Sunday, October 28, 2007

Bay Area fisheries acting weird


Rico J. Halo said...

Even if everything they attribute to so called climate change is a good thing they will still decry the eeeevul BushCo and our environment killing SUV's.

billspaced said...


My two-word comment was a little tongue-in-cheek. While I do believe climate change happens, I am not a completely true believer that humans have caused it all.

Do I think mankind has done some horrible things to the environment? Yes.

But do I think it's all our fault? No. We can -- and should -- do more, not just because we'd be "saving the planet" but because I believe in the boyscout code (though I never was in the Boy Scouts) -- leave the campsite cleaner than you found it.

It just makes sense. Earth is such a beautiful place -- why wouldn't we want to leave it -- at the very least -- how we "found" it?

But I know what you mean. The environmentalists and "greenies" will point to every story that mentions the environment as having some confirmation that tomorrow the Earth will cease and we'll all go the route of the dinosaurs.

I tend to view people on both extremes as being a little goofy. They seem to have an agenda that's their own rather than one that benefits mankind.

Rico J. Halo said...

I dont even believe that their agenda is meant to help the environment. I think the environment is a 'constituency' that can't refute them.

I believe that their real goal is twofold. First they aim to punish American business for their success and secondly to roll back the technology we use to make life more enjoyable.

Another item on their agenda is taking away freedom of travel. Why the constant push to public transit? Which conveniently would be controlled by them of course.

As for climate change...I would like someone to prove to me that a polar bear likes being cold to begin with before I agree to giving up anything to suit that same polar bear.

billspaced said...

I agree that the environment is a silent constituency and therefore can neither refute the environmentalists nor embrace their views.

I am not as skeptical as you on the other points you make. I do believe that you have some valid points. I think time will tell whether the enviros are right or not. I guess you could look at it and say, what have we got to lose by using less oil, spilling more toxins into our water and air, etc.?

I'm not saying we should stop technology. In fact, we should further use technology to try to figure out how to become not only more effective in business but also more efficient. Businesses that figure out how to strike the right balance will flourish; those that stick with old technology will flounder and die.

As for your polar bear comment, I think that's really funny. Have you ever seen a polar bear in a hot climate? They don't look too happy! But maybe that's because they don't like being incarcerated against their will. Or do they?

Proving that a polar bear likes his freedom is as hard a task as proving he likes cold weather. He's an animal: I don't think it matters. He has thick fur to withstand that cold and he'll naturally lose that protection over time as the weather warms. As humans build more, he'll also acclimate to having less freedom.

Animals are less likely to be harmed by all of this than humans. Animals adapt to moderate, incremental change. Humans bitch about it.