The drum beat against toilet paper is continuing, this time by those oh so responsible and respectable folks at Greenpeace, who are know for their rational actions
The issue over tissue in the bathroom — the really super-soft stuff — is more like the fight about the big SUVs loved by many Americans.
Anti-green, according to environmentalists. Politically incorrect. Why should Americans use luxurious toilet paper made from old-growth trees when much of the world gets by with a far more basic and often recycled product?
Why should we flush redwoods, so to speak?
So Greenpeace, the Natural Resources Defense Council and other environmental groups have pushed manufacturers such as Kimberly-Clark (Cottonelle) and Procter & Gamble (Charmin) to stop using wood from virgin forests to make tissue products.
But, of course, they just can’t stop there. They can’t make it about saving the forests
Environmentalists said old trees were being cut down when recycling alternatives exist. And it’s not just about trees, they said. It’s about carbon dioxide and ecosystems necessary to wildlife.
“The large old trees are the ones that do the most good,” said Bill Grotts, head of the Heartland Tree Alliance, which is part of Kansas City’s Bridging the Gap.
“They absorb the most water because they have more leaf area and provide the most cooling effect.”
So, they offset through nature what Mankind is doing by driving SUVs and not wanting to tear their delicate posteriors up with bargain brand triple recycled sandpaper, er, toilet paper. Liberals want government out of the bedroom. I want liberals out of my bathroom.
Meanwhile, Andrew Bolt links up an interesting new study
They unravelled records of atmosphere, temperature and ice-cap formation 33.6 million years ago, when the Earth cooled from a greenhouse without ice caps, into something quite similar to our present day…
Pearson’s work contains a couple of remarkable results. First the greenhouse atmosphere pre-cooling contained a CO2 concentration of 900 parts per million by volume, or more than three times that of the Earth in pre-industrial days… Second, while the cooling of the Earth took place over a time-span of around 200,000 years, the atmospheric CO2 first dropped in association with the cooling, then rose to around 1100ppmv and remained high for 200,000 years while the Earth cooled further and remained in its new ice ages cycle.
The climate alarmists still haven’t done more than create a tenuous and irresponsible link between Mankind’s output of CO2 and rising temperatures. They just assume there is one.
The NY Times is pushing a story about how costly a deal at Copenhagen will be, monetarily, but, of course, they spin it by saying there will be some pie in the sky jobs and energy arriving, perhaps through a time slip from an alternate universe. That way we can do away with evil oil companies who are just….evil, but, pay the bills
Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU
Have you seen this farce yet, Teach?
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/yahoocanada/091208/canada/greenpeace_ages_world_leaders_in_head_turning_ad_campaign
This is a silly protest anyway. No one cuts down virgin timber to make paper of any type. Paper is made from scraps, scrap trees, and trees too small for lumber.
Shhhhh, Kevin, it wouldn’t be as effective for these guys to mention the truth…
Teach, I have a couple of thoughts on this one. First of all, I thought you were a champion of the environment. Why do you not support these people’s cause of saving trees? Why are you complaining about using a recycled paper product?
Secondly, are you seriously denying the fact that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas that warms the atmosphere? This isn’t an assumption; it’s established science.
Oh. Interesting note on your “interesting new study”. First of all, Bolt didn’t link a study. He linked an opinion piece about a study, which he then added his own addition opinion to. So, I sent the link to Asten’s opinion piece to Dr. Pearson (the scientist who conducted the research in question) to see if he felt that it accurately described his findings. His response? “No, I don’t!”
He said that he and his co-authors have written a response to The Australian, clarifying the findings in their research:
Do you people see what I mean when I say that you are being brainwashed? This is what deniers like Bolt, Asten, McIntyre, McKitrick, and Watt do. They misrepresent science and take scientists’ statements out of context in order to make political statements about the science. See? You think it’s scientists who are manipulating data and inserting politics into science, but it’s the other way around. You’re being fed a pack of lies, and conservative publications will most likely not print the corrections requested by scientists, which means the deniers can lie all they want without any repercussions.
Please tell me that you find this troubling.
We find you troubling, realsick.
They’ll get my Charmin when they pry it out of my cold, dead, butt.
Quoted from and Linked to at:
FIRST, THEY CAME FOR OUR SUV’S
—–
It’s Time To ROC ‘N’ ROLL:
Restore Our Constitution & Restore Our Lost Liberties