Well, is my face red.
As people around the world spent the evening of March 28th marking the Hour of Power, Human Achievement Hour, and the Ceremonial Banishment of the Snows, the World Wildlife Fund was encouraging others to participate in an event they called “Earth Hour” to “raise awareness” of something they call “global warming”.
Environmentalists hail Earth Hour as a big success
“The world said yes to climate action, now governments must follow,” the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) said a day after hundreds of millions of people worldwide followed its call to turn off lights for a full hour.
From an Antarctic research base and the Great Pyramids of Egypt, from the Colosseum in Rome to the Empire State building in New York, illuminated patches of the globe went dark Saturday night to highlight the threat of climate change. Time zone by time zone, nearly 4,000 cities and towns in 88 countries dimmed nonessential lights from 8:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m.
WWF called the event, which began in Australia in 2007 and grew last year to 400 cities worldwide, “the world’s first-ever global vote about the future of our planet.”
“Last night’s message from the masses was loud and clear: Delay no more, real action now!” Kim Carstensen, the leader of WWF’s Global Climate Initiative, said in a statement.
Well, here in Saskatchewan, not so much. SaskPower: Earth Hour Had “No Measureable Effect
Had I known, I’d have helped get the word out.
But back to the WWF – what is this “climate action” that they speak of?
“Using the carbon footprint calculator on the WWF’s own web site, the 36,800-mile trip in a Boeing 757 jet will burn about 100,000 gallons of jet fuel to produce roughly 1,231 tons of CO2 in 25 days — that’s the equivalent of putting about 1,560 SUVs on the road during those three-plus weeks and that doesn’t even include emissions related to local air, ground and water transport and other amenities.”
I’m told they’re turning the cabin lights down.
More World Wildlife Fund tours for the carbon-reducing set: the Galápagos (multiple year round departures, including Galápagos Multisport ), snorkeling Thailand, Botswana by Land Rover, and the “end of the earth appeal” of Borneo.
If you tickle those ‘tangs, they giggle like schoolgirls!
Related – “The kicker, though, were the dozen or so floodlights grandly highlighting several trees and illuminating the driveway entrance of Gore’s mansion.”
Well the left gets a lot of their money from endowments from the MacArthur, Ford and Joyce Foundations.
Weren’t those created by people that were from the right side of the spectrum?
Have they been hijacked at the Board level?
Only the truly dim would miss that turning off lights in Winnipeg powered by hydro-electricity in favour of burning candles would increase C02.
CTV(tass) just cant stop .
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20090330/winter_sports_090330/20090330?hub=Canada
12 years of cooling and they continue to spew Suzuki tripe.
I would venture to say that Ducks Unlimited, which the Gaians love to hate (because they hunt ducks, you see), does a great deal more to conserve wildlife, through its wetlands development programs than the WWF has ever done, and without sponsoring round-the-world luxury tours to witness ‘the wild’. These WWF tours are likely necessary to raise the large amounts of money required to sustain their propaganda barrages, while Ducks Unlimited is supported by private contributions from people who really care about conservation.
What’s going to be done in the name of the enviroment in our lifetime makes me cringe.
more first nations at one with Gaia
http://www.am770chqr.com/News/National/Article.aspx?id=98286
“Wonder what their Executive Compensation package is like ?”
In 2001, the WWF CEO received an annual salary of about US$223,000 plus unspecified benefits of US$29,000 or so.
To follow up on a couple of points made by previous posters, it was Gandhi who first stated in his autobiography that community service organizations of whatever stripe should be funded solely by the subscription of their members. Otherwise they would become self-perpetuating and self-serving bureaucracies focused more on their own expansion than on the original purpose they were created to serve. I think most “environmental” groups are well past that point, WWF included.
My daughter turned 10 a couple of weeks ago. As she has too many toys already and she is nuts about animals, she asked that all her presents be in the form of cash so she could symbolically adopt an animal through the WWF (she raised enough to adopt three)
The WWF sends out a package thanking the adoptor and gives information about the animals adopted. Here’s the kicker, they FEDEXED it. I’ll say that again, THEY FEDEXED IT! So not only did they probably use up $40 of my daughter’s $120 donation to overnight it, how many great gobs of the poison CO2 did they pump out to get it to her. (Now how much has gone to administration, advertising and Chairman Mo’s cut)
SaskPower: “Earth Hour had No Measureable Effect”.
They must mean in terms of hard measureable data like KW Hours used.
But since when has hard data ever been something the Enviro nuts would be interested in?
Sorry, no news here. Time to move along…
Earth Hour?
Don’t you mean happy hour?
WWF?
Isn’t that for wrastlers?
Wonder how much CO2 will be spewed by Obama’s 500-strong (yep, five bloody hundred people, as if they need that many!) entourage to the G-20?
Not that I care, but it’s fun to expose hypocrisy!
As said before…not stupid enough…when I read of your obit stating you have buried your CO2 footprint in the ground…well STFU!
“…it was Gandhi who first stated in his autobiography that community service organizations of whatever stripe should be funded solely by the subscription of their members. Otherwise they would become self-perpetuating and self-serving bureaucracies…”
Gee, DrD, that would seem to apply to the CBC as well.
WendyG @1:34 “Correct anyone?”
Quite right. Carbon has an atomic mass of 12, Carbon dioxide has an atomic mass of 44, with the oxygen taken from the atmosphere. Thus, you get more than three times the amount of mass in the waste gas compared to the original carbon content of the fuel. There will also be a quantity of NOx, as combustion at that temperature will cause nitrogen in the atmosphere to oxidize as well.
Liquid carbon fuel is primarily a mixture of carbon and hydrogen atoms. The carbon oxidizes as noted above, and so does the hydrogen, with each hydrogen molecule becoming H2O. When you see aircraft contrails, the vast bulk of the plume you see is water, some of it from burning the fuel but most of it simply from the disturbed air flowing through the engine. Modern turbofan engines churn up a lot more contrail than old turbojet engines, not because they pollute more, they are in fact far more energy efficient, but they move a lot more air, and that creates more water vapour.
The Auld Sod Hours strikes agin, Begoreya.
…-
“28,000 homes left without power (More Power Outages….)
An explosion at an electricity substation in Belfast was caused by a “disruptive failure”, Northern Ireland Electricity have said”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2218304/posts
BC Hydro reported higher electricity consumption for Earth Hour over last year.
Atlantic Jim / ET.
Great point. I would only dispute the mechanics. You can’t actually require special interest groups to disband. We could however end tax deductibility after a certain time period. Better yet would be to deny deductibility to all advocacy/special interest groups, limiting it to TRUE charities which offer direct concrete assistance to people (private welfare). Clearly in this instance, we all profit by a strong private welfare system which limits the reach of government.
Interesting how Obama is proposing to reduce charitable deductions for people over a certain income threshold. Nothing offers better evidence of his hard left ideological statism.
Update: Goreacle, the sob-lizzard, advances on all fronts with bears.
…-
“Snow Could Complicate Flood Recovery
New York Times – 3 hours ago
By KIRK JOHNSON and MONICA DAVEY FARGO, ND – A major snow storm that is expected to hit the Dakotas Monday night and into Tuesday is not expected to exacerbate flood worries or significantly raise water levels in the still-swollen Red River, …
Blizzard bears down on flooded North Dakota AFP”
These AGW people make me laugh; it’s all “Do as I say, not as I do”, like the Gore mansion, and this wWF flight. What a bunch of flaming hypocrites.
Oh, and Bruce, it’s “manbearpig”.
not stirred enough Can you please explain your point? It’s called push-back and if you are a civil servant you wouldn’t know what it means. Get in my face with the propaganda and I will push back. If you want to go farther..well I’m up for that too. Otherwise there is one message (wrong) with no one opposing. Facts don’t matter so logic does not work. When I went to U I learned a couple of things: Commies can’t fight and they make sense when they can’t talk.
I heard somewhere that Al Gore was born nine months after the Roswell incident.
As fact and logic….
“The findings follow a massive rescue operation on Tuesday in which hundreds of temperate penguins that mysteriously turned up on warm Brazilian beaches – possibly due to climate change impacts, according to some scientists – were returned to their Southern Ocean nesting area, more than a thousand miles to the south.”
logic would dictate that these critters were seeking warmth by deliberately getting 1000 miles closer to the equator…..or maybe Canada Geese go south to find the cold weather?
Disco Bay, Green land, full of floating ice is alleged evidence of a melting icecap…..unless tidewater glaciers are ADVANCING there can be NO ICEBERGS….unless you are an idiot…..
You really don’t have to be Freeman Dyson to see through their BS.
The ice in Dysko Bay, Greenland comes from the Illusiat Glacier which flows downhill from the Greenland ice cap and empties into Bafin Strait. I been there, so I know.
Everybody knows that water flows “down hill” and ice does the same thing via gravity. As more snow is dumped onto the Greenland ice cap annually at higher elevation, there is more ice to flow off the ice field via glacier into Bafin Strait.
If you passed high school physics you would know that an ice skate “glides” across ice on a thin film of water under the blade due to the extreme pressure of a large mass resting on a small surface of ice, which melts from the pressure and re-freezes as the skate glides away.
The pressure of the mass of ice (approx 3000 m thick) resting on the rocks of Greenland melts at the contact and the water acts as a “lubricant” allowing the ice to “flow” down hill. The ice then flows out onto Dysko Bay and “calves” into the icebergs that float north into Bafin Straits and then south past NFLD. Has nothing to do with AGW, just plain old physics.
Science isn’t hard you know and I didn’t use any Big Words.
Every time I see this gorilla’s face I am reminded of the Women who had her face ripped of by a kinsmen of this animal while on a zanex & wine high.
Latest Goreacle tracker via the “*World’s Weather AuthorityTM”.
“Plains snowstorm will expand into parts of Manitoba and northwestern Ontario Tuesday and Tuesday night”
*urlm.in/bzxo
I know this is a bloody long post, but I’ve been assured that its worth a read if you can spare the time. Since I cant post this on Law Is Cool cause they shut down dissenting voices, I felt the need to post it here, where I have faith that someone will take the time to read it and agree/disagree.
There is no dispute among the accredited scientific community about human contribution to global warming.
Yes actually, there is, go take a look at NASA, I seem to recall a few of their top scientists admitting to being embarrassed by a former staff member who wanted war-crimes tribunals to be held for anyone who doesn’t believe global warming is going to kill us all. See also Doctor Tim Ball. The list is growing.
We know some of SDA readers have problems with the notion of “science.” Sorry, the world was not created 4004 BCE, and evolution is a fact.
Ah the name-calling is coming, I can just feel it with the mockery of religion in the second line here. I’d say it was beautiful, but really, it’s just more sadly predictable, and I say that as both a Christian and a believer of the theory of evolution, acknowledging the fact that it is impossible to disprove EITHER and knowing that Christianity and Science do not have to be mutually exclusive as so many left-leaning people seem to believe.
NY Times:
On Feb. 2, 2007, the United Nations scientific panel studying climate change declared that the evidence of a warming trend is “unequivocal,” and that human activity has “very likely” been the driving force in that change over the last 50 years. The last report by the group, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, in 2001, had found that humanity had “likely” played a role.
The addition of that single word “very” did more than reflect mounting scientific evidence that the release of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases from smokestacks, tailpipes and burning forests has played a central role in raising the average surface temperature of the earth by more than 1 degree Fahrenheit since 1900. It also added new momentum to a debate that now seems centered less over whether humans are warming the planet, but instead over what to do about it.
Human activity has been likely in that tennis courts have been erected right next to the thermometers designed to monitor long term changes in weather. Generally if you start off putting a thermometer in a grassy field and then pave the field to make way for a tennis court, the temperature changes on the thermometer. Course, I’m right-wing, so I’m probably wrong in thinking that more direct sunlight in a small space tends to heat something up rather than cool it down. The average surface temperature of the earth has ALWAYS been in a state of constant flux, go take some archaeology classes and discuss evidence of ice ages and tropical periods in the dirt. I’ve done those classes, aced them, and had a great time talking about how dinosaurs enjoyed a much warmer climate than we have right now. Debates should always be allowed to happen, and should always be respectful of dissenting opinions because debate is evidence of a healthy theory, and frankly, theory is all that Global warming is. There is not nearly enough data for it to be considered proof, and I’d apologize for saying this but, consider the fact that the Earth has been around for a helluva lot longer than 6000 years. Lets say oh… 100 million years (I’m lowballing the Earth’s age, but bear with me), and we have data for a little under 100 years of that time which means we have 0.0001% of the data tracked regarding the Earth’s temperature. If we go with just the time that humans have been around, heck, lets assume 4004BC as a benchmark date, as it was the one brought up in the beginning of this post, we’re now dealing with 1.6% of all the data, but since we know that man has been around for more than a mere 6000 years, so for accuracy’s sake, I’m going to go with the smaller of the two numbers. Skeptics might just be questioning the lack of data collected, because frankly, drawing a conclusion from 0.0001% of all the possible data doesn’t really scream accuracy.
We also know some SDA readers have problems with big words, so here’s a hand.
un•e•quiv•o•cal: Admitting of no doubt or misunderstanding; clear and unambiguous.
Ah here we go with the name-calling. Its not direct, and its lovely that you don’t go down to the level of just saying SDA readers are stoopid, but still, you have now completely destroyed your entire argument by mocking the other’s intelligence. Frankly, in the context of the article, unequivocal becomes arrogance because of the refusal to even admit the possibility of being wrong. See my previous comments about 0.0001% (or at best 1.6%) of the data on the Earth’s temperature; really, I think NYT might just be jumping the gun by using the term “unequivocal” when discussing proof of global warming.
The only remaining explanation is a complete conspiracy by all of the established scientific community, all politicians and governments around the world, and even all the NGOs and the UN. The bigger problem is what do you do with a very small subset of the population that is enormously resistant to fact and continues to act in sociopathic ways?
Actually, it’s not the only remaining explanation, but I will acknowledge that it certainly is one of several. Skeptics are questioning the LACK OF DATA, again, see my previous comments, people paying taxes are questioning the need for another tax to save a planet that has a tendency to be able to look after itself, I question the science, the people screaming that the debate is over because claiming that debate is over is a step towards tyranny of one side or another, despite what you may want to think. Not all politicians and governments believe in global warming (thank God for that) and so debate is still allowed to happen. It is not sociopathic to disagree with someone, and it is NOT a very small subset of the population who disagrees. To be resistant to the “fact” of Global Warming is to demand that more data be collected before claiming that the science is settled. Isn’t that a reasonable request, considering again my previous comment about 100 years of data collection (and I’m being generous here) vs. a minimum of 100million years of actual weather?
Inevitably such people will not content themselves with hostile words, and resort instead to breaking laws. At that point we do hope you obtain legal counsel and receive fair treatment. Just do not expect that your lawyer, better educated and more intelligent than you, will be similarly delusional.
So anyone who disagrees with you will eventually break the law? Do you honestly believe that? I cant even figure out a way to properly point out the absurdity of this statement because frankly, it’s already so silly that it really doesn’t need any help. The problem with these three sentences is we’re back to completely destroying any argument that you MAY have had regarding the article, or the disagreeing voices, because well, you resort to petty insults. Insulting the dissenting voices does not show a strong argument, but rather takes any argument, be it strong, weak, or unequivocally proven to be right and makes it a weak argument, and at best, makes the person choosing to use insults rather than respectful comments little more than a screaming child in a room full of adults. I mean that in the kindest possible way, not meant to call you a child, but rather to encourage you to drop the attitude when posting your opinion, because keeping a tone polite makes for a more powerful argument and makes people more likely to listen.
All of the arguments presented have been adequately debunked here.
1. It’s the sun
2. Climate’s changed before
3. There is no consensus
4. It’s cooling
5. Models are unreliable
6. Surface temp is unreliable
7. Ice age predicted in the 70s
8. We’re heading into an ice age
9. It hasn’t warmed since 1998
10. Al Gore got it wrong
And on that note, we will end it.
Not going to bother with anything big regarding this little gauge, again, it’s condescending at best and rude at worst, and succeeds only in strengthening the resolve of those who disagree by being rude to dissenters. Going through them really quick though, (1) take a look at the Sun’s activity ever since we developed the technology to monitor it and actually started monitoring it. (2) The climate has changed before, remember the dinosaurs? They weren’t really suffering through -40C winters, and Mammoths (imagine one of those big hairy bastards going through your windshield!) didn’t survive the warming trend after the Ice Age. (3) There IS no consensus, hence the existence of scientists who disagree! (4) 0.0001% of all the data has been collected. (5) 0.0001% of all the data has been collected. (6) 0.0001% of all the data has been collected. (7) Honestly, go take a look at a scientific journal from the 70’s, they did think the world was cooling. (8) 0.0001% of all the data has been collected, this is starting to sound like a broken record, but this one can’t be proven either way. (9) Personal experience says this is true, but comparisons can be made between 1998 averages and 2008 averages because we have data on both, find a credible source of information (note the use of the word credible) and do a comparison for yourself. (10) If Al Gore believed his own tripe, do you think he’d have bought a home in Tallahassee, Florida? After all, if he’s right, then why buy a house that will eventually be flooded by the rising ocean levels?
And on that note, I’d love to say this is ended, but I don’t want to get my hopes up.
Heard on the radio this morning from Manitoba Hydro that power consumption was up 8% during earth hour! Way to go Manitoba! (Can’t find an article anywhere on the internet to attach to this though. hmmmm…)
Oh, and Bruce, it’s “manbearpig”.
KevinB, I know that was the original phrasing, forgive me, but I think that Old Fat Albert Gore is more of a pig than a bear.
No insult to pigs intended.
Here’s my Earth Hour story. As I’ve been separated after a long marriage for the past year, I’ve had the opportunity to meet a lot of new people. So I went up to a cottage in the Kawarthas owned by my date (apparently a tree hugger – hey!, who knew?) and we were joined by her female friend and her school teacher date.
So, I’m trying to be discreet and go along with the Earth Hour candle-fest because things with the date are looking promising when the school teacher starts telling us about a recent viewing of An Inconvenient Truth in his classroom. I roll my eyes subtly in the dim room. No one notices… Phew. Anyway, the teacher dude calls Al Gore a hypocrite for living in a huge mansion while selling the noble cause of climate change to the masses.
I finally blurt out “Al Gore is an A$$hole!” and go on to explain that the facts behind AGW aren’t exactly factual and cited several examples that I’ve read here and elsewhere.
I slept alone in the spare room…
You’re my kind of guy, Brian. I loved your story;-)
Hang in there!
Brian, it was worth it for all us intelligent non-teachers now wasn’t it. Btw ever wonder why some people look like the animal they most act like. Algore looks exactly like a RAT, just add the whiskers.
cgh @ 4:22
Well, that’s all well and good, but answer me this- how in hell do they get the caramel in the Caramilk bar??
Gore is not only getting FAT, but he’s well on his way to looking like Don Rickles, … no shit!!
Yep that’s a lot of hot air.
This is a distraction from the real disaster!
we must all band together to save the planet!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymqeNYVBZ00
Brian, you’re my kind of man!
Power consumption went UP in Manitoba during Earth Hour.
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/life/earth-hour-a-downer-as-city-power-use-rises-42072407.html
“Last night’s message from the masses was loud and clear: Delay no more, real action now!” Kim Carstensen, the leader of WWF’s Global Climate Initiative, said in a statement.
1 hour out of 8760 in a year is about 1/100th of 1 %, if these WWF people were serious about “real” action, wouldn’t they be increasing there own personal contribution to something more than the token hour a year.
I was away from home on Saturday, and was out of my hotel room, visiting people. At 8:30 they jumped up, and turned out the lights, and lit a couple of candles. I basked in the knowledge that back in my hotel, incandescent lights were happily blazing away, in recognition of Human Achievement Hour. Bless Thomas Edison!
I decided I wasn’t going to play along during “Earth Hour”, and in so doing I offended all of my nice, pious neighbours. I live in a “nice” suburban neighbourhood with back yards bull of publicly schooled children, whose dutiful parents took them for “Earth Hour Walks” as instructed in a school handout to parents. They were horror struck at my little house, which was ablaze with the cheerful warmth of incandescent lamps and prettily decorated outside with little white Christmas lights. My next door neighbour, who is a kind-hearted soul was so shocked at my misbehaviour that he couldn’t look me in the eye the next morning, and refused to talk to me.
What kind of people are we becoming?
chris Ivey
you ask what kind of people are we becoming?
wait till they ask the young ones to report back to school of your indecresions, your usage of the peoples power in the forbidden hours.
its harder not to imagine it , than to imagine it, in place with cameras everywhere. George Orwell was so perceptive its really scary.
infrared helicopter finding and fining inadequately sealed vents , underinsulated attics and contraband incandescant bulbs bought on the local indian reservation. all in the next 5 years. Id bet CBCpravda would support it if they had thought of it first.