And so it appears that the vaunted "Hockey Stick Graph", the chart that shows the Earth's temperature rising precipitously has been, if not discredited, badly diminished. While true believers continue to pooh pooh the impact of the manipulated data scandal, a clear and decisive victory has been posted by climate change doubters.
Sweet revenge for those scientists who have withstood ridicule and ostracization because of their resolute refusal to give in to climate hysteria.
Now that a crack has been punched into the foundation of radical environmentalism, let's explore other myths and misconceptions of the movement with an open mind. At least let's have some fun!!
Re-cycling is bad for the environment.
Don't waste your time. Curbside recycling is by far the worst form of environmentalism, a counter productive act that actually increases your carbon footprint. Come to think of it, almost all forms of re-cycling are bad for the Earth!!!
Read my favourite article debunking the myth of re-cycling written by John Tierney in the New York Times. Some delicious quotes;
Hybrids vehicles are worse for the environment than Hummers!!Ha Ha. Read the article if you have an open mind, environmentalists, skip it!!!!!
- ...the simplest and cheapest option is usually to bury garbage in an environmentally safe landfill....
- The typical household in Mexico City buys fewer packaged goods than an American household, but it produces one-third more garbage.
- A typical McDonald's discards less than two ounces of garbage for each customer served -- less than what's generated by a typical meal at home.
- If Americans keep generating garbage at current rates for 1,000 years, and if all their garbage is put in a landfill 100 yards deep, by the year 3000 this national garbage heap will fill a square piece of land 35 miles on each side. This doesn't seem a huge imposition in a country the size of America. The garbage would occupy only 5 percent of the area needed for the national array of solar panels proposed by environmentalists.
According to a report, entitled "Dust to Dust: The Energy Cost of New Vehicles from Concept to Disposal," when the amount of energy it takes to produce the vehicle before it gets on the road -- and the amount used to dispose of it are figured in to the carbon footprint, the Hummer comes out far ahead of the Prius.
In "dollars per lifetime miles," a Prius' "energy costs" average $3.25 per mile, compared to a mere $1.95 per mile for a Hummer H3.
Implausible-probably. The report was attacked by a enviormentalists who drew other conclusions, but the inference is clear. Don't assume politically correct environmental alternatives are a panacea.
Buy local programs are a bad idea.
Transportation is just one of the factors in determining a product's carbon footprint. The marketplace buys products from far away producers because it is cheaper and more efficient and that usually includes the overall carbon footprint.
Buying fresh grown flowers from a local hothouse is usually a poorer environmental choice that getting them from a hot climate country that grows them in bulk outdoors. Buy local programs are usually a smokescreen to encourage local producers to shut out foreign competition. Don't buy into the myth.
Organic Food is Crap
Studies have conclusively proven that organic food is nutritionally equal to mass produced food. There are no health benefits and the 'natural' pesticides used by organic farmers are more dangerous and toxic than those big bad chemicals provided by big pharma. Producing organic food uses up significantly more resources and has much higher carbon footprint than conventionally produced food. If all the world's food were produced organically, we would starve. Watch the incredible entertaining episode of Penn and Tellers' exposé on the organic food industry on their cable show "BULLSHIT"
Watch a funny video about an organic taste test from the show. LINK
Compact Fluorescent Light Bulbs are no big deal.
We've all been bombarded with exhortations to change our regular inefficient incandescent light bulbs to those curly CFL neon bulbs to save energy. You know, those new-fangled bulbs that emit an uncomfortable and annoying ghoulish white light.
Truth be told, in our situation in Quebec and almost all over Canada where electricity is cheap and the weather cold, they don't make economic or environmental sense.
CFC's may use electricity more efficiently but really are no money savers at all, even if they consume up to three quarters less energy than regular light bulbs.
The problem with conventional light bulbs is that they turn up to 90% of the energy consumed into heat. But in Canada, this heat is not wasted, at least not for the 7 or 8 months a year that we heat our homes. On top of it, in the summer when the heat is actually wasted, we hardly use the bulbs at all, given the extended hours of sunlight. Instead of the 75% savings that are touted, we actually reap less than 10-15% savings. The expensive and resource rich manufacturing process destroys almost all believed to emit dangerous radiation. Although manufacturers claim that CFLs outlast regular light bulbs, in my own experience the opposite is true, with CFLs burning out or reducing output to the point that they have to be changed, at a rate far superior to incandescent bulbs. By the way, don't ever drop a CFL, the mercury inside them is toxic!
En garde, environmentalists!!!
Back to the data-fixing scandal.
Isn't it puzzling that environmentalists have roundly rejected the notion that the case for global warming has been weakened by the data fixing scandal?
Wouldn't normal and reasonable person be happy that the possibility that the case for global warming has gotten weaker?
Imagine if your doctor told you that one the major diagnostic tests which was conducted on you and which confirmed a medically terminal diagnosis was faulty. Wouldn't you be happy and wouldn't you shout out in joy at the possibility of living longer!
How would you react if your family jumped up to deny the results.
NO! NO! We don't care about that. We're sure he's dying!! Arggh!
