![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I have been poking about looking for a transcript for Sine (no luck yet, hon). And I see that there are a lot of people talking about the video. The biggest argument I see is that throwing trillions of dollars at a problem that we might not be causing will cause a world that is much like the bottom of column B (except without the Arizona beach front property).
My question is, who asked you to throw trillions of dollars at a problem without having any idea of what you are doing with it? There are extremists on both sides, but that doesn't mean that either of their solutions is the right one. Throw trillions of dollars at something or do nothing is not the choice we are faced with (please remember that the video guy said that he was using extremes for the sake of argument).
My point is this: we do have an impact on the planet. I don't think that anyone would disagree with this. Most of the time, it isn't a very good one. But arguing over extremes gets us no where. I don't believe that what humans do will kill the planet. Might make it less inhabitable for us, but I am pretty sure that we will survive whatever comes.
So, why lessen our impact on the planet? Well, throwing trash out your car window as you speed along the highway won't kill the planet either. What stops you from doing that? I can tell you what stops me. No one wants to live in a garbage heap. It makes the world a little nicer for us to live in when we don't litter or when we recycle or whatever else.
THAT is the reason to do something. That is the reason that we need to demand that our governments adapt to more sustainable ways of doing things. It is why we all need to make sure that we are lessening our impact when we can. I'm not asking everyone to live in a hut in a tree. There are plenty of little things that can be done. Does your office recycle? How much? Do you use paper cups for your coffee or are you encouraged to bring mugs from home? Does paper wind up in your garbage? Does it need to?
The government is the entity that ensures that businesses that will not listen to their employees do the right thing anyway. Business is interested in sustaining itself and making money. But people are the ones who have the power to say, 'we are willing to give up some profit in order to make this place operate in a manner that is better for society as a whole.'
You do it to make the world a little nicer of a place to live. You do it because it is the right thing to do. Do you really need to be threatened that bad things might happen if you don't? I know I don't. And I know I don't appreciate it when people try that.
Live by example, folks. It's the best thing you can do. Make your voice heard in the government halls. Make sure that what is important to you is being done. Talk about it. Tell people who might not have thought about things in the way you have. And when the time comes, VOTE, dammit!
That is all I wanted to say.
--Phae
My question is, who asked you to throw trillions of dollars at a problem without having any idea of what you are doing with it? There are extremists on both sides, but that doesn't mean that either of their solutions is the right one. Throw trillions of dollars at something or do nothing is not the choice we are faced with (please remember that the video guy said that he was using extremes for the sake of argument).
My point is this: we do have an impact on the planet. I don't think that anyone would disagree with this. Most of the time, it isn't a very good one. But arguing over extremes gets us no where. I don't believe that what humans do will kill the planet. Might make it less inhabitable for us, but I am pretty sure that we will survive whatever comes.
So, why lessen our impact on the planet? Well, throwing trash out your car window as you speed along the highway won't kill the planet either. What stops you from doing that? I can tell you what stops me. No one wants to live in a garbage heap. It makes the world a little nicer for us to live in when we don't litter or when we recycle or whatever else.
THAT is the reason to do something. That is the reason that we need to demand that our governments adapt to more sustainable ways of doing things. It is why we all need to make sure that we are lessening our impact when we can. I'm not asking everyone to live in a hut in a tree. There are plenty of little things that can be done. Does your office recycle? How much? Do you use paper cups for your coffee or are you encouraged to bring mugs from home? Does paper wind up in your garbage? Does it need to?
The government is the entity that ensures that businesses that will not listen to their employees do the right thing anyway. Business is interested in sustaining itself and making money. But people are the ones who have the power to say, 'we are willing to give up some profit in order to make this place operate in a manner that is better for society as a whole.'
You do it to make the world a little nicer of a place to live. You do it because it is the right thing to do. Do you really need to be threatened that bad things might happen if you don't? I know I don't. And I know I don't appreciate it when people try that.
Live by example, folks. It's the best thing you can do. Make your voice heard in the government halls. Make sure that what is important to you is being done. Talk about it. Tell people who might not have thought about things in the way you have. And when the time comes, VOTE, dammit!
That is all I wanted to say.
--Phae
Tags:
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Vote!
Date: 2007-06-24 07:32 pm (UTC)The problem is the government is actually NOT spending any money on it.
Currently Bush Co. is giving trillions of dollars to the gas companies and asking that they find a way to spend on something kinda sciency that sounds good. PR is everything you know.
Scientist who had a clue have been replaced with yes men.
They believe their job is to find feel good slogans that basically say "just ignore the guy behind the curtain"...and then sign their name and an impressive EPA title.
Oh but hey, the problem has been solved...haven't you heard. Replace gas slowly with ethanol.
Ok just one small problem. The ethanol by law (little fine print thing) must be made from corn.
Now you can make ethanol from almost anything,...but according to the Bush Co. experts, only moonshin..oo...er uh..corn derived ethanol is pure enough for gasoline.
No sorry, that don't play.
So upshot is, gas made with corn ETOH, will be twice as expensive as current gasoline. Oh yea,...and the other plus side, grain will be more expensive, and meat will be more expensive, and milk...ok almost everything is going to be more expensive.
Ok so maybe not so much a plus side for most of us.
But for the Bush Co. buddies who own futures in corn...oh yea baby...lets talk profit.
Sorry but contrary to the science wanna bees currently making news...yes, oil reserves are dwindling, and it is not a renewable resource.
There are no real extremist on both sides.
There are real scientists who are just discussing how bad it is going to be. One side says pretty bad...you know dark ages bad...and the other side says extinction level event bad.
Then the perceived other side are the political idiots who want business to go on as usual. Cuz well gee that science stuff is kinda confusing so you know it probably is not really going to be all that bad. Sorry...that really is not a side, that is pollyanna BS.
If you look closely at the credentials of the "sides" it starts becoming obvious.
Not long ago I posted one of the "sides" who is typical of those saying its all rosy, just ignore those saying things are going to get bad. He has a PhD and everything. And he even runs a diamond and gold company, so he must know something right?
Wrong, his PhD is not in anything resembling scientific and the institution is even kinda shady.
But he acts like he has a clue and occasionally uses big words.
Now go look at the other side. And you find credentials like large name Ivy League research centers, and real PhD.s in things like geochemistry, physics, ecology, environmental science.
You do not find real scientists, at least not ones who are doing real science nay saying global warming or oil reserve depletion.
You do find us blogging and asking...why are people so stupid on such a global scale?
Re: Vote!
Date: 2007-06-25 03:21 am (UTC)I don't agree with what a lot of folks got out of it (if you go to the website there are LOTS of comments both for and against).
I am really beginning to think that Capitalism as it seems to be practiced today is very much incompatible with any notion of community. Which is a real shame because less than 60 years ago, helping people for the sake of helping them was part the 'American Way'.
Now, if you aren't making money off of it, it doesn't seem to be worth doing (unless it is Christmas or Earth Day). That is severely wrong-headed thinking if you ask me.
I don't agree with scientists who are big on doomsday predictions. They have a tenancy to be wrong ... a lot. But, as I said, people shouldn't need the threat of terrible things happening to do the right thing.
I wasn't really aware of that whole Bush thing. You know, the more I hear about that man, the more difficult it is for me not to believe that he is the devil. There is something seriously mentally wrong with someone who can cause the death and destruction of his own people thinking that because it lines his pocket, that it is ok.
Has there ever been another president who has screwed the country over this badly? And still thinks he is doing a good job??
--Phae