Conservance

Social, Economic, Enviromental Responsibility

Why I Hate “Green”


I recently read an open letter from an activist group called One Sky.

I was led to believe this was a call to action, citing the failure of the Senate to pass comprehensive energy and environmental reforms. Basically I believed it was going to be a “we can only trust ourselves to do it” kind of thing.

It wasn’t.

It turned into a platform for their set of “green beliefs.” The same green beliefs that partially destroyed the environmental movement and the energy reform.

Here’s the problem with “Green:”

  • No infrastructure planning. I think we’ve all realized that our infrastructure needs to be updated, and better laid out (we’ve all felt that way stuck in rush hour traffic); but the “green” movement doesn’t offer up any alternative ideas.
  • Everything is a crisis. By labeling everything a crisis, the real ones get overshadowed. Am I concerned about extinction and urban sprawl? Yes. Are those crises? No. Their symptoms of the actual crises.
  • “Green” is easily high jacked. Vegans use “green” to advocate an end to meat. PETA uses it to try and get rid of farming. Automakers use it to sell the same exact cars they’ve always had. If a group doesn’t like something, they can label it as “not green” and themselves as “green.” Because of this, the entire movement is schizophrenic.
  • No bipartisanship. Republicans and other conservative groups aren’t going to work with “green groups” because those groups don’t understand how a compromise really works. They’re guilty of compromising like Nancy Pelosi compromises embarrassing you publicly until you toe her line. That’s not compromise, that’s coercion.
  • No understanding of political climates, economic factors, or basic human needs/wants. If you want environmentally friendly changes to occur anywhere: they have to be either comparable in price to the current products, better quality, longer lasting, and less inflammatory. Had the movers and shakers backed away from global warming, and focused on energy independence and security: Energy reform would have passed. Who doesn’t want a secure country, clean economy, better products, and cheap energy.
  • We keep talking about research and breakthroughs. We’ve been researching since the 70s! For fucks sake, we’ve had breakthroughs, but no one wants to implement them! Somebody get off your ass  and actually start doing something.
  • To much politics. I’ve highlighted this before, but to be “green” it appears I have to be an ultra-liberal, abortion loving, business hating, vegan, unwashed hipster pseudo-anarchist.

You know who’s really putting out great ideas that aren’t being talked about? Shai Agassi. He presents electric cars in a completely viable manner; to the point where I even like them. And I hate most electric cars! He also makes strong arguments for why we should convert to renewable energy, and how cheap it will actually be.

Teddy Roosevelt was an environmentalist, so was John Muir. They weren’t anarchists, they weren’t vegans, they weren’t hipsters. And look at their accomplishments as compared to our current “greenies.”

Advertisement

Truth or Insanity


Animal Planet debuted a two hour special tonight, The Uprising. In it they present a series of animal attack on humans ranging from the sadly mundane (Circus elephants, pet chimps) to the bizarre (wild dogs and pythons), and asks the question:

“Are these random events or signs of something larger?”

Looking at seemingly random events and pulling out the patterns and signs is risky business, it is incredibly easy to draw false conclusions or slip into conspiracy insanity.

I’m not one to highlight animal attacks on humans, personally we like to focus on the sensational (the 1 bear attack a year) and ignore the serious (the 14,000 deaths from deer a year).

However something about this strikes me as worth considering. Here’s why:

When researchers attempted to teach chimps and apes sign language something strange happened. Both the researchers and the participants became frustrated and gave up. Not from the difficulty of the experiment, but rather from the difficulty in making the other individual understand. Basically, chimps couldn’t get the researchers to understand what they were saying, and vice versa.

When we look at higher functioning, intelligent animals we should move away from the idea of dumb as compared to us. Rather, we need to think of it as a foreign intelligence. It’s so otherworldly it appears to be nonsense and instinctual to us.  We know something is there, but we don’t understand it.

For myself, there is growing evidence combined with my growing skepticism about the supremacy of man, that would suggest certain animal species are as intelligent as we are, if not more so.

Could certain species of animal be targeting humans? Possibly. If a dog can learn to associate a bell with food so strongly as to elicit a physical response, then a highly intelligent animal (like a cougar, wolf, coyote, elephant, or monkey) could put human presence and loss of habitat together.

Furthermore, humans and animals have been interacting for the last 10,000 years, long enough for us to start seeing evolutionary changes.

I don’t believe this to be a sign of some global meta-cognitive event, with Eywa controlling the animals of the Earth. What I do see this as being, is a sign of a larger issue.

And we need to understand this is entirely our fault. We are encroaching. We are the usurpers, we are the trespassers. This is entirely a problem brought on by our doing through our own actions. It’s our responsibility to fix it.

We have to come up with better ways of doing things. If things continue, and habitat dwindles, stress levels rise, and animal attacks become more frequent. We’ll reach a breaking point. Our only option after that?

Mass, human initiated extinction. Unless the animals get us first at that point.

%d bloggers like this: