Redstate

I know a good place to start, and whom to start with, if we were to take that article seriously.
R.J.

I'm convinced that they are a conspiracy by the light-bulb manufacturers (who, BTW, aggressively support the eradication of Edison's great invention) to sell overpriced bulbs. My wife and I bought a pair of those $7 light bulbs, and not only did they produce distinctly inferior illumination, but one of them burned out after about two months. It's not hard to see why the manufacturers are licking their lips at the thought of outlawing cheaper bulbs.

"No compromise with the main purpose, no peace till victory, no pact with unrepentant wrong." - Winston Churchill

But when an environmentalist advocates it, its public spirited.

Good to be clear on that.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

3) The hardcore environmentalists like Gore are such a bunch of hypocrits it's hard to take them seriously.

When these guys
a) are leaving their multiple mansions in limousines to fly here in private jets to tell me I need to change my lifestyle without asking any questions,
b) are blocking all forms of any conventional or alternate energy in their state because they are afraid it affects their pristine view from their overpriced vacation homes, and
c) are using ridiculous Ponzi schemes like "carbon offsets" to enrich themselves and/or assuage whatever little guilt they might feel for not changing their own lifestyles,
well then I'm going to tell them to pound sand.

I dare say many of us are doing common sense things. I've put CF bulbs in some places, recycle as much paper/plastic/glass as possible, etc. But I don't need some hypocrit like Gore or Kerry or Kennedy or Edwards or Bono trying to force me to do things they refuse to do.

Should they just want as many people as possible to die? War is good then, right (assuming lots of casualties)? We don't need to spend valuable resources fighting diseases around the world, let'em die! Charge mightily onto that slippery slope.

China the other day was bragging about their one-child policy helping the environment. Yeah, we know, totalitarian communism and the environmental movement share much.

I don't think I can say anymore without running afoul the posting guidelines.

___________________________________
Two thirds of the world is covered by water,
the other third is covered by Champ Bailey.

Whether you can see it or not, fluorescent lighting does not produce continual light, they produce flashes of light that simply flash too fast for most people to notice. To me, the effect ends up being like an old monitor with a refresh rate that's too low; look at it too long, and you end up with a wicked headache later.

(Oh, and personal pet peeve: it's fluorescent, not flourescent.)

---
(Formerly known as bee) / Internet member since 1987
Member of the Surreality-Based Community

...that the enviromental wackos want to limit their reproduction. That can only be a good thing for the country.

-imwithfred-

socialized healthcare provides:
1) unlimited abortions (for all trimesters and for any reason).
2) screening for disabilities, to abort those that are not of "perfect health"
3) euthanasia. mandatory death at 75 (might go as hight as 80. but 80 just sounds old).
4) mandatory retirement at 65 (but earlier if you can afford it). so the younger generations can find jobs.
5) assisted suicide. if you have a bad day, kill yourself.

the world with no grandparents. the world with no offspring. the world with... nobody?

R.J.

I don't understand why children are the problem here, why not adults, or senior citizens while we're at it? When it comes to productivity vs consumption you'de think that we would hear a case for offing anyone over 65. As a person born some where in the middle of Generation X and the Echo Boomers I'm ready to be done with the whole generation of boomers frankly. Early retire them and send them on their way. Course none of them would be willing to write themselves out of a book deal or office for that matter. Criticizing the indulgent practice of life giving is far too lucrative.

I wonder is his book printed on "renewable" materials? Where are the factories printing it? How are their immissions ratings? Is his book helping the environment or just spewing more hot air? Are the trucks delivering it to the bookstore hybrids? I don't think so.

And as for creating a generation of gas-guzzling teenagers, too late. I can't recall the last time I saw a teenager biking to school, out here in Fairfax, VA they all have their own cars.

we might follow the advice of the founder of the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement,...

And the evil bastage in me immediately thought, "Great idea! You first."

And I concur entirely - except for the bit about the fluorescents, that is. They gave everyone in my house terrible headaches that went away, strangely enough, within a week after they were removed.

-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

this is an interesting post arguing a similar point...

http://throughrighteyes.blogspot.com/2007/09/evolution-of-environmental-...

being environmentally "responsible" or whatever else you want to call it definitely doesn't have to be done in an extreme way as the "face" of environmentalists often portrays.

and figure that conservative babies born to conservative families will be even more greatly on the rise.

Oz

www.first-cut-politics.blospot.com

The problem with the militant greens (as opposed to those who just want to make lifestyle changes based on thier philosophy), is that thier ultimate goal is to impose thier vision of societal order upon everyone, whether one agrees with it or not. It's not to further the movement that they appear to champion. As with all endeavors of the socialist/fascist Left, it revolves around using whatever convenient vehicle is at hand (Workers unite!, Jews are responsible!, Western imperialism!, Gringo imperialism! (chavez), etc.) to extract liberties from the populace and replace it with State mandated diktats.
Of course, they run the State.
This is just one more movement co-opted by the facist left for it's own political machinations.

I, too, support a conservative lifestyle with regards to consumption and moderation on polluting activities. But I am resolutely against forcing my neighbor to adopt my lifestyle because I think its right. Economic reality and enlightenment will create the changes, not laws and coercion.

The lefties never want to allow incentive-driven or market solutions; the only ones they ever like involve punitive laws, regulation, mandatory technologies (MTBE anyone?), and do-it-my-way.

To hear a lefty tell it, a company that owns timberland wants to strip it of all trees and never grow another one. Lefties never understand "the tragedy of the commons."

Drink Good Coffee. You can sleep when you're dead.

The environmentalists are so freaking crazy that I don't trust a word they say.

Of course, I know polluters also have an incentive to lie- but at least they aren't crazy, so I have a chance of wiggling out the truth from beneath the falsehoods.

Very little discussion of facts in these comments. The U.S. population will reach 500,000,000 (500 million) by 2050, and will double again in another 40-50 years at the expected rate of growth, so by 2100 we will have 1,000,000,000 (1 billion people in the U.S.). But it won't end there, since the rate will remain the same so that by 2150 there will be 2,000,000,000 (2 billion) or nearly seven times as many people in the U.S. as now. If that arch-conservative GWB gets his way then the rate will be even greater due to the massive influx of aliens. So where do you good people think we should stop?

I am an independent, I don't carry water for 'liberals' or 'conservatives'. The fact that no one here is willing to face is that there are limits to the Earth's ability to provide services for society. Until this fact is acknowledged then there is no common ground for discourse. What will happen when the Ogallala Aquifer, the largest fresh water aquifer in the world, runs out in the next 50 years? It provides all the irrigation for the 'bread basket to the world' in the Central U.S. How about when the oil runs out within the next 30 years, or at least becomes totally uneconomical?

We are not living in your father's, or grandfather's world where human impacts were less. We ARE approaching the limits of sustainable society, and may have already overshot that mark. Smart people will take action, others will shoot at strawmen.

It is a simple FACT that each person adds significantly to the environmental load. It is also a FACT that this continued behavior WILL cause an environmental collapse within our, or our children's, lifetime. The great innovations of the Greeks occurred in a time when the entire population of the Earth was only in the millions. This proves that innovation is not dependent upon the sheer number of people on the Earth, rather it is the quality of the society that supports such advances. Quallity over quantity. We really do not need more people; we need fewer but better educated people. There are facts and there are attitudes. Most of the comments here are based on an attitude, but do not engage the facts of over population.

A final comment is that the population WILL be regulated. It is simply whether we want to act like smart primates and take control of the situation in order to reduce suffering, or wait for the necessary ecological adjustment, which is guaranteed, and the death and suffering will be widespread since it will be necessary for about 3 billion people to die. Study population dynamics and the science and mathematics of it and you will realize that nature is self regulating, no matter how uppity arrogant humans get. We have been warned by recent events - Katrina, Ebola, etc. Are we listening?

BTW - compact florescent bulbs are old news. The light of the future is LED - less energy than a compact florescent, bright full spectrum light, dimmable, and they last for 30 years. It is that last reason that is delaying the coming to market (and a higher cost) since if a company can only sell one bulb in 30 years the market will sure slow down.

Bottom line - We reduce our population or Mother nature will do it for us. Which will it be?

Conservation is a topic rarely discussed in conservative circles, and yet it should be very important to us for a number of reasons, not least of which is our own physical health.

The extreme left has done terrible harm to an otherwise beneficial and vital cause.

Please continue to write about conservationist topics!

www.win-the-war.com.