|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 9:03 pm
Wired Magazine ran a piece not too long ago about environmentalism. I didn't agree with everything they said. But one thing I really liked about their take - there are too many environmental causes. Hear me out! Each cause is good in its own right, no need to argue that. I'm personally happy for each person out there that is inspired to dedicate their life to a certain species (ex. Orangutang Island). But I can still see Wired's point. The average person is overwhelmed and confused by all the environmental problems (there are soooo many). Its easier to make fun of or ignore the problems than to join in the resolution. Perhaps environmentalists need to find One Voice.
To me the number one problem is fossil fuels. There are a LOT of bad problems, but this is one that affects soo many areas. A big area being, of course, the greenhouse gases that have led to today's alarming rate of global climate change. Also the economic impact, ex in the USA our dependence on foreign oil. And another huge impact of fossil fuel use... the Iraq war. C'mon, its been clear from the start - no matter what the advertised reasons for the war are, the US has oil lords running the country. Iraq has oil. You do the math. And the victims are the Iraqi citizens AND the American soldiers who give up their freedom to serve, or worse yet they give up their lives. My heart breaks for all the mothers back home in the USA heartsick over their children at war. Or the Iraqi's whose lives have been torn apart, and loved ones killed. And its all for stupid fossil fuels!!
More power to the people working to protect whales - your work is important. But I think environmentalists must all start shouting the same mantra for a while. We must all say it in unison until finally we are heard. WE NEED CLEAN ENERGY!
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:15 am
Ah yes, that one Wired issue.
I was already rather dissappointed whenever they threw a few stereotypical insults at Texas, but their little "environmental" issue really got my blood boiling.
Stirred the rest of the hive from what I hear, got a whole mess of flak.
No surprise, they also jumped on biofuels a while back.
Anyway, enough of that.
I'm afraid I'll have to agree with you though. Unfortunately, despite the green frenzy going on nowadays, it seems like very few people are willing to go any further than installing a few lightbulbs, putting in a low flow showerhead, and buying that oh so fashionable canvas grocery sack. Better than nothing I suppose.
But the point is, those who go further, who demonstrate a higher level of love and concern, the type of love and concern that the planet really needs...there's not a whole lot of them.
And though I admit, clean energy is key, I'm thinking there's a far greater problem.
No one gets enough vitamin D, their sunshine vitamin, the all natural way.
What I mean by that is that the American people, no doubt the greatest cause of environmental harm nowadays (China pollutes the most, but we give their factories business), are not getting enough time outside.
Just a theory I suppose, but I'm willing to wager that if we managed to get enough Americans away from their workload, away from their computers, get our kids pryed off from their numerous electronic gadgets, and subject them to increasing increments of sunshine, that some of them will actually possess a passion for the natural that motivates them to do more than just put in some lightbulbs.
Why on earth would someone want to save the earth whenever they never walk outside and take a good look at it? If we really want to love something, then we need to understand it.
Anyway, in following through with this plan, the collective voice of the country's environmental interests will be far louder, and will even be able to tackle numerous issues.
Or so in theory.
Clean energy though, still key, we definitely need to secure that goal, or at least make ourselves more secure than we are now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 8:13 pm
I had never thought of that connection - people inside tethered to their Wii's aren't going to appreciate what it is that needs preserved.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 25, 2008 8:06 am
Go electric cars! ohm Ohm
I've noticed from media outlets like wired magezine they tend to get the right info but then what they put in the articles is just more of the same crap. Stuff like If you are an environmentalist you must be a member of Greenpeace or chain yourself to trees. More and more environmentalists today are not acting like that. they use their buying power to drive change, but for some reason wired, popular science and others don't seem to get that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2008 1:34 pm
Yeah I can definitely see what you are saying with those articles. I thought that one Wired article had a few good points, but were also so off the mark on some things.
Unfortunately I think there are plenty of big-money-entities (corporations, individuals, etc) that would prefer to see the crazy-environmentalist stereotype persist.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 12, 2008 10:52 am
Quote: No one gets enough vitamin D, their sunshine vitamin, the all natural way. And you can only get enough from sunlight if you spend 10-20 minutes outside at midday in your skivvies. (And it takes longer if you're dark skinned.) Of course, we can also get vitamin D from animal foods, but idiots we are, we started throwing away the parts that actually contain it. http://www.westonaprice.org/basicnutrition/vitamindmiracle.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2008 1:11 am
Hmm..
I think oil is a good center-point for many of our environmental problems.
Without petroleum, we wouldn't have plastics, artificial colors, flavors, cancer-causing sugar substitutes, pesticides/fertilizers(oil and natural gas derived)...
We wouldn't have the energy to consume as much as we do, waste as much as we do. We wouldn't be able to afford that trans-continental strawberry. We wouldn't be able to consume food that on average takes 10 calories of energy to create for every single calorie of energy it contains.
.. yep.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
