Kira’s Recent Comments

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Never on a Friday

  I actually thought it got a lot of attention. But why release on a Friday? Shades of the Bush administration!

  I think if it hadn't been for the whacky weather (gw-related or not), this report, Al Gore, and AIT would have been ignored. Nuthin' like a 60-degree January day to make converts.
  On It just ain't sexy posted 2 years, 9 months ago 16 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  But seriously folks

  I guess this pretty much kills the chance of sending a woman on the Mars mission.

  Better yet, maybe it'll kill the Mars mission.On Diapers and a BB gun posted 2 years, 9 months ago 23 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Clearly I'm late to this party

  Tom describes the book as covering the "cultural history of vegetarianism from 1600 to modern times." I have only read reviews of the book, but does it talk about the natural history of vegetarianism? Isn't our physiology geared toward being omnivorous? I once read that no traditional society on earth is vegetarian. It's one thing to declare it better philosophically, but how about physically?

  And if "livestock production emits fully 18 percent of global greenhouse gases," what if we replaced all those cattle with the original animals that used to be around, like the past numbers of bison, antelope, etc. Wouldn't they be producing gas too? Just because the gas is emitted from a domesticated animals, doesn't make it worse.

  "Who are we to make other sentient creatures suffer and die painful deaths, so we can gain our sustenance. . ." Do away with war, and we'll talk.

  Like most things we Westerners consume to excess, if we had to pay the true cost of meat production--its impact on the environment as well as the animal--we'd probably eat a whole lot less, because it would simply cost too much. That doesn't make it evil, per se.

  If we think that somehow we can stop eating meat and therefore think of ourselves as pure in spirit, then, really, how about we start with ending the killing of other humans first. Isn't that much more profoundly monstrous?

  Besides, chimpanzees, our closest genetic relative, eat meat. They also make war, rape, kill infants. Sigh.

  For those who think animals suffer by being slaughtered, do you advocate getting rid of all predators? Don't wild animals suffer too? Not all, if any, are killed quickly and painlessly. Why are we the only bad guys? Just because we know better? I tried going vegetarian. I didn't feel well. Sometimes I think you just have to accept that it's a cat-eat-mouse world. Limit the environmental damage, pay the full cost, which would reduce consumption, and let's move on.

  Personally, I treat meat as a side dish in my meals. Actually meal. I really only eat it at dinner and then very small portions. I like it. I think it's healthy (I don't buy Perdue or Tyson). And, something we Westerners seem unable to grasp, fine in moderation.

  Right now I'm on a kick to eliminate high fructose corn syrup from my diet. Much worse than meat, I say.

  Michael Pollan says "eat like an omnivore."
  On Why the vegetarian critique of meat-eating should make meat-eaters squirm posted 2 years, 9 months ago 103 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Formula Won

  Thank you Umbra for not being afraid to use a formula to explain something. That's the first real explanation I've heard. I also very much doubt that 75 is most efficient for new cars. Since gas started competing with my mortgage payment, I've vowed to stick to the speed limit--which unfortunately is often over the 50-55 I'd heard was most efficient. But I recently got to Cape Cod and back (to Boston) on half a tank of gas instead of the 3/4 I expected.On Umbra on speed limits posted 4 years, 1 month ago 10 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Hard Science

  I think reporters are hesitant to write about climate change because it is hard to write about science, period. I once wrote science stories and found my scientist sources parsing every word I used because I tried to translate their very exact, yet hard to understand, language into something lay people could grasp.

  Take the term climate change, for example. Debate rages about whether we should call it global warming or climate change. I've read stories implying that climate change is a wimpier, even right-wing, appellation. But I had a scientist insist I write climate change because global warming is misleading. Climate change CAN mean colder temperatures in certain areas. Climate change can cause the Gulf Stream to stop flowing, which will render England uninhabitable due to cold.

  But I very clearly have gotten the message that climate change WILL produce more intense storms, but trying to pinpoint how much more instense a storm is because of climate change is likely something we won't know until years have passed, decades maybe, and we can look back and analyze the whole spectrum of storms.

  Whatever caused Katrina to be as severe as it was is moot compared to the fact that as soon as it crossed Florida we were told it was heading straight for New Orleans. And why New Orleans was not prepared, is frankly inexcusable, whoever is to blame. And let's face it, who could be prepared for devestation the size of Great Britain?On How are journalists covering climate change in Katrina's wake? posted 4 years, 2 months ago 10 Responses