Firen up the BBQ for one teeny weenie

I was perusing the July 1, 2009 Bozone looking for what is happening in the music scene.  As I was turning the pages I came across The EcoZone pages in the middle.  The pages that are tinted light green so as to remind you that the absurdities that appear here are validated by the green movement and therefore are not to be laughed at.  The soothing green and the action verb headlines provide those who feel insecure about their allotted time on this planet the deluded notion that they have control over their fate.  One of these headlines was “Grilling Green.”  Anyway, they emphatically believe these scientists because they are scientists and a bunch of them agree with each other, like we haven’t heard that before.

In contradiction they seemingly ignore the majority of scientists who agree that most negative health issues are genetically driven.  This accounts for the 84 year old mechanic who worked daily for 32 years with solvents and lubricants containing cancer causing carcinogens while standing in an enclosed area breathing in gas fumes and maintaining his 6 packs a day Marlboro love affair.

In the above example smoking around the flammable liquids present in a garage and falling asleep with a cig in your hand might just increase the risk of a shorter lifespan.   Conversely, grilling green will not significantly add to the probability of a longer lifespan.   Now, I am not saying eating well, exercise and being cautious (good driving skills) will not improve your chances of living longer, should something else not kill you first.  But you can keep that extra three months you bought through a restrictive lifestyle to languish in a hospital bed unable to control your veggie pampered bowels wishing you had eaten meat-lover’s pizza more often.

The amount of worrying one does regarding over-charred meat, what type of method you will chose to grill with.  If you chose charcoal, what type and how you light it, is all nonsense.  If you are really worried about such things take it to the full level and BBQ in a spacesuit!

 This excessive analysis of every single thing you do is sick and ineffectual.  You might be careful when you begin to charcoal but after a few beers caution will fall to the wayside.  You will fire up a bowl, inhale 65 unknown chemicals and pass it around to share not only the buzz but the bacterial microbes, even the microbes of the guy with bad teeth, questionable sexual appetites and lingering tongue sores.  In this feel good state of mind you will speak ill of those who are ignoring the fragility of the planet while you brag about your mouse sized carbon foot print, catching rain water, green grilling techniques and the use mulch instead of gravel.

Get this through your green indoctrinated minds.  The planet will be here long after we are.  You cannot build a better planet.  You will die just like the rest of us.  You will return to the dirt and eventually no one will know you existed.  Unless some visiting life form happens upon your grave thousands of years from now and finds nothing but your bones and the non-biodegradable bottoms of the eco-sandals you bought.

Peace

Permalink
tags: you, who, we, know, are..., BBQS
posted on Tue, Jun 30, 2009 02:17 PM
last updated on Thu, Jul 02, 2009 10:18 AM
CommentsRSS Feed
Want to leave a comment? Log In to your account
You sir are an idiot byFenske June 30, 2009 (3 votes) (report abuse) (reply)
No offense.

Get this through your green indoctrinated minds. The planet will be here long after we are. You cannot build a better planet.

Don't want another, better planet, just want to take care of the only one we have right now. Is that so wrong?

If you want to trash our home, move.

You are one of the reasons I don't enjoy this place very much.
RE: You sir are an idiot bydanie006 June 30, 2009 (5 votes) (report abuse)
Fenske- haven't you learned that if there isn't something in it for LD then it must be a liberal maneuver regardless if it is right or wrong, or based in common sense?

There is a term to describe Liberal Doses but he/she will cry a verbal bloody river if I make mention of the obvious.
RE: You sir are an idiot bysouthward June 30, 2009 (2 votes) (report abuse)
Careful danie, that post just earned you a 6 paragraph response documenting your personal and social failings. Bring on the verbiage!
RE: You sir are an idiot bydanie006 June 30, 2009 (1 votes) (report abuse)
True, but what's a guy to do?

I have to get ready for a picnic/cook out. I'll respond later when I have more time. I hope it doesn't rain on us.
RE: You sir are an idiot byAlphaBeagle June 30, 2009 (5 votes) (report abuse)
You guys (Fenske, danie) are real "weenies". If you can't take the heat, jump off the "grill"!
Can't sleep, clowns will eat me. byLiberal Doses June 30, 2009 (6 votes) (report abuse) (reply)
Hey! I have no problems with clowns like you doing what you want to. What I don't like is clowns like you sticking in your big red noses thinking that we all need to go along the circus. Spending mine and other's tax $$$ on your fantasy of global warming. Taxing cow farts, studying pig odor and spending millions on pumping C02 miles underground, not knowing what the long term affects might be. It will probably leach back into the aquifers and poison the fish.

All of these things are designed to economically force people into a lifestyle they may not want. Make meat more expensive to buy (economically force vegetarianism). Cap and trade, raising convential energy costs to force utilization of yet to be proven economically or mechanically viable alternatives. This would be like if Ford said, "Yeah buy this car. The engine? Oh don't worry about that, I am working on that. That is the long term plan."

Obama said that these alternative energy sources in the long run will provide for 20% of our energy use. Yeah he never mentions how much it will cost. He never mentions how much the cost of our convential energy sources(the other 80%) will skyrocket.

Fenske, I redact my comments in my post, "Fenske, Alamator, comeback!" Since you have been back all you have done is throw out names like loon, idiot etc. Brilliant debating skills.

As far as the planet is concerned, I believe in good stewardship, I said that in my very first post, "little green men." What I don't go for is hypocrisy, alarmist, extremist, the sky is falling nonsense. Don't blame me for the "build a better planet" comment that is in the GE commercials. You guys are loving the Big evil Corps now that they have colored their ads green. Have you noticed how GM suddenly is on board with green? Now they see the light? Yeah right, we just paid for their re-tooling they did not want to pay for.

Man in his great wisdom of environmental management has caused more harm. Shutting down oil drilling in America. Yeah what did that do? Made us tank it in. Tell me what land based oil drilling has caused as much damage as the Exxon or other tanker spills? Huh? Where have the environmental protesters on this been? Show me the footage of them standing in large numbers demanding oil tanking be stopped.

Daine, I know what you want to say, "hater, hater hater!" That is about all you have to offer. Well people are not shying away from that childish tactic anymore. Call me what you will, for it is more a reflection upon your lack of intellect not mine.

I think the truth is I pushed your green buttons and you yellow yarn-haired, big shoed, clown frowns just can't handle it. See how easy it is to name call?

Carry on with your cotton candy two ring circus, it makes me laugh.

Peace
RE: Can't sleep, clowns will eat me. bydanie006 June 30, 2009 (3 votes) (report abuse)
[pause....then a deep sigh]

I rest my case.
RE: Can't sleep, clowns will eat me. byAlphaBeagle June 30, 2009 (3 votes) (report abuse)
Danie, it's pretty obvious that you're just not up to the same level of reasoning that LD is. Your inability to answer directly any of LD's questions or respond in any logical fashion shows plainly in the brevity of your answers - which are simply personal attacks on LD rather than anything of true substance.
Sorry for the double post bydanie006 June 30, 2009 (0 votes) (report abuse) (reply)
Darn computer/web site/internet.
RE: Sorry for the double post bydanie006 June 30, 2009 (0 votes) (report abuse)
Pooterman - thanks for deleting my double-post.
They can have my red meat . . . byAlphaBeagle June 30, 2009 (3 votes) (report abuse) (reply)
when they pry my cold, dead fingers from around it! You manic vegetarians kill me - literally! As someone who has suffered from severe anemia, I can tell you that there's no way I'd ever become a strict vegetarian. If you people would study the facts, you'd find out that there are two kinds of iron - heme iron and non-heme iron. The heme iron is found in red meat and is far more absorbable than the non-heme iron, found in plant sources. It is true that if you eat red meat AND vegetables together, you will increase iron absorption even more. And we've all heard spinach has iron - guess what? Eating spinach actually inhibits iron absorption because it contains oxalic acid, which binds with the iron and keeps it from being absorbed by the body. Chard, beet greens, rhubarb and sweet potatoes likewise inhibit iron absorption for the same reason. I like vegetables, fruits and grains - but don't you dare try to deprive me of my red meat! (Above info from a variety of sources such as AmeliaBurton.com - which has a great chart outlining the amount of iron in a food source as well as the amount of ABSORBABLE iron. Red meat tops the chart. Fish comes next, and plant sources are well below).
Clowns, I love clowns, except the really scary ones. byFenske June 30, 2009 (4 votes) (report abuse) (reply)
AB, brevity can be a sign of wisdom. To paraphrase Samuel Clemens, Better to be thought a fool due to silence than to speak and erase any doubt whatsoever.

Meat???? I love it. Haven't had a beef burger in about 6 months. Lots of Elk, Bison, venison and farm raised pork, (I know the producers). So don't go all aggro on me.

As for LD, I have no idea what this topic of discussion is even about. Another troll I suppose.

LD, whatever you think about global warming is fine with me, I could care less. Everyone else, try and focus. This is about energy independence. Its about not sending US Dollars to Russia and the Middle East. It is not propping up the price of petroleum by consumption. That we help clean up our home is an added and in my opinion worthwhile idea.

"All of these things are designed to economically force people into a lifestyle they may not want. Make meat more expensive to buy (economically force vegetarianism). Cap and trade, raising conventional(sp) energy costs to force utilization of yet to be proven economically or mechanically viable alternatives. This would be like if Ford said, "Yeah buy this car. The engine? Oh don't worry about that, I am working on that. That is the long term plan."


If Oil is priced in excess of 100.00 a barrel which is more economically feasible?


Sorry you don't appreciate my coming right back at you with the same level of bitter and hateful rhetoric, your post is insulting and stereotypical and suits you and your level of reason and thinking to a T.

Hang here with AB and the other folks who mistake you for a deep thinker. The only thing deep with you is the level of manure.

Ciao.

Oh and Peace.
RE: Clowns, I love clowns, except the really scary ones. byAlphaBeagle June 30, 2009 (3 votes) (report abuse)
It's one thing to be "a good steward of the earth" as we are commanded to be in the bible (which I only mention because I believe in it, regardless of what you might believe - hence I try to practice what it says). I do believe in not being wasteful or destructive. I believe in getting the most use out of everything, and even enjoy it! For example, I like "repurposing" things - instead of throwing that old twin headboard out, maybe I'll make it the back of a bench, for example. I really do not like to see things wasted - but it has nothing to do with "going green" or "saving the planet". And it's nothing new. People during the depression did it - but they didn't give it fancy names like "going green" and they didn't equate it with "saving the planet". They simply did these things because of cost and/or scarcity, and because it was just the right thing to do. God gave us this earth and the gifts in it - when we don't treat what he has given us with respect, I believe we offend him. That's why I do what I do. I don't think what I'm doing will make a hill of beans worth of difference in terms of "saving the planet". The planet will save itself in spite of what we human beings do! (P.S. - I noticed your post above was a lot longer this time - about as long as LD's and mine tend to be. Brevity?).
Going through the motions byArt June 30, 2009 (6 votes) (report abuse) (reply)
I also think the planet will be here after I've left it. Which isn't to say I don't think it's in danger. Or at least our presence on it is.
But know what? I don't think we have it in us to make significant change. Sure, I'll recycle my soda cans because it's the thing to do. But the bottom line is that doing a lot of what it takes to be "green" is a feel-good type thing. Which a lot of us go through the motions on to help us think we are going to change the environment. I'll continue to try to be green but I am not making pretense about it.
As far as diet is concerned, I very well could be a vegatarian if I could afford it. Because people a lot more intelligent than I aren't bothered by the fact that they eat other animals, then I have to conclude it' probably not evil.
Except for Rocky Mountain Oysters. (You are what you eat).
RE: Going through the motions byAlphaBeagle July 01, 2009 (1 votes) (report abuse)
Hey, it takes b**** to eat rocky mountain oysters!
RE: Going through the motions byLiberal Doses July 02, 2009 (3 votes) (report abuse)
What is evil is being unwittingly caught in a cloud of reeking veggie generated flatulence. Especially when one is browsing the horror section of the bookstore.

Gas producing vegetables should be taxed.

Peace
$100 OIL: byCitizenpain June 30, 2009 (5 votes) (report abuse) (reply)
Actually Fenske, Americans are consuming less; however the price of oil has less to do with consumption, and more to do with the devaluation of the dollar to which it is pegged.

As for global warming, mother nature does not conform well to the linear one dimensional computer models, which much of this junk science is based upon. A flaw in Algores design no doubt.

Did you know that one acre of hemp can produce the same amount of paper as three acres of trees, and the paper is of a higher quality. It is also a steady cash crop for the grower/farmer. The gov. won't allow it in any worthwhile amount, and I have never seen one environmental group champion it. Probably because you can't smoke it. The environmental movement was started and promoted by people who are not interested in saving anything, but controlling everything, including the population. Their minions have been snookered.
Pain the economist byRightof Left July 01, 2009 (0 votes) (report abuse) (reply)
"however the price of oil has less to do with consumption, and more to do with the devaluation of the dollar to which it is pegged."

You sure about that claim Citizen?

I would venture that you are making a gross oversimplification. Yes the relative strength of the US dollar has some effect on the price of oil but that is not the driving factor.

Read this and get back to me.

http://www.econbrowser.com/archives/2007/10/does_dollar_wea_


"I also think the planet will be here after I've left it. Which isn't to say I don't think it's in danger. Or at least our presence on it is.
But know what? I don't think we have it in us to make significant change."

Pretty depressing interpretation Art. Unfortunately I have to agree with your analysis, particularly after reading some of the posts here that deny the existence of human impact on climate and long term weather patterns.
Interesting Opinion piece in the Washington Examiner today. bygixa July 01, 2009 (2 votes) (report abuse) (reply)
Food for thought?

“... President Obama revealed in a White House address on Monday his model for the nation's economy - California. ‘In the late 1970s, the state of California enacted tougher energy-efficiency policies,’ Obama said, noting that the state and its residents use less energy today per capita than the national average. ‘Think about that,’ he said, ‘California producing jobs, their economy keeping pace with the rest of the country and yet they've been able to maintain their energy usage in a much lower level than the rest of the country.’

Obama might want to rethink his choice of a model state because it is easy to understand how California has curbed its energy use. Between 2000 and 2007, before the current recession, the state shed nearly 21 percent of its manufacturing jobs, driving down its industrial electrical consumption by 21 percent. California's industrial users pay electric rates twice as high as their Midwestern counterparts - which helps explain why so much heavy industry has fled the state. In addition to alienating its industry, California has also curbed energy use through exorbitant residential electric rates (50 percent higher than the national average) and massive net out-migration. Between 2005 and 2007, 2.14 million Californians moved to other states, while only 1.44 million people from elsewhere moved to the Golden State, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Don't be surprised when the 2010 Census finds even more people leaving to escape California's 11.5 percent unemployment. And, as jobs and residents fled California, its tax revenues have declined, while its politicians went on a spending binge, creating a severe budget crisis.”
[Emphasis mine.]
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/California_-here-w

It's worth bearing in mind that California is technically in default at the moment with a $24 billion budget shortfall, and will have to begin issuing IOUs instead of cash for its payments.

I believe in being good stewards of the earth, too, but are citizens willing to endure exorbitant power bills and a decline in industry during this recession/depression (whatever it is) just for the sake of being “green”?
Food 4 thought byRightof Left July 01, 2009 (0 votes) (report abuse) (reply)
Thanks for the opinion piece.

The entire address can be found here.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-by-the-Pr

Not that anyone would ever quote the President out of context, but I think this goes deeper than where the Examiner took it. California has massive problems, no doubt. Their energy policies are just a part of what got them to this stage. Read up on Prop. 13 and what it has done to the state.

Exact quote of how Obama used California as an example.

We know the benefits. In the -- in the late-1970s, the State of California enacted tougher energy-efficiency policies. Over the next three decades, those policies helped create almost 1.5 million jobs. And today, Californians consume 40 percent less energy per person than the national average, which over time has prevented the need to build at least 24 new power plants.

Think about that. California: producing jobs, their economy keeping pace with the rest of the country. And yet they've been able to maintain their energy usage at a much lower level than the rest of the country.
RE: Food 4 thought bygixa July 01, 2009 (0 votes) (report abuse)
Your link is not working, Rightof Left.
Sorry Gixa Lexus got the best of me. byRightof Left July 01, 2009 (0 votes) (report abuse) (reply)
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-by-the-Pr
You probably won't be interested in this then. bygixa July 01, 2009 (0 votes) (report abuse) (reply)
Thomas Tanton of the Pacific Research Institute called into question both David Roland-Hoist's and the California Air Resources Board's (CARB) analysis that California's policies helped create 1.5 million jobs.

“Since 1980, per-capita consumption in California has remained flat but increased in most other states. However, holding per-capita consumption flat is not the same as reducing overall consumption or emissions. California today consumes 65 percent more electricity than it did in 1980. Coal-based electricity imported from other states grew by 60 percent from 1983 to 2005, and is now 10 percent of California’s total generation, growing from nine percent in 1980. Moreover, California’s comparatively low per-capita electricity use is due to other factors.

“First, California’s climate aids dramatically in reducing consumption for heating and cooling of homes and businesses. Second, California’s economy has undergone a structural change, away from energy intensive manufacturing to less energy intensive services. Third, California’s high residential property prices tilt the housing market towards smaller homes and apartments and encourage more people to live in the same household. Finally, Californians use natural gas for applications where others use electricity.”
http://liberty.pacificresearch.org/press/does-climate-regula

The Wall Street Journal published an article, California’s ‘Green Jobs’ Experiment Isn’t Going Well, on 31 January 2009 that noted, “The green lobby has lectured us for years that global warming is all about the sanctity of science. Those who question the ‘scientific consensus’ on catastrophic atmospheric changes are belittled as ‘deniers.’ Now, in assessing the costs, the greens readily cook the books and throw good science out the window. ‘To most of the most strident supporters of this legislation,’ says Mr. Niello, [Assemblyman Roger Niello] ‘the economic costs don't really matter anyway, because we are supposedly facing an environmental apocalypse.’”
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123336500319935517.html

It was a mistake to hold California up as a positive example of green economic success and suggest the whole country should follow its lead at this point in time.
OLD NEWS: byCitizenpain July 01, 2009 (1 votes) (report abuse) (reply)
I think a few things have changed since Oct. of 2007. It wasn't that long ago that lower consumption drove the price below $60 a barrel. Then 9 to 12 trillion (you pick the number)gets pumped into the economy and the price of oil rises for 50 straight days. Not really rocket science, just simple observation.

I will agree that there are other forces at play, both national and international, but to say that the rise in price is due to over consumption is BS. When the price of oil goes up everything else goes up with it, leaving less for the consumption of oil, among many other things in everyones pocket.

The last time I looked Calf. was unable to sell it's bonds and writing IOUs in lieu of payment, are they not bankrupt? It doesn't seem all that long ago that they were rated like the 12th largest economy on the planet. So what was/is the problem, taxing or spending? I wonder how many of the 1.5 million new jobs were in gov.? Maybe they didn't build a bunch of new power plants, but they sure made up for it in new prisons, which they cannot afford to operate. A shining example they're not.
RE: OLD NEWS: byRightof Left July 02, 2009 (1 votes) (report abuse)
I can't argue or disagree with any of what you wrote. Oil prices react to many different market forces. Pretty simple.

Thanks for those links Gixa. The end all is that green is here to stay, the majority of US citizens support it and feel we can do better by our home.

My view is that every dollar we can spend here to support green jobs is a dollar we don't send to Canada or Russia or Saudi Arabia. Every dollar spent on renewable energy is a dollar not burned and never seen again. Efficiency and conservation should be virtures, instead many americns still sneer at the idea and believe it is their god given right to consume as much as they want. Not a very conservative message.

FWIW I am not too thrilled by this energy bill. I would have preferrd a simple carbon tax and been done with it. This bill is too rich a sausage for my palate.
RE: OLD NEWS: bygixa July 02, 2009 (1 votes) (report abuse)
RE: “The end all is that green is here to stay, the majority of US citizens support it and feel we can do better by our home.”

I agree with the first part of your sentence, Rightof Left, but I don't think a majority supports it.

Agree that the Cap-and-Trade Bill is not a good one. My beef is that it won't actually do anything for the environment and simply amounts to a new (hidden) tax that we will all pay in one way or another.
RE: OLD NEWS: bytiredofbeingjudged July 02, 2009 (1 votes) (report abuse)
re: what happened to california -Gov. GREY DAVIS. ugh.
OIL byCitizenpain July 01, 2009 (1 votes) (report abuse) (reply)
Thanks for the bailouts!

http://www.bigbigforums.com/news-information/609608-filled-o


http://econompicdata.blogspot.com/2009/01/oil-tankers-are-ba
Staying power byLiberal Doses July 03, 2009 (3 votes) (report abuse) (reply)
"Green is here to stay." This has the makings of a bumper sticker of great profundity. How about, "Here today, green tomorrow." Or, "The gas is greener on our side." Green is a concept. A concept of control, power and greed.

Under the Pope of Green-Rich Pilliage, Al Gore, the green movement is a concept that aspires to all of humankind, in the form of industry, transportation and lifestyle changes, working together in total agreement to reduce the C02 emmissions around the globe, in order to "save the planet." This is accompanied with the threat that we will all die of global warming if we do not. So for those people, industries and countries that do not comply they, by default, become a threat to those of us who are ("haters" danie calls them).

Haters, a term that I am sure danie learned from his children as I do not hear many adults using it. Shows what noble qualities are being passed on by the use of our education dollars.

Haters, those who disagree with the green movement. Scientists with differring opinions shut out of forums where they might express their viewpoints and financially cut-off from funding their contriversal research. You want to fund your research? No problem, agree with global warming. Find a niche study to support our claims and we will cut you a check for $500,000 of taxpayer money. Haters, those who do not lose sleep over char marks on their chicken.

There is a concept called peace. The concept of peace has been around longer than the concept of green. This concept aspires to end violence by means of all of humankind, around the globe agreeing to get along in a civil manner, without resorting to violence or those things which might give rise to it.

Solve peace without violence, solve green without hate, solve both with total voluntary agreement by all for longer than one hour and you just might have something there, for a little while anyway.

Given that we cannot even accomplish agreement or civility this on this forum, leaves me skeptical. However, I am here to stay...

Peace
RE: Staying power byRightof Left July 03, 2009 (4 votes) (report abuse)
Sorry, did you say something?
RE: Staying power byAlphaBeagle July 03, 2009 (2 votes) (report abuse)
Seems ROL lacks comprehension. I'll leave it to time and reality to hit home - maybe then you'll finally "get it".
Yay LD byvanquished1 July 03, 2009 (2 votes) (report abuse) (reply)
thats all...