Does Earth Hour actually help the environment? Fri, March 25, 2011
Do you plan on sitting in the dark this Saturday night?
Around the world, people will make the symbolic gesture of showing they support a cleaner world and lower-carbon lifestyle by raising their carbon output.
Earth Hour, started in 2007, encourages people to show their support for the planet by turning their lights off and enjoying the world by candlelight. The problem, of course, is for most Canadians that means turning off a low-carbon energy source and burning pure fossil fuels.
The absurdity is likely lost on most professional environmentalists.
The difference between us and the dinosaurs? When the next species obliterating asteroid hits the planet, we will see it coming.
When the next species to dominate the planet rises from the ruins of mankind and unearths our fossilized bones, comprehension will seem quite irrelevant.
The Crusher, 2011-04-11 08:45:36
The Crusher, 2011-04-07 16:25:08 Posted: "But if you are an evolutionists, of which most scientists are, THEN THEY MUST ALSO AGREE THAT WE ARE NO DIFFERENT THAN OTHER ANIMALS (caps mine)that have evolved on this planet, animals that have come and gone throughout the ages."
Ah, NOPE. A hint would be our genus and species: Homo sapiens. There is much that distinguishes our genus and species from all others and those distinctions you may glean from a Human Taxonomy 101 seminar.
"And like other animals, should we concern ourselves with the impact of our activity? Does a tiger worry that the animal its eating for lunch is threatened to extinction?"
Ah, the tiger does not possess the faculties to comprehend the effects of its actions.
You remember: "Tiger got to hunt, Bird got to fly; Man got to sit and wonder, "Why, Why Why."
Religion has nothing to do with it. An atheist may be more concerned with the environment than the Pope.
Not_the_Daddy, 2011-04-09 16:23:53
Earth hour is a joke, in the same class as "don't buy gas today" stupid initiatives. Only serves to remind us what energy hogs we all are.
However, I do find it interesting how scientists / evolutionists are ringing alarm bells over the environment anyway. If you are a god-fearing creature, then I can see how you would believe that humans were put here as caretakers of the earth, with dominion over all other creatures, and would have a god-given responsibility to look after the environment, determine if things are going off track and take corrective measures, otherwise the earth is liable to come to a sudden end. But if you are an evolutionists, of which most scientists are, then they must also agree that we are no different than other animals that have evolved on this planet, animals that have come and gone throughout the ages. And like other animals, should we concern ourselves with the impact of our activity? Does a tiger worry that the animal its eating for lunch is threatened to extinction? Should humans worry about carbon when burning fossil fuels? Humans time is now and maybe tomorrow it is up. Are we so full of ourselves that we believe we can actually control all this? If evolution is the reality of life on this planet, then man, like all other animals, is destined to extinction, from whence another species will rise to domination, whether intelligent or not. The world will return to equilibrium from this minor wobble we likely had a small hand in creating. I mean, you can’t expect to grow populations to the billions, pave over half the planet, increase fuel burning exponentially, amass and congregate methane belching animals in dirt fields and shelters, while simultaneously removing the master air cleaners, greenery and forestation, and expect things to stay in equilibrium. Should we be concerned? Maybe, aware at least. Can we do anything about it? Not likely. Too much forest removed and can’t/won’t be restored, too many people needing too much food and energy. But hey, that’s how famine wipes out most herds of animals anyway. They grow too fast in the abundance of food, then pass the tipping point of sustainability, then crash and burn. Animals like us eh? We’re probably already well past our tipping point.
The Crusher, 2011-04-07 16:25:08
How about if all of the downtown business' turned off about 90 percent of their lights, everyday? They waste sooooooooooo much electricity.
Why are they so selfish?
Yellow Petal, 2011-04-04 19:36:18
Okay, earth hour is well past, lets fill up our 2 stroke motor scooters that pollute more then the biggest SUV from North America, burn those tires we have kicking around, dump our sewage into the rivers, kill any animal we want, even if it is on the endangered species list. Oh, sorry I thought I was in China or India.
Redneck Larry, 2011-04-02 08:22:49
my view, 2011-03-30 09:59:00
It wouldn't be too difficult to get a consensus that our climate has been changing for the last 4 billion years (5000 years for the bible/koran/torah thumpers). To leap from that fact to the previously "global warming", now dubbed "climate change", is due to human activity is at best conjecture. To attribute climate change to CO2 emmisions is simply a scam to introduce a carbon tax.
I was THRILLED to notice that Al Gore's and Maurice Strong's CCX (Chicago Climate Exchange) where carbon credits were to be traded with the above getting a slice HAS FAILED and is CLOSED to business.
Not_the_Daddy, 2011-03-31 09:10:04
Give me the money that those gravy train "scientists" receive and I'll have the same ones swearing that the moon is green cheese and their computers will testify to that. Money buys lots of scientists, what good are they anyway? Sitting on computers manipulating data and creating algorithms with less than 10% of the relevant data.
Consensus is not the test of scientific validity. At one time consensus was the earth is flat, warmers still think that.
my view, 2011-03-30 09:59:00
Grow up and take some responsibility.
Neil McClung, 2011-03-28 15:55:19
Same to you pal and your blathering which is not factual whatsoever does not resonate with most people. Your immaturity regarding most issues nowadays with posts smeared with fear mongering and rubbish has no place in today's world.
paul, 2011-03-29 13:19:07
this apart from the competition
Werlywall, 2011-03-29 12:21:50
Neil McClung, 2011-03-28 15:55:19 Posted: "99.9% of the planet`s scientists has stated that climate change is not just a future possibility, it`s here."
WOW. You expect people to swallow YOUR fiction. "99.9%"? You would, of course, have sources to verify that B.S.? Even IF global warming may be linked to human activity there is ABSOLUTELY NO CAUSAL link to CO2. To state that CO2 levels have risen since the industrial revolution proves nothing except that you are an idiot.
Does Earth Hour actually help the environment? 
When the next species to dominate the planet rises from the ruins of mankind and unearths our fossilized bones, comprehension will seem quite irrelevant.
The Crusher, 2011-04-11 08:45:36
Ah, NOPE. A hint would be our genus and species: Homo sapiens. There is much that distinguishes our genus and species from all others and those distinctions you may glean from a Human Taxonomy 101 seminar.
"And like other animals, should we concern ourselves with the impact of our activity? Does a tiger worry that the animal its eating for lunch is threatened to extinction?"
Ah, the tiger does not possess the faculties to comprehend the effects of its actions.
You remember: "Tiger got to hunt, Bird got to fly; Man got to sit and wonder, "Why, Why Why."
Religion has nothing to do with it. An atheist may be more concerned with the environment than the Pope.
Not_the_Daddy, 2011-04-09 16:23:53
However, I do find it interesting how scientists / evolutionists are ringing alarm bells over the environment anyway. If you are a god-fearing creature, then I can see how you would believe that humans were put here as caretakers of the earth, with dominion over all other creatures, and would have a god-given responsibility to look after the environment, determine if things are going off track and take corrective measures, otherwise the earth is liable to come to a sudden end. But if you are an evolutionists, of which most scientists are, then they must also agree that we are no different than other animals that have evolved on this planet, animals that have come and gone throughout the ages. And like other animals, should we concern ourselves with the impact of our activity? Does a tiger worry that the animal its eating for lunch is threatened to extinction? Should humans worry about carbon when burning fossil fuels? Humans time is now and maybe tomorrow it is up. Are we so full of ourselves that we believe we can actually control all this? If evolution is the reality of life on this planet, then man, like all other animals, is destined to extinction, from whence another species will rise to domination, whether intelligent or not. The world will return to equilibrium from this minor wobble we likely had a small hand in creating. I mean, you can’t expect to grow populations to the billions, pave over half the planet, increase fuel burning exponentially, amass and congregate methane belching animals in dirt fields and shelters, while simultaneously removing the master air cleaners, greenery and forestation, and expect things to stay in equilibrium. Should we be concerned? Maybe, aware at least. Can we do anything about it? Not likely. Too much forest removed and can’t/won’t be restored, too many people needing too much food and energy. But hey, that’s how famine wipes out most herds of animals anyway. They grow too fast in the abundance of food, then pass the tipping point of sustainability, then crash and burn. Animals like us eh? We’re probably already well past our tipping point.
The Crusher, 2011-04-07 16:25:08
Why are they so selfish?
Yellow Petal, 2011-04-04 19:36:18
Redneck Larry, 2011-04-02 08:22:49
It wouldn't be too difficult to get a consensus that our climate has been changing for the last 4 billion years (5000 years for the bible/koran/torah thumpers). To leap from that fact to the previously "global warming", now dubbed "climate change", is due to human activity is at best conjecture. To attribute climate change to CO2 emmisions is simply a scam to introduce a carbon tax.
I was THRILLED to notice that Al Gore's and Maurice Strong's CCX (Chicago Climate Exchange) where carbon credits were to be traded with the above getting a slice HAS FAILED and is CLOSED to business.
Not_the_Daddy, 2011-03-31 09:10:04
Consensus is not the test of scientific validity. At one time consensus was the earth is flat, warmers still think that.
my view, 2011-03-30 09:59:00
Neil McClung, 2011-03-28 15:55:19
Same to you pal and your blathering which is not factual whatsoever does not resonate with most people. Your immaturity regarding most issues nowadays with posts smeared with fear mongering and rubbish has no place in today's world.
paul, 2011-03-29 13:19:07
Werlywall, 2011-03-29 12:21:50
WOW. You expect people to swallow YOUR fiction. "99.9%"? You would, of course, have sources to verify that B.S.? Even IF global warming may be linked to human activity there is ABSOLUTELY NO CAUSAL link to CO2. To state that CO2 levels have risen since the industrial revolution proves nothing except that you are an idiot.
Not_the_Daddy, 2011-03-29 10:41:07