "tax electricity" and "burn SUVs". They don't have jobs so they can show up at every little riotous protest and destroy cities in the name of saving everybody. Of course they have nothing to lose by expecting the developed world to throw itself into the stone age because they already lead soap-free, third world lives.

Then there are those who live in houses, have kids, and wear shoes. They have air conditioning and buy cars they can lug around their highchair, playpen, diaper bag, two car seats and kids, and two adults in. They have worked to earn things to make their lives comfortable, and are expected to be apologetic to a bunch of unkempt anarchists. It is assumed they secretly laugh every time they see a cloud of blue smoke spew out of a tailpipe and leave their water on all the time just for the hell of it, that they must go to Redwood National Forest and cut down trees for fun, then toss a cigarette butt, hoping it starts a fire. It is assumed people who have earned a modicum of wealth and/or comfort in life either don't care or are pleased with enviromental destruction, global warming, and the shrinking rainforest because they have something better to do than break windows at Starbucks or torch an H2.

The only people who get any press in America are the idiots, who always seem to have the biggest mouths and the most fringe, radical opinions. The vast majority of Americans do care about global warming, do want to help, and will even make small sacrifices. But most of them are too busy going to parent teacher conferences, changing diapers, and going to work, to march on the White House, loot a GAP, or read scientific journals to understand the practical subtleties of hydrogen fueled vehicles.

Quoting, or even referring to extremists and passing it off as what people really want is weak. If you want to know what people want, ask them. People want a safe, clean planet for their family's future, even after they're dead.

As far as global warming goes: It is an indisputable fact. The argument is over whether or not the change is part of the Earth's natural climatological cycle, or if it is caused by human activity. This only reveals the depth of humanity's ignorance; to think that even if it is caused by human activity, that this would somehow not be part of the Earth's natural cycle, as if we don't belong to the Earth. Human beings are the technological animal. We belong here and our development doesn't separate us from the rest of life, it only lays a burden upon us; the ability to control what happens, the ability to create as well as to destroy, to damage and repair, and the responsibility and freedom it entails. We are not guests on our planet nor are we required to act like it. The entire approach to the subject of "the Environment" is still something new to us and, like children trying to learn to read, we'll get it, but for now we'd rather argue over how to spell words while we miss the moral of the story. As a species, consciousness of our actions is our newest trait and we are far from using it for anything good, so far.

 

[Danoff]

I should have named this thread Environmentalist Issues. I really meant to attack the French taxation policies here… but oh well. I’ll go with the flow.

Global warming is not a closed subject. Human beings are so vain we actually take it as fact that we could ruin the earth. The earth has survived quite a bit and can survive us I promise you. It is true that global warming has not been shown to be fact. The temperature fluctuations are well within tolerances and we haven’t had computers long enough to track the earth’s climate. All that worry about whether your car gets 25mpg or 30mpg turns into a pile of crap when Mt. St. Helens goes off and dumps thousands of tons of the very substances we worry so much about into the atmosphere. There are some environmental issues, however, that are totally fact.

Rainforests are being cut down for lumber and species are dying in them.
Localized pollution can cause respiratory problems for the citizens of that location.
Human eating habits are having an effect on the ocean food chain.
There is a hole in the ozone layer.
We are depleting our supply of fossil fuels.
Pig waste in North Carolina is a huge issue.
Localized water pollution due to factories is a huge issue.

These issues can be addressed and are being address. Actually mostly its driven by the depletion of fossil fuels which drives up the cost of gasoline. The result is a huge push to develop and purchase flexible fuel vehicles and electric vehicles. Solar and wind power are also a result of research done to find an alternative for non-renewable resources.

The bottom line is that for the most part, the free market is ensuring that we slowly but surely take care of the environment.

I fully expect electric cars to catch on (because they’ll be cheaper eventually). Also solar panels for electricity are already catching on (because they’re already cheaper in some areas). Let’s worry about something we can document and isn’t already being taken care of…. like pig waste.

In the mean time, we can witness in France what environmental wacko taxation can do to a population.

For more information on global warming check out www.cato.org

 

[Talentless]

Originally posted by Talentless
We're too soft on these groups. It's time for a serious crackdown. Get these ^@&%()%$ and make them pay. For every truck, every building, every construction site that groups like the EDF attack, the fine should be a million dollars or more. if the truck was worth $18,000, it's still a million dollar minimum.

I have made an error, confusing two groups with each other. I don't know what kind of organisation the EDF is, but I think I had been thinking of the ELF when I posted the comments above. I regret the error.

 

[HIGH ON LIFE]

its easy to tell the whole sublect of this thread was lost after about 3 replys

 

[1X83Z]

Originally posted by milefile
Wonderful. When a thread turns into a series of tedious posts picking apart other posts, a thread is soon to die.

Meh - I knew he wouldn't respond once I said this to him:

Not good enough! I want the exact words FROM your initial statement:

"My favorites are the one who say, 'Global warming is an illusion, a leftist plot to...'"

Since those are your favourites, I bet you've got loads of credible quotes in which that is said!!!

He probably thinks I'm a conservative but in truth I hate people who blindly ally themselves with one side - I'd argue against them all day.

(mods - this isn't spam! Don't delete it or my account - unless you can create a rule than says you're allowed to - then, by all means)

 

[Danoff]

So what do you guys think? Is it the environmental taxes that are killing the french people? Is it just bad luck this year? Is it that french people don't bathe? Is it that they should have all gone out and bought A/C's they couldn't afford to use?

 

[milefile]

Originally posted by HIGH ON LIFE
its easy to tell the whole sublect of this thread was lost after about 3 replys

Thanks for fixing it. Who the hell are you?