Category Archives: Environmentalism
FrackNation and Liberal Tolerance
The screening of FrackNation scheduled for Sunday at the Frozen River Film Festival in Minnesota has been canceled. This is the first such cancellation in the festival’s nine year history.
The organizers gave several contradictory reasons for the cancellation. FrackNation Director Phelim McAleer chalked it up to a cowardly response to Left-wing bullying.
FrackNation was funded through the most successful Kickstarter crowd-funding documentary campaign ever, raising $212,000 from more than 3,300 people.
I’m proud to say I was (a very minor) one of those crowdfunders and that the documentary is excellent. Dearest went to the screening in Binghamton and got my DVD signed by Phelim. 🙂
Source:
http://us1.campaign-archive2.com/?u=65361a4a899c736f66ed8fb13&id=8fe96a65b6
Comments Off on FrackNation and Liberal Tolerance
Filed under Environmentalism, Fracking, Movies & Television
Freezer burning irony!
THE STORY:
December 25, 2013: Russian ship, Akademic Shokalskiy, became trapped in polar ice. Three rescue attempts were thwarted by the high levels of sea ice and blizzard weather conditions in what is summer in the Antarctic.
January 2, 2014: All 52 passengers were rescued by helicopter Jan. 2. The crew elected to stay with the ship, which has enough supplies for “a very long time.”
THE MEDIA COVERAGE:
98% of the MSM news stories between Dec. 25 and Jan. 2 failed to mention the REASON the ship was in the area, referring to the stranded as “passengers,” “trackers” and even “tourists,” rather than “climate change researchers.”
But Chris Turney, the expedition’s leader, is a professor of climate change at the University of New South Wales, who wrote on his personal website that the purpose of the expedition was to “discover and communicate the environmental changes taking place in the south.”
If this story had gone the other way and made climate deniers look stupid, every MSM news story would have led with that fact and multiple “news” hosts at MSNBC and Morning Joe would’ve fallen out of their chairs laughing about it.
Yes, I do know that polar bears do not live at the South Pole. I think the cartoon includes them to be extra ironic about the Al Gore thing.
Source:
Filed under Climate, Environmentalism, Funny Stuff, Media Bias
Gore-acles and Fracktivists
Truthland Trailer
About Truthland: Shelly and her husband own a dairy farm near Franklin Forks, Pennsylvania and they have gas wells on their property. Truthland is her story of how she answered several questions raised by Gasland. She travels the country seeking out the truth about Josh Fox’s claims, talking to experts ranging from John Hanger to Terry Engelder, visits a steel plant, discusses issues with landowners, learns why one shouldn’t smoke in the shower of some homes and even participates in some explosive tests of gas well casings. She asks questions, reports on what she learns and puts it all together from the perspective of a farm wife and mother with the same concerns any family would have. It’s authentic. It’s educational. It’s the antidote to a very flawed Gasland.
Truthland: Dispatches from the Real Gasland – Full Movie [HD]
Source:
Filed under Al Gore, Climate, Energy, Environmentalism
The religious underpinnings of Leftism
J-bob sent me a list of links about Josh Fox’s numerous lies about fracking. At one of them, I read an illuminating piece by Tom Shepstone excerpted here:
The truth is irrelevant for their purposes, only material to be cut from or pasted into the script when convenient. It reminds me of a forum discussion, in which I was engaged recently, where an anti-natural gas commenter argued the following:
Weak-minded individuals confuse facts with truth. Facts are merely data points, and data can be used to support just about any argument you care to make. When people want to distract you from a critical issue, they often attempt to push the debate into factual minutia. It’s a common rhetorical tactic in today’s American public forum.
Sadly, this is how so many of our activist friends think. It’s all about the narrative, the story and the theater for them – a way for them to tell us what they believe, rather than what they know. The entire debate, for them, is anything but a review of the evidence, the logic or the science. No, it’s about what they imagine to be true, what they have faith to be true. Facts that contradict are just distractions to them because they are committed, heart and soul, to one set of beliefs about what they see and don’t care to know anything else. Their minds have been captured in an ideological perspective that allows no dissent and dismisses all criticisms, all facts to the contrary and all possibilities of any other view.
Shepstone is talking about the fracking debate, but we’ve seen the same thing from Gore-acles, Obama-philes, Pro-Aborts, Atheists and on and on.
It reminds me of something Dinesh D’Souza wrote about life after death:
The bottom line is that the atheist has no better proof that there isn’t life after death than the believer has that there is. Both groups are claiming knowledge that neither group actually possesses. For the atheist, no less than for the believer, it is entirely a matter of faith.
This equivalence between atheism and belief might seem equally damaging to both positions, but in fact it poses a much bigger problem for atheism.
First, the faith of the believer at least has a plausible source. That source is divine revelation as expressed in a sacred text. So the believer is trusting in what is held to be an unimpeachable source, namely God.
From where, by contrast, does the atheist get his faith? Who or what is the atheist trusting for the determination that there is no afterlife? To this, the atheist typically replies that he is trusting in reason. …
[But] there are no controlled empirical experiments that can resolve the issue one way or the other. Consequently atheists [say,”The absence of evidence is evidence of absence.” … But this position] confuses “what is known by a given person under the circumstances” with “what is or is not the case.” …
“Not found” is not the same thing as “found not to exist.” … On the basis of the available facts, not only does the atheist not know what happens after death, he cannot possibly know. The absence of evidence is evidence of nothing. …
Atheists like to think of themselves as the party of reason, advancing views that are based only on facts and evidence [when in reality they too hold] a faith-based position.
Source:
Filed under Atheism, Christianity, Environmentalism
Something Rotten in Gasland
You may or may not have heard of the anti-fracking movies “Gasland” and “Gasland II”” by Josh Fox. The fake “David and Goliath” myth about him is presented uncritically at the beginning of this trailer as absolute fact.
Gasland Trailer [2:47]
According to the Josh-as-David myth, a natural gas company offered him $100,000 for permission to frack on his property. Josh-as-David nobly declined. Instead of taking the money and keeping quiet about the alleged evils of fracking, Josh stood up to the Philistine natural gas giants and made “Gasland.”
The thing about heroes is … they’re supposed to be honest. Josh Fox is not. In the movie’s opening segments, Fox often refers to the 19.5 acres in Milanville, Pa., as “my land.” He also talks about “my $100,000″ in reference to money allegedly offered to him by an unnamed gas company to frack on “his” land.
1. The land belongs to his father.
2. The property consists of two parcels each about 500 feet wide and totaling 19.29 acres. One is fairly steep in parts; the other is near a stream. A typical fracking well pad is slightly less than 500 feet square and requires fairly level ground. It also must be sited a minimum of 500 feet from any major stream, building, well or septic system. Neither of Josh’s father’s parcels are suitable for fracking.
3. Natural gas leases are easy to identify, because each company uses a unique format. In “Gasland,” Josh shows the lease offer he claims he turned down. It’s from Hess Corporation, a company that has done zero business in the township where Pater Fox’s parcels are located.
4. Josh claims he received “his” offer in 2008. But the Hess company didn’t start soliciting fracking leases until 2009 when Josh was already making “Gasland.” However, once Hess came into the general area (though not the specific townships where the Fox parcels are), their lease forms became widely available.
5. When challenged, Josh says he no longer has the original documents. What … this was SO IMPORTANT that he turned up his nose at $100 grand, but then he misplaced the evidence? Maybe the dog ate them.
6. Josh likes to cast himself as this altruistic savior of the planet, but anti-fracking has paid much more than $100,000, even if that latter money had ever even existed, which it clearly did not. HBO paid him $750,000 in upfront money to shoot “Gasland”, then publicized it for him. The Park Foundation paid him $150,000 to promote anti-fracking. And he gets paid $5,000-$7,500 to lie out his lying liar hole about his personal saintliness and the evils of natural gas.
Gasland II Debunked [2:44]
Source:
Something Rotten in Gasland by Tom Shepstone – June 7, 2011
http://energyindepth.org/marcellus/something-rotten-in-gasland/
H/t J-bob
Filed under Energy, Environmentalism, Fracking, Movies & Television
The Moral Case for the Fossil Fuel Industry
If we define morality to mean any activity that is fundamentally beneficial to human life, then the fossil fuel industry is resoundingly moral, because it produces the most abundant, affordable, reliable energy in the world.
The fossil fuel industry thus makes every other industry more productive and, in turn, makes every individual more productive and thus more prosperous. Because of fossil fuels, human beings enjoy a level of opportunity to pursue happiness that previous generations couldn’t even dream of.
But, I hear the Lefties squawking, fossil fuels are bad for the environment, which makes them immoral by your own definition! Really? Let’s talk about that. In order to assess the fossil fuel industry’s impact on our environment, we need to answer two questions:
- What is its impact on threats to the environment?
- What is its impact on environmental resources?
1. What is its impact on threats to the environment?
The “fossil fuels are immoral” case says they damage our environment, making it less habitable for humans. But this is based on a false assumption that the raw environment is hospitable to humans. It isn’t.
The natural environment is loaded with things that cause high infant mortality, premature aging, injury, disease and death. It is only thanks to the cheap, plentiful, reliable energy provided by fossil fuels that we are able to modify and control our environment so that it is safer and more hospitable for human life.
We enjoy sturdy, climate-controlled shelter and clothing, purified water and plentiful fresh food only because of fossil fuels. We live longer, healthier lives because of labor saving machinery and high tech medical care. None of this is possible without cheap, plentiful, reliable energy.
2. What is its impact on environmental resources?
The “fossil fuels are immoral” case says fossil fuel resources are scarce, so we shouldn’t use them. That’s just dumb. If I’ve got food in the cupboard and I’m hungry, I need to eat so I can keep up my strength to work toward obtaining more food.
Besides coal, oil, and natural gas aren’t natural resources until we do something to make them useful. If we just leave them in the ground, they don’t do anyone any good at all.
Some call those developing shale and oil sands energy sources “exploiters.” Gimme a break. They’re turning stone and sludge into life-giving energy. What good is that stuff doing anyone sitting in the ground? Sheesh.
Besides, every material is finite including the materials necessary to making solar panels and windmills. And don’t get me started on what the absurd corn ethanol industry has done to food prices. “You can always grow more corn” isn’t a valid argument, because you need land to grow corn and land is a finite resource.
And so what if fossil fuels will eventually be depleted? They’re there now. We’re here now. The only MORAL choice is to use them to keep human society strong while we work on developing non-fossil fuel energy technologies that work as well or better than fossil fuels … which the ones we have now do not.
The above is based on The Moral Case for the Fossil Fueld Industry
Comments Off on The Moral Case for the Fossil Fuel Industry
Filed under Energy, Environmentalism
Flaming faucets are not caused by fracking
Methane (which is flammable) was first isolated by Alessandro Volta between 1776 and 1778. Volta was inspired to study gases after reading work by Benjamin Franklin.
The following is excerpted from a letter written by Benjamin Franklin:
In 1764, I heard it several times mentioned, that by applying a lighted candle near the surface of some rivers, a sudden flame would catch and spread on the water. …
In 1765, I heard of the same experiment, the whole surface of the water was in a blaze, as instantly as the vapour of warm inflammable spirits.
Obama’s Former EPA Chief Admits NO Fracking Water Contamination
Later, the Obama EPA issued … then RETRACTED … a “Fracking Is Bad” report.
Sources:
What is methane? @ http://www.rwlwater.com/what-is-methane/
Franklin letter @ https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=579036415471047&set=a.208982849143074.48148.208180129223346&type=1&ref=nf. Edited for clarity only by CtH. The full text is at this URL.
Filed under Energy, Environmentalism, EPA, Fracking
The FBI’s 31 Most Wanted Terrorists
That’s right, Janet.
ALL 31 of these people are NOT Rightwingnuts.
- They’re not war veterans.
- They’re not Christian fundamentalists.
- They’re not Pro-Lifers or NRA gun nuts.
THIRTY are violent Muslim extremists, all with Muslim names and dark skin.
The lone “whitebread” is a violent Animal-Rights extremist.
He eats vegan, enjoys sailing, and likes to set off bombs laced with nails.
The FBI is offering a reward of up to $250,000 for information leading directly to his arrest and has his poster marked, “SHOULD BE CONSIDERED ARMED AND DANGEROUS.”
Not that a quarter mill is that big a deal on this list. The lone woman is worth a whole entire million.
And that crap about how poverty and a lack of education breed violence? It’s crap. Zulkifli Abdhir is a Malaysian who was educated in engineering in the United States. He speaks Malaysian, English, Tagalog, Arabic and Terrorism. Wadoud Muhammad Hafiz al-Turki is a civil engineer who speaks Arabic, English and Terrorism.
So tell me, Secretary Left-Wing Obama Democrat Napolitano. Who is guilty of profiling? Me for reporting the facts or you for sending reports out to every law enforcement agency in the country pointing your “OMG! Potential Terrorists” finger at your POLITICAL enemies?
And while you’re answering questions (or shouting, “Look, a squirrel!” which is more likely), I’d really like to know why Anas Al-Liby has been granted political asylum in the UNITED KINGDOM!
Has _Resident Øbama’s foreign policy managed to not only embolden our enemies but embitter our allies to this degree?
Or was it the iPod he gave the Queen?
Sources:
Filed under Barack Obama, Environmentalism, Islam, Janet Napolitano, Terrorism
Roasting Al Gore for Earth Day
@algore – Earth Day is a reminder of our eternal duty to protect our planet, our home.
- Al Gore owns a $9 million mansion in Montecito, a luxury apt at the St Regis in SF, and a 10k sqft house in TN.
- His home has 20 bedrooms and 8 bathrooms, which can only be powered by 18,400 kWh. (12 times the average in US)
- He had a $30,000 home electric bill last year.
- Al Gore’s carbon footprint is a 24 EEE.
- He is the most obscene hypocrite in the history of politics.
@angelaisms – My son brought home a flier for an Earth Day thing. I threw it away & told him that we don’t celebrate fake holidays started by murderers.
Source:
http://twitchy.com/2013/04/22/iowahawk-roasts-al-gore-for-earth-day/
Comments Off on Roasting Al Gore for Earth Day
Filed under Al Gore, Climate, Environmentalism
polination.blog 