Lars Larson Rips Wall-E As ‘Propaganda’; It Teaches Kids ‘Humans Are Bad For Planet Earth’
Lars Larson Rips Wall-E As ‘Propaganda’; It Teaches Kids ‘Humans Are Bad For Planet Earth’
Yesterday, ThinkProgress noted that members of the right wing are apoplectic over the “leftist propaganda” latent in the current No. 1 movie in America, Pixar’s “WALL-E.” Conservatives have claimed it contains “fascistic elements,” represents “Malthusian fearmongering,” and is evidence of “Bush Derangement Syndrome.”
Last night, MSNBC’s “Verdict” with Dan Abrams ran a segment on the reaction to the film, with conservative talk radio host Lars Larson largely agreeing with the right-wing attacks, insisting the movie “is propaganda.” He even half-jokingly demanded to know whether Abrams was “in favor of robot marriage.” Larson was furious that the movie suggested humans need to take care of the earth:
ABRAMS: This is craziness, right?
LARSON: No, no. … It’s propaganda! We’re talking about a movie that foists off on little kids the idea that human beings are bad for planet earth. And that’s not true. Why are human beings bad for planet earth? … If you take your kids to this, understand they’re going to come away with the idea that mommy and daddy are bad for the planet and the planet would be better off without them.
Watch it:
It’s no surprise that Larson, a long-time global warming denier, would detest the film’s ecological message. Larson has admitted that “we’re warming up a little bit,” but insists “it’s not caused by humans and it’s not curable by humans.”
Abrams’ ridicule seemed to prompt Larson to try to steer the conversation to tried-and-true conservative talking points: fearmongering on marriage and blasting Al Gore.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Lars is one very fruity fruitcake….
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:10 pmLars is right about one thing- humans ARE bad for mother earth.
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:13 pmWell, humans are bad for most other species on Earth, saving only those that scavenge off our garbage or live symbiotically with us in one way or another. We are the super predator of this geologic era. Or as Colbert would say, “Suck on it, Nature!”
As far as the Earth itself goes? I don’t think it is too worried about us.
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:14 pmWhy do pseudo-conservatives hate free speech?
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:16 pmPerhaps Lars should go eat him some tomatos and think about his clean world while he’s power shitting his brains through his ass. (The FDA still don’t know where the salmonella is coming from).
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:22 pmAs far as the Earth itself goes? I don’t think it is too worried about us.
She will still be here, long after the last evidence of humans has disappeared. We represent a nanosecond in the grand scheme of things.
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:25 pmHomo sapiens are the worst disaster for plants and other animals since the asteroids hit the earth millions of years ago. Humans torture, exploit and kill other animals. Zoos are animal prisons: innocent animals are caged up for life with no possibility of parole. How’s that for justice, human style… No Writ of Habeus Corpus for zoo animals, that is a right which we reserve for “higher animals,” i.e., ourselves.
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:25 pm“Why are humans bad for planet earth?”
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:26 pmIs this man really that stupid?
Poor Lars…nothing to talk about but a CARTOON. We ARE bad for the planet unless we start having conservation be more than a personal virtue…
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:28 pmKeltoi Says:
As far as the Earth itself goes? I don’t think it is too worried about us.
True. The idea that we will destroy the Earth is the utmost in arrogance. We can’t destroy the Earth. We can only destroy ourselves and the unfortunate organisms who presently occupy the Earth with us.
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:28 pm#6: We represent a nanosecond in the grand scheme of things.
Maybe, but the last 7 years feels like eternity to me.
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:29 pmIt will end with not a bang, but a wimper.
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:29 pmBadmoodman Says:
#6: We represent a nanosecond in the grand scheme of things.
Maybe, but the last 7 years feels like eternity to me.
Leave it to you to make me laugh while discussing an important topic - thanks for that…You are correct, BTW.
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:31 pmIf you take your kids to this, understand they’re going to come away with the idea that mommy and daddy are bad for the planet and the planet would be better off without them.
Heh, heh. Sounds like Lars got some tough questions from his kids after they saw this movie.
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:32 pmNo, no he got it all wrong, it should have been….
…. “the earth would be better off without Lars Larson.”
There, that’s a truth you can live with.
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:32 pmlars is bad for the earth. he should leave. anyone support my campeign “send lars to mars”?
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:32 pmBadmoodman Says:
#6: We represent a nanosecond in the grand scheme of things.
Maybe, but the last 7 years feels like eternity to me.
and obama can’t be elected
soon enough.
it’s all relative.
ª
i don’t think “lars” larson
understands the theory
of relativity.
do you?
?
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:32 pmThere’s are a couple of different (and legitimate) views on the subject.
Here’s Karlin’s take:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7W33HRc1A6c
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:34 pmOval12345678 aka James K. Sayre Says:
Homo sapiens are the worst disaster for plants and other animals since the asteroids hit the earth millions of years ago.
Colbert: “That’s right! We humans are SUCH a super predator it takes something from outer space to even touch us! Suck on it, Asteroid!”
I hate their two week vacation…
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:36 pmStratRat Says:
She will still be here, long after the last evidence of humans has disappeared. We represent a nanosecond in the grand scheme of things.
A truth that I have always found both comforting and depressing at the same time.
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:37 pmBuckie Boy Says:
…. “the earth would be better off without Lars Larson.”
Are you one of Lars Larson’s kids?
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:39 pmSend Lars to Mars!
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:39 pmI sure hope NASA’s deep space program finds that alternative reality soon so these neocons wackos can be forced to go live there… it’s getting boring just listening to them squeak…
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:39 pmI think asking the same from this disney film as al gore’s seems odd.It had enough politics really.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ jessica-jensen/ wall-e-robotic-ode-to-env_b_109847.html
Why did Pixar pass up the opportunity to help people learn what they can do to become better stewards of the planet?? The movie is an inspirational environmental call to action, and yet there is no mention of how or where people can learn to cut carbon emissions, save water, reduce their trash production, etc. Why didn’t Pixar put up a simple screen with “ten recommendations for loving planet Earth” at the end of the film — or a link to a site with educational information? It pains me that MILLIONS of people will see this movie and learn nothing about what they can do to save the planet
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:40 pmWait, they think Malthus was a liberal figure?
I love it when neocons throw out historical names in an attempt to look intelligent…
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:45 pmOT but for anyone who was on the questions on McCain’s service thread earlier
http://www.slate.com/id/2194600/
gives a pretty convincing rationale behind Wes Clark’s comments and why Obama isn’t getting within 100 miles of them.
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:46 pmrozerze Says:
I think asking the same from this disney film as al gore’s seems odd.
Since you Republicans didn’t understand Gore’s film, maybe they were hoping you would get it, if it was in a cartoon.
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:47 pmKeltoi Says:
StratRat Says:
She will still be here, long after the last evidence of humans has disappeared. We represent a nanosecond in the grand scheme of things.
A truth that I have always found both comforting and depressing at the same time.
It forces a person to make the most of the little time we do have.
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:50 pmOh for pete’s sake. It’s an animated movie for the kiddies. Why in the hell do conservatives hate the kiddies?
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:51 pmAs a race, humans ARE bad for the Earth. The Earth will survive us though, I doubt we will make it more than a generation or two.
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:52 pmthe late, great Bill Hicks said it best, “We’re a virus with shoes….”
you don’t need a child’s intellect to know that human behavior has had an impact on the earth, most of it negative. it’s sad that people will say anything for a buck.
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:54 pmIgnoranceIsNotBliss Says:
Why in the hell do conservatives hate the kiddies?
Well, in the case of Lars Larson and his kids, the feeling seems to be mutual.
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:55 pmLarson says this:
But, in this clip, George Carlin is saying essentially the same thing. Check it out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7W33HRc1A6c
I respect Carlin a lot. He was brilliant and a general on the front lines of the fight for the freedom of speech.
Why the fuss over Larson’s comments, and not Carlin’s?
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:58 pmStratRat Says:
It forces a person to make the most of the little time we do have.
Yeah, but it is more than that. It is that if you think about it too much you begin to realize how incredibly pointless everything you will ever do ultimately is, including your entire life, all your loves, all your pleasures…it just doesn’t matter in the end.
Whoa! Okay, and now, back to the insipid Wall-E thread.
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:58 pmcould conservatives make their own
computer animated movie for children
extolling their beliefs regarding earth
and the environment?
?
it would mean finding a company of
conservatives who have mastered:
science,
technology,
computers,
art,
music,
film making
and spelling for starters.
?
roz, where are these conservatives?
¶
thank you.
£
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:59 pmLars, and you pay for your daughter to go to this big bad scary college?
July 2nd, 2008 at 4:59 pmbackup Says:
Why the fuss over Larson’s comments, and not Carlin’s?
you must find your own answers.
otherwise you’ll always be lost.
?
le conservateur flâne,
masturbez votre esprit
et appréciez les résultats!
*
good luck.
?
good luck.
July 2nd, 2008 at 5:05 pmOnce our advanced technology turns the planet into a semi-habitable hell hole, only the very strong humans will survive, and humans will survive by adopting Native American and aboriginal traditions, culture and low tech diet, farming, foraging and hunting skills.
The rest of us, adios, been fun racing our gas guzzling SUVs around.
July 2nd, 2008 at 5:06 pmKeltoi Says:
StratRat Says:
It forces a person to make the most of the little time we do have.
Yeah, but it is more than that. It is that if you think about it too much you begin to realize how incredibly pointless everything you will ever do ultimately is, including your entire life, all your loves, all your pleasures…it just doesn’t matter in the end.
Whoa! Okay, and now, back to the insipid Wall-E thread.
Even in the beginning when you and I butted heads a lot, I always knew you had a particular grasp of reality that was lost on some on the right side. I don’t mean any disrespect, but your posts always had threads of facts and balance. That was (and is) refreshing.
I know what you meant when you wrote it makes you both comforted and depressed at the same time. Remember to take time to hug your loved ones.
July 2nd, 2008 at 5:06 pmbackdoor
Did you notice that in that George Carlin clip you keep posting he says the Earth is four and a half billion years old?
Don’t let your trollmasters know you are a G-D evolutionist.
Oh, and Lars? It’s a kiddie movie. Get over it.
July 2nd, 2008 at 5:08 pmThe message that Lars and his neocon defenders are ignoring is simply “You don’t sh*t where you eat.”
The message shown in the film is if you treat where you live with apathy and contempt, then don’t expect it to be around forever. Seems a fairly simple and logical concept to grasp. But these greedy corporations and their lapdogs just like to chew things up and spit them out and move on to the next target.
July 2nd, 2008 at 5:09 pmStratRat Says:
——————————————————————————–
Keltoi Says:
StratRat Says:
It forces a person to make the most of the little time we do have.
Yeah, but it is more than that. It is that if you think about it too much you begin to realize how incredibly pointless everything you will ever do ultimately is, including your entire life, all your loves, all your pleasures…it just doesn’t matter in the end.
Whoa! Okay, and now, back to the insipid Wall-E thread.
Even in the beginning when you and I butted heads a lot, I always knew you had a particular grasp of reality that was lost on some on the right side. I don’t mean any disrespect, but your posts always had threads of facts and balance. That was (and is) refreshing.
I know what you meant when you wrote it makes you both comforted and depressed at the same time. Remember to take time to hug your loved ones.
Dude…I think I am going to go put in a James Taylor CD ;)
July 2nd, 2008 at 5:10 pmI embrace evolution wholeheartedly. And G-D doesn’t work much on atheists.
July 2nd, 2008 at 5:11 pmI’m fairly certain that Larson Lars’ ratings are in the tank. If I’m not mistaken, it wasn’t that long ago that he lost his Lars Imus show on the local station. It surprises me he even has a listener around these parts. I believe this area is pretty much a liberal stronghold. We’ve gotta keep our eyes open because of that, Bush may strike at any time.
July 2nd, 2008 at 5:12 pmKeep a watchful eye on those bacteria. Now what can we say about what sort of tripe Top Gun, Saving Private Ryan, and the Ten Commandmants laid down upon our children?
July 2nd, 2008 at 5:13 pmDude…I think I am going to go put in a James Taylor CD ;)
Actually, I was thinking of Ozzy’s ‘Crazy Train’. That songs seems appropriate for this thread…
“We’re goin off the rails, on crazy train….”
July 2nd, 2008 at 5:15 pmkeith h.,
lars thinks he’s a general on the
front lines of the fight for the
freedom of speech.
but he’s not.
?
July 2nd, 2008 at 5:15 pmWhen are the repugs going to wake up and realize that they are being led by escapees from the insane asylum?
July 2nd, 2008 at 5:21 pmI embrace evolution wholeheartedly
I suspect Darwin and his theory would prefer that you just be good friends. Now that you agree to basic scientific theory, go back and rewatch the Carlin clip. He isn’t disputing the ability of man to destroy his environment — kind of embraces it actually. His points are (1) the Earth will flush us and fix itself after we poison/blow up/asphyxiate ourselves; and (2) too many people talk about “saving the planet” when they are really worried about themselves. Not sure what point you are trying to make but I guess I should say thanks for the Carlin link.
July 2nd, 2008 at 5:23 pmKurt Vonnegut likened the human race to yeast. Yeast consume as long as there is food available and excrete alcohol as a waste product. Alcohol is poisonous to the yeast and when the level of alcohol gets to a high enough percentage the yeast die off. Likewise, humans apear to be dying in our own shit.
The idea that the earth is bigger than all of us and will survive anything we throw at her (true enough as far as that goes)has been used by the capitalists for years as reason to resist environmental protections. That and the crap in the bible about humans given dominion over the earth and everything on it and in it are handy excuses for those who would pollute every ocean, and cut down every redwood as long as there’s a buck in it.
July 2nd, 2008 at 5:26 pmnanlichi:
July 2nd, 2008 at 5:32 pmYou have touched a nerve…
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0305-27.htm
My point is that it’s human ego centrism drives us to see a global warming trend as ‘man made’.
It’s a lot like our ancestors believing that they somehow displeased the gods resulting in a drought or poor harvest.
Prompting some need for sacrifice.
Even if you don’t agree, it’s worth it to watch Carlin. He was great.
July 2nd, 2008 at 5:34 pmIs it not typical that they would choose this movie after such post-apocalyptic epics as Mad Max, Logan’s Run and Soylent Green? Not to mention the countless “Doomsday Flicks”. Is it OK to write fiction about nuclear holocaust but not environmental disaster? What kind of effed up lesson is that for children?
It’s “heroic” to nuke the bad guys before they can nuke you, but, if you worry about the environment you’re insane!
No wonder they home”school” their kids. They don’t want the world to find out what kind of sociopaths they’re turning out till they get past cruel adolescence. Half of the little creeps would be on death row, or beaten to death, before they hit 14.
July 2nd, 2008 at 5:35 pmJust one question: Who the hell is Lars Nelson, and what is he credentials to be a pundit?
July 2nd, 2008 at 5:36 pmI know Faux standards are awful low in the first place, I mean, even Ingrahm has a job on that pathetic excuse of a news station
tonyand Lido
he=his
July 2nd, 2008 at 5:37 pmKeltoi Says:
Whoa! Okay, and now, back to the insipid Wall-E thread.
Why do you hate insipid Republicans?
July 2nd, 2008 at 5:39 pmMy point is that it’s human ego centrism drives us to see a global warming trend as ‘man made’.
Actually, it’s Neocons greed and faith in mythology that blinds them to the damage man has done to Earth. How much smog would there be if humans never came to be? How much carbon (gas and oil) would have been released into the atmosphere if humans never came to be?
Your point is to show your ignorance.
July 2nd, 2008 at 5:47 pmbackup Says:
My point is that it’s human ego centrism drives us to see a global warming trend as ‘man made’.
Science is not “human ego centrism”. Scientific method and peer review of scientific method is specifically designed to remove human ego from the equation, as much as is humanly possible.
On the other hand, baseless right-wing propaganda is nothing but “human ego extremism”.
July 2nd, 2008 at 5:49 pmThanks for that dbadass. So it goes.
July 2nd, 2008 at 5:53 pmperhaps we are in the same karass…
July 2nd, 2008 at 6:04 pmIt’s interesting to read about the Native Americans first exposure to European technology. Some were in awe, others disdainful. Many of the younger warriors saw the military advantage of adopting western ways. Others, more of the tribal elders saw correctly that trying to adopt just the weaponry would forever change their way of life.
July 2nd, 2008 at 6:20 pmThey had no method of forging bullets nor powder, so they would be dependent on the western technology from that moment on.
A few asked the question, do we need this new technology to kill more buffalo? We kill all the buffalo we need with our existing weapons.
Those tribes who were in intermittent states of warfare with surrounding tribes realized they must have guns, or perish.
We should be questioning what path our technology has taken us down. Could we exist without it? What would our lives look like?
We may be looking at that way of life sooner than later.
One observation I’ve got to make. This is a children’s animated movie. Anyone who doesn’t like it should simply not see it. Siegmund Freud once said that sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Those who are projecting their own bizarre imagery onto it should go do something to clear their minds. Go work out, talk to another human being, sit in the park and read a book, whatever. Just keep repeating, It’s Only A Movie.
July 2nd, 2008 at 6:36 pmImpeach Pelosi,Cheney and Bush and Save the Constitution!
Sorry about the length everyone.
Backup.
Normally you don’t bother me, but, you’re way off on this subject. I’ll even preface by saying I’ve never voted for a candidate because he or she belonged to a particular party, or followed a particular philosophy. Until recently, before the neocons foisted George’s idiot man-child on an unprepared world, my leanings were slightly right of center.
Then the greedy, incompetent, arrogant, ignorant bastards continued the idiotic policy that the environment is a political issue, dear only to “tree huggers”. It’s driven me “left” almost as much as Bushco’s foreign policy.
Well. I’ve spent 40 years in the wild places chasing fish and game. With a gun and creel when I was younger. Now? With a camera and barbless hooks. I’ve killed more than my share of wild creatures and they used to be a big part of my diet. I’m not a tree hugger by any stretch of the imagination. I even used to heat my home with wood. Nature has been good to me, and the whole human race, and it’s time to repay the favor. If we don’t?
Worst case scenario? The end of human life. And it’s not too far fetched. I don’t need, or read, the conclusions from obvious doomsayers, or deniers. I’m well enough educated in math to go through the data. There are two inescapable facts.
1. Atmospheric CO2, and other greenhouse gases, are higher than they have been in the history of accurate instrumentation and, indeed, greenhouse gases are at an at least 750,000 year sustained high based on the best available data.
2. CO2, and other greenhouse gases, have risen in direct proportion to measured human emission since the dawn of the industrial age. And as emissions have dramatically increased in recent decades, the proportion itself has increased.
There is only one logical conclusion, if you have even a modest knowledge of mathematics and fluid dynamics; human emissions are directly responsible for high levels of greenhouse gases. And they only people who dispute that fact are: stupid, greedy politicians. stupid ignorant religious zealots. trolls. and people who have never seen an ecosystem suffer. Plus a few so-called scientists who collect checks from the energy industry.
Personally? I have seen ecosystems collapse with my own eyes. And I’ve also seen them be restored. Believe it, or not, the reality is that we MUST do it on a global scale. And the only people who will have to sacrifice are those who rape the short term profits of commodity trading. Particularly oil and other energy.
And the uber-rich just keep trying to convince the middle class that they’ll go down too if we make them pay for developing alternative energy sources. What a crock. Who do you think will sell the Hydrogen and (non-corn) bio-fuels? Who’s gonna hold the patents on cheap, efficient, solar cells? Can you imagine the profit on a wind powered fuel cell facility? Can you imagine how much GM could make on a 100mpg hybrid?
If they have their way, nothing will change until gas is rare at any price, or Miami has 30 ft of water downtown. And it’s so simple to do something, anything, to slow the process. Nature has thrown us enough curves that we can hope we don’t need to fix the whole problem ourselves. But if we succeed in changing climate on a global scale? We’re screwed.
You recall the collapsed ecosystems I told you about? Every one was directly attributable to man. And the successes? All have been spurred on by unexpectedly resilient nature. But without the complete removal or repair of Man’s damage they remain barren.
We could stop all CO2 production today, and I don’t know if the Upper Mississippi Flyway would be restored to its former glory. We could rid ourselves of every blade of millfoil and I don’t know if the wild rice and water celery would return. But we have to try. because we are in a mass extinction event. It’s largely caused by our actions. And, as the “top of the food chain” we become more vulnerable with every species lost. And you wanna hear something really amazing?
I spent part of the summer of 1970 fishing with a Dakota Elder. He, and his people, knew from the smell of the first factory (ca 1885) that we “Easterners” as he called us, would doom the planet if we didn’t stop polluting. And virtually every piece of legitimate science in the last 35 years agrees.And much of the world is taking steps to help. So should the good ol’ USA.
We MUST stop wasting energy. We MUST clean emissions regardless of cost (NOTE: Much can be accomplished with existing technology. We can burn coal much more cleanly until we can phase it out.) And we MUST sacrifice our 5,000lb. sports cars for “people movers”. I’m afraid our beloved muscle cars are destined for museums. But, it’s their time and ours to do our part to avoid a catastrophe.
Once again, I apologize for the length, but, it’s a grave subject.
July 2nd, 2008 at 6:48 pmBecause Carlin’s dead?
July 2nd, 2008 at 7:41 pmFrankly, this fixation of the Republicans with toon movies is really sick…
July 2nd, 2008 at 7:41 pmBTW, this just in:
Hot future shock: Heat wave temperatures to soar By SETH BORENSTEIN, AP Science Writer
Wed Jul 2, 4:04 PM ET
WASHINGTON - During the European heat wave of 2003 that killed tens of thousands, the temperature in parts of France hit 104 degrees. Nearly 15,000 people died in that country alone. During the Chicago heat wave of 1995, the mercury spiked at 106 and about 600 people died.
ADVERTISEMENT
Email:
ZIP / Postal Code:
In a few decades, people will look back at those heat waves “and we will laugh,” said Andreas Sterl, author of a new study. “We will find (those temperatures) lovely and cool.”
Sterl’s computer model shows that by the end of the century, high temperatures for once-in-a-generation heat waves will rise twice as fast as everyday average temperatures. Chicago, for example, would reach 115 degrees in such an event by 2100. Paris heat waves could near 109 with Lyon coming closer to 114.
http://news.yahoo.com/ s/ ap/ 20080702/ ap_on_sc/ sci_extreme_heat
July 2nd, 2008 at 7:43 pmpete. you don’t need to apologize for the length of your post; you put a lot into it.
I don’t oppose the changes you suggest (I support most of them); only the use of apocalyptic forecasts to stymie debate or compel unproductive (unrelated) redistributions of wealth.
July 2nd, 2008 at 7:52 pmpete @ 63 Excellent post.
I heard the news tonight on MSNBC that GM may be headed for bankruptcy. Perhaps the extinction of automobiles will happen before the extinction of humans. We can hope, I guess.
July 2nd, 2008 at 7:55 pmhttp://www.worldclimatereport.com/ index.php/ 2007/ 01/ 23/ summer-heat-history/
July 2nd, 2008 at 8:08 pmThanx folks. But you’ve got to get past the “redistribution of wealth” crud. It’s time for the people with the resources and facilities to invest in products and technologies that will bring a profit long after petroleum is gone. Getting along without gas won’t be that big a deal. But we damn well better stop burning the crap while we can still get a few hundred years worth of plastic from the leftovers.
And I won’t shed a tear for the management of GM, but that too is unnecessary. They just kept whining about how hard it is to build competitive cars when they have continually lagged behind in products people want.
If the American car industry used the energy/pollution issue to make that 100mpg, heck! 45mpg, hybrid? They would have a chance. But they’ll piss around trying to fit the maximum number of cup-holders in a 15 year old design. Someone is going to make the next Model T. And I fear it won’t be an American company.
July 2nd, 2008 at 8:51 pmI’m just curious why Lars and his ilk aren’t condemning their hero Charlton Heston for his remarks at the end of Planet of the Apes: “You Blew it up! Damn you! Damn you all to hell!” Since the basic plot of those films was the incredible stupidity of human beings, and the successful evolution of other primates, one might consider it, and its hero, propaganda of hideous communist liberals.
July 2nd, 2008 at 9:59 pm.
Lars has a 19 year old step daughter who he fears can not tell the difference between fantasy and reality…
Scary…
.
July 3rd, 2008 at 1:03 ampete. redistribution of wealth is not from big corporations like GM to poor people, it’s from developed nations (U.S. and Europe) to developing nations (China, India, emerging markets, etc).
Here’s some of the commitments from Bali (you’ll remember the U.S. was booed for dragging it’s feet):
http://news.bbc.co.uk/ 2/ hi/ science/ nature/ 7146132.stm
Maybe bureaucrats were booing because they understand the carbon credit market will be worth an estimated 3 trillion dollars (of nothing but redistributed wealth, not new innovation) by 2020.
But, the inks not even dry and the BBC has uncovered examples like this:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7436263.stm
I’m still not confident of the need for taking money from the U.S. and Europe and sending it to China, India, and other emerging markets.
We all want a healthier planet, but let’s support the policies that make it healthier and leave the redistribution of wealth to socialists.
July 3rd, 2008 at 2:40 amsimilar info from wired.com.
http://www.wired.com/ science/ planetearth/ magazine/ 16-06/ ff_heresies_07trading
carbon credits aren’t the answer.
July 3rd, 2008 at 3:16 amWho the heck said anything about carbon credits? Your talking points aren’t cutting it. The subject is the right’s idiotic demonization/politicization of a matter of World security and, possibly, the destruction of life as we know it.
Eff carbon credits and eff waiting for the rest of the World. We led everyone into this mess, it’s up to us to lead everyone out. We need to make a higher percentage of our energy from cleaner sources and stop stupid, profligate waste. We need to build smaller, slower, cars. We need to pay whatever it costs for the cleanest use of existing fuels. We need to walk, bike or bus (I know it’s sometimes impossible and seldom convenient. Boo-hoo!)We need to rebuild “the grid” so the roofs of vacant houses are supplying power to the office down the street and we need to look into new, efficient, on-sight generation for industry. We have to stop wasting power pumping it vast distances and replace mechanical drive trains with cables and motors. We need to develop state of the art green technologies, sell them to anyone with cash, and insist on “green” imports. We need to stop debating as if the problem wasn’t identified decades ago.
July 3rd, 2008 at 4:31 amBTW. We have virtually eliminated lead emissions. We have drastically reduced the amount of pollutants per ton of coal burned. We need to aggressively build on those successes and cover the expense for small improvements which may be soon obsolete. Every little bit, greenhouse, particulate or radiological/particulate (check out radiation from coal burning for a scary read), is a pollutant that doesn’t ever have to be removed or neutralized.
The point is that we have won other environmental battles, or at least made improvements, we MUST mobilize on this one. Who knows, maybe Mother Nature, or Artemis, or Monsanto, or God will meet us half way with a CO2 scrubbing, edible, super-algae?
We do not have to make significant sacrifices, individually or as a nation, to start the change. We made a good start once, then we adjusted to the new fuel prices and got greedy and lazy. There’s no logical reason it will hurt anywhere near as much as the energy industry, and their shills, would have the sheeple believe. The first lesson we need to remember is that conservation saves money, for everyone but the energy industry. Everything else follows from that simple realization.
July 3rd, 2008 at 4:49 amWhy is it so hard for some people to admit and accept that yes, people are destructive and yes, we are responsible for some of the negative impacts to the planet? They just don’t want to DO anything about it? Or is it the feeling of being forced to do something that they don’t like? One thing is certain, Lars Larson has an issue with being “bad”, and fears being irrelevant. Perhaps mommy or daddy was too critical of Lars as a child. Not that it would be their fault, mind you… that would make them bad. Hmmmm.
July 3rd, 2008 at 9:29 ampete. I just wanted you to know I read your posts. I agree with almost everything you say. you didn’t bring up redistribution of wealth (carbon credits), but I did in an earlier post in response to general promotion of kyoto type protocols from TP and many progressives. I agree with the initiatives that you lay out, the only debate that I believe should be ongoing is the need to tax our corporations to send the money to other countries. That may be right thing to do, but, on that count, I suggest that the debate on how worthwhile the protocol is vs. how expensive it is; is far from over.
Progress on conservation, lower emissions and new innovation can and should continue, while we continue the debate on the most effective ways to accomplish the common goals.
July 3rd, 2008 at 1:53 pmI believe the worst thing that could happen to the current environmental movement would be a reversal in fuel prices. High gas prices have probably done more for conservation and innovation than other initiaves could ever hope to achieve.
July 3rd, 2008 at 1:57 pmI appreciate that backup. However, we need to get rid of all those politicians, and “pundits”, who continue to talk about environmental issues as “hoaxes, scams and frauds” that entail cures worse than the problems. The dangers, known and unknown, are obvious to any rational observer and have been for most of human history. (Side Note: I read a fascinating book about hunter/gatherer cultures that disabused the notion of “living in harmony with nature”. The authors contention is that hunter/gatherers would live in an area until it was stripped of everything edible, and/or the garbage became a hazard, then they moved to a new area and repeated the process. It seems we exhibit similar behavior to this day.) And any claim that “humans can’t affect the whole planet” MUST be shouted down.
We need t make a fundamental change in how we produce and use energy and the people who will be providing that new energy must make the initial investment even if they have to be compelled. And all the gnashing of teeth over Kyoto and other proposals is counterproductive.
Screw international agreements. We need to take unilateral action and might have to eat some costs. Big deal. It’s past time to start taking risks. I sure would love to see it begin with a law mandating that every passenger vehicle sold in this country achieve a minimum of 40mpg.
Another promising idea is for the energy industry to pay a large portion of their taxes (It would not necessarily entail a net increase in taxes.) to a managed alternative energy fund. And the administrators of the fund would be mandated to invest in real projects which, though they may need development, actually produce energy or reduce greenhouse gas. Such a program would effectively force the energy industry to innovate in order to earn their current tax breaks by, essentially, paying them out of their taxes. Ultimately the only “redistribution of wealth” would be between the “dirty” part of the industry and the “green”.
July 3rd, 2008 at 7:22 pmWhat’s next, Larson?
You gonna bash the movies “Cars” and “Toy Story” for trying to brainwash little kids into believing that inanimate objects can really talk?
July 3rd, 2008 at 9:37 pmpete. I agree with pretty much everything you said. The hoax charges are counterproductive. The U.S. should take unilateral action (provide some leadership). And the sentiment of redistributing wealth from the dirty to the green is very appealing. And sacrifice to ensure a healthy environment is a worthwhile endeavor.
The only caveat (that could apply to any initiative) is that someone needs to champion liberty from unwarranted policy. And someone needs to ensure good stewardship of the policies. (Taking actions that are costly, but unproductive should be scrutinized and discarded for more effective measures).
You’ve open my mind on the issue a little more. Thank you.
BTW, was the book ‘Collapse’ by Jared Diamond?
July 4th, 2008 at 5:45 pmYou’re welcome. I have found that environmental issues, stripped of hysterics from whatever political fringe group decides to get hysterical, are self explanatory.
BTW, nope. It was actually a late 19th century natural history textbook’s, heavily racist I might add, examination of the romanticizing of the “Noble Savage”.
But the politics and prejudices of the observer don’t invalidate the observation. Namely that all humans, aside from the authors narrow definition of civilized man of course, would naturally strip the resources they found desirable and rarely gave much thought to preserving anything or where they tossed the garbage.
Of course, the authors still believed that piping raw sewage into a river, and burying anything that won’t flush, was the end of waste disposal and strip mines would become flowing pastures.
July 4th, 2008 at 8:59 pm