Every teacher in the New York City Department of Education has received (or is receiving) a paper copy of a survey that we're supposed to fill out. At the top it says "GO GREEN!", with instructions on how to answer the survey online if you so choose.
Doing the survey online doesn't actually save any paper if the paper surveys have already been printed out!
On a pile of shul flyers for a concert - "We're environmentally friendly, so no tickets will be issued for this event." On the pile next to it, exhortations to purchase fresh flowers from Israel as ideal seder gifts. Green Fail.
ReplyDeleteWhat's "ungreen" about flowers from Israel? Unless you mean that the fact that they have to be transported means that this is "bad for the environment". If that is the case, why don't we all go back to living in caves since almost all economic activity....no....all HUMAN activity is bad for the environment?
ReplyDeleteHow do you figure all human activity is bad for the environment?
ReplyDeleteShipping flowers from Israel when they can be purchased from local growers is pretty easy to figure out.
ML-
ReplyDeleteYou are putting some questionable problem about supposed "global warming" ahead of economic support for Israel? Who says that is the right priority? Are the environmentalists are planning to institute some sort of police state to enforce their values on the rest of us by telling us what we can or can not buy based on some "priority" scheme they cook up?
How do you get from the comment "Green Fail" to the suggestion of a police state (or any enforcement mechanism whatsoever)? Are you planning to institute some sort of a police state to make sure we all buy from Israel?
ReplyDeleteBZ-
ReplyDeleteMr Question Mark was claiming that it is hypocrisy to claim one is "green" (i.e. "environmentally concious") in saying that "no tickets will be issued for the event" (why is that considered "green"?) and then to encourage people to buy flowers from Israel.
In other words, Question Mark is attempting to shame people into not buying flowers from Israel because that doesn't jibe with his "green conciousness". I am sure you are aware that there are no lack of people who want to legislate all kinds of behavior in order to push their environmental agenda, regardless of the cost, regardless of the consequences and regardless of whether there indeed is a real threat to the environment by such activity.
If buying flowers from Israel is "ungreen", then buying ANYTHING transported over some distance is a "problem". If "Green" people are going to start nagging people about things like this, like some people are already nagging meat eaters for the same sins, then we are going to end up with something like the "America Firsters" before World War II with everbody turning in on themselves, cutting off trade with other countries, damaging economic development, particularly in poorer countries and basically telling everyone else to shove it just so a few people who are fanatically enamored of this cause can "feel good about themselves".
Hysteria about the supposed threat from Global Warming and other such doubtful "environmental threat" (and I am not saying that one should ignore and abuse the enviroment, I am just saying we should be cautious before taking precipitate action that could backfire) doesn't do anybody any good.
Mr Question Mark was claiming that it is hypocrisy to claim one is "green" (i.e. "environmentally concious") in saying that "no tickets will be issued for the event" (why is that considered "green"?) and then to encourage people to buy flowers from Israel.
ReplyDeleteWell, it is. One way to avoid this hypocrisy is your way - to say that environmental impacts aren't important and other concerns (such as supporting the Israeli economy) have more priority. Another way is to say that environmental impacts are important, and to make purchasing decisions accordingly. Either of these positions might be considered right or wrong, depending on one's opinion, but neither is hypocritical. Hypocrisy is loudly self-identifying as "environmentally friendly" and acting otherwise.
I am sure you are aware that there are no lack of people who want to legislate all kinds of behavior in order to push their environmental agenda, regardless of the cost, regardless of the consequences and regardless of whether there indeed is a real threat to the environment by such activity.
Straw man! No one would say that they push an environmental agenda "regardless of whether there indeed is a real threat to the environment". They push it because, in their estimation, there IS such a threat. You may disagree that there is, and therefore reach a different normative conclusion, but you misrepresent their motives when you suggest that they (might) accept your premises and push an environmental agenda regardless.
BZ-
ReplyDeleteI have heard it stated by environmental activists that indeed the global warming threat has not been conclusively proven but that fear of it can be used to push other agendas that would not otherwise generate the mass support a good scare the public can relate to would create...you know, Rahm Emanuels "you shouldn't waste a good crisis".
This is what the late Michael Crichton was pointing out in his book "State of Fear".
GEEZ, these people. Michael Crichton wrote FICTION. You probably think somewhere out there a bunch of dinosaurs have been made from fossilized DNA extract.
ReplyDeleteSaying things like "not conclusively proven" and "excuse to push an agenda", you might very well be talking about Weapons of Mass Destruction. Except the proof of global climate change comes from science, not people with vested interests in geopolitical dominance.
I have heard it stated by environmental activists that indeed the global warming threat has not been conclusively proven but that fear of it can be used to push other agendas
ReplyDeleteCitation?
BarNavi-
ReplyDeleteMichael Crichton wrote books about the misuses of science, using fiction as his vehicle to do this. In his book "State of Fear" he clearly states his opposition to the hysteria generated by the "Global Warming" mafia. He says clearly that the world has been warming up recently (actually, more recently, it has been cooling off, but there has been an upward trend). It is NOT proven conclusively that it is due to human activity. It is knows that the climate has undergone great changes in the past, before mankind had any significant impact on the environment.
The Earth-Atmosphere-Ocean system is an EXTREMELY complex feedback system. Thus it is IMPOSSIBLE to PROVE conclusively that human industrial activity producing C02 is the cause of "global warming". But, even if it is (which, as I said, has NOT been proven), taking rash steps costing trillions of dollars simply as a response to public hysteria is a terrible mistake.
Sure, it is said "there is a scientific consensus" about it. It is said "a majority of climatologists" believe in it. I spoke to a climatologist and he said clearly "we don't know". IN any event, there was once a scientific consensus that the world was flat, that the sun orbited the earth, that phrenology was an accurate science, that astrology is effective, etc, etc.
Too little is still known in order to jump to rash conclusions.
And, no, I am NOT in the pay of the oil companies (on the other hand, maybe the formerly discredited nuclear power industry is secretly funding those who support the "global warming" hysteria-remember how they were discredited after Chernobyl and Three-Mile-Island?).
Kale with Garlic and Oven-Roasted Parsnips
ReplyDeletehttp://www.foodandwine.com/recipes/kale-with-garlic-and-oven-roasted-parsnips
Ingredients
1. 1 1/4 pounds parsnips, peeled and cut into 2-by-1/2-inch sticks
2. 5 tablespoons extra-virgin olive oil
3. Salt and freshly ground pepper
4. 2 pounds kale, stemmed
5. 4 garlic cloves, thinly sliced
6. 8 large scallions, cut into 1/2-inch lengths
Directions
1. Preheat the oven to 400°. Spread the parsnips on a large rimmed baking sheet and toss with 2 tablespoons of the olive oil. Season with salt and pepper and roast in the bottom third of the oven for about 25 minutes, or until lightly browned on the bottom and tender.
2. Meanwhile, bring a large pot of water to a boil. Add salt and then the kale and cook until just tender, about 5 minutes. Drain and then squeeze out the excess water. Coarsely chop the kale.
3. Heat the remaining 3 tablespoons of olive oil in a large skillet. Add the garlic and cook over moderate heat until golden, about 2 minutes. Add the scallions and cook over moderate heat, stirring, until softened, about 2 minutes. Add the kale, season with salt and pepper and cook, stirring, until heated through, about 3 minutes.
4. To serve, add the parsnips to the kale and warm through over moderate heat.
Make Ahead
The kale and parsnips can be prepared through Step 2 and refrigerated overnight. Let return to room temperature before finishing.
btw, did anyone click to see who '?' is? interesting
ReplyDeletebtw, did anyone click to see who '?' is? interesting
ReplyDelete