On Saturday, March 28, 2009 at 8:30 PM, people, businesses, and governments will switch off their lights to save energy for one hour. The campaign, called Earth Hour, is aimed at promoting action to address climate change. According to the campaign website:
Earth Hour is a global WWF climate change initiative. The campaign invites individuals, businesses, governments and communities to turn out their lights for one hour on one day of the year to show their support for action on climate change. The event began in Sydney in 2007, when 2 million people switched off their lights. In 2008, more than 50 million people around the globe participated. In 2009, Earth Hour aims to reach out to 1 billion people in 1,000 cities.
The initiative enjoys widespread support, even from conservatives. Earlier today, Christian Paradis, Minister of Public Works and Government Services, and Jim Prentice, Minister of the Environment announced that the Government of Canada will participate in Earth Hour by reducing lighting in all federally owned buildings.
Unfortunately, a handful of conservative bloggers didn’t get the memo. Several member blogs of the Blogging Tories are calling for a counter-campaign to waste energy in order to offset the energy reductions of those participating in Earth Hour. One of the bloggers calling for a waste energy campaign is Kate McMillan of the popular blog Small Dead Animals, which was recently named the #3 political blog in Canada.
The effectiveness and optics of a waste energy campaign are self-evident. As fellow Law is Cool contributor Will McNair (@willmcnair)Â tweeted, “that’s like dismissing the efficacy of the gun registry by shooting someone.”
McNair's Gun Registry Tweet
Progressive bloggers were quick to respond to the conservatives’ contrariness. Having learned how to play these situations from “opposite day” in elementary school, one leftist blogger called for a counter-counter-campaign called “Don’t Stab Yourself in the Face Hour 2009“. As of writing, no conservative bloggers have taken the bait. (Note: Law Is Cool and its contributors do not support the stabbing of any body part.)
So what does this little episode teach us? First, it puts into sharp focus the extent to which political partisans are willing to do incredibly assinine things in defence of their ideologies. Second, it reminds us that there are still a great many people who do not believe that human-induced climate change is a reality. Third, it suggests that the blogosphere is in dire need of a more, shall we say, Law-Is-Cool-esque level of discourse.
I would say that Blogging Tories are a blessing to all who want to bring the Harper government down.
I saw the suggestion the other day that for people like that, we have a DO NOT POKE YOURSELF IN THE EYE WITH A KNITING NEEDLE day
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oppositional_defiant_disorder
Leftdog – perfect.
Like most you missed the point of Kate’s Y2Koyto posts. I would recommend looking up the word satire.
Turning off your lights for one hour while living the 8759 hours a year in a glutinous wasteful western lifestyle is what is really sad. Turning off your lights in a 2000 sqft suburban house is akin to making sure your tire pressure is right in your hummer 0.01% of the miles you drive.
Two things:
First – “Climate change” is not caused by people. Watch the documentary “The Great Global Warming Swindle” and see if you still think science backs up “climate change”.
Second – “It will take more than the metropolitan borough of South Tyneside, population 152,000, to solve global warming. Even if a billion people turn off their lights this Saturday, the entire event will be equivalent to switching off China’s emissions for six short seconds” -The Australian. Looks like you’d better get China on-board with the-sky-is-falling-drill first.
ODD describes perfectly the Left and the Greens.
Anyway, as one who doesn’t believe the AGW fearmongering because it is not based on scientific evidence but political feel-goodiness, I will explain why I will be burning tires, leaving my diesel idling all weekend, and turning on every single light and appliance in the house all weekend long.
Because I’m speaking truth to power.
Because dissent is patriotic.
Because nobody tells me what to do, especially do-good busybodies who haven’t yet finished going through puberty.
Because the Left have a hidden agenda of becoming a totalitarian fascist Green state, where every aspect of my life is to be controlled by somebody else.
Because I live in a free country. As of today, anyway.
It should be renamed “Annual P1ssing Green Into the Wind But Feeling Self-Important Nonetheless” Hour.
Anything stemming from the morally bankrupt WWF should be rejected out of hand or at the very least looked upon with grave skepticism: these are the gaia lovers who sentence millons of Africans to a horrible malaria-infected death each year through their support of banning DDT.
mhb23re at gmail d0t calm
Listen people Earth Hour is nonsense from several standpoints. First it does nothing but put people in dark and cold homes for an hour as a form of protest and activism.
It saves ZERO energy, the powerplants do not shut down for an hour regardless of the demand. Now that would be a real earth hour based on the goals, a complete black out. Of course the person needing emergency surgery would be SOL.
The counter-activism proposed is as legitimate a form of protest as any counter demonstration. When conservatives protest the liberals are out in droves counter protesting and vice versa, what is the difference here?
It is that “environmentalists” cannot fathom that someone could possibly come to a different conclusion than they have on climate, or there are alternative views on how to deal with any possible anthropogenic influence on climate.
All this anti-“earth hour” rhetoric is nothing but a show that not everyone is drinking Al Gore’s Kool-Aid. A few of us can think for ourselves and see right through these little BS propaganda exercises.
“the efficacy of the gun registry” – yeah, OK. As in, it was efficient in wasting money.
As such, the money was unavailable for more policing, suicide prevention counselling, or healthcare. You know, programs that would actually SAVE lives. Bonehead.
Check out the Auditor General’s audit findings on the Registry from a few years back. She’s hardly a Conservative Partisan.
Texas Canuck:
We gather that Texas Canuck didn’t know what ‘efficacy‘ meant and thought it was misspelled.
Maybe we can ask for free samples?
Lots of samples.
Law is Cool Contributors:
Says a lot about you that you even know about that medication. I had to look it up.
To be contrarian to make a point about the stupidity of useless gestures implies a mental disorder to you, does it?
I teach my children to turn off unnecessary lights and to be thoughtful about their use of energy, especially since Dad has to pay the bill! But to follow this simpleton plan to turn off lights for one hour is to be a sheep, and not a thinking, independent human.
In your world, it’s better to be part of the in crowd, eh? I’ve always preferred to THINK for myself.
Intersting line at the end of the statement:
“Third, it suggests that the blogosphere is in dire need of a more, shall we say, Law-Is-Cool-esque level of discourse”
And what level would that be?
Would it be the level where we all think and say the same thing…because that’s what our Professors told us to think and say?
Would it be the same level that tells us to believe everything we hear because it came from the mouths of Al Gore or David Suzuki?
Would it be the same level that prevents other voices from joining the debate because they do not agree with the subscribed mantra of the Ivy League and elitist clubs?
Please share your infinite wisdom with we knuckle draggers. While you’re at it….look up the word hubris.
and if you can’t find that word…..try “dork-wad”
Geez guys…..(and girls)…if this is your level of critical thought, remind me to defend myself in court if the need every arises. Frankly, you are doing the reputation of lawyers a disservice, and given that the reputations of lawyers is below slug-slime……that’s an impressive accomplishment.
Tell you what….the next time you hear some scientist or activist tell you that Global Warming is real, and that the debate is over…ask them why they keep insisting on taxpayer grants to carry on with their “research.”
That’s basic logic folks……if the debate is officially over, then why the insistence on more money? Pehaps there is more to Global Warming that temperature….maybe money? Fame? Glory?
I daresay that many of the “scientists” on the Global Warming bandwagon are going to look like real idiots very soon. Credibility gone…funding gone, and hopefully the idiots who bought into the claptrap will start thinking for themselves.
If not…they may as well go to Law School.
My two cents:
Earth Hour is symbolic. It is not a tactic to substantially reduce emissions. I don’t think many people believe that it is, regardless of their political ideology.
So what does Earth Hour symbolize?
Making personal sacrifices in order to reduce pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.
What does this do to help reduce pollution and greenhouse gas emissions?
The consequence of hundreds of thousands of people across the world simultaneously making a symbolic gesture is probably that the symbol, the message, gets remembered just a little bit more strongly and clearly for the year by everyone. This, in turn, will hopefully change peoples’ actual day-to-day behaviour just a little bit.
What a crazy idea! Making sacrifices to keep the planet clean and cool. We can make sacrifices to fight wars, plagues, and natural disasters. But if the problem isn’t visceral and sudden, it’s pretty much invisible to some people. Too bad. So that’s why we have Earth Hour. To make the problem of pollution and climate change perceptible.
What does this Anti-Earth Hour symbolize?
I’ll let you tell me.
(And to those who say “freedom from totalitarianism,” please try again. (1) Earth Hour is voluntary; (2) Is it totalitarian to use the power of numbers and “propaganda” to fight wars, plagues, natural disasters? If your answer is “No,” then how can you claim that this is? If your answer is yes, then I would say that this is justifiable totalitarianism. I would also say, go read Hannah Arendt because this is not totalitarian.)
My girlfriend reminds me of two things:
1. Each year we have Remembrance Day. That is symbolic. Think back to your memories of Remembrance Day as a child. What did it symbolize to you? To me it symbolized human sacrifice, especially fighting just wars. Any problems with Remembrance Day? Too totalitarian for you guys to participate in Remembrance Day?
2. The absurdity of fighting the “collectivism” and “totalitarianism” of Earth Hour by collectively, all at the same time, with much publicity, doing the same thing for one hour (viz., wasting electricity and polluting).
So…I guess for energy gluttons of the likes of Al Gore and David Suzuki (huge houses…low people density) turning off their lights for an hour would probably feed an African village for a week.
James Halifax:
Thank you for your kind comments.
There are two reasons why funding for climate change research is necessary:
1) To come up with a solution to the problem.
2) Apparently, there are still people out there, like you, who refuse to believe the research. Unfortunately, we are still having to spend money to try to convince you. By “you” I mean policymakers, who are ignoring the facts and are doing little or nothing to fix our broken planet.
Like David, I agree that Earth Hour is not about actually having a serious impact on climate change. Everybody – including the people who started Earth Hour – recognizes that turning off your lights for an hour isn’t going to solve the world’s problems. When a billion people join together to make a symbolic gesture, what that does do is send a message to our leaders that climate change is an issue we care about, and they’d better start listening.
By the way, I strongly urge you to take up smoking. I hear the jury’s still out on whether it’s harmful.
In the history of the planet Earth, there have been 11 recorded Ice Ages. Global Warming (or climate change, if you prefer) has ended every one of them!!
Saying that, I like the idea of this Earth Hour, and I’m going to get it to work for me. I’m going tell my two daughters that I am going to launch a protest and that we should turn on every light in the house on for this hour. Probably clean the oven too.
Now I know that they have been indoctrinated in the whole Earth Hour/Climate Change Scam at school. When they show their disgust at my plan, I will use it to highlight their hypocrisy in trying to suggest that this Earth Hour will have an impact when they leave the lights, TVs and computers and even the friggin’ hair straightener on behind them ALL THE TIME.
Long term, I hope to have Earth Hour help me save on my utilities.
James Halifax wrote, “Intersting [sic] line at the end of the statement:
‘Third, it suggests that the blogosphere is in dire need of a more, shall we say, Law-Is-Cool-esque level of discourse’
And what level would that be?
Would it be the level where we all think and say the same thing…because that’s what our Professors told us to think and say?”
I wrote the blog post, so I guess it’s up to me to explain what I meant by it. Law Is Cool has a diverse cast of contributors from across the political spectrum who hold a wide range of opinions on political, social, and legal issues. Contrary to your suggestion, Law Is Cool contributors do not “think and say the same thing”.
What I meant by “a […] Law-Is-Cool-esque level of discourse” is that we tend on this site to actually engage in discussions about issues that are important to us. We argue, sometimes quite passionately, about those issues, but we always try to do it in a way that is somewhat constructive or insightful.
My criticism of the SDA post is that it is childish and ridiculous. I understand that many people on the political right do not believe in human-induced climate change. That is fine. I also understand that many on the political right will not be participating in Earth Hour. That is also fine. What isn’t fine is deliberately doing something that will be damaging to the environment (for reasons over and above the climate impact) in order to make that political point.
Perhaps a better way to engage in those issues would be to hold an awareness campaign in which attention is drawn to the evidence that undercuts the arguments of those who believe in action to address climate change. Instead, SDA and a few other blogs have decided to do something that not only fails to advance their political position, but makes them look like children.
Lawrenece gridin wrote:
“1) To come up with a solution to the problem.”
To which I respond:
There is no problem. Global warming is a myth, and as soon as the “scientists” who raised the alarm became aware of it…they changed the name to “Climate change”
Which by the way…happens about 4 times a year. We call them:
Spring
Summer
Fall
Winter
He continues:
“2) Apparently, there are still people out there, like you, who refuse to believe the research.”
To which I respond:
Sorry Larry, but if you’re going to discuss the “research” you would be well advised to study the research of the scientists who are still very skeptical of those who couldn’t wait to jump on the (funding) bandwagon. There are more scientists who have DOUBTS or simply do not believe that our activities affect the climate, than there are who signed Kyoto. You don’t hear from them much though……but many who are listed in the IPCC are ticked that their names are on the document.
He continues:
” Unfortunately, we are still having to spend money to try to convince you. By “you†I mean policymakers, who are ignoring the facts and are doing little or nothing to fix our broken planet.”
To which I respons:
Sorry again Larry….but I have the ability to think for myself, and observe. Throwing money around to change my mind is a waste of time, I can’t be bought or frightened into believing something I know to be bogus, any more than you can climb off the bandwagon you find so comfortable.
He goes on:
“Like David, I agree that Earth Hour is not about actually having a serious impact on climate change. Everybody – including the people who started Earth Hour – recognizes that turning off your lights for an hour isn’t going to solve the world’s problems. When a billion people join together to make a symbolic gesture,”
Sorry, I don’t deal in symbolic gestures. I’m more of a realist. You should try it some time.
More:
“what that does do is send a message to our leaders that climate change is an issue we care about, and they’d better start listening.”
No Larry, what it does is show how shallow minded folks make themselves feel better by accomplishing nothing, while taking the opportunity to feel superior. Sort of like the logic expressed by supporters of the gun registry mentioned earlier. Folks who know nothing of guns, or legal gun owners are all for it…because in their case ignorance truly is bliss. Try and take the gang-banger off the streets though…and watch out. Some lawyer or judge will start worrying about the poor soul’s rights.
Finally:
“By the way, I strongly urge you to take up smoking. I hear the jury’s still out on whether it’s harmful.”
Actually Larry, smoking is bad for you. We have actual proof of that. Scientific, observable proof. Proof in the form of dead smokers, lung cancer, chemo…etc..etc…
The only proof of Global Warming or Climate Change….is to be found in Climate models that have NEVER been accurate, have been soundly refuted, and are produced by activists with an agenda that frankly dismisses humans as a disease infecting the earth. Their solution is to reduce the population. These folks see humans as a disease…and they too would probably love it if more people took up smoking. The end result of that habit is what the eco-fanatics are looking for eventually.
Larry, I’m sure you and your equally shallow band-wagoneers have watched the movie “The Day After tomorrow” and thought it was a documentary. Well, let’s use your logic Larry…..I’ve seen “Planet of the Apes” three times…I think we should immediately kill all the chimps.
Just in case.
As an aside….folks here think Kate McMillan at small dead animals is a bit of a duffos because she’s asking people to use more energy during “Earth Hour.” Well, let’s turn that around a bit. We all know that whatever SDA’s results are…they will be symbolic. Leaving your lights on and running up the power bill won’t accelerate “Global Warming”…but it’s a symbolic act exactly the same as turning your lights all off.
Those who turn the lights off, and those who turn them on are two sides of the same page. Both accomplish nothing, but apparently feel better about themselves.
I guess that’s a draw.
Earth Hour is a joke. A propaganda tool.
Devin says that Kate’s post was “childish and ridiculous”, as opposed to what Devin has written here?
I’m sorry for bursting some bubbles here, manmade global warming is a scam. It has no scientific validity. The whole CO2 leads temperature theory doesn’t work. It’s amazing how many people seem to overlook this.
As mentioned, the climate models don’t work. We’re going to turn society on its head because of seriously flawed computer models?
Climate change eh? Is the global climate ever stable? The idea seems to be that we will exercise control over the global climate – never mind the details I guess……
Now, yes humans actually do have an impact on climate. For instance, Calgary going from 400,000 to over 1 million people in 30 years has a -local- impact, mostly from -land use- changes.
Compared to the power of the Sun and all the other various natural factors, humanity is quite insignificant.
regards,
“What isn’t fine is deliberately doing something that will be damaging to the environment (for reasons over and above the climate impact) in order to make that political point.”
Devin, that’s simply an opinion (which you’re entitled to), but bud, you’re going to have to prove that point. Nothing in the act of turning on a light or running a car can be shown to be any more detrimental to the planet than the act of turning off a few lights. That’s very old news (from the …70s, no less)and one of the reasons why most office towers leave their fluorescents on. Yes, Earth Hour is indeed symbolic – its symbolic of a population which really has no idea about how their planet works, or what the real risks to it are. Its simply analagous to the good churchgoers who throw a coin in the tray every Sunday, then head out to play a round of golf…
Devin
You wrote “I understand that many people on the political right do not believe in human-induced climate change.”
I think this statement shows your misunderstanding of the situation. Yes, many on the “right” take issue with the whole climate change meme being disseminated as a fait accompli. However, are you seriously postulating that the legion of scientists who refute the theory of climate change are to be so easily ideologically categorized as “right wing” because they disagree with your or your fellow travellers version of the world? Can they not be “left wing” or “moderate”, “progressive”, “neo-liberal”, “neo-conservative” or even ideologically agnostic? Why does their scientific opinion, or indeed the opinion of those who agree with them, have to be ideologically pidgeonholed? Are we discussing science here or political ideology?
b clarkson,
let me answer that question for you. the answer is “b” – political ideology.
“First, it puts into sharp focus the extent to which political partisans are willing to do incredibly assinine things in defence of their ideologies.”
I agree with this comment. They sit around in the dark claiming it will save the world.
I’m going to save the planet by creating a carbon sink.
I’m throwing all my old newspapers in the landfill.
It’s a great way to sequester carbon.
Almost as good as storing carbon in the walls of my house.
Canadians have carved out a living in a climactic zone that is in a deep freeze for half the year and where distances are enormous. Furthermore, Canada supplies the world with natural resources on a scale unequalled anywhere … and it all requires energy. From the bricks on the buildings, the asphalt on the highways, to the tourist industry and agriculture, from manufacturing to mining and technological innovation … it all takes energy and transportation in a region vast and harsh.
Yet, Canada has, despite a reliance on fossil fuels, one of the cleanest environments on the planet … there is no sulphur cloud drifting from Canada’s shores floating over entire oceans … our cities and towns are not poisonous swamps of human refuse and chemicals … and our lakes along which Ontario’s largest manufacturing belt is located are cleaner now than they were 30 years ago. Canada is a miracle … truly a shining example to the world of how a culture can thrive in an environment that is harsh, and how to do so without destroying nature.
Can we do better? Of course; but that improvement has little to do with Earth Hour but rather to do with reductions in pollution, better conservation, and balancing human development with natural ecosystems. Earth Hour has nothing … I repeat NOTHING to do with these. Earth Hour is a Global Warming protest … and human caused Global Warming isn’t even a fact … it’s a failing theory.
“that’s like dismissing the efficacy of the gun registry by shooting someone.â€
Touché, sir. Because, as we have seen, ever since the imposition of the gun registry, not one person has been shot.
Until you live in a cave, wear a loin cloth, and renounce all forms of industrialization, including fire, then you are just another Earth Hour hypocrit. Its easy to be a critical, moralizing blowhard when one doesn’t actually walk the talk!
As a nation it should be a duty to rid ourselves of intolerant, bigoted individuals like yourselves. I agree with Kate and all people including liberals who question your narrow status quo. You fly and drive everywhere and continue to live your “Carbon” lifestyle. Buying “credits” is unbelievably hypocritical. Your thinking is pure idealogical BS. If you want people like me to change, make an example of yourself first. And make it so that I believe you mean it. Do it for at least a year. Please justify yourselves in a response. I love a good laugh.
Scientific opinion on climate change
END.
Lawrence Gridin, Wikipedia? Seriously?
You better get use to not being taken seriously if that’s the limit of your critical thinking.
Show me a graph of the last 100 years where CO2 leads temperature increase, without exception.
This should be pretty easy……right Lawrence. END!
regards,
There is no dispute among the accredited scientific community about human contribution to global warming.
We know some of SDA readers have problems with the notion of “science.” Sorry, the world was not created 4004 BCE, and evolution is a fact.
NY Times:
We also know some SDA readers have problems with big words, so here’s a hand.
un·e·quiv·o·cal: Admitting of no doubt or misunderstanding; clear and unambiguous.
The only remaining explanation is a complete conspiracy by all of the established scientific community, all politicians and governments around the world, and even all the NGOs and the UN. The bigger problem is what do you do with a very small subset of the population that is enormously resistant to fact and continues to act in sociopathic ways?
Inevitably such people will not content themselves with hostile words, and resort instead to breaking laws. At that point we do hope you obtain legal counsel and receive fair treatment. Just do not expect that your lawyer, better educated and more intelligent than you, will be similarly delusional.
All of the arguments presented have been adequately debunked here.
And on that note, we will end it.