Comments zacaroni has made

Biofuel

HEMP.On Billionaire Branson regrets mindless biofuel support posted 1 year, 9 months ago 22 Responses

Hey all

Thanks for the resources.

If we can make it so that there's no reason to justify having such a ridiculous military (by making peace with other nations, trading intelligently, and adopting a non-interventionist foreign policy) then military consumption will naturally decrease, and funds can be spent elsewhere.  Diplomacy and quality foreign policy really are green issues, in that sense.

To Tasermons: I would have to agree with Jon Rynn on this one and say that the resources used/abused to build tools of destruction are much greater than the number of people who end up not consuming as a result of war - but it was a good question.  I would also point out that most war casualties occur within poor populations, which wouldn't be consuming a vast amount of resources anyway.On Between Iraq and a hard place posted 1 year, 10 months ago 23 Responses

I think we should revive this conversation

Why are we screwing in CF bulbs to save the planet when our own government is subsidizing an industry that spends billions of dollars manufacturing pure destruction?  Think of the energy it takes to make a single missile.  Now think of how the construction of that missile renders your actions with measly light bulbs virtually meaningless.

For those who have their doubts about the military industrial complex's involvement in issues of foreign policy, just read the recent news:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1807 ...

-blackwater still raking in the dough (check)
-no sign of an end to military activity (check)
-weapons manufacturers still funding think tanks (check)
-government continues to use scare tactics to garner support for military spending (check)
-country run by individuals linked to weapons manufacturing (check)
-$20 billion arms deals with other countries (check)On Between Iraq and a hard place posted 1 year, 10 months ago 23 Responses

Corn

Monocrop for a monoculture.On Seed-and-chemical giant sees its profit triple posted 1 year, 10 months ago 9 Responses

to death

everyone is horrified at even considering population growth an issue.  

we're going to ignore this issue out of existence by way of of pure discomfort until the living standard finally works its way lower than we ever imagined.  then we all die.On Is it only OK to talk about limiting population after it's too late? posted 1 year, 11 months ago 117 Responses

The best of Grist

Mr. McKibben, your assessment is nonpareil.  Thank you.On Are you brave enough to say no to a high-stress holiday? posted 2 years ago 51 Responses

Water Bill Veto Override

Isn't anyone going to cover this story about Congress overriding Bush's veto of the $20 Billion water project - some of which deals in wetland renewal?  Come on, Grist!  Get on it!

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1614 ...On Domenici tries to kill the energy bill and sneak nuclear loan guarantees into the farm bill posted 2 years ago 3 Responses

Recycling is NOT GREEN!

"Teacher, teacher!  What's the best way to save the Earth?"

"I'm glad you asked Timmy!  The best way to save the Earth is to SHIP plastics and metals to a special location and MELT them at high temperatures (using tons and tons of coal), and pour what's left over into the water system!  Then the new materials can be used to make inferior products that nobody wants!"

"But that doesn't save the Earth!"

"That's the point of recycling, Timmy!  It's to keep people from actually saving the earth by relieving their guilt.  Then, they can keep on purchasing plastic and metal without feeling bad, and industry can keep its costs down!  Isn't our industrial system ingenious?!"On 7 items you didn't know you could recycle posted 2 years ago 5 Responses

it depends on PR

A stunt like this sends the right message: that Gore is willing to do more than just talk - but get his hands dirty - in the fight against global warming.  Coal is public health enemy #1, and it's about time the press covered it.  

Also, I'm ready for civil disobedience to leave the realm of "hippies" and be adopted by more respected individuals.  Gore will need a good media campaign, though, and maybe some high-profile fellow protesters to keep the media from saying he's gone crazy. On Should Gore get arrested protesting coal? posted 2 years, 1 month ago 4 Responses

Good and Bad

As a green libertarian, I find Ron Paul to be very attractive, though part of me cringes at his acceptance of coal and nuclear.  I'm libertarian, but not as zealously free-market as Ron Paul.  An ideal pairing would put Ron Paul as the vice president to someone like Edwards.  Or even Ron Paul and Kucinich would make a nice match - perhaps balance each other out!

Some mentioned and unmentioned benefits and detriments of Paul's proposals:

-Drug war ends; industrial hemp boosts production of environmentally sound products like hemp biofuels, hemp plastics, hemp clothing; marijuana production boosts economy and revives farming from death by corn

-Military operations are cut significantly; fossil fuel use cut considerably

-Separation of big government and big industry creates a fairer markeplace for competitors with oil, corn, plastics, cotton, coal, etc, by not giving them subsidies

-National Parks and Public Lands would have to be somehow safeguarded from the abuses of private entities

-Officially recognizing pollution as an attack on the property/health of another may result in more stringent laws; China's pollution, which migrates over the Pacific to California, would be seen as an international attack on American propertyOn An interview with Ron Paul about his presidential platform on energy and the environment posted 2 years, 1 month ago 55 Responses

ps

The only thing green about Obama is the cash in his pocket.On The full text of Obama's energy remarks posted 2 years, 1 month ago 4 Responses

Obama's business plan

Focus on efficiency?  There's nothing inherently "good" about being efficient.  Why are we cutting corners when we could be eliminating problems at the core?  I'm not talking about sweeping, extreme changes, I'm talking about things that we would have started doing years ago if business hadn't stuffed a wad of cash in the mouth of government: developing a nationwide railroad, cutting reliance on coal, signing Kyoto, ending oil subsidies, planting something other than corn, etc.

Coal and corn are this man's interests.  Obama is only implementing strategies that will allow these industries to continue taking from the future for the sake of a luxurious present.  It will be old fashioned industrial practices with a new coat of paint.  

How does Obama define green tech?  He defines it as coal with a filter.  But let's face it: in 19 states it's unsafe to eat fish because of mercury contamination due to coal.  Asthma, multiple-chemical sensitivity, and cancer are epidemic - ask any health care professional living in the coal belt.  And we call this green?  (Don't even get me started on the VAST expanse of subsidized, barely-profitable, overproduced monoculture that is industrial corn farming in the midwest!  Apparently this passes for green tech, too!)  

There's no such thing as clean coal.  

EVERYONE!  SAY IT WITH ME, NOW!  
There's no such thing as clean coal!  
There's no such thing as clean coal!  
There's no such thing as clean coal!

How about this one, for Obama:

Ring around the rosie
A pocketful of coal, see?
Ashes, Ashes
We all fall down!

There's nothing "ambitious" about these policies, and there's nothing green about Barack Obama.  On Thoughts and reactions on Obama's bold new energy proposal posted 2 years, 1 month ago 21 Responses

Libertarian Ayn Rand Types

Excuse me, plum, but I am an ardent environmental activist and happen to also be a libertarian, and a [sceptical but open minded] reader of Ayn Rand.  I don't like that India's results are written off simply because you think that most of them are the "type" to ignore the issue.  And maybe they are.  But I am not.  

Environmentalism and libertarianism are not in opposition to each other, as I see it (though unfortunately, many libertarians disagree, as you seem to).  I see environmental justice as a personal health issue as much as I see it as a global issue.  Therefore, it is in the best interest of an individual to care about the air that they breath and the water that they drink.  As my water could come from as far away as China or India, I should also care about water quality in that place.  Perhaps I simply have a broader view of "home" than most libertarians: my home is the Earth, and the Earth is a mess.

(All you non-libertarians out there should use this as an example when trying to convince your libertarian friends to be environmentalists!)On Poll finds people ready for action on climate change posted 2 years, 2 months ago 9 Responses

Don't certify it

Efficiency is not inherently a good thing!  Is an efficient Nazi a good thing?

How do we measure greenness?  We shouldn't measure greenness by how many trees "were not cut down" or by how many fossil fuels "were not burned up."   We should measure success not by how much we save but by how much we give.

As far as I'm concerned, building a 15,000 sq ft mansion is taking away from space that would otherwise be a 15,000 sq ft nature preserve.  There's nothing "GREEN" about that.

We need to do better than being less bad; we need to be good.On Should USGBC certify a 15,000-sq.-ft. home as green? posted 2 years, 2 months ago 40 Responses

morethangreen is on the right track

You cannot have a revolution if the masses don't believe in the ethics of the change.  While getting people to change their lightbulbs is not an effective solution, it does give ordinary people a very tangible step towards greater efforts, and gets them involved in these issues.  Once we have people invested via small, tangible steps, we can then propose massive structural changes that will be well-received by the general public.

Being so involved in the green movement ourselves, it is easy to overlook the fact that most people haven't even stuck their toes in the pool, much less jumped in.  Sweeping changes only work when the time is ripe, and a quality force is behind the transformation.  We don't have that right now.  

"The idea of revolution coming from outer conditions, in the industrial field or the so-called reality of economic conditions, can never lead to a revolutionary step unless the transformation of soul, mind and will power has taken place."

-Joseph BeuysOn Voluntary actions didn't get us civil rights, and they won't fix the climate posted 2 years, 2 months ago 61 Responses

both

Why not have both?  Be the change AND mass-produce it.  Both are essential for truly transforming civilization.  You cannot have a revolution if the masses don't believe in the ethics of the change: trying to do so is Fascism.  On Alex Steffen on individual action in context posted 2 years, 2 months ago 9 Responses

predators

You mean like velociraptors? Or SUVs?

Funny that anyone is worried about predators when there are more incidents related to poor driving than there are attempted abductions.  And, most sexual predation happens with people the child/family already knows.  (For the record, I wouldn't let John Bailo anywhere near my kids, nor would I want to see him driving.)

Granted, the nicer the neighborhood, the safer it will be.  However, what better incentive do you need to crack down on crime than having kids out walking the streets?  If kids are out, parents might be more watchful, neighbors might get to know each other, and drivers might be more careful.  Who wants to live in a world where kids can't walk in the street?

I think that this is an excellent idea.  I also think schools should create spaces outdoors where kids can eat lunch outside the cafeteria walls.  Getting kids outdoors is very important today, for health and mentality - and this is a great idea!
On Municipalities try to encourage students to walk to school posted 2 years, 2 months ago 8 Responses

how true

They are adding a new sidewalk along the road I bike to work on.  It is completely unneeded: it will cut a diagonal from one sidewalk to another, just so people can have a more direct route than taking the road (which is quite wide, rarely used, and very safe to walk on).  How much of this concrete do we need, really?  

This is a hilarious little speech on the subject of such suburban tragedies:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1ZeXnmDZMQOn Study shows that urban dwellings have less pavement per unit than suburban homes posted 2 years, 2 months ago 3 Responses

this is excellent

Hopefully businesses that are making an effort to go green (especially the companies mentioned) will begin to see coal power as an economic liability, and go after the coal industry for wasting their money!On New full-page ad makes the case against coal posted 2 years, 2 months ago 2 Responses

ids

don't be an assOn And don't piss off Pearl Jam posted 2 years, 3 months ago 9 Responses

BP

Since learning about the sludge dumping a few weeks ago, I've moved BP even further down on my list of gas stations to support: they have now fallen from second to fourth, behind Dutch Shell, Citgo and Sunoco.  BP seems to have a vast number of hits against them, and a vast number of good things going for them at the same time.  Perhaps it's just greenwashing, but this has been a step too far.

I've had enough of BP polluting areas that I hold dear: I come from northern Indiana, near the lake, and many of my friends and family eat locally in the region, drink the water, breath the air...  I also have friends and family who are experiencing the negative health effects of living near a BP refinery in Ohio - an area known for its high cancer rate.  I'm sure there are even bigger issues with the company, but these two hit close enough to home that I may never buy gas from them again.On And don't piss off Pearl Jam posted 2 years, 3 months ago 9 Responses

to amc89

Maybe you aren't looking at the right candidates... Gravel travels by rail.  Kucinich is a vegetarian.  And, as far as I know, the US military emits more airplane-related carbon than the US public does in normal travel - so maybe you should consider voting for a candidate who wants to reduce military spending abroad... Ron Paul.  On We have what we need to beat global warming posted 2 years, 3 months ago 12 Responses

no such thing as a collective will

I object to your wording.  There's no such thing as a collective will, sir, only individual will.  The "will of the people" should be defined as a broad and common interest in a desired end.  We cannot think, nor can we act collectively, as these actions are a process that is limited to the mind/body of an individual.  That's what makes coming together as a team/group so amazing: we are a collection of separate minds and separate personalities, and we have highly diverse (and unique) motivations with numerous but extraordinary commonalities/overlap.  Groups and populations do not function collectively (this implies groupthink, the stifling of new/unique ideas, even coercion) but function collaboratively.  This gives credit to the ingenuity of the human mind, and allows necessary dissent within the group, thus giving more credibility to our values and aims.

So, I simply object to the phrase "collective will."  Perhaps a better way to put it would be:

"The lack of means is not the problem. The problem is the lack of collaboration and motivation."On We have what we need to beat global warming posted 2 years, 3 months ago 12 Responses

heaven forbid

please no!On An interview with Hillary Clinton about her presidential platform on energy and the environment posted 2 years, 3 months ago 32 Responses

William McDonough

Cradle to Cradle is still the best book out there on green techOn If you only read one book, pick this one posted 2 years, 3 months ago 10 Responses

Kucinich

I've had enough of corrupt politicians and policies that hinge on business interests instead of AMERICAN interests.  As far as I'm concerned, the environment is a matter of health care and national security.  Kucinich is a breath of fresh air!On An interview with Dennis Kucinich about his presidential platform on energy and the environment posted 2 years, 4 months ago 34 Responses

ridiculous

This test is so dumb.  Calculating a walk score based on your house's proximity to stores assumes that you shop at those stores, or that you would go there in the first place.  I live within a half-mile of a hospital, a library, an elementary school, a high school, an organic co-op, a number of local restaurants, and my work.  I never drive anywhere.  My score was in the 60s.  Explain that one!On Calculate how walkable your home is posted 2 years, 4 months ago 12 Responses

HA!

Isn't it funny that "Harry Potter's Lasting Legacy" is the amount of waste/pollution/clearcutting avoided?!  How silly.  So HP is efficient: who cares?  Reducing is not inherently good.  If you're driving 100 mph toward Canada, but suddenly realize that you should be going to Mexico, it's not going to help you to slow down to 20 mph.  Efficiency means nothing when HP is still responsible for the loss of a great number of trees (which should be sequestering carbon right now instead of sitting on bookshelves...).  

And, how long will the books she IS printing last, and what landfills will they go to when they are at their end?  How many millions of books are out there, waiting to be someday thrown away?

(By the way, I'm a Harry Potter fanatic.  I'm buying the book instead of waiting for a library copy to free up, even though I don't approve of it.  There.  Now you can't call me a hypocrite because I just did!  Expelliarmus!)On Harry Potter is way greener than your average book posted 2 years, 4 months ago 5 Responses

to wiscidea

Again, renting was the wrong word for me to use, and I suggest you read Cradle to Cradle - especially if you like Amory Lovins or Paul Hawken.  (You'll notice McDonough's name in the "special thanks" section of Natural Capitalism.)  Or, for a quickie, watch the video I linked to.  I must note that the system McDonough envisions gives corporations incentives to put the consumer in control of what happens to a product, and not the other way around.

I'm sorry I called you a leftist.  I have seen WKEL, including the special features on the DVD.  Happy reading.  

Onward!
(as if progress were directional! ha!)On Send me your questions before tomorrow posted 2 years, 4 months ago 35 Responses

Cradle to Cradle Technology

Ask him what he thinks of William McDonough's idea to transform industry by shifting the focus from product-ownership to the purchase of services (for instance: instead of buying a stereo and trashing it when it's old, you rent the stereo and pay for the service of fixing/upgrading when it gets too old).  Is this kind of industrial system in our future?  

Also, try this:

If [Lovins] could pick any issue OTHER THAN global warming as the most urgent/significant environmental issue, what would he choose?On Send me your questions before tomorrow posted 2 years, 4 months ago 35 Responses

Changing minds, changing lifestyles

Let's look at this concert for what it is: an advertisement (or PR stunt) for the green movement. The question is: does it work?  And is it a good thing?

At this point, advertising only works in one context: materialism and vanity. If you are trying to sell someone on a certain religion (the green religion), worldview, or type of lifestyle, you cannot do it unless you appeal to a person's vanity, sense of identity, need for fulfillment, etc. In other words, sell them something first. "That car is green?  I want one! Then everyone can see that I am that type of person."

Rock concerts like this one are no different. They are selling an identity to the audience, and the audience wants the identity - not the ideas being praised, but the identity that comes with the ownership of the ideas. Greenness is now a material thing to be had: just as Bono's (RED) campaign plays off of rampant materialism and peoples' vanity, so Live Earth manipulates rock fans into adopting an image that reflects "greenness."  

So, yes, this concert is successful advertising.  But is advertising a good thing?

Unfortunately, all advertisments are successful only in the short term. Advertising is based on an industrial system that values quick profits and efficiency instead of sustainable profits and effectiveness - its method of persuasion must be quick, neatly packaged, and simplistic. Our culture, now saturated with advertising and materialism, has come to function in a way that reflects this ethic: we can fight global warming by campaigning against it, by appealing to your need to define your identity, by using simplistic, packaged solutions. And, like advertising, you will forget about these ideas just as quickly as they came.  

Truely convincing someone cannot be done with advertising tactics. It cannot be done by appealing to their materialistic nature. Truely changing one's mind and lifestyle is a process, not an event. It takes challenge, not fundraising. It takes a conversation, not a rock song. And, most importantly, it takes action - real action: personal action. This is to say, nothing about a rock concert or a pledge gets people to begin a new routine. One simply has to start living differently - not just think about it, sing about it, pledge about it, or go to a rock concert about it!  Even small steps, if employed, are better than backwards steps and big thinking.

Let's be skeptical for a moment and consider this event for what it is: just a show.  
On Depends how you define green posted 2 years, 5 months ago 5 Responses

Children's Books

Please allow me to take a moment to declare my outright disgust at the idea of a children's book that pushes a specific ideology.  ACK!  

Let's face it: biased books aimed at children have never been successful except among adults.  Have you ever met a kid that actually likes the book "The Giving Tree" or "The Lorax" or "The Butter Battle Book"??  These books are trash.  Adults only buy them because they reaffirm preexisting beliefs and appeal to an adult's desire to reconcile a very innocent childhood nostalgia with a very adult sense of politics.  

Quality children's books are neither bias-free nor biased.  That is to say, they are apolitical, genuine, and unrelated to political desires and motivations.  Books that are generous in imagination win the hearts of kids, and encourage creative thinking, independence, and intelligent/moral thought.  It is one thing to have a moral to a story, and quite another thing to plug an ideology.  Think of how much "Where the Wild Things Are" would've sucked if Sendak had made it into a political thriller about imperialism or something like that!

Not to mention, kids are much more capable of understanding complex ideas and metaphors than we often give them credit for; they deserve better than superficial propaganda (liberal or conservative).  Why bother indoctrinating them anyway?  If we are so confident that our own morals and values are correct - that is to say, based in reason, intelligence, and truth - then why not let our children come to these ideas on their own, if they are indeed natural conclusions of a moral/intelligent mind?  Youth are quite capable.  To think otherwise is to deny them true success.On A conservative kids' book publisher takes on climate change posted 2 years, 6 months ago 3 Responses

Vicious Ecofanatics

Ad hominem attacks and stereotyping have got to stop if we want to get serious about our environmental impacts.  Insults don't win people over to your side...

Also: the McGyvers are out there, and so is the technology.  They/it has been around for years.  Why do you think it hasn't been implemented yet?  Anyone?  Anyone?  Hmmmmm....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZ1dECu5sScOn Taking on the belief that technotoys will allow the status quo to continue posted 2 years, 6 months ago 27 Responses

YOW

So true.On A columnist thinks so posted 2 years, 6 months ago 5 Responses

Trolls

I agree with you Bart.  But dispite the fact that jabailo usually spouts an unclever mixture of ad hominem and bull, he does occasionally (if entirely by accident) give a good discussion prompt.

And to John Bailo himself: What difference does it make if we get fanatical about stopping emissions or not?  What does it matter if the science is right or wrong, when we know what we're doing is healthy for everyone?  There's nothing bad about doing a BETTER job of stopping pollution.  There's nothing dangerous about being healthier.On A great profile posted 2 years, 6 months ago 42 Responses

Class stereotyping

I'll say it again: without the example of Brown and people like Nathan, many universities and colleges would likely not be making the practical changes that are now being made to campus energy use, etc. - my own alma mater included.  Their actions are commendable, even ithe lifestyles of their classmates are not.  Actions such as these encourage changes in lifestyles.

And I agree with sparky001 that there are two different discussions going on here: one is over the importance of students' green initiatives, and the other is over class stereotyping, intolerance, and guilt/envy.  Those who want to continue acting like children, by all means: continue making fools of yourselves.
On Some students don't want to go carbon neutral posted 2 years, 6 months ago 36 Responses

liberal elitists

Those liberal academic elitists forced that impressionable young man to watch and believe in that dirty film without offering a different point of view?!  That's outrageous!

I bet they also made him study Plato and offered no differing perspective on his philosophies.  And they probably also forced him to study Copernicus without offering the alternative perspective of the world being flat instead of round!  My God!  And French class: I'll bet never allowed him to use alternative pronunciations to French words.  In fact, I bet they forced him to pronounce words a certain way!!!  When will those liberals in academia stop being so politically incorrect and start teaching every possible perspective on every subject??!!!  You call this education?????On Breaking news on Fox posted 2 years, 6 months ago 4 Responses

dirty dirty dirty

Politicians and leaders in the business world would be wise to listen to visionaries like Amory Lovins and William McDonough.  Why frantically search for new solutions to our energy crisis (like coal) when all that's really needed is a revolution in the way we design things (and perhaps a slight change in our lifestyles)?  

Inventors, engineers and designers have proved that the technology works, and that it is economically feasible.  And now there's a big market for it.  All that's needed is for people in power, like Obama, to stand behind it.  Too bad he's got his head stuck in the coal bucket.

Maybe he would see things differently if he saw this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZ1dECu5sScOn That's what his support for CTL shows posted 2 years, 6 months ago 74 Responses

Trivialize

Fox may end up trivializing the green movement, but will the public?  Murdoch doesn't package and sell ideologies and in doing so make them cheap, he packages and sells ideologies that already have a firm base of support, and that continue to thrive after he's promoted them.  Though he may have simplified it, he certainly didn't trivialize the conservative movement.  And I happen to have a lot more faith in the American public: this movement is not going to explode and then disappear.  With more exposure, people are going to start thinking more critically about the issues, and I think we'll see a generation of younger folks that really do want to change the world.

That said, I agree that Murdoch's only motivation is green... that is: green bills... money.  dough.  cash.  bucks.  dinero.  moolah.  blingy bling.  oh yeah, and power too.  On Rupert Murdoch launches effort to green News Corp.'s operations and programming posted 2 years, 6 months ago 14 Responses

Green Libertarians

As a libertarian and an ardent environmentalist I am offended by your generalizations.  I think there are a lot of libertarians out there that see environmentalism as an essential part of taking responsibility for their actions.  I personally don't believe that maintaining a healthy planet has to come at the expense of personal freedoms. It is in our nation's self interest - just as national security is in our self interest - to guard the health and safety of our air, water and resources.  To suggest that green ideology and libertarianism ideology are opposed is rediculous! On Technoscientific and ... not posted 2 years, 6 months ago 35 Responses

And also

And recently, our president has signed the Presidents Climate Commitment, here.  We also just built a new LEED certified education center at Merry Lea.On Some students don't want to go carbon neutral posted 2 years, 7 months ago 36 Responses

All this talk about flying

I don't think it's fair to villainize people who are spreading the message of environmentalism as successfully as Al Gore has done.  It's too easy to cry "hypocrisy," here, and ignore the positive impact made.  Think of spreading the message as an investment that if successful will return results better than any individual can produce on their own, and that will make up for the pollution caused to do so.  Making green mainstream is a good thing.  Changing peoples' minds is an essential first step to getting them to change their lifestyles.

"The idea of revolution coming from outer conditions, in the industrial field or the so-called reality of economic conditions, can never lead to a revolutionary step unless the transformation of soul, mind and will power has taken place."  -Joseph BeuysOn Is the starfish story really just bunk? posted 2 years, 7 months ago 19 Responses

Again, Pangolin

This is the reason people have hated environmentalists for the past 30 years: people like you use guilt instead of inspiration to get people to go green.  I'm willing to bet your smugness and general animosity has already alienated people who might otherwise be convinced to change their lifestyles.  What does your family make of your eco-obsession?

I understand your "patching holes in a lifeboat" metaphor.  I often feel that my own mother undoes most of the positive impact that I have made with my personal lifestyle choices.  However, my mother is an individual, and makes her own choices.  I can't force her to change anything.  And I don't attempt to convince her using guilt tactics and finger-pointing.  Bitterness converts no one.  On Some students don't want to go carbon neutral posted 2 years, 7 months ago 36 Responses

Overall

I think it ridiculous to criticize a green business that supports education on environmental issues when there are any number of businesses that support the blatant destruction of our world for no reason other than financial gain.  JMG, why have your sights set on the moderate do-gooders when you could be bagging the real villians?  What a waste of energy on your part: to fuel debate against that which furthers the cause you advocate.

Before you change your lifestyle, you must first change your mind.  NOLS is changing minds.

"The idea of revolution coming from outer conditions, in the industrial field or the so-called reality of economic conditions, can never lead to a revolutionary step unless the transformation of soul, mind and will power has taken place."  -Joseph BeuysOn Travel to exotic lands ... posted 2 years, 7 months ago 82 Responses

Mayer Lite

Mayer seems to suffer from an inability to apply himself when it comes to practically everything he does.  Here is a person who has the potential to play quality music (he's pretty skilled at guitar, but doesn't challenge himself), and instead decides to sing and record pure fluffy crap.  It looks like he takes this watered-down approach with morals as well as music.  If only it were possible to offset moral lethargy - or even bad taste!On From pop star John Mayer posted 2 years, 7 months ago 31 Responses

I agree

I agree with many of your points, John Fish Kurmann.  

And speaking in a psychological/philosophical sense, I think it is difficult for many people to come to terms with the fact that life in general depends on death - that is to say, death plays a role in the life cycle. We fight death in many ways, and in many ways convince ourselves that death is an enemy.  We see starvation as a moral issue, and not as a natural occurance ("It is wrong to let people starve."). This is not to say that I advocate starving people, or abolishing modern medicine, or anything like that.  But I agree that perhaps the most moral thing to do at this point is to look at life for what it is: a cycle of life, death and rebirth.  

On a less philosophical note, I agree that we may be inviting further destruction if we "try to increase food production."  I think we can all agree that doing increasing food production would be excessive, if not also entirely undesirable.

I am surprised that no one has yet considered the fact that a good percentage of the world's population stays alive thanks to industrial food production, i.e. corn/soy, and that reliance on such monoculture may also be inviting future problems.  Really, it would be easy to feed a population of 9 billion or more: just industrialize food to the point that it is not food anymore, pump it full of corn syrup, and add loads of artificial/natural flavors so that no one knows the difference!  Kraft will feed the world in 2050!On Feeding the world sustainably posted 2 years, 7 months ago 36 Responses

Oh, and to save Jabailo the time...

You just really hate people, don't you!  You want us all to die or live in a totalitarian distopia!  Crypto-Malthusians!  Oh, you finally show you're true colors, elitist liberal atheist pigs! Anthropophobia-ists...  Baby HATERS! I suppose your solution would be to kill off all the old people and make a law against NOT having abortions!  NAYSAYERS!

Here is a wiki article i wrote!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crypto-malthusian

_The Texeme Construct offers international text memetics construction and textcasting services. http://www.you-read-it-here-first.com_On Quit talking about it already posted 2 years, 7 months ago 92 Responses

Green Fad

I'm always amazed at these magazines that do profiles of "green" celebrities but neglect to mention numerous people who are actually doing more for the earth and environmentalism than mere public relations.  By the cover, I would guess that this issue of Vanity Fair is no different.  

The American public is interested in lavish pop lifestyles, not saving the planet (I doubt DiCaprio's giant coat on the cover was made with recycled fibers - or even (gasp!) bought second-hand!).  I agree with JMG.  If we continue to defend superficial greenness - its consumerism, celebrity worship, vanity (forgive me!), and greed - then the current environmental renaissance will surely be nothing more than a passing fad.On In which Knut gets even cuter posted 2 years, 7 months ago 8 Responses

On a different note

Why is overpopulation always overlooked when it comes to this issue?  Fewer people means less of a demand for housing/food/energy.  We should be promoting birth control and family planning as much as we promote clean energy!

Oh, and, please feel free to ignore jabailo, who just likes to blindly naysay everything...  On As expected, the news is mostly bad, and then worse, and then worse still posted 2 years, 7 months ago 23 Responses

Grow up.

Have either of you got any better suggestions?  Zarkov refuses to point out better, less "childish" alternatives to Gore's recommendations, and instead resorts to ad-hominem attacks.  And jabailo: what would you suggest?  Did you foget to read the parts that were not about light bulbs?  Give some stronger arguments - otherwise, I'll listen to Gore.On All ten of 'em posted 2 years, 8 months ago 13 Responses

More on art

Some good comments, Caniscandida.  You can ignore the "politically objective" part of my previous post.  If we were to discuss objectivity and/or politics, we would likely go off-course quite quickly.  What I appreciate about Burtynsky's work is that he allows great room for interpretation, and doesn't try (at least not blatantly) to make a political statement with his art.  

You are right to observe that Burtynsky and Jordan are very different conceptually - though I myself would not call Burtynsky's "classical" documentary photography old-fashioned.  Documentary photography (particularly with large format camera systems) has become quite popular once again, with both new and old artists redefining what the term means though use of digital technology (Wall, even though he meticulously fabricates his scenes, is something of a documentary photographer himself... journalist, no, but documentary photographer, yes... actually, he's really more of a poet...).

I am afraid, however, that I must agree with your friend about Wall's presentation of his work.  I'm actually pretty fed up with large-scale photography and the whole "bigger is better" mentality.  Wall seems to do with photography what the masters did with painting, and because of this, large-scale images make the most sense for his work.  However, I think I would appreciate his work just as much if it were a fraction of the size that he prints it.

The light boxes I can handle...  Consider the fact that Wall only prints his images once or twice, and doesn't release many books: that alone makes his work much more eco-friendly than most photographers.  And, I would rather see Wall's images in light boxes than ads in light boxes - which is where he got the idea.

I hope you enjoy Wall at MoMA.  I'm quite jealous that I cannot see it myself!
On Chris Jordan makes staggering statistics visually real posted 2 years, 9 months ago 9 Responses