I just knew you needed a mid-evening dose of insanity
We must look down and to the left, as the Zapatistas of Mexico say: to the people, and what we can do ourselves. For example, stop producing waste, rather than recycling it. This requires a lot of things, from rejecting plastic bags and packaging to radically abandoning the flush toilet – one of the world’s most destructive habits, absorbing 40% of water available for domestic consumption and contaminating everything in its way. And instead of overusing polluting vehicles, let’s reclaim auto-mobility, on foot or bikes. Just as we strive to eat and drink sensibly, let us live our whole lives in a different way.
You first, Gustavo Esteva, you first.
Oh, and in the way back (like to November 21, 2009) machine
Warmer winters, wetter springs and more flooding along riverfront communities in Illinois may become the norm, Wes Jarrell says.
“The time for debate about global warming is over,” he said. “It’s not a matter of opinion; it’s a matter of fact. Climate changes are already occurring in the Midwest.”
Hmm, how’s that working out? Most of Illinois is under a winter storm warning at this time (obviously, if you check the link at a later date, that will change. Or, based on the way this winter is going after a harsh one last year, maybe not).
Did you see this little gem in the article from the same guy:
To affirm or to deny climate change supposes that we understand our planet well, that we know how it reacts – both now and for the next hundred years – and that we have the appropriate technological fix. This is plain and simple nonsense, and intolerably arrogant.
On one hand he states that we are destroying the earth’s climate and then on the other hand, he states that “knowing” we are destroying the earth’s climate is “intolerably arrogant.”
Can you say “logical disconnect?”
On the other hand, he is right about a couple of things. If we can walk or ride a bike, we should for any number of reasons. I am not saying that we should be forced to walk or ride, but it is a choice that should be in our conscience.
The other point he makes about toilets and water is somewhat valid. Low consumption toilets are a viable alternative and can save money in the long run. In my own world, I have had great success with dual flush toilet valves retro fitted to older toilets. They cost more – about $30 – but with a family of four you make the cost back in less than a year.
There are alternatives out there to help keep the world “green.” They should be examined, not thrust down our throats.
If they’d stop using terms, like “green” and “global warming” and the like, and instead talk rationally about the best way/s to care for our earth; and like gitar said, not thrust it down our throats, it would go a long way to advancing their causes.
But as in all things human there has to be a fringe element(and in this case a big contingent) the total loon society, who think it’s their duty to force all people to follow their standards and beliefs. At all cost. And despite a lack of scientific proof or agreement on a lot of their arguments.
Exactly, folks. If they didn’t talk, and act, so insane, many of these ideas would be embraced more. As I’ve said before, I am a big environmentalist. I like clean air, seas, and land. I’m for alternative energy sources. I bet most people are. But, when they hear these insane notions, and see insane actions, by these extreme enviro’s/climate alarmists, people tend to back off of doing these things.
Take recycling. Great idea. We all should, though, I’m not for forcing people. The enviroweenies have almost turned recycling into a dirty word, or, at least something only wacko’s do, with their unhinged proclamations and actions.
And that’s what bugs me the most about the climate alarmists: they have taken over every worthwhile environmental issue, subsumed it under the banner of global warming, and turned people off.
I love my plastic bags, but,…I promise to no longer flush my toilet
From what I gather about the article, he was not upset about high-volume flush toilets but toilets in general.
Or did I get that wrong.
It’s these extreme idiots on the extreme side of the discussion that always seems to get things pushed through government and down our throats.
Just give us the option and explain the economics to us. Then let us decide.
I’ve hated low flush toilets from the get go. And still do. But, you know, as a guy, I got NO problem urinating down a no-flush urinal or pipe. That saves me money and resources. heheheh
And please tell me how a toilet absorbs 40% of all water for domestic consumption?? Isn’t all water processed for domestic consumption whether it is used in a factory or water cooling tower or filling an olympic pool?
But again, how does a toilet ABSORB water, let alone 40% of all water that is produced?!