Climate change news has been much in the news of late. All the ferocious winter weather has been claimed by those who are devoted to the gospel of man-made climate change and by those who are not. Our favorite environmentalist, algore, has even written a poem. You can read it here, if you like.
In that spirit, I have composed a little missive of my own, in honor of the goracle.
The Ballad of algore
The climate is changing
The temps they are rising
Polar bears are losing their ice
Is there anyone who knows what to do?
An unassuming man, all dressed in tan
Said, “I can show you the way”
The Nobel Committee said huzzah
We shall give you a large prize
So people will notice you more
Yes, he has quite a large house in Tennessee
So he needs more energy than you and me
Some call him a prophet
Far ahead of his time
I think maybe he wants to relieve you of your last dime
Ladies and gentlemen, climate guru extraordinaire- algore
Or,”who’s in charge here? Alas, this well could describe the situation in the earthquake ravaged Haiti. ( By the way, we know now what caused the earthquake. Hugo Chavez has announced that it was caused by a new U S weapon. His statement would by ludicrous beyond belief if not for the fact that there are people who will believe it. And others who blame it on George Bush.) Now back to our original subject.
My son and I were talking briefly about things in Haiti and one or both of us commented on Haiti’s state before the earthquake. They already had a barely functioning government and crushing poverty and now this devastation caused by a massive earthquake. Virtually anywhere else in the world would have better positioned to deal with the aftermath than Haiti.
So, what is happening there? The country’ s leadership is either dead or invisible. The United Nations has suffered grave losses in personnel and facilities so who takes charge, provided security, operates the airport etc.? It seems, almost by default, that the U S military has taken charge ( see title quote by Francois Rabelas) of the country in a sense. And that brings a vast amount of criticism, from numerous sources.
People such as our friend Chavez, good ol Daniel Ortega from Nicaragua, the group Doctors Without Borders, Bolivian leader Evo Morales, various French groups and other humanitarian groups. Our troops are in a no-win position. Someone has to do what they are doing. And no , they are not there to occupy the country. Without some semblance of order the over one billion dollars that has been pledged so far will be squandered, stolen or worse.Our own Time magazine is calling it a” compassionate invasion.” Thanks for nothing fellows.
82nd Airborne troops are already there, probably some Marines and Navy as well as directed by Joint Chiefs Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen. So, just one question, maybe two for all these clowns who are protesting. Who do want to handle all this stuff ? Political commentator Janet Daley, writing in the U K Telegraph called it a case of ” America is always wrong, part 85.” Reckon the French are just jealous. She made this telling point. If our interventions are kept to a minimum, they are “callous” and ” selfish.” If we accept full responsibility we are engaged in “imperialist occupation.”
For the troops that are there, I wish you God speed. We know you will do your country proud.
As a young sprout, I wasn’t a big fan of vegetables, unless you count potatoes which you probably can’t. However, as one of the many unexpected benefits of marriage, Mrs THT showed me the error of my ways and I learned that there was more than one food group. I doubt that I get my minimum daily requirement of the green and yellow leafys, but I have significantly improved. ( Do coffee beans count as a vegetable? Shucks!)
From what I have learned in recent days, I may be in real trouble if I do not significantly increase my vegetable intake. According to an article in the UK Telegraph by Murray Waldrop, we might all need to become vegetarian to save our planet from the ravages of global warming.
Waldrop quotes global warming expert Lord Stern of Brentford who authored the Stern Report in 2006 on the cost of tackling global warming. He believes that in the future eating meat could become a socially unacceptable as drinking and driving. He is of course not the first to address this issue. There have already been questions raised about the cost of raising livestock in terms of the resources expended. Also, methane from pigs and cattle is a source of greenhouse gases.
Listen to Lord Stern.” Meat is a wasteful use of water and creates a lot of greenhouse gases. It puts enormous pressure on the world’s resources. A vegetarian diet is better. I think it’s important that people think about what they are doing and that included eating.”
Lord Stern is a former World Bank economist and believes that the Climate Change Conference scheduled for December in Copenhagen should call for an increase in the price of meat and other foods that cause climate change. Presumably this would cause people to consume less of these products.
Shockingly, the British National Farmers Union did not agree with him.
Let us just say for a moment that Lord Stern is spot on and he among others holds sway in this area. What about the untold millions whose livelihoods would be affected? What happens to them? Could one buy carbon offsets and continue to eat meat? Looking down the road, could socially unacceptable become , shall we say, not legal? Sounds really far-fetched, I know. I guess we shall wait for Copenhagen and see.
- Bible study
- Christian living
- Foreign Policy
- International politics
- Legal system
- Life and Death
- Local Politics
- State Politics