Want some more proof of Google's political leanings.
Well, consider that the websearch giant is participating in Earth Hour, "a global event created to symbolize that each one of us, working together, can make a positive impact on climate change - no matter who we are or where we live."
Here's what Google displayed at its website moments ago (h/t NBer Wilbur747, emphasis added):
Google users in the United States will notice today that we "turned the lights out" on the Google.com homepage as a gesture to raise awareness of a worldwide energy conservation effort called Earth Hour. As to why we don't do this permanently - it saves no energy; modern displays use the same amount of power regardless of what they display. However, you can do something to reduce the energy consumption of your home PC by joining the Climate Savers Computing Initiative. [...]
Given our company's commitment to environmental awareness and energy efficiency, we strongly support the Earth Hour campaign, and have darkened our homepage today to help spread awareness of what we hope will be a highly successful global event.
Why did Google choose this specific organization?
We believe in doing our part to help combat climate change, and found the Earth Hour initiative to be a timely, important event. Further, we think the "lights out" idea's individual-centered nature is something that millions of people worldwide can participate in. In short, we really like it. So we did something about it.
Isn't it comforting to know that the leading search engine in the world believes in manmade global warming, and is willing to use its influence to focus attention on this as yet unproven climate theory?
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.




















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Do you think they realize...
March 29, 2008 - 11:41 ET by heldmyw...that this makes them look like a pack of pandering moonbats, reduces their credibility and makes a portion of the population far less likely to use their services, accept their proposals or support them when politicians get around to regulating their goofy butts?
They lost me with the Veteran's Day thing...
heldmyw, In this instance a GAGGLE is more fitting than a "pack"
March 29, 2008 - 16:31 ET by upcountrywater"..that this makes them look like a pack of pandering moonbats,"
A gaggle of pandering moonbats.
Good one hmw LMAO
<wake up>SAVVVE The Whales N' Earth; conserve N' recycle !
IranianUranium<sleep>Infrastructure/repair?/ROFLMAO
Al Gore is a Google Senior Advisor
March 31, 2008 - 16:36 ET by PopularTechI am not surprised by Google being in on the AGW hysteria considering they take advantage of the Goracle's "services":
Al Gore is a Google Senior Advisor
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
Earth Hour
March 29, 2008 - 11:47 ET by saw the lightOne television news channel here is promoting the Earth Hour idea, complete with showing a compact fluorescent bulb as an icon on their website. I plan to participate.
At 7 p.m., my eco-conscious neighbors will turn out their lights to combat manmade global warming. The problem is that it will be dark and there will be a great potential for injury from walking around in the dark. So, in the interest of safety, I will turn all the lights on in my house as a beacon of safety and a refuge from lunacy. The CO2 these brain-dead "neo-environmentalists" think they are saving will be "spent" by me!
And I have a lot of light fixtures!
Any chance they'll make a real sacrifice?
March 29, 2008 - 11:51 ET by Dave in TexasWow. So much sacrifice from these guys. That's much better than giving up all, or even one, of their many private jets.
Al Gore's mansion
March 29, 2008 - 11:58 ET by ThisnThatThe real question is what is Al Gore doing at his 221,000 kWh/year mansion -- he, of the "you are all flat-earthers" fame?
___________________________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber
I Just Switched to Yahoo Search!
March 29, 2008 - 12:07 ET by ChasvsWell maybe we can get their attention by going to their competition! These idiots are only doing this because theythink there's money in it. Just show them that the money goes to those who use their brains and not their emotions when it comes to science!
Yahoo - Liberal Bias?
March 29, 2008 - 23:10 ET by Giles WinterbourneHas Yahoo Caught the Liberal Bias Virus?
http://www.newsbuste...
Giles
March 29, 2008 - 23:16 ET by Noel SheppardGiles,
For a change, I like your source. Far better than the normal liberal swill you link to! :-) ns
No, Yahoo is working with Al Gore
March 31, 2008 - 16:42 ET by PopularTechYahoo and Al Gore form venture
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
Lights Out Liberals
March 29, 2008 - 12:18 ET by Jack BauerThere's just something hilarious about liberals boasting that their lights are out.
Sure Lefty -- we knew that already. You don't have to make a special event to prove it.
But thanks Google for another pointless sacrifice in a cruel cruel world. And thanks for all the fish too.
Tonights code is "RU A LIGHTS OUT LIBERAL?
Can you imagine having to work at the Godawful Google? I bet you don't mention you're a conservative or a Republican in that bastion of conformity.
C'est La Vie...
March 29, 2008 - 12:17 ET by BondPlainBondI don't care why they're doing it; Earth Hour, Aliens Are Coming Month, We're Owned by George Soros Day, We Censor Only Conservatives All Day and Every Day - I prefer a black screen.
Easier on the eyes, and on the old computer system.
What Google didn't tell you
March 29, 2008 - 12:29 ET by coffee260So Google is going black for one hour, earth hour. How do we know? Well, as google probably hopes, hundreds of millions of computers will be fired up, sucking up otherwise unused energy to visit their homepage.
So let me get this straight. Google advertises their good faith jesture, requiring untold amounts of energy to do so, saying they are "going black" on their homepage. But for anybody who cares, they will have to use untold amounts of energy to witness what Google is doing to save the earth. Can you say paradox?
I think the whole thing is a scam.
Google
March 29, 2008 - 12:33 ET by Army BratMorons...dangerous morons...
Happy Trails...
How is it a scam? Did they
March 29, 2008 - 12:34 ET by JasonCHow is it a scam? Did they ask you for money?
Who can revolt if man has become a simple conglomerate of organs, a person barely free enough to use a remote control to choose his channel? -J. Kristeva
"The lady doth protest too
March 29, 2008 - 13:05 ET by danbo"The lady doth protest too much, methinks."
Good going Noel. They yipe.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
Google users in the United
March 29, 2008 - 12:32 ET by JasonCGoogle users in the United States will notice today that we "turned the lights out" on the Google.com homepage as a gesture to raise awareness of a worldwide energy conservation effort called Earth Hour.
Exactly. It is a gesture. No one's pretending that Google is accomplishing anything significant by doing this. They are, indeed, a corporation like any other. But how does participation in an innocuous and well-meaning gesture (turning lights out for a day - oh, the bias!) reveal one's political leanings per se? When Google puts four-leaf clovers in their homepage for St. Patrick's Day, does it mean they're propagandizing for Catholicism? What about their Halloween motif; does it mean they're promoting Druidism?
Your (typical) overreaction to this harmless gesture is nothing short of curmudgeonly. Imagine if a search engine did some small graphical thing to honor US soldiers last week for the 5-year anniversary of the Iraq invasion. Wouldn;t it be absurd of me to say that that site is dmeonstrating its imperialist, pro-war leanings?
As far as I'm concerned, environmentalist concerns are only politicized as leftist because conservatives have constured them as such.
Who can revolt if man has become a simple conglomerate of organs, a person barely free enough to use a remote control to choose his channel? -J. Kristeva
Hey.. Lights Out Liberal..
March 29, 2008 - 12:38 ET by Jack BauerHey.. Lights Out Liberal..
I say go for it man. But let us know first.
Wear the the T-Shirt...
"My lights went out... but
March 29, 2008 - 19:15 ET by danbo"My lights went out... but nobody noticed, maaan."
I love it.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
"My lights went out... but
March 29, 2008 - 19:15 ET by danbo"My lights went out... but nobody noticed, maaan."
I love it.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
Like the UK
March 29, 2008 - 21:02 ET by Angry AfricanIf someone switched the light off in the UK. Would anyone notice?
Actually, I heard Republicans read better in the dark.
Save a whale, harpoon a conservative!
-
March 29, 2008 - 21:15 ET by dahliatraversOh so clever!
He'll be at the Comedy Connection all next week, folks. Let's give him a hand.
If someone switched the
March 29, 2008 - 21:22 ET by R D HelmIf someone switched the light off in the UK. Would anyone notice?
Sure, about a gazillian members of the "peaceful" religion of Islam, who will soon be needing plenty of light to change all those signs that currently read "London" to "Londonistan."
Theme for Election '08: I want my mommy!
they're already living in
March 30, 2008 - 06:23 ET by Jack Bauerthey're already living in the dark ages, with the clock turned back to the year 8oo.
Pale African speak with forked tongue
March 30, 2008 - 05:50 ET by Jack BauerHey Pale African (a Palican?)
I made the gag. You made the lame reply. Congratzzzzzzzzzzzzz. You know funny like Mugabe knows economics.
Try coming up with something original.
Oh -- like I give a crap about the ex-Great country formerly known as Britain.
As a barb, that's like being savaged by a dead Thompson's Gazelle.
I like that
March 30, 2008 - 10:29 ET by Angry AfricanName calling - very sharp. Like that will win wars - action do baby. But I like it - I might use it at some stage to identify myself.
On the gag - I was trying to see the funny side. But couldn't see it. Must have lost that infamous English humour rather quickly. Sounds like you are stright from a Little Britain sketch without the funny bits.
Jack Bauer - like hell you are. That takes balls and not cute little words.
Save a whale, harpoon an English expat!
If they were serious...
March 29, 2008 - 12:43 ET by coffee260JasonC--
Good faith gesture or not, by publicizing this event Google is defeating the purpose of conservation. If you think people aren't aware you've been living under a rock. How many people who otherwise wouldn't have turned on their computers, thereby using more energy than they otherwise would have, did so just to see what Googles homepage looked like? Probably millions. So by announcing they are going dark they not only didn't help save the earth from certain disaster. They encouraged it.
You think people went to
March 29, 2008 - 12:52 ET by JasonCYou think people went to Google just to see what it looks like in black? Thrilling lives they must lead...
Who can revolt if man has become a simple conglomerate of organs, a person barely free enough to use a remote control to choose his channel? -J. Kristeva
As Danbo asks/says below:
March 29, 2008 - 19:07 ET by DarkCurrentAs Danbo asks/says below: "Aren't you supposed to have your computer turned off? More meaningless retoric."
One more time: not
March 29, 2008 - 21:47 ET by JasonCOne more time: not particularly interested in Google's or Gore's message. Just in pointing out conservative hypocrisy/paranoia/inconsistency/stupidity (choose one).
Who can revolt if man has become a simple conglomerate of organs, a person barely free enough to use a remote control to choose his channel? -J. Kristeva
Aren't you supposed to have
March 29, 2008 - 12:54 ET by danboAren't you supposed to have your computer turned off? More meaningless retoric.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
Why, Danbo? I'm not any
March 29, 2008 - 16:28 ET by JasonCWhy, Danbo? I'm not any more into this stuff than you are. I'm just commenting on the rank paranoia of people who think that participating in such a harmless gesture means taking a hard-left political stance.
Who can revolt if man has become a simple conglomerate of organs, a person barely free enough to use a remote control to choose his channel? -J. Kristeva
amnesiac
March 29, 2008 - 16:35 ET bymuch?
Jason, i would agree if this were an isolated 'tell' but with the many, many you have commented on here there comes a point where the brain does this thing called 'pattern recognition'.
"Television is where you watch people in your living room that you would not want near your house." Groucho
Actually, I hardly ever
March 29, 2008 - 16:48 ET by JasonCActually, I hardly ever comment on AGW. Note that I'm not trying to delve into the science that 99% of us don't even fully understand, but discussing the unfortunate politicization from both sides.
Who can revolt if man has become a simple conglomerate of organs, a person barely free enough to use a remote control to choose his channel? -J. Kristeva
jase
March 29, 2008 - 17:07 ET byyou think this is about AGW and not Googles on-going support of liberal dogma?
"Television is where you watch people in your living room that you would not want near your house." Groucho
Calling attention to an
March 29, 2008 - 17:10 ET by JasonCCalling attention to an event that can only possibly do good (at worst, it might accomplish nothing) is hardly radical liberal dogma. Other than failing to display an American flag motif on Veteran's Day, what else exactly has Google done to put itself in league with the hard-leftists of modern America?
Who can revolt if man has become a simple conglomerate of organs, a person barely free enough to use a remote control to choose his channel? -J. Kristeva
Anything you want to do
March 29, 2008 - 17:15 ET by Free StinkerAnything you want to do voluntarily to prevent "global warming" is just fine with me.
It's when you libs try to get the government to coerce us into wasted effort that I have a problem with.
We just spent the last 5 months freezing our &^%$#@! off here in NJ. Global Warming my arse!
Pledge to not support RINOs ever again!
Exactly. So what about
March 29, 2008 - 17:21 ET by JasonCExactly. So what about Google's cute little gesture aligns with vigorous political lobbying?
What environmental efforts are automatically wasted?
Really? In New England we've had the two warmest consecutive winters in decades. Of course, anecdotally relating the idiosnycratic weather patterns in our particular region hardly makes for any sort of compelling case one way or the other. That's why it was hard not to just laugh whenever Noel posted a story to the effect that (put down those potables!) because some island off the coast of South American had snow for the first time in 20 years, AGW is clearly not real!
Who can revolt if man has become a simple conglomerate of organs, a person barely free enough to use a remote control to choose his channel? -J. Kristeva
Wasted Effort
March 29, 2008 - 17:30 ET by Free StinkerWasted effort?
Those are just the obvious ones.
Now, how come you Libs are against Nuke Power Plants?! They give us cheap and CLEAN power.
I'm not against nuclear
March 29, 2008 - 17:32 ET by balboaI'm not against nuclear power. I'm wary of it, but not against it.
I'm not against them. Who
March 29, 2008 - 17:33 ET by JasonCI'm not against them.
Who can revolt if man has become a simple conglomerate of organs, a person barely free enough to use a remote control to choose his channel? -J. Kristeva
Bal JasonC
March 29, 2008 - 17:37 ET by Free StinkerBal, JasonC;
I'm glad we agree then. Building more Nuke Power planst would be much better for the environment than coal fired plants.
Much cheaper, and much cleaner. Something for everyone! ;-)
Pledge to not support RINOs ever again!
Just an observation
March 29, 2008 - 21:30 ET by Angry AfricanI don't want to get into a global warming debate here. I don't know the science, but I don't want to be like Condi and say that I saw the memo but thought nothing of it. I'll rather play it safe and try and deal with it even if it is "just in case".
More interesting though. Google's own little stunt actually did nothing for global warming. Their own study of last year showed that a black screen actually chews up MORE electricity. So the black screen might have been a publicity stunt, but a bad one if they are serious about the impact on global warming.
Save a whale, harpoon a conservative!
So I'll mark you down as
March 29, 2008 - 23:06 ET by Free StinkerSo I'll mark you down as "Against Nuclear Power" :-\
When did you decide that coal fired plants were a good idea?
Nooo
March 30, 2008 - 11:58 ET by Angry AfricanNo-no. I agree with you. I was just making an observation that the Google stunt wasn't actaully a very good one at that. I agree with you that nuclear is better than coal. We will have risks no matter which way we go. I agree that nuclear is just less of a risk. Even though the impact might be higher if something goes wrong - the chance of that happening with the technology we have today makes that risk worthwhile. So - we agree.
On coal though. I agree it is bad, but we have a problem in most developing countries - China and South Africa for example - where they have so much of it that they continue to use it and expand on it. It puts us in a dilema - should we give them the nuclear technology to not use coal or suffer the consequences of coal. Don't have the answer - just raising the question.
Clean Coal is perfectly fine
March 31, 2008 - 13:54 ET by PopularTechClean Coal is perfectly fine
- The United States has 268 billion tons of coal reserves or about a 240 year supply (National Mining Association)
Clean Power From Waste Coal (Science Daily)
Coal Gasification Could Fuel Clean Coal: Myths, Challenges And Opportunities (Science Daily)
New Process Promises To Reduce Costs Of A Clean-coal Technology (Science Daily)
New System Uses Coal Mine Waste To Generate Clean Power (Science Daily)
Ultra-clean Coal (Science Daily)
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
jase
March 29, 2008 - 17:22 ET bynice invention that 'radical liberal dogma' claim when i clearly claimed ongoing support for liberal dogma. Just keep making up what i post as if no one can check.
"Television is where you watch people in your living room that you would not want near your house." Groucho
Sorry for the adjectival
March 29, 2008 - 17:40 ET by JasonCSorry for the adjectival editorial license. I didn't realize you meant the unradical kind.
Who can revolt if man has become a simple conglomerate of organs, a person barely free enough to use a remote control to choose his channel? -J. Kristeva
Unfortunately, now anyone
March 29, 2008 - 17:13 ET by balboaUnfortunately, now anyone who dares believe in anything from recycling to conservation is deemed a liberal kook.
Exactly my point. And in
March 29, 2008 - 17:17 ET by JasonCExactly my point. And in typical knee-jerk fashion, it's become common among conservatives to say things like "I don't recycle anything...and I can't wait to buy that Hummer," just to make sure no one mistakes them for a bleeding-hear lib.
Who can revolt if man has become a simple conglomerate of organs, a person barely free enough to use a remote control to choose his channel? -J. Kristeva
Yup, and it's done in such a
March 29, 2008 - 17:21 ET by balboaYup, and it's done in such a way to antagonize any liberal that might be reading, when I could really care less if someone doesn't recycle or drives a Hummer (although, truth be told, that's a stupid car). EVERY issue suddenly comes to political sides.
It is a stupid car. Though
March 29, 2008 - 17:32 ET by JasonCIt is a stupid car. Though I think "compensatory" might be the more fitting adjective.
Who can revolt if man has become a simple conglomerate of organs, a person barely free enough to use a remote control to choose his channel? -J. Kristeva
Lol. Yup. That's the way I
March 29, 2008 - 17:35 ET by balboaLol. Yup. That's the way I feel when packs of "dudes" drive by on their crotchrockets, popping wheelies and revving their engines.
JasonC
March 29, 2008 - 22:46 ET by well99"Exactly my point. And in typical knee-jerk fashion, it's become common among conservatives to say things like "I don't recycle anything...and I can't wait to buy that Hummer," just to make sure no one mistakes them for a bleeding-hear lib."
Arent you doing the same thing your complaining about?Lumping everyone together?The problem is too many extremist in the evironmental movement.That and Limo Libs.Hypocrites who expect others to sacrifice but wont themselves.It has given environmentalist a bad name.Stupid laws put on the books because of politicians catering to these idiots.Oregon in the 60s had recycle laws.You pay a nickel deposit or something and got it back when you turned in the bottle also heavy fines for littering.Which was fine.The problem is states like mine cant clear dead,diseased trees or brush to help keep down forest fires.I been to two forest fires and the rangers have said that was a major problem yet that cant do nothing about it.Common sense needs to be applied.It isnt.Glad to hear you and Bal werent against nuclear power.Your alright for bleeding heart liberals.Just kidding...maybe
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4qGqEb-t98&feature=related For group harmony..Ohhmm Ohhmm .
All I said is "it's become
March 30, 2008 - 10:04 ET by JasonCAll I said is "it's become common." That phrase does not equal "All conservatives do X." Look around this site, especially at comments made on stories about suggestions that environmental groups make for every-day things a person can do (or do less of) to "make a difference." My statement is demonstrably true.
But that doesn't mean I believe or follow all of those suggestions myself. There are environmental extremists, obnoxious ones, no doubt about it. My point is merely that the mode of backlash that I've observed in many conservatives only serves to exacerbate the problems, both environmental and political.
Who can revolt if man has become a simple conglomerate of organs, a person barely free enough to use a remote control to choose his channel? -J. Kristeva
JasonC
March 30, 2008 - 13:12 ET by well99So it becomes common for liberals to set up death watchs like Kos Kids?As far as obnoxious well tree spikers and people that burn down houses are more than obnoxious.The problem is the hypocrisy of these do as I say not as I do liberals.How many Ed Begleys compared to Al Gores,Lenardo DohCicaprio or Sheryl(one tissue)Crow.Ed practices what he preaches.The others want us to while they dont.There does need to be discussion about environment/conservation.The problem is the left says the debate is over.
Point well taken. You're
March 30, 2008 - 14:50 ET by JasonCPoint well taken. You're right, a smattering of impolitic comments or jokes on a message board of any political persuasion should not be automatically construed as representative of that entire ideology. Your DailyKos example was spot on.
Who can revolt if man has become a simple conglomerate of organs, a person barely free enough to use a remote control to choose his channel? -J. Kristeva
bal
March 29, 2008 - 17:19 ET byi do conservation and recycling you do it would seem strawman
"Television is where you watch people in your living room that you would not want near your house." Groucho
What? Who can revolt if
March 29, 2008 - 17:23 ET by JasonCWhat?
Who can revolt if man has become a simple conglomerate of organs, a person barely free enough to use a remote control to choose his channel? -J. Kristeva
jase
March 30, 2008 - 22:53 ET byi was saying that i indeed conserve and Balboas post was a strawman argument
"Television is where you watch people in your living room that you would not want near your house." Groucho
jase
March 30, 2008 - 23:03 ET by"nevermind" --- Emily Latella
"you do it would seem
March 29, 2008 - 17:25 ET by balboa"you do it would seem strawman"
?
If you were new to this board, people would say "liberal!" But since people know you're a conservative, they say, "Ah, look, evidence of just how wonderful the conservative movement is and how little liberals really know about us. We do SO care!"
ah the classic 'you
March 29, 2008 - 17:36 ET byah the classic 'you people'
"Television is where you watch people in your living room that you would not want near your house." Groucho
Doesn't make it any less
March 29, 2008 - 17:40 ET by balboaDoesn't make it any less true.
what part of conserve-ative
March 29, 2008 - 17:46 ET bywhat part of conserve-ative don't you get?
"Television is where you watch people in your living room that you would not want near your house." Groucho
Uh-huh...that's why I see so
March 29, 2008 - 17:50 ET by balboaUh-huh...that's why I see so many conservatives on this board talking about what they're going to do for Earth Day...
i don't do feel good
March 29, 2008 - 17:57 ET byi don't do feel good nonsense
lets build lots of mid-sized nuke power plants
lets build some up to date refineries
lets avoid bio-fuels since they are more pollutant than gas
"Television is where you watch people in your living room that you would not want near your house." Groucho
bal earth day is in April
March 29, 2008 - 18:05 ET by upcountrywaterthis is a one hour twiddle with the power grid .
<wake up>SAVVVE The Whales N' Earth; conserve N' recycle !
IranianUranium<sleep>Infrastructure/repair?/ROFLMAO
»→ Earth Day
March 29, 2008 - 22:58 ET by Cool ArrowYou're right bal.
Far better they pay lip service one day out of the year than live as a conservationist.
♣ a seal
Well CA
March 30, 2008 - 20:25 ET by well99It is about being responsible citizens.I agree that it shouldnt be one day a year or Ooooh dark hour but year round.It shouldnt be about political view or party.It should be about taken care of our country.You can drill for oil build nuclear facilities and it be done right.There are laws in place to take care of it.Make sure they are enforced.Hopefully better than laws against illegally entering this country or overstaying visas are.We need to get off this dependency on foreign oil.We also need to bring down the cost of utilities.That makes life alot easier on working people.
Quite untrue, Bal
March 29, 2008 - 22:54 ET by BlondeRecycling and conservation are not deemed "liberal kookism".
I have a book on my coffee table, Green to Gold...about driving the "green agenda" in a business mode to improve the bottom line. How is that "liberal kookism"?
I am a conservative, I know all about recycling (it's part of how I make my living), as well as being an avid outdoorswoman. Conservation (and proper use) of natural resources is of huge concern to me.
Warming and the warming agenda is quite another story, however. So don't make the mistake of conflating a disdain for the warmer agenda for an aversion to recycling or conservation....that's just plain stupid.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Blonde. I found this.
March 30, 2008 - 08:45 ET by danboBlonde. I found this. Thought you would like it.
With your orchids, and my crinums and gingers. We may be entitled to burn off a lot more carbon.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
Thanks, danbo!
March 30, 2008 - 09:06 ET by BlondeThat was great! A tax return for the warmers....figure out your carbon credits. You really ought to post that on a forum. It deserves it's own thread.
I particularly liked the system of measurements. How big is your home? Ted Kazynski size?
Are you a minimalist? Do you wear the same clothes for two weeks?
The instructions were a riot, too. Unfortunately, couldn't copy/paste my favorite bits from that.
Must run....I have to attend a picnic, although it's raining right now. Command performance, sheesh.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Carbon Credits for sale.
March 30, 2008 - 11:46 ET by danboI have 3 day lilies, a rose bush, a Mexican marigold and a crinum on my patio, ready to plant, as I write. These plants will remove that deadly CO2 from the air and replace it with good old healthy killer O2.
Buy the credits that these plants will provide. Sooth your guilt.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
"I'm not any more into this
March 29, 2008 - 16:54 ET by danbo"I'm not any more into this stuff than you are. I'm just commenting on the rank paranoia of people who think that participating in such a harmless gesture means taking a hard-left political stance."
Sure?
They can speak. But not us. You protest seems....
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
Who says you can't speak?
March 29, 2008 - 16:59 ET by JasonCWho says you can't speak? Go ahead. And when it presents itself as contradictory or petty, I'll point it out. the 1st Amendment is a grand thing, ain't it?
Who can revolt if man has become a simple conglomerate of organs, a person barely free enough to use a remote control to choose his channel? -J. Kristeva
I'm going to behave. I'll
March 29, 2008 - 18:10 ET by danboI'm going to behave. I'll let you continue.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
This was a meaningless gesture
March 29, 2008 - 19:12 ET by DarkCurrentand meanigness gestures ARE harmfull as they distract attention from meaningful gestures
JC
March 29, 2008 - 13:08 ET by Noel SheppardJC,
"Curmudgeonly?" You're suggesting I'm a grouch?
Give me a break!
Regardless, it is indeed fascinating how telling your indignation is. First, you seem oblivious to how belief in manmade global warming divides strictly along Party lines, and that the vast majority of Democrats believe it whilst the vast majority of Republicans don't.
As such, any company participating in an international climate change awareness promotion is indeed tipping its hand concerning its political leanings. I'm very surprised this was so easily lost upon you.
Of course, maybe more telling was this comment:
Fascinating. Aren't you admitting here what most Republicans believe: concern for the troops is INDEED exclusive to those on the right, and folks on the left view such as "imperialist" and "pro-war?"
You must be a FABULOUS poker player, JC!!! Thank you for playing my game. :-) ns
You're not the only
March 29, 2008 - 16:45 ET by JasonCYou're not the only curmudgeonly one on this issue, Noel. Note the poster below here who plans on switching search engines due to Google's crime of "believing in global warming." But it is not an inherently political issue. It has been made that way by opportunists and stubborn party loyalty. And I have no dog in this fight. I'm neither (D) nor (R). Nor do I give two s--ts about Google. I find extremist AGW activists who bother me on the street corners of Boston for donations just as irritating as those who think that a harmless little gesture about energy conservation is grounds for determining one's political stance.
If Google had put a banner on their site proclaiming that those who don't believe in AGW are on par with Nazis, or that everyone should vote Democrat so as to save the planet, then you might have a point. But it is divisiveness of the kind that is propagated by Al Gore on the one hand, and those who proudly proclaim they will turn on every electric device they have just to give the proverbial finger to environmentalists on the other, that perpetuates the unfortunate binarism that to believe (or not) in AGW automatically situates one with Dems or Repubs. It's a very unfortunate thing, Noel.
My above average number of typos aside, I'm not sure what to make of your remark about my counterexample. You're not to familiar with this kind of ironic, reductio ad absurdum argument, are you? Look it up. It's the same kind of thing that went over your head with Cleverpig's comments on your story about how poor people have no one but themselves to blame. My point, since you've so dramatically misconstrued it, is that it would be ABSURD to claim that a tribute to the troops on Google is in favor of imperialism and warmongering and so forth. That it would, in fact, be little more than a liberal paranoid fantasy. Just as the very suggestion that energy conservation might be a good thing is construed as hard-left pinko socialist propaganda.
Yes, Google should have just shut down all their servers if they really wanted to "make a difference." A big congrats to the brilliant minds who suggested that; your exposure of Google's hypocrisy is just breathtaking. That's why it's called a "gesture," geniuses.
And my poker game is just fine, thanks very much. I have a system.
Who can revolt if man has become a simple conglomerate of organs, a person barely free enough to use a remote control to choose his channel? -J. Kristeva
JC
March 29, 2008 - 17:17 ET by Noel SheppardJC,
And you're suggesting I'm curmudgeonly? It's Saturday. Get a sense of humor, will you?
As for irony and sarcasm as a tool to make a point at message boards, having participated in forums like this since the mid-90s, my experience has been that it doesn't work, and often leads to irreparable misunderstoodings. After all, it's tough to see someone's tongue in their cheek through their keyboard. As such, most sarcasm is indeed misunderstood.
In fact, you totally missed my ironical quest in the post you just responded to. "Aren't you admitting here what most Republicans believe: concern for the troops is INDEED exclusive to those on the right, and folks on the left view such as "imperialist" and "pro-war?" was intended to be ironic.
You seemed to miss that, and, instead, took it quite literally. So, you might want to point that reductio ad absurdumitis finger at yourself. :-)
Finally, I think you must have missed this fabulous NB article by yours truly concerning a Congressional poll done in 2007:
So, this issue, like so many, does fall strictly along Party lines. ns
I don't disagree that the
March 29, 2008 - 17:28 ET by JasonCI don't disagree that the leeches in the legislative branch have dramatically bifurcated the issue. That's what they do. See Iraq, abortion, etc. I reject your premise that any private individual or group who does or does not believe that AGW exists or should be worked against has automatically staked out some political territory. The D vs. R bulls--t does not apply to everybody's personal take on the issues.
Apparently we're in agreement that my counterexample was "absurd".
Who can revolt if man has become a simple conglomerate of organs, a person barely free enough to use a remote control to choose his channel? -J. Kristeva
JC
March 29, 2008 - 17:36 ET by Noel SheppardJC,
Actually, from my experience with this issue -- and as one of the more prominent conservative AGW writers in the blogosphere, I have a lot! -- it is one that identifies Party affiliation potentially more reliably than anything else.
After all, there are pro-choice Republicans, pro-gun law Republicans, and anti-Iraq war Republicans. However, with some notable exceptions, the vast majority of Republicans are indeed climate realists, while the vast majority of Democrats are climate alarmists.
Where moderates and Independents fit in this is anyone's guess.
That said, I believe quite fervently that if an organization is willing to publicly support and advocate something like Earth Hour, it likely is led by liberals. And that was the point of this post.
I'm not sure why you turned it into more than that. ns
"...each one of us, working
March 29, 2008 - 17:06 ET by JasonC"...each one of us, working together, can make a positive impact on climate change - no matter who we are or where we live."
And the conservative reaction to this is: "What a horrible, un-American idea! This so merits my outrage."
And I'm showing MY cards? At least mine was sarcastic.
Who can revolt if man has become a simple conglomerate of organs, a person barely free enough to use a remote control to choose his channel? -J. Kristeva
JC
March 29, 2008 - 17:23 ET by Noel SheppardJC,
You're still missing the point. This isn't about conservation. I'm all for conservation. Do it all the time. What's outrageous is using global warming to beat people into doing it, for I don't believe for a second that average global temperatures would change one bit if Americans ceased emitting carbon dioxide tomorrow.
Not one bit.
As such, it is really you that are getting outraged over a false assumption that folks here are opposed to conservation and believe it to be somehow un-American. That's not what people are saying at all. ns
How is Google's inversion
March 29, 2008 - 17:31 ET by JasonCHow is Google's inversion of their trademark colors "beating" people into environmentalist submission?
And there are indeed people who think that simple, everyday acts of environmental consciousness are for losers. For instance, those who drive SUVs they don't need (usually festooned with Patriotic sentiment, ironically) and brag about their levels of wasteful consumption. It's all over this site. I have a hard time believing it's all done sardonically...
Who can revolt if man has become a simple conglomerate of organs, a person barely free enough to use a remote control to choose his channel? -J. Kristeva
JC
March 29, 2008 - 17:44 ET by Noel SheppardJC,
But, you haven't seen me express or support such behavior, have you? In fact, irrespective of my position on AGW, I'm actually pretty green in my lifestyle, and part company with a lot of my conservative brethren when it comes to things like energy conservation. I actually lost a pretty good friend a number of years ago because I "protested" his family's gas-gluttony.
I'll take this a step further: I think CAFE standards should be MUCH higher than where they are, and am appalled by how little our nation's energy policy has changed since the first oil crisis in 1973.
Here's an article I wrote on the subject almost exactly three years ago that I think you'll find rather surprising: http://www.americant... ns
Fair enough. So may I
March 29, 2008 - 17:55 ET by JasonCFair enough. So may I assume that your problem with the current AGW issue is not one of environmentalism but of individualism vs. socialization in trying to find solutions to energy problems?
Who can revolt if man has become a simple conglomerate of organs, a person barely free enough to use a remote control to choose his channel? -J. Kristeva
JC
March 29, 2008 - 18:06 ET by Noel SheppardJC,
Not necessarily individualism. Instead, capitalism versus socialism. Carbon dioxide IS NOT a problem. CO2 is good. Ask plants and trees whether they like it. There are also human biological functions that require CO2. Most life on this planet would cease to exist without it.
Furthermore, this idea that a greenhouse is a bad thing is also preposterous, for without our atmosphere's "greenhouse," we would burn to death during the day, and freeze to death at night.
Beyond this, if there ever came a point when it seemed the greenhouse was becoming to "strong" so to speak, we would look at the more primary greenhouse gases such as water vapor, methane, ozone, and nitrous oxide as the possible culprit rather than CO2 which actually plays a very minor role in this equation.
With this in mind, the only reason CO2 is labelled as the problem by climate alarmists is because it can be tied to fossil fuels and, therefore, taxed. After all, you can't tax water vapor and methane, can you?
As such, Jason, climate alarmism is indeed a hoax perpetrated to levee additional taxes on energy companies, car companies, and consumers. Period. And that's what I so strongly protest. ns
Good, but not clear
March 29, 2008 - 21:20 ET by Angry AfricanYou make some good points here. I don't agree on all, but less interested in getting into that debate. Just didn't get the link socialism link to all of this. Can you clarify?
-
March 29, 2008 - 20:55 ET by dahliatraversWhat's outrageous is using global warming to beat people into doing it, for I don't believe for a second that average global temperatures would change one bit if Americans ceased emitting carbon dioxide tomorrow.
Exactly, Noel. There are good reasons to edge away from burning fossil fuels. The problem is, Al G and James H are trying to trample us towards ... nothing. They want to panic us into swearing off petroleum. But there is no replacement at this point. Yet, according to their own theory, a wholesale abstention is the only cure for this (non)problem.
Sorry, I'm not willing to go without lights and/or heat and/or my car and/or food. And it's patently unfair for them to expect the third world not to aspire to these basic comforts.
Their service sucks too !!
March 29, 2008 - 12:35 ET by RonCTry finding a conservative posting via Giggle...
I gave up on them long ago, as soon as I caught them deliberately discriminating against conservative websites. Yahoo is no better.
You might try Ice Rocket.
March 29, 2008 - 12:38 ET by mattmYou might try Ice Rocket.
Ice Rocket is a Blog Search Engine
March 29, 2008 - 18:50 ET by PopularTechAnd it is owned by Mark Cuban who financially backed the anti-war Redacted movie.
If you do not want to use Google or Yahoo try Microsoft's Live Search.
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
As today is my 44th birthday (darn it) I am going to participate
March 29, 2008 - 12:43 ET by R D HelmAs today is my 44th birthday (darn it) I am going to participate in this completely empty gesture by turning on every light I have between 8 and 9pm, just for the fun of it. :-)
Who knows? Perhaps I will discover a few burned out bulbs that need replacing.
I wish I had thought to rent one of those huge trailored search-lights, too. Of course, I have been smoking a huge piece of pork since 8:00 this morning, so I guess that will have to do.
Theme for Election '08: I want my mommy!
Is this trite today?
March 29, 2008 - 12:50 ET by danboIs this trite today? Remind me to turn all our lights on this evening. Including the porch lights and the outdoor flood lights.
And have our putters set for Icecap.us or newsbusters. Maybe a page for both. The TV on Fox.
Let's light the way.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
Hey you could use your cake
March 29, 2008 - 12:52 ET by mjgHey you could use your cake as a beacon. lol.
Very funny, mjg.
March 29, 2008 - 13:15 ET by R D HelmLOL-Yeah, 44 candles could probably be seen by the shuttle crew orbiting the planet.
Good thing they aren't still up there.
Theme for Election '08: I want my mommy!
RD, do you know how many
March 29, 2008 - 13:59 ET by dboRD,
do you know how many CO2 emissions there are in 44 burning candles? For the sake of the planet and global warming, why don't you pretend you're 39 and counting!
dbo,
March 29, 2008 - 15:12 ET by R D HelmLOL-I have been doing that every morning for the last five years.
Theme for Election '08: I want my mommy!
D
March 29, 2008 - 15:34 ET byhappy b-day. just remember you'll alway be younger than me.
"Television is where you watch people in your living room that you would not want near your house." Groucho
Thanks, botg.
March 29, 2008 - 16:48 ET by R D HelmI'll try to keep that in mind. :-)
Theme for Election '08: I want my mommy!
no prob RD
March 29, 2008 - 18:08 ET byhere's a picture for ya to remember me by
"Television is where you watch people in your living room that you would not want near your house." Groucho
Happy b-day Helm; no doubt,
March 29, 2008 - 15:30 ET by Sick-n-TiredHappy b-day Helm; no doubt, if you are smoking some meat, there are also copius quantities of adult beverages being consumed. Did the same thing last weekend myself; did a pork butt, small brisket and a rack of baby backs!-----and of course the brews---some Newcastle's.
Back to dork day; I am going to do absolutley the same thing myself. Turn on all the lights, run the dishwasher, the washer and drier; start up both vehicles and turn on all of the water! What a joke this thing is.....
"Controlling carbon is a bureaucrat's dream. If you control carbon, you control life," Richard Lindzen - March 2007.
RD Helm, A happy birthday to you!
March 29, 2008 - 16:03 ET by upcountrywaterIt's diffcult to store electricity.
So at 8:00 O clock, wham a voltage spike..
The dark zealots may flip their main breaker, shutting off hot water, refrigeration, AC etc.
At 9:00 a voltage drop will occur, while these devices power up.
Nightmare for the hard working utility folk.
I think I'll do my part to dampen these voltage issues.
<wake up>SAVVVE The Whales N' Earth; conserve N' recycle !
IranianUranium<sleep>Infrastructure/repair?/ROFLMAO
ucw,
March 29, 2008 - 16:45 ET by R D HelmI was wondering about that myself. Though I doubt enough people are going to participate in this lunacy to have any real impact, wouldn't it be kind of funny if power grids started blowing out at 9:00pm in each time zone, when everybody turned everything back on?
Bet that would make the alarmists real popular.
I wonder if any media outlets will have choppers up, burning lots of fuel while lamenting the fact that so many of us uncaring ignern't types still have our lights on between 8 & 9pm?
Theme for Election '08: I want my mommy!
RD, yea the chopper guys flying by candle light.
March 29, 2008 - 16:52 ET by upcountrywaterNow that would be good.
<wake up>SAVVVE The Whales N' Earth; conserve N' recycle !
IranianUranium<sleep>Infrastructure/repair?/ROFLMAO
Happy Birthday R D
March 29, 2008 - 16:55 ET by well9944 to be young again.Pork sounds good but Fried chicken is how I celebrate on my bday.Just the white meat though.Maybe hanging some christmas lights would be a nice gesture.
Thanks, everybody.
March 29, 2008 - 17:06 ET by R D HelmIt's been a good day.
well99, actually, I took my Christmas lights down about the second week in January (finally). I should have left them up. It would be fun having then on tonight.
Of course, those six halogen flood lights I have will be much better, anyway. I think they will be able to see those shadow-etching scorchers all the way up in Chattanooga tonight.
Theme for Election '08: I want my mommy!
We think alike. I was
March 29, 2008 - 18:05 ET by danboWe think alike. I was debating going out and putting some of the christmas lights back up.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
lol
March 29, 2008 - 22:09 ET by well99Yup those flood lights will do the trick.
Only The Lights?
March 29, 2008 - 13:25 ET by JoelCTHas anyone noticed that none of the Television stations "participating" in this thing have suggested turning off your TV, some of which consume much more power than a 100-watt light bulb? Oh please don't turn off the TV, dude.
Or, why isn't Google suggesting we turn off our computers? Mine has a 600-watt power supply, and although it never pulls the maximum wattage, it could be considered the equivalent to six 100-watt light bulbs burning for that whole hour!
Typical liberalism/leftism. Don't do anything important, just symbolize something important, so we can all feel better about ourselves and our "carbon footprint." Meanwhile, keep watching TV and stay on the Internet, clicking those ad-money-links!
Bye, Bye Google
March 29, 2008 - 13:38 ET by roadgeek9Looks like it's offical. I was right. Google is loaded with hippie, greenie, progressivists who believe in global warming.
I'm moving to Ask.
Google
March 29, 2008 - 15:31 ET by david999Notice that Google will not turn off their servers around the world. They use up the most energy - 5 megawatts per googleplex server farm
Here is an idea of the size http://www.nytimes.c...
Pubic Service Notice
March 29, 2008 - 15:37 ET by AndanteAnyone who did not take part in Earth Hour must turn in their Conspicuous Altruism wrist bands and ribbons.
"We are going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."... Karl Marx? Nope, it was Hillary Clinton.
Man, I’m glad I did not
March 29, 2008 - 16:42 ET by USA4freedomMan, I’m glad I did not miss it. I thought it was last night. Not only am I going to turn every light on in the house I’m going to start up my F250 diesel and run its lights, (high beam). The really great part is the town I’m in (New Bern, NC) has a core of nut cases that is pushing for New Bern to become a “cool city” one of the main ring leaders lives right across the street from me, right in line with the lights from my truck..
Ronald Reagan, 1962: I did not leave the Democratic party, the party left me.
Insert: your name, 2008, and the Republican party.
Romney / Jendil 2012 (if,we survive)
Liberals have been in the
March 29, 2008 - 16:55 ET by ckc1227Liberals have been in the dark for a long time now. What's one more hour to them?
LOL- ckc1227
March 30, 2008 - 00:08 ET by CapeCodScottSo true..
www.ScottOnCapeCod.com
"Most men lead lives of quiet desperation"... until they get fed-up enough to finally say something about it!
I find the entire Google
March 29, 2008 - 17:26 ET by mostlymoderateI find the entire Google Blackout concept annoying as hell. I like my screen white, not black. Already in process of finding comparable search engine. Amazing how a little thing like this will be enough to make users switch, but that's how the web is. I think Google has forgotten that they never have been and never will be the only game in town.
Ok, all the lights are on,
March 29, 2008 - 19:13 ET by USA4freedomOk, all the lights are on, even the ones in my wood shop, and my attic..
I have my headlights on my truck shining on the lib, house across the street..
I love it.
Ronald Reagan, 1962: I did not leave the Democratic party, the party left me.
Insert: your name, 2008, and the Republican party.
Romney / Jendil 2012 (if,we survive)
That's showing...somebody.
March 29, 2008 - 19:32 ET by balboaThat's showing...somebody.
bal
March 29, 2008 - 19:40 ET byyou a Shawn Merriman fan?
"Television is where you watch people in your living room that you would not want near your house." Groucho
Not particularly. I don't
March 29, 2008 - 19:46 ET by balboaNot particularly. I don't dislike him, but I don't follow him or anything. Am I missing some reference?
shawn merriman
March 29, 2008 - 20:41 ET bydoes the
"Lights Out" dance
"Television is where you watch people in your living room that you would not want near your house." Groucho
When I heard about this
March 29, 2008 - 20:17 ET by steveba4When I heard about this "Earth Hour" thing on the way home from visiting my mother, I knew there was only one thing I could do when I got home. I turned on every single light (porch light and the light over the stove included) in my house. I also turned on every appliance in the house. Why? Because I'm an evil "flat earther" who wants to destroy the earth of course. Actually, I figured the only thing it would affect would be my electricity bill and it would only affect that by a few cents. God, liberals are morons.
That's an even dumber
March 29, 2008 - 20:21 ET by balboaThat's an even dumber gesture than Google's.
All of you ecologically
March 29, 2008 - 20:33 ET by MikeBAll of you ecologically conscious, politically correct, morally bankrupt, mentally deficient idiots who buy into all this man-made global warming crap, how about you call your local electricity provider and have your house removed from the power grid? Then, you can sell your car and walk everywhere, do your laundry in some stream so you don't use all that much water. Don't use any laundry soap or detergent, though: you don't want to pollute the water supply. You also need to stop buying produce from the grocery store. The production, processing, transporting, storing, and display of the produce results in carbon dioxide emissions. You have to go back to a hunter-gatherer existance. Oh, that's right: a lot of you fools are also animal rights idiots, so you just have to get out and grub for enough nuts, roots, and berries to supply all your protein and vitamin needs. But, be careful, you don't want to harvest so much that you cause your food source to die out.
C'mon, you AGW true believers! It's time for you to excrete or get off the pot. Turn off your lights for one hour? Male bovine feces! Live your faith! Quit emitting greenhouse gasses, or shut up and leave the rest of us alone.
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
Mike B,
March 29, 2008 - 20:45 ET by R D HelmWell said.
Theme for Election '08: I want my mommy!
NBers
March 29, 2008 - 22:13 ET by Noel SheppardNBers,
The following was sent to me by e-mail:
Thanks, Ram. ns
Noel, thank you for posting this.
March 29, 2008 - 22:20 ET by R D HelmIt has made my day complete. :-)
Theme for Election '08: I want my mommy!
See we can agree
March 30, 2008 - 17:24 ET by Angry Africanhey RD, See we can agree - and I SOMETIMES have something interesting to say. I tried to make that point earlier up the thread. ;)
That's ironic, Alanis, but,
March 29, 2008 - 22:24 ET by balboaThat's ironic, Alanis, but, still, it was a gesture to raise awareness. Not an effort to save the earth.
»→ Alanis
March 29, 2008 - 22:28 ET by Cool ArrowSomebody watched too much "You Can't Do That On Television"
♣ a seal
I don't know. [slime falls
March 29, 2008 - 22:36 ET by balboaI don't know.
[slime falls from sky]
:-)
»→ Slime me
March 29, 2008 - 23:01 ET by Cool ArrowWATER
♣ a seal
" ironic"? But people who
March 30, 2008 - 08:38 ET by danbo" ironic"? But people who know the AGW issue is far from settled, turning on their lights in protest is dumb?
So, only the guys you like can get credit for a "gesture to raise awareness". Everyone else is dumb.
Good going there Bal.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
I didn't say Google's
March 30, 2008 - 12:38 ET by balboaI didn't say Google's gesture was tremendous, either.
So? "There is a clear
March 30, 2008 - 13:00 ET by danboSo?
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
So I'm not "giving them
March 30, 2008 - 17:43 ET by balboaSo I'm not "giving them credit" just because I like them.
Bal. I like you. But you
March 30, 2008 - 21:08 ET by danboBal. I like you. But you said. "but, still, it was a gesture to raise awareness." But everyone else was dumb.
I may have erred in saying it's because you liked them. But there does seem to be a wee bit of a double standard here.
Just like I think you'll point it out to me when I do it. I'll point it out to you.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
That's fair enough. What I
March 30, 2008 - 21:34 ET by balboaThat's fair enough.
What I was saying was that, yes, it is ironic that "going black" cost more energy, but that the goal was raising awareness, which with their broad reach they probably did.
Even with the counteractive irony, somebody turning on every light and appliance in their house in opposition doesn't seem like a very worthwhile response.
You mean like flying around
March 30, 2008 - 22:05 ET by danboYou mean like flying around the world in a private jet. To lecture people about their lightbulbs?
Turning on outside floodlights as a statement on blackout night isn't a worthwhile response? But turning off all the lights at home and sitting in the dark is?
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
Just my opinion. All you're
March 31, 2008 - 09:26 ET by balboaJust my opinion. All you're really doing is wasting a lot of electricity.
Yep. That it is. "There
March 31, 2008 - 16:14 ET by danboYep. That it is.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
Google Admits Turning Black Wastes Energy on their Blog
March 30, 2008 - 01:09 ET by PopularTechIs black the new green? (Google)
"One idea, suggested by the site called "Blackle" (which is not related to Google, by the way, though the site does use our custom search engine), is to reduce energy used by monitors by providing search with a black background. We applaud the spirit of the idea, but our own analysis as well as that of others shows that making the Google homepage black will not reduce energy consumption. To the contrary, on flat-panel monitors (already estimated to be 75% of the market), displaying black may actually increase energy usage. Detailed results from a new study confirm this."
Fact or Fiction?: Black Is Better than White for Energy-Efficient Screens (Black isn't the new green) (Scientific American)
Does a Darkened Google Really Save Electricity? (The Wall Street Journal)
Blackle vs Google power savings – the final test (Techlogg)
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
yeah, but these are the same guys who fly in private jets!
March 30, 2008 - 08:01 ET by political mavenAnd we are all the usefull idiots who fund them!
Google goes over to the ~DARK SIDE~
March 30, 2008 - 00:31 ET by BritcomGoogle goes over to the ~DARK SIDE~
---
Communist vs. Statist '08
Q. Is Panamanian born John McCain a "Natural Born Citizen"
60 Minutes of candlelight
March 30, 2008 - 00:31 ET by CapeCodScottLast time I checked, that black stuff rising from the candles was carbon, so I hope all the participants sent AlGore payment for their carbon credits... otherwise he will get you, don't believe me, check this out: http://thumbsnap.com...
www.ScottOnCapeCod.com
"Most men lead lives of quiet desperation"... until they get fed-up enough to finally say something about it!
Well no surprise there
March 30, 2008 - 02:33 ET by well99Since he has come down with a severe case of talkingouthisass.The debate aint over.
Was at a friend's house last
March 30, 2008 - 04:04 ET by Lancasters Saved UsWas at a friend's house last night as the hour approached. Since it is her house, I am not one to question what she should do. She had about ten candles lit in the small room where were sitting . At about the 45 minute mark, the dog's tail caught fire. So I used the Blackout search engine known as Google to see what the carbon emissions are for a candle. By my estimate, considering we have decently efficient electric production, she had the equivalent of 30 100 watt bulbs burning in a small room. It's a moot point I guess, as 100watt bulbs are getting hard to find.
Thats why I don't use Google
March 30, 2008 - 07:58 ET by political mavenYahoo, search.com & others are just fine. Even if google is a drop better, why support such people?
Starve the Plants & Starve the Algae
March 30, 2008 - 14:52 ET by KalihiwaiBeachthis is the real agenda of the "Green" freaks. If they can kill off enough of the plants and algae there won't be enough oxygen to support the evil invasive human species and we will slowly die off. The world would be better off right?
Freakin wackos