Notable quotable 12

Comments View as Flat

1. 

   mkayser Posted 10:02 am
   10 Oct 2007

   FunnyIt's a shame to see religion being appropriated against the environment.
   Let's be careful to respect people who believe in God. This quote is different from "God gave us bananas so we could eat them" (which to me sounds equally silly but is much more benign) because this coal fellow is using the religious angle to serve a non-religious purpose. He's insinuating that we don't even need to reduce fossil fuel usage.
   The absurdity is the stretched connection between "God's bounty" and "let's pollute." We should ridicule the connection, not accept the connection and attack both at once.
   David, I'm sure you see it this way, but I want to get that out there because being a liberal I know how we often think about religion.

   Permalink

2. 

   Des Emery Posted 2:16 pm
   10 Oct 2007

   Quote ???This quote from Fred Palmer about coal-generated smog and CO2 emissions being so generously given to us by God is no doubt based on the same theological reasons why we shouldn't complain about slavery since God put those coloured people here "for us to use."
   Didn't Palmer ever come to the conclusion that God  must have also wanted us to actually 'think' about consequences since He gave us the brains to figure out the connections?
   
   Des Emery

   Permalink

3. 

   nedruod Posted 4:52 pm
   10 Oct 2007

   Of course not. Did he actually get one?

   Permalink

4. 

   PolluteLessDotCom Posted 9:03 pm
   10 Oct 2007

   Fantastic conclusionsIt is not difficult to understand how people who believe in such fantastic concepts as "God", ""prayer", "resurrection", etc. have little difficulties in believing less fantastic concepts such as "the good Lord put them on earth for us to use". Once you drop reasonable thinking and believe without evidence anything becomes a possibility. It is just a matter of degree and I do not see good reasons to be respectful toward people who are religious or believe without evidence AND are outspoken about it. Religion, spiritualism, and superstition create save havens for EVERY irrational thought construct.
   Karsten
   
   http://www.polluteless.com

   Permalink

5. 

   Devilstower Posted 9:31 pm
   10 Oct 2007

   Peabody PRIs the same guy who at one of Peabody's annual meetings presented a series of slides:
   Slide 1: Countries that burn more coal have more electricity.
   Slide 2: Countries that have more electricity have better health care.
   Slide 3: Countries with better health care have a longer life expectancy.
   Slide 4: Burning coal makes you live longer.

   Permalink

6. 

   farnishk Posted 1:19 am
   11 Oct 2007

   What a......twat!
   Go on, if you see him, shout out "You are a twat!".
   
   Keith Farnish
   
   www.theearthblog.org

   Permalink

7. 

   caniscandida Posted 2:41 am
   11 Oct 2007

   two problems with biblical religionFirst, a literalist reading of the Bible, for example in this case the decree of God in Genesis 1 that human beings "have dominion" over all creation, can indeed be used to support such attitudes as Fred Palmer's.  Unfortunately, Fred Palmer and far too many other Christians fail to do the hard work of exegesis, literary criticism and the study of church history that is required for any adequate understanding of true biblical values.
   Secondly, one of the most hideously disgraceful legacies of biblical religion is that self-serving prejudices can be "defended," or so it might seem, by quoting certain choice biblical verses, e.g. sexism, racism, speciesism, slavery, carnivory and homophobia.  Frank Palmer, whom the Peabody PR presentation described by DevilsTower indicates to be nothing more than a charlatan and trickster, is unfortunately not very different in that regard from many an ordained Christian preacher.
   But I certainly cannot call a "third problem" with biblical religion, or with any religion for that matter, what Karsten refers to, by way of reducing religion to no more than "believing without evidence."  Indeed, inasmuch as there is no evidence for the belief that the total contents of the universe of being and meta-being can only include objects for which there is evidence of the sort that Karsten would recognize, that belief itself looks irrational, rather crazy and sad.
   The great American religious philosopher and proto-environmentalist Henry David Thoreau, thinking especially about his late-Calvinist Protestant-ethic-following neighbors in Concord and Boston, who had given themselves over to a de facto materialism, famously wrote in the first chapter of his masterpiece "Walden," "The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation."  How can that fail to be the case, when lively and liberating religious and philosophical creativity is lazily allowed to lapse into a coffin-like materialism?
   
   Chickens are our cousins! So are fish! So are other sentient animals! Let us learn to be kind.

   Permalink

8. 

   wiscidea Posted 3:00 am
   11 Oct 2007

   Yeah, but...The devote Christian, Bible class instructor, and scientist George Washington Carver warns us...
   "I believe the Creator has put
   
   ores and oil on this earth
   
   to give us a breathing spell.
   
   As we exhaust them,
   
   we must be prepared to fall back on our farms,
   
   which is God's true storehouse
   
   and can never be exhausted.
   
   For we can learn to synthesize materials
   
   for every human need from the things that grow."
   For more information, go to...
   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Washington_Carver
   
   Another victim of Jean-Paul Marat's ghost and his virtual guillotine?

   Permalink

9. 

   trock Posted 4:15 am
   11 Oct 2007

   that's whyThat's why god put all that mercury in the coal, to poison us.
   Many somebody should ask him if god put all those tall cliffs around the world so he would drop off one or all those buses so he would jump in front of one.

   Permalink

10. 

    wiscidea Posted 4:55 am
    11 Oct 2007

    I suppose...If God had meant us to burn coal, he would not have buried it so deeply. Perhaps He (or She or It) was trying to make sure we could not get at it.
    
    Another victim of Jean-Paul Marat's ghost and his virtual guillotine?

    Permalink

11. 

    PolluteLessDotCom Posted 5:42 am
    11 Oct 2007

    That is the essenceBelieving without questioning and without evidence is the ESSENCE (not a reduction) of religion and spiritualism. Otherwise it would be called science.
    "Indeed, inasmuch as there is no evidence for the belief that the total contents of the universe of being and meta-being can only include objects for which there is evidence of the sort that Karsten would recognize, that belief itself looks irrational, rather crazy and sad."
    Even though I did not even say the above, I am wondering if you could explain to me how thinking this would be irrational or cracy? Wouldn't believing that something exists without it being  measurable by anyone or at least more probable than alternative explanations be significantly more crazy or irrational? Of course what is sane is defined by society, but not what is rational.
    I trust (not believe) what can be measured or observed repeatedly by anyone (not by me alone, silly!). That is current reality. It may change based on observations or measurements. At least we will have something to discuss. If you acknowledge that things exist for which there is no evidence you will have to recognize a lot of things on this planet, most of which you will not be able to accept because they may contradict or appear not to fit your believe system. You end up not having a reasonable method to deny it being real or valid. What makes you think you know what is real or right or better or sustainable or "green"? Just what you want it to be?
    I am not saying that all there is has been found. That would be very boring. I am saying that religion and spiritualism RELY on the fact that it cannot be proven as support for the firm and unquestioned believe that it is there. That is no reasonable way to argue. Please explain to me how you see this differently in a way that can be followed by someone who does not trust hear-say. Not trusting hear-say may make me a person with sad values in your opinion but I cannot follow how those values are irrational.
    The environmental debate needs to stay rational otherwise it will not go where it needs to go. It is hard enough to convince people what needs to be done; it will be impossible if you support them in believing whatever they like to be right.
    Karsten
    
    http://www.polluteless.com

    Permalink

12. 

    jeffgoodell Posted 6:40 am
    11 Oct 2007

    This is nothing new for FredThe following is an excerpt from a 1996 speech that Fred Palmer gave at coal conference in Madrid, during the run-up to the Rio Treaty (the forerunner to Kyoto):
    To understand Rio and what is behind it, then, you have to
    
    understand the powerful political force that modern day
    
    American environmentalism represents and how American environmentalists
    
    approach energy issues. The Rio Treaty is based on
    
    a vision that rejects the developed world's industrialized past and
    
    the industrial evolution of mankind. Rio is based on a vision of
    
    apocalypse, scarcity, drought, famine and pestilence. Rio is
    
    designed to limit the material progress of the human community
    
    based on a moral view of the present and future that by definition
    
    rejects the pro-human vision of all of the world's great religions.
    
    The Rio Treaty is based on a vision put forth by American environmentalists
    
    that seeks to separate the human condition from
    
    conditions on Earth. That is, because environmentalists exalt an
    
    undisturbed Earth above all other values, the footprint of human
    
    activity on Earth must be minimal.
    Coal and oil, the use of which are most threatened by the Rio
    
    Treaty, are among God's greatest gifts to the human community.
    
    Formed over eons, these fuels have laid in wait for development by
    
    humans as they carry out the Old Testament command. In
    
    Genesis, it is written:
    God said, Let us make humankind in our own
    
    image according to our likeness! Let them have
    
    dominion over the fish of the sea, the fowl of the
    
    heavens, animals, all the Earth, and all crawling
    
    things that crawl upon the Earth!
    Bear fruit and be many and fill the Earth and
    
    subdue it! Have dominion over the of the sea,
    
    the fowl of the heavens and all living things that
    
    crawl upon the Earth!
    And, of course, humans have done just that....One reason for human
    
    success is the Earth's abundance of fossil fuels particularly coal and
    
    oil. It is easy to conclude that, under a preordained plan, coal and oil lay in wait for
    
    exploitation by humans to permit our creation of an environment on Earth conducive
    
    to the spectacular success of our species.

    Permalink