I few days ago I had another morning when nothing I saw made sense. To help you understand why, you should watch this Youtube video analyzing the Pipi Longstocking marketing idea. But that is old news. It has been analyzed to death. Continue reading →
When the likes of Jonathan Adler ask the question: What would it take to convince us, there is a lot implied in it.
To start with, the question takes it for granted that the theory is correct and AGW exists, meaning that we are responsible for it. The question was: what will it take to make conservatives take it seriously, most likely so that they can start participating in the quest to find a solution. Maybe I am paranoid, but I also felt a hint of “what will it take to get to your senses” in the question as well.
This Mark Steyn article (Return to Towel Mountain) took me to this question of Jonathan H. Adler:
“What does it take to convince libertarians and conservatives that climate change is a problem?”
(George Orwell)
I have been asked the question several times: “You don’t believe in global warming???” Usually accompanied with an incredulous look or a huff and a smirk with the unspoken comment (“I thought you are smarter than that”)
Then I have to start explaining why the very question is a problem for me. I AM NOT A BELIEVER!
Rudyard Kipling’s poem, “The White Man’s Burden” was controversial from the moment it was printed in 1899. Read it. It is regularly misquoted, misinterpreted and misrepresented for over a hundred years.
As recently as 2005 a book was published with the title ‘the white man’s burden’ debating the implications of Kipling’s original point.
This is part one of a series on the subject looking at the relationship between ideology and pragmatism through issues related to three ideological systems: Environmentalism, Libertarianism and Socialism.
As I was sitting in the sky on my way to Thailand, I had to watch several times the same commercial for Air Canada. It was boasting about their achievement in improving ‘sustainability’. They shed some weight from their airplanes to improve fuel efficiency by 30%. They did it for the planet.
Just watched a segment on “The Source” discussing the brilliance of the Bloomberg Big Gulp ban idea. Continue reading →
The battle is raging in Toronto’s City Hall over the fate of the 2009 plastic bag bylaw
The major wants to scrap it – meaning to take away the compulsory aspect and the penalty of non-compliance. Retailers would still be free to charge for them just as they were before the bylaw took effect in July 1st 2009 but without the threat of penalties if they decide not to. Continue reading →