At 08:45 AM 4/25/2006, Rich Blinne wrote:
>On 4/24/06, Janice Matchett
><<mailto:janmatch@earthlink.net>janmatch@earthlink.net> wrote:
>At 04:50 PM 4/20/2006, Rich Blinne wrote:
>
>>This also contradicts Rush's "humility"
>>argument. Rush contends it's humble to conclude
>>that we can neither fix nor destroy the
>>environment because it is so much bigger than
>>us and thus God not us is in control.
>
>@ It contradicts nothing. You just misunderstand his position. ....."
>
>...The "list" being discuss here has an
>extremely narrow definition of destruction.
>Destruction means no longer a planet. Merely all
>life being extinguished doesn't qualify. So,
>taking a position more extreme than anyone is
>proposing such as we get Venus' atmosphere
>overnight and killing everyone by definition
>could not make the list. Nevertheless, the
>exercise could have been a good antidote against
>overly pessimistic projections in showing how
>resilient the Earth really is. So, if Rush
>merely quoted the article then we would have accomplished that.
>
>As always Rush needs to add his conclusions at
>the end. Unfortunately, Rush's conclusions were
>not in keeping with the rest of the article.
>Rush's conclusion was since there is no Death
>Star out there that's going to blow us up, then
>we can drive our SUVs and run our air
>conditioners as much as we care. No discussion
>of responsible stewardship of our technology and
>stating we have used our technological prowess
>in the past to solve similar problems and we can
>do it again. Sure, there is tongue-in-cheek with
>what Rush is saying but part of Rush's humor is
>to lump together all who are concerned about the
>environment not merely the small group of
>extremists who would shut down our economy to
>"solve" the problem. Thus, I stand by my original assessment.
At 11:22 AM 4/25/2006, Rich Blinne wrote:
>I would like to add even if I misread Rush and
>he is obliquely arguing for my position (global
>warming is real but overstated in some quarters)
>it is still a non sequiter. The definition of
>"destruction" in the top-ten list is too limited
>to support either of our positions.
@@ The subject is "destroying the planet" ----
but you insist on changing it to "harming the
environment", and various other non-sequiturs.
If you would keep that in mind, you would not be so confused.
I have copied and pasted something Rush wrote in
1992 -- you will find it at item # [3] below.
If you take the time to carefully read it, I
think you will be able to see that he shows the
difference between the hysterical,
radical/extremist environmentalists who insist
that we can either "save the planet" or we can
"destroy the planet" (Sierra Club, et.al.)
and the sane/decent environmentalists (Audubon
Society, et.al.) Particularly notice the bolded
parts, if you will. Do you disagree with any of
the substance of what he wrote?
Now, getting back to yesterday -- notice on
Rush's web page right now -- to the direct
right hand side of his link to the "Top 10 ways
to destroy the earth" is featured one of these
radical extremists. When you click the link
below you'll see who it is and get to read Rush's
comments about this radical and his extremist,
off-the-wall prediction of the world's
destruction within 10 years. (If you don't want
to click the link, here it is at # [1] below):
[1] Algore: "We Have Ten Years Left Before Earth
Cooks " January 27, 2006 http://www.rushlimbaugh.com
RUSH: "... I don't know if you people know this
or not, but Al Gore has been out at the Sundance
Film Festival out there in Park City, Utah. This
is one of Robert Redford's big do's, and
apparently Al Gore is working on a movie that --
what is the name of this movie? Oh, that's right,
"An Inconvenient Truth," and the movie will
document his efforts to raise alarm on the
effects of global warming, and so he brought Tipper and the kids out there.
He's attending parties and posing for pictures
with his fans. He's enjoying macaroni and cheese
at the Discovery Channel's soirée. He's palling
around with Laurie David of Curb Your Enthusiasm,
who is the husband of Larry David, who drives the
Prius and then flies the GV. Larry David says,
"You know, Al is a funny guy, but he's also a
very serious guy who believes humans may have
only 10 years left to save the planet from turning into a total frying pan."
Now, the last time I heard some liberal talk
about "ten years" it was 1988, Ted Danson. We had
ten years to save the oceans; we were all going
to pay the consequences, which would result in
our death. Now Al Gore says we've got ten years.
Ten years left to save the planet from a
scorching. Okay, we're going to start counting.
This is January 27th, 2006. We will begin the
count, ladies and gentlemen. This is just... You
have to love these people -- from afar, and from
a purely observational point of view.
Algore's doomsday countdown to world destruction
stands at approximately 9 years, 278 days, 16
hours, 5 minutes, 47 seconds at the moment. See
the actual number as it counts down live, here: http://www.rushlimbaugh.com
*
Now let's go over what Rush said yesterday :
[2] Monday, 4/24/2006, aprox. 2::20 PM: Rush
(paraphrased) from the audiotape: "Lenin's
birthday (4/22) was chosen for "Earth Day" by
Communists (who've been lost and wandering since
the Soviet Union went south). They've been
saying over and over and over that "we're
destroying the planet". ...So here is some
advice to those would-be earth-destroyers: (Rush
then reads from the list here): Top 10 ways to
destroy the
earth
http://www.livescience.com/technology/destroy%5Fearth%5Fmp.html
-- then says, "...As we can see, the vanity of
humanity thinking they can "destroy the planet"
merely by advancing technological aspects of our
lifestyle is just pure rot-gut. So go ahead and
drive your SUVs ( @ $5. a gallon soon - make book
on it ), and use your air conditioners, etc.,
because there is no way you will "destroy the earth". ..." ~ Rush
*
[3] 1992 Rush Limbaugh
Excerpted from pages 152-168 - Chapter 15
entitled, "Sorry, But The Earth Is Not
Fragile" in his 1992 book, "The Way Things Ought to Be"
"My views on the environment are rooted in my
belief in Creation. I don't believe that life on
earth began spontaneously or as a result of some
haphazard, random selection process; nor do I
believe that nature is oh-so-precariously
balanced. I don't believe that earth and her
ecosystem are fragile, as many radical
environmentalists do. They think that man can
come along, all by himself, and change everything
for the worse; that after hundreds of millions of
years, the last two generations of human
existence are going to destroy the planet. Who do they think they are?
I resent the presumptuous view of man and his
works. I refuse to believe that people, who are
themselves the result of Creation, can destroy
the most magnificent creation of the entire
universe. We cannot comprehend many of the
wonders of the universe. The human mind, or that
small percentage of it that we use, is incapable
of imagining the size of the universe, its
origins, or even where it is. Although some
incredibly arrogant scientists believe they are
capable of scientifically unlocking every mystery
of the universe and of understanding everything
in purely material terms, I believe that there
are certain things that the mind of man simply
cannot discover or ascertain. there are certain
things we were not meant to understand, cannot
understand, and must accept on
faith. ....... [he talks about how in awe he
is about the perfection of this small sphere
(earth) located in this small solar system,
located in this small galaxy, located in this
endless universe] ... then says, "We humans had
nothing to do with the earth's creation, its
placement, or its functioning. We are only part
of it, which is not to downplay our role or
significance in this world. [but] we are as much
a part of it as any of its other inhabitants,
both animate and inanimate; as much as the
redwood tree or a spotted owl, as much a part of
it as a glacier. But environmentalists paint
humans almost as an aberration; as the natural
enemy of nature. According to them, we are
capable of destroying this wondrous planet merely
by being ourselves. That is true vanity, or what
I call humanity vanity. ..[he goes on to discuss many examples].
"...humans are the only creatures capable of
cleaning up the messes made by themselves and all
other creatures. ...The fact is, we couldn't
destroy the earth if we wanted to. The earth is
over 4 billion years old. The arch-enemy of
nature, man, has been on the planet no more than
200,000 years. Man cannot even come close to
creating the powerful forces of nature - many of
them damaging and destructive - yet these forces
have been around for the same 4 billion years the
earth has. And the earth is still here. Imagine
that! [he then goes on to describe how
impossible it would be for man to "destroy the
planet", even if we dedicated all of our mental
and physical resources to the effort.] ...
"...Now, I want to make it clear that when there
is damage to the environment, there is no one who
wants to fix it more than I do. ... [but] we
don't have to punish progress in order to fix the
environment. ... The key to cleaning up our
environment is unfettered free enterprise, our
system of reward. The more economic growth we
have, the more a prosperous people will demand a
cleaner environment. The poor have other things
to worry about, such as feeding their
families. For a study in contrasts, look at the
level of man-made pollution in countries with
totalitarian regimes. Pollution in Eastern
Europe and the former Soviet Union is
horrendous. If you go there you will see dead,
not dying, forests. You will see three-eyed fish
in streams. When no one owns private property,
there is no incentive to keep it clean and pure
because no one has a stake in keeping up its value. ...
"...Yet the environmentalist wackos go out of
their way to find fault with everything in
America. They criticize our profit motive, even
though it's given us the most sophisticated
pollution-control technology in the
world. ...Our prosperity has created a leisure
class that has too much time on its hands, so
they use it to complain about America. In the
process they also enhance their self-esteem. If
they agree that things are wrong and need to be
fixed, they also believe they are the ones who
should have the power in society, not some
business owner or civic leader. These people
"Care". They care so much that caring becomes a
crutch that makes them feel special and more
noble than the rest of us. [the "guuuud"
people]. ... Many of these people have replaced
religion with secular environmentalism. Some of
them even worship the earth goddess Gaia. When
they get together, their gatherings take on the
air of a religious revival meeting. There were
750,000 people in New York's Central Park
recently for "Earth Day". ... [ he then talks
about methods used by environmentalist wackos,
including attempting to criminalize much of the food we eat, etc., etc.] ...
"...It's interesting to note which
environmental hazards these people really worry
about. It is those that are caused by business
or man-made things. ... [gives comparison examples] ...
"...My friends, the earth is a remarkable
creation and is capable of great
rejuvenation. We can't destroy it. It can fix
itself. We shouldn't go out of our way to do
damage, but neither should we buy into the
hysteria and monomania which preaches, in
essence, that we don't belong here. We have a
right to use the earth to make out lives better.
".. I want to make it clear that there are some
decent environmentalists. My comments are
directed at the doomsday fanatics who want to
sharply change the American way of life. The
Sierra Club wants to limit the number of kids you
can have to two. They are trying to limit the
way you drive your car. They are trying to stop
people from preserving food by irradiating
it. They are into power and controlling people's
lives. They go way beyond their nominal environmental agenda.
Decent environmentalists are those such as the
Audubon Society. Did you know that they have a
wildlife refuge in Louisiana that has oil rigs on
it? Audubon members carefully monitor the rigs
so that there is no damage, and the revenue the
oil companies turn over to them helps pay for
additional efforts they make to preserve wildlife. ...." ~ Rush Limbaugh
~ Janice
Received on Tue Apr 25 15:14:54 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Apr 25 2006 - 15:14:54 EDT