# Will you be celebrating Earth Hour this evening?



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

If so, how?

If not, why?


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

I go out of my way to make sure that every light and electronic device in the house is ON during earth hour. 

In Manitoba our electricity is hydro generated, and it's publicly owned. It's clean energy, and the more we use the more money the province makes. The last thing I want to see is use of hydro power discouraged.


----------



## Adrian. (Nov 28, 2007)

bsenka said:


> I go out of my way to make sure that every light and electronic device in the house is ON during earth hour.
> 
> In Manitoba our electricity is hydro generated, and it's publicly owned. It's clean energy, and the more we use the more money the province makes. The last thing I want to see is use of hydro power discouraged.


In the larger picture, that makes absolutely no sense. If Manitoba existed in a vacuum, perhaps.


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

Adrian. said:


> In the larger picture, that makes absolutely no sense. If Manitoba existed in a vacuum, perhaps.


How does the larger picture have any bearing on our situation? We use hydro power. It's clean, it's renewable. What's the premise for shutting the lights off? Because an activist group whose credibility is barely a step above PETA said so?


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Sure--any excuse for a party. (Having guests over for dinner by candlelight.)


----------



## chasMac (Jul 29, 2008)

bsenka said:


> I go out of my way to make sure that every light and electronic device in the house is ON during earth hour.


+1, including keeping the garage door open with all its lights on. But this is Calgary, half my neighbours work in oil, don't think anybody will notice.


----------



## DR Hannon (Jan 21, 2007)

I will not be participating in Earth Hour. There are better things I can do for the environment without jumping on every band wagon.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

I'm certainly not a bandwagon jumper either but I personally like the idea of Earth Hour. 

If nothing else it gets you away from all the distracting, isolating elements and maybe, just maybe brings people together. If in that time the topic of conservation is brought up, even better.

I'll be enjoying the view of the skyline from the portlands tonight. I'm sure it will not disappoint.


----------



## G-Mo (Sep 26, 2007)

bsenka said:


> How does the larger picture have any bearing on our situation? We use hydro power. It's clean, it's renewable. What's the premise for shutting the lights off? Because an activist group whose credibility is barely a step above PETA said so?


I don't want to be rude, but, you're a fool! The whole point of the event is to raise awareness to people (like you!!) who can't see past their own backyard towards climate change *world wide*, not discourage the use of clean electricity. The ignorance in your responses simply perpetuates the continued need for events like this.


----------



## ScanMan (Sep 11, 2007)

Perhaps the many idiots in my neighbourhood still burning Xmas lights, will douse them for an hour this evening. 

In our house, we're mindful of the issue all year round and have modified our behaviour correspondingly. We will not be "hopping on the bandwagon".


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

G-Mo said:


> I don't want to be rude, but, you're a fool! The whole point of the event is to raise awareness to people (like you!!) who can't see past their own backyard towards climate change world wide, not discourage the use of clean electricity.


As long as we are not wanting to be rude but still calling people names anyway, a fool in my book is someone who thinks that turning your lights off for an hour has any effect on climate. It's an empty gesture done to facilitate liberal guilt over a false premise.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

G-Mo said:


> I don't want to be rude, but, you're a fool! The whole point of the event is to raise awareness to people (like you!!) who can't see past their own backyard towards climate change *world wide*, not discourage the use of clean electricity. The ignorance in your responses simply perpetuates the continued need for an events like this.


And I don't mean to be rude either, but if everyone did what we do there would be no need for knee jerk organizations to promote turning off lights for a single hour a year. That's bullsh!t.

I turn off every appliance and light that is not needed year round. And it's lights out and bedtime at 9:30 p.m. every day. Practicing power conservation year round every single day makes this useless exercise to make a bunch of greens feel good look as silly as it really is.


----------



## G-Mo (Sep 26, 2007)

bsenka said:


> As long as we are not wanting to be rude but still calling people names anyway, a fool in my book is someone who thinks that turning your lights off for an hour has any effect on climate. It's an empty gesture done to facilitate liberal guilt over a false premise.


You're not doing anything to help your cause or make yourself look any better. The point isn't to have an immediate effect on the climate by turning your lights off, no more than cycling or running will immediately cure cancer, but is to RAISE AWARENESS (something you are clearly in need of!) towards climate change issues world wide. It's a symbolic gesture to get people thinking... Something perhaps you need to do some more of.


----------



## G-Mo (Sep 26, 2007)

SINC said:


> And I don't mean to be rude either, but if everyone did what we do there would be no need for knee jerk organizations to promote turning off lights for a single hour a year. That's bullsh!t.
> 
> I turn off every appliance and light that is not needed year round. And it's lights out and bedtime at 9:30 p.m. every day. Practicing power conservation year round every single day makes this useless exercise to make a bunch of greens feel good look as silly as it really is.


You are also missing the point, SINC. It is about raising awareness to the need to take action against climate change globally. While energy conservation is an important part of lessening climate change -- and something we should all be doing anyway -- the event is symbolic to encourage awareness to a large number of people (bsenka for one, who is going to be turning all his lights on!) who are not aware of a) the issue, and b) what you can do.


----------



## The Doug (Jun 14, 2003)

I barely use any lights / appliances etc. in the evening / nighttime to begin with so this evening's "event" won't see any special behaviour on my part. I like it dark and quiet.


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

G-Mo said:


> You're not doing anything to help your cause or make yourself look any better. The point isn't to have an immediate effect on the climate by turning your lights off, no more than cycling or running will immediately cure cancer, but is to RAISE AWARENESS (something you are clearly in need of!) towards climate change issues world wide. It's a symbolic gesture to get people thinking... Something perhaps you need to do some more of.


There's a major difference in that cancer is real.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

SINC said:


> And I don't mean to be rude either, but if everyone did what we do there would be no need for knee jerk organizations to promote turning off lights for a single hour a year. That's bullsh!t.
> 
> I turn off every appliance and light that is not needed year round. And it's lights out and bedtime at 9:30 p.m. every day. Practicing power conservation year round every single day makes this useless exercise to make a bunch of greens feel good look as silly as it really is.


^^^ +1 ^^^
You will notice that the same folks that are aware that the ManMade Global Warming Scam is a cash grab by the Gore Gang and Big Government, are the same ones that already practice conservation.

The reason is quite simple: Not only do we oppose giving our money to the Gore Gang or the Government, we also oppose needlessly enriching the Utility groups.


----------



## G-Mo (Sep 26, 2007)

Ignorance is bliss... clearly!

(Unsubscribing from this thread.)


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

This event is actually embarrassing to me in the same was I found it embarrassing in Kindergarten to see the kids willingly do a dance as dumb as the "Hokey-Pokey." 

Event the use of the term "celebrate" in relation to Earth Hour is astonishing to me. Like asking people in WWII if they would celebrate meat rationing. I will use the same amount of light I always use, because using any more or any less will show that I'm paying attention to it.

The fact that modern civilization has brought us unlimited use of light at any point we need it is something to celebrate, Turning it off? Not so much.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

bsenka said:


> As long as we are not wanting to be rude but still calling people names anyway, a fool in my book is someone who thinks that turning your lights off for an hour has any effect on climate. It's an empty gesture done to facilitate liberal guilt over a false premise.


absolutely. Only a fool would think turning your lights off for an hour will have a direct effect on the earth's climate.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

G-Mo said:


> You are also missing the point, SINC. It is about raising awareness to the need to take action against climate change globally. While energy conservation is an important part of lessening climate change -- and something we should all be doing anyway -- the event is symbolic to encourage awareness to a large number of people (bsenka for one, who is going to be turning all his lights on!) who are not aware of a) the issue, and b) what you can do.


Do you really think that people aren't already "aware" of the issue. If they aren't, then they aren't using any electricity anyway, i.e. they don't have a TV, radio or computer as the "issue" floods the media on a continual basis.

It is only "symbolic" and preaches to the converted, it will not make any real difference in power consumption.

All we have to do is look at Christmas a a "symbolic" event to raise the awareness of Christianity and for people to act in a more "Christan" manner. How successful has that been? It has been completely stripped of its original meaning and now only serves as a marketing tool for retailers.

Sorry G-Mo Earth Hour is meaningless and more importantly serves no real purpose with no real results.


----------



## ComputerIdiot (Jan 8, 2004)

I try to buy the energy-efficient bulbs, turn lights out behind me (and yes, the fact this apartment building's rent does not include hydro has a lot of bearing on that) and so on, so no, I don't see any added benefit to sitting in the dark for an hour. Plus I don't want to be tripping over cats should I wish to go to the loo during that hour. My eyes don't adjust to darkness nearly as well as theirs.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Christmas is a symbolic event to make people act more christmas?

This just gets better by the minute!


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

I won't be participating. I'm more interested in terribly ordinary, quotidian ways of reducing my energy footprint and bringing down my monthly bills.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

oh Max. You heathen.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

groovetube said:


> Christmas is a symbolic event to make people act more christmas?


Act more _Christian_, not christmas.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Max said:


> ...bringing down my monthly bills.


There's my motivation. 

I wonder what this does to Ontario's "wind resources?" None of that energy can be stored, and an hour is too short a time to adjust traditional electricity generation by much. I guess they just turn and turn while nobody uses that clean, green power.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Y'all need to lighten up.... er, no pun intended.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

screature said:


> ...All we have to do is look at Christmas a a "symbolic" event to raise the awareness of Christianity and for people to act in a more "Christan" manner. How successful has that been? It has been completely stripped of its original meaning and now only serves as a marketing tool for retailers.
> 
> Sorry G-Mo Earth Hour is meaningless and more importantly serves no real purpose with no real results.


Probably just as well when we look at the examples that Bush, Cheney, Palin and other self-proclaimed Christians set.beejacon


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Sonal said:


> Y'all need to lighten up.... er, no pun intended.


Sonal will be shutting off the power to all of the buildings she manages tonight...


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Groove: why am I a heathen? It's just thin symbolism to me, so I'm not interested in getting involved. You want to observe the day, by all means - have at it.

MF: yeah, certainly I'm interested in bringing down the bills. Lots of us are. But that doesn't get press. Saving the planet from evil humanity does.


----------



## MLeh (Dec 23, 2005)

'Earth Hour' is just a way for the latté* drinking tree huggers to inflict their brand of 'social consciousness' on the rest of society who have been turning off lights behind them and conserving power sensibly for reasons other than 'what the neighbours think'.

Turn everything off for a hour? Results in nothing but an enhanced feeling of superiority to the 'heathen' who don't. Awareness, G-Mo? Please ... spare me the patronizing attitude. There's someone who needs to become aware, but it isn't the people who don't subscribe to this 'all show' event.

Every hour is earth hour, not just one this Saturday night, but I don't need to make a 'public social statement'. 

The one light that is usually on in our house at this hour will remain on.


*(Creating a latté probably consumes more electricity and resources than me having the TV on for a hour. I'm all for banning coffee houses, lattés and drive-through service at Tim Hortons. Now THAT would have an effect on society... )


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Macfury said:


> Sonal will be shutting off the power to all of the buildings she manages tonight...


I wish! Think of the money I'd save.

Stupid tenant protection laws.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I'm wary of any movement/club/group of boneheads who get upset if I don't join.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Macfury said:


> Act more _Christian_, not christmas.


battin' a hundred you are!


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Max said:


> Groove: why am I a heathen? It's just thin symbolism to me, so I'm not interested in getting involved. You want to observe the day, by all means - have at it.
> 
> MF: yeah, certainly I'm interested in bringing down the bills. Lots of us are. But that doesn't get press. Saving the planet from evil humanity does.


smilie forgotten.


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

Here's how I'll celebrate earth hour. 

Just insulated my entire basement. Added more insulation to my roof. When from two 18 litre toilets to two 3 1/2 litre toilets. Installed a tankless water heater. Installed new side door with better trim and less heat loss. Installed 4 Energy Star windows and replaced aging windows. 

But actually during earth hour... I'll be going about my regular business.


----------



## OccidentalCharlieHearse (Dec 31, 2009)

Normally, I turn off every appliance or light that I'm not using. However, tonight, I'll turn everything on, just to illustrate my contempt for political correctness.


----------



## Kazak (Jan 19, 2004)

All you folks gots 'lectricity? Tarnation, if that don't beat all. 

(Because of the visible nature of this symbolic gesture, it becomes a form of neighbourhood peer pressure. I have a long-standing history of disappointing my neighbours, and I won't be giving them any satisfaction tonight, either.)


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

G-Mo said:


> Ignorance is bliss... clearly!


Enjoy, G-Mo!



Sonal said:


> Y'all need to lighten up.... er, no pun intended.


Snort.

I'm not changing anything I normally do tonight - this awareness campaign is unenlightening at best.


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

Macfury said:


> This event is actually embarrassing to me in the same was I found it embarrassing in Kindergarten to see the kids willingly do a dance as dumb as the "Hokey-Pokey.".


I agree with MF!! I always wonder about the whit of those who willing join in on a patently useless, knee-jerk gesture. The guise of "raising awareness" is gratuitous and insulting.

This "event" is just another variation on "me too"...


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Wow, I find the cynicism in this thread surprising. How one could glean so much negativity from something as benign as shutting down for an hour. I guess the panic of leaving your computers and tv's is just too much for some of us.

Bully for all you superior types who have been 'conserving' for years. Whether it be to save money or actually do some good. I think the message this event sends out to children is fantastic. It gets them involved and regardless whether it's 'all show', they see results. Also, it's a bit of a party. It gets people out meeting their neighbours. Actually talking to people face to face. 

Someone made a tired generalization regarding the arrogance of the 'latte drinking tree huggers' inflicting their values. Well, give me their 'witless' positiveness over this sour curmudgeonly bunch any day. 

"I'll show them, I'll leave all my lights on!" Why? Because I know better!" Spare me....


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

mrjimmy said:


> ............ I think the message this event sends out to children is fantastic. ....


The message children get is that doing a mindless, pointless act can be passed off as real action.... Kids are young, not stupid - they see through this tree-hugging nothing crap.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

^

+1, the kids are brighter than the proponents of this stupidity who believe it actually makes a difference.

And for the record, I talk to my neighbours face to face nearly every day and have done so for over 20 years.


----------



## MLeh (Dec 23, 2005)

mrjimmy said:


> Wow, I find the cynicism in this thread surprising. How one could glean so much negativity from something as benign as shutting down for an hour. I guess the panic of leaving your computers and tv's is just too much for some of us.
> 
> Bully for all you superior types who have been 'conserving' for years. Whether it be to save money or actually do some good. I think the message this event sends out to children is fantastic. It gets them involved and regardless whether it's 'all show', they see results. Also, it's a bit of a party. It gets people out meeting their neighbours. Actually talking to people face to face.
> 
> ...


That was me who talked about the latté drinking tree huggers, but I never said anything about wasting more electricity to 'show them'. What I did imply is that it takes more than an hour once a year to make a difference, and sometimes it means giving up stuff for the betterment of humanity without the self-satisfaction and smugness of the 'show' that goes along with it. Most people don't have a clue of how their actions affect things - the latté was an example of 'waste', as was people queueing up at the Tim Horton's drive through, idling their cars, waiting for their double double. Park the car, go inside. It's better for the environment. And take a travel mug with you.

I'm all for conservation - I'm just not into the 'look how good I am to be doing this' self-justification that goes along with it.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"Wow, I find the cynicism in this thread surprising. How one could glean so much negativity from something as benign as shutting down for an hour." I was bombarded with negative criticism last year, mrj, when I said that I would fully support this hour. While I do conserve year round, I, **** you, feel that an overt demonstration is helpful. We were going to have a block party until today's snow storm put an end to that. So, my wife and I shall sit by candlelight, with the woodstove going, and our hounds around us.

Paix, mon ami.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Dr.G. said:


> "Wow, I find the cynicism in this thread surprising. How one could glean so much negativity from something as benign as shutting down for an hour." I was bombarded with negative criticism last year, mrj, when I said that I would fully support this hour. While I do conserve year round, I, **** you, feel that an overt demonstration is helpful. We were going to have a block party until today's snow storm put an end to that. So, my wife and I shall sit by candlelight, with the woodstove going, and our hounds around us.
> 
> Paix, mon ami.


Good for you Dr.G.! Enjoy your 'pointless act', I sure will.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

mrjimmy said:


> Wow, I find the cynicism in this thread surprising. How one could glean so much negativity from something as benign as shutting down for an hour. I guess the panic of leaving your computers and tv's is just too much for some of us.
> 
> Bully for all you superior types who have been 'conserving' for years. Whether it be to save money or actually do some good. I think the message this event sends out to children is fantastic. It gets them involved and regardless whether it's 'all show', they see results. Also, it's a bit of a party. It gets people out meeting their neighbours. Actually talking to people face to face.
> 
> Someone made a tired generalization regarding the arrogance of the 'latte drinking tree huggers' inflicting their values. Well, give me their 'witless' positiveness over this sour curmudgeonly bunch any day.


Nice try, MrJimmy. So now if we don't jump on board it's because we're pathetically tethered to our Macs. Way to get people on side, man.

I'm a dyed in the wool cynic over many things but on this I feel I am being merely pragmatic. Nor am I smug about conserving energy... I'm sure I have a ways to go on that score yet.

I'm not bashing those who want to dine by candlelight (sounds romantic in fact... let's hope some good vino gets quaffed); how about you trying not refrain from tsk-tsking those who don't see it your way?

And don't look now, but you just came off like a sour curmudgeon. Oopsie!

Have a good night showing the city how much you care.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

MLeh said:


> T
> I'm all for conservation - I'm just not into the 'look how good I am to be doing this' self-justification that goes along with it.


My goodness, you and others here certainly have contempt for anyone seeing the postive in this event.

I don't think ANYONE thinks that one hour will make a difference to the health of the planet. It is a symbolic gesture. One which gets people talking and thinking. All of the children in my life (many) get very excited by this. It gets them thinking. Nothing mindless about it at all.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

rgray said:


> The message children get is that doing a mindless, pointless act can be passed off as real action.... Kids are young, not stupid - they see through this tree-hugging nothing crap.


really? Because you say it is?

I think you're full of crap.

I have to agree with mr jimmy. The screeching of negativity is laughable to me. Tree hugging crap, spare me.

Mindless generalizations!

Lets rub a couple neurons together and see if we can get a few synapses to fire here.

Earth hour won't affect the climate. Well done geniuses!!! Wow the brain power here is overwhelming.

I don't think anyone posting in this thread really needs further awareness of environmental issues. Everyone seems well versed, and seems, well according to the rising din, everyone is a candidate for a david suzuki gold trophy of environmental excellence. However I think the huge masses who aren't so well enlightened and event like this is a light reminder. Simple. No one is going to lose a limb, and I suspect the communi... er, the socialists aren't gonna tax it. Well yet, anyways.

Nothing to get all freaked out and start screeching TREE HUGGERS!!! AAAARGGGHH!!!! And run screaming. It's ok, really. 

Whether you take part, well, that' a personal choice.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Max said:


> Nice try, MrJimmy. So now if we don't jump on board it's because we're pathetically tethered to our Macs. Way to get people on side, man.
> 
> I'm a dyed in the wool cynic over many things but on this I feel I am being merely pragmatic. Nor am I smug about conserving energy... I'm sure I have a ways to go on that score yet.
> 
> ...


I apologize if I come across a bit harshly Max but I felt some of the comments from others to be nothing other than insulting. Especially given the fact that I wasn't attempting to get anyone 'on side'.

This truly is a benign event. To raise the ire of so many leaves me scratching my head.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

the hysterical tree huggers stuff kinda brings on the response.

oh well.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

No harm done, mrjimmy.

The topic of the environment is, more than ever, a hot potato. So much politics wrapped up in it. This thread being yet more proof.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

The futility of the exercise is what brings on the responses in this thread and nothing else. The poll results add an exclamation point to it all.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

SINC said:


> The futility of the exercise is what brings on the responses in this thread and nothing else. The poll results add an exclamation point to it all.


SINC, I take it you're speaking for the planet?


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Only minutes left to fill your boots boys and girls:


----------



## Aurora (Sep 25, 2001)

Sorry Dr. G but how much carbon will be released by the candles and wood stove?
Just askin'


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Likely more than leaving a light on.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

ehMax said:


> Here's how I'll celebrate earth hour.
> 
> Just insulated my entire basement. Added more insulation to my roof. When from two 18 litre toilets to two 3 1/2 litre toilets. Installed a tankless water heater. Installed new side door with better trim and less heat loss. Installed 4 Energy Star windows and replaced aging windows.
> 
> But actually during earth hour... I'll be going about my regular business.


Sorry this is too late for you but a simple rubber band around the base of the flapper valve will convert most 13 litre toilets to controllable 4-6 litre toilets. Cost to the land fill $0. Have been doing this for several years now.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

mrjimmy said:


> SINC, I take it you're speaking for the planet?


apparently. Futility because he and few others say so. :lmao:


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Aurora said:


> Sorry Dr. G but how much carbon will be released by the candles and wood stove?
> Just askin'


True, but we have three week old puppies to consider, and there is a snow storm outside with -13C windchills. So, we started at 815PM and ended at 945PM, and did not really notice the extra half hour. We still have the candles going and just a couple of lights on. Luckily, my MBP has a good battery for this sort of situation, but we did not use our computers either.

Still, I agree that this is a year-round effort and needs to be undertaken by all. Paix, mon ami.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

mrjimmy said:


> Good for you Dr.G.! Enjoy your 'pointless act', I sure will.


It was nice. Most of the folks on my block were going to have a backyard "scoff", but the snowstorm put an end to that. Still, my wife and I shared a fine quiet moment together .............. complete with six doxies and five puppies. Paix, mon ami.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

I love how trying to live "more simply" for an hour -- a harmless exercise in alternate thinking -- get so many conservatives (and its ALWAYS the so-called "conservatives") so bent out of shape. So what if its pointless? What's the point of golf? 

If you want to think of Earth Hour as "Electricity Appreciation Hour," or "Remembering Those Who Do Not Have Access to Regular Electricity" Hour, or "Honouring How Tough Our Ancestors Had It" Hour, or for that matter "A Small Act By A Lot of People Can Make a Big Difference" Hour, go right ahead. It's an excuse to try something a little different. It's a massive performance art piece, if you will.

I personally do not really need much of an excuse to spend an hour in the dark with my wife. I kind of feel sorry for those of you who ignore the opportunity, frankly ...


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

I guess I kind of pity you for kind of feeling that way, Chas_m. By the way, am I a conservative too?


----------



## Puccasaurus (Dec 28, 2003)

I just think of it as an excuse to sit by the fireplace and relax with a glass of wine in the peaceful and quiet dark. So I participated


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Max said:


> I guess I kind of pity you for kind of feeling that way, Chas_m. By the way, am I a conservative too?


well, if I'm a tree hugger, you must be a conservative.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

LOL

But are you _really_ a tree hugger?


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

groovetube said:


> well, if I'm a tree hugger, you must be a conservative.


I must be the latte drinker.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Dr.G. said:


> It was nice. Most of the folks on my block were going to have a backyard "scoff", but the snowstorm put an end to that. Still, my wife and I shared a fine quiet moment together .............. complete with six doxies and five puppies. Paix, mon ami.


We had a great time also. A good friend came over and we took the basset to a street in the east end of the city that offers a spectacular view of the core. There were lots of people out enjoying the view and the evening. Later we came back home to candlelight and a glass of wine. Had excellent conversations and lots of laughs. A very good night indeed.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

I'm sure I have a shot of me trying to wrap my arms around a huge douglas fir in the cathedral of trees somewhere. 

Pretty damning evidence.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Enjoyed some candlelight, burned some sage, which I'm pretty sure has far more a carbon footprint than 700 Hummers in a streetrace.

Thought of wearing goat leggings and barking at the moon, but didn't want to take things too far. You know.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

groovetube said:


> Enjoyed some candlelight, burned some sage, which I'm pretty sure has far more a carbon footprint than 700 Hummers in a streetrace.
> 
> Thought of wearing goat leggings and barking at the moon, but didn't want to take things too far. You know.


You latte drinkin' tree huggers are all the same....


----------



## DR Hannon (Jan 21, 2007)

Well, my house was in complete darkness, I took the family out to enjoy some Ethiopian food. We get along with the owner quite well. It is fantastic food. After we went for a long stroll downtown London (Ontario). Now we are enjoying some peace (my son is in bed) and quiet.


----------



## mpuk (May 24, 2005)

I would usually support something like this, but tonight with March Madness and hockey, I just simply forgot all about it...(whoops)


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

chas_m said:


> I personally do not really need much of an excuse to spend an hour in the dark with my wife. I kind of feel sorry for those of you who ignore the opportunity, frankly ...


I suppose if you had invited people ahead of time, more of them would have taken the opportunity to spend an hour in the dark with your wife.


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

chas_m said:


> I personally do not really need much of an excuse to spend an hour in the dark with my wife. I kind of feel sorry for those of you who ignore the opportunity, frankly ...


Some prefer the lights on. beejacon


----------



## SoyMac (Apr 16, 2005)

*It was nice.*

Just like last year, my Earth Hour was spent commuting to work. 
Very nice again to go through the city and see so many patches of darkness, where usually blazing lights burn, and to see groups of people outside, chatting and just looking at their neighbourhoods.

Happy Earth Hour, Everyone! 
I hope you had a good one, whatever you did.


----------



## chasMac (Jul 29, 2008)

Earth hour here. If I am sitting in complete darkness, is it ok to be using my computer?


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

chasMac said:


> Earth hour here. If I am sitting in complete darkness, is it ok to be using my computer?


You can light a fire, sit in a hot tub, light candles, play on your PS3, drive through the city at alarming speeds, use your computer--but don't turn on the lights.


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

chasMac said:


> Earth hour here. If I am sitting in complete darkness, is it ok to be using my computer?


Yes, just turn your screen off. Thx.


----------



## chasMac (Jul 29, 2008)

KC4 said:


> Yes, just turn your screen off. Thx.


Punk!


----------



## chasMac (Jul 29, 2008)

Macfury said:


> You can light a fire, sit in a hot tub, light candles, play on your PS3, drive through the city at alarming speeds, use your computer--but don't turn on the lights.


That's what I was kinda hoping for.


----------



## MacGuiver (Sep 6, 2002)

> Starting in November, the 90 or so local utilities throughout Ontario will begin paying anyone producing solar power for 42 cents a kilowatt hour. Wind, hydro or bio-electric production will bring 11 to 14.5 cents a kilowatt hour.


I don't want to do anything to add fuel to the eco paranoia so my house will be glowing. Pleasing Gaia comes with a hefty price tag though I reckon we best get used to sitting in the dark when utilities start passing the costs of this religious exercise down to the consumer.

Cheers
MacGuiver


----------



## MLeh (Dec 23, 2005)

mrjimmy said:


> If so, how?
> 
> If not, why?


Perhaps next time, you'll not ask the second question. (You can hardly get mad at us for answering your question, now, can you?)beejacon


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

MLeh said:


> Perhaps next time, you'll not ask the second question. (You can hardly get mad at us for answering your question, now, can you?)beejacon


That's just it, isn't it? He asked the question, then got mad at the answers.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

groovetube said:


> I'm sure I have a shot of me trying to wrap my arms around a huge douglas fir in the cathedral of trees somewhere.


That' a funny one, GT. You get a point for it.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

mrjimmy said:


> If so, how?
> 
> If not, why?


The wife and I are going out this evening. My environmental consciousness is not dictated by when someone else thinks it's a good time to shut the lights off for an hour.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

G-Mo said:


> I don't want to be rude, but, you're a fool! The whole point of the event is to raise awareness to people (like you!!) who can't see past their own backyard towards climate change *world wide*, not discourage the use of clean electricity. The ignorance in your responses simply perpetuates the continued need for events like this.


Uh, that _was_ rude, dude. The first I heard of this year's "earth hour" was today while reading the paper. Pretty p!sspoor campaign for awareness, I'd say. If people have plans, let them be. Being ignorant won't persuade anyone to join your cause. "Guilting" the population seldom works. And why is this particular hour so important? Maybe someone else keeps their lights off for an extra hour by sleeping in in the morning, or goes to bed an hour earlier. What's the difference? 

Also: why not celebrate "earth hour" on "Earth Day" on April 22? At least that day is on the calendar.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

SINC said:


> And I don't mean to be rude either, but if everyone did what we do there would be no need for knee jerk organizations to promote turning off lights for a single hour a year. That's bullsh!t.
> 
> I turn off every appliance and light that is not needed year round. And it's lights out and bedtime at 9:30 p.m. every day. Practicing power conservation year round every single day makes this useless exercise to make a bunch of greens feel good look as silly as it really is.


Awesome gesture, SINC. Not getting enough sleep can lead to crankiness.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

Macfury said:


> This event is actually embarrassing to me in the same was I found it embarrassing in Kindergarten to see the kids willingly do a dance as dumb as the "Hokey-Pokey."
> 
> Event the use of the term "celebrate" in relation to Earth Hour is astonishing to me. Like asking people in WWII if they would celebrate meat rationing. I will use the same amount of light I always use, because using any more or any less will show that I'm paying attention to it.
> 
> The fact that modern civilization has brought us unlimited use of light at any point we need it is something to celebrate, Turning it off? Not so much.


Oddly, I find myself in total agreement with you on this one, Macfury. A symbolic return to the dark ages does not equal progress, and flicking the switches on after an hour neither constitutes enlightenment.


----------



## MLeh (Dec 23, 2005)

bsenka said:


> That's just it, isn't it? He asked the question, then got mad at the answers.


Obviously not anticipating the visceral response to anything World Wildlife Fund related.  (Participating in these apparently benign WWF events can serve to give them credence for some of their more ... ahem ... controversial projects.)


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

groovetube said:


> apparently. Futility because he and few others say so. :lmao:


Best brush up on your math. Last I checked a poll showing 72% of us is a lot more than "few".


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

SINC said:


> Best brush up on your math. Last I checked a poll showing 72% of us is a lot more than "few".


He may be referring to the thousands who participated worldwide.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

MLeh said:


> Perhaps next time, you'll not ask the second question. (You can hardly get mad at us for answering your question, now, can you?)beejacon


Please don't confuse this with me getting mad at you having a differing opinion. I could care less what you do with your one light burning.

I was responding to your tired generalization of "latte drinking tree huggers". A sentiment strictly intended to insult and discredit those who think differently from you. How's that for arrogance? You might get a lot further in the future without feeling the need to resort to name calling.

Have a nice day.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

SINC said:


> Best brush up on your math. Last I checked a poll showing 72% of us is a lot more than "few".


dear god! That must mean the entire world!


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

It would be interesting to know just how many participated world wide. My bet is less than 10%.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

I would think 10% of the world's population, is more than 72% of who responded here.

And pretty amazing I'd think if it were even as high as 10% of the world's population.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

groovetube said:


> And pretty amazing I'd think if it were even as high as 10% of the world's population.


I was thinking the same thing.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

mrjimmy said:


> I was thinking the same thing.


10% is only an amazing figure to latte-drinking tree huggers. And from the sound of your Earth Hour experience, mrjimmy...


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

this coming from someone who apparently has a late 2010 "iSlate"...
:lmao:


----------



## RiceBoy (Aug 1, 2009)

I don't know about this year, as I have been pretty much cooped up at home recovering from surgery. But I rememeber last year there was so much printed promotional material everywhere for Earth Hour, that I wondered if turning the lights off for an hour was enough to offset the energy used to promote the event in the first place.


----------



## chasMac (Jul 29, 2008)

RiceBoy said:


> I don't know about this year, as I have been pretty much cooped up at home recovering from surgery. But I rememeber last year there was so much printed promotional material everywhere for Earth Hour, that I wondered if turning the lights off for an hour was enough to offset the energy used to promote the event in the first place.


I read in our paper that a lot of shops were using earth hour as a promotional/sales tool. How ironic it would be if future earth hours saw signs such as "Open late for Earth Hour".


----------



## RiceBoy (Aug 1, 2009)

The news reported this morning that, at least in the Toronto area, less people participated in Earth Hour this year than last year. The drop in electricity usage was not as significant as it was last year. They even reported on a guy who turned on as many lights as he could, including some large spotlights, drawing the ire of his neighbours.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Macfury said:


> 10% is only an amazing figure to latte-drinking tree huggers. And from the sound of your Earth Hour experience, mrjimmy...


Sorry, what is it you're trying to say MacFury?


----------



## MLeh (Dec 23, 2005)

mrjimmy said:


> Please don't confuse this with me getting mad at you having a differing opinion. I could care less what you do with your one light burning.
> 
> I was responding to your tired generalization of "latte drinking tree huggers". A sentiment strictly intended to insult and discredit those who think differently from you. How's that for arrogance? You might get a lot further in the future without feeling the need to resort to name calling.
> 
> Have a nice day.


You must really like your lattés to constantly miss the point I'm trying to make about 'actions' versus 'words', and 'long term commitment in lifestyle' versus 'all for show'.

Can you not see the irony behind wasting electricity 364 days, 23 hours a year on 'steaming the milk' and all the other crap associated with the typical urban lifestyle, and then assuming a perceived moral superiority because of flicking off the lights for 60 minutes?


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

mrjimmy said:


> Sorry, what is it you're trying to say MacFury?


That you sound like you would find yourself comfortable amidst a crowd of latte-drinking tree huggers, mrjimmy.


----------



## med8or (Jan 18, 2002)

One relatively recent analogy that comes to mind about societal change has to do with seat belt use. There was a great deal of opposition to the seat belt laws when they were first introduced. People had a lot of reactions, similar to "going green" and many refused to participate. It was through the legal system (fines) and sound scientific research that change became more embraced, though slowly. Now compliance is relatively high and I think most would agree that seat belts are beneficial. Even with statistics of how seat belts can save lives and real life examples, people still often refused to change. Now think about all of the confusion and ambiguity with environmental consciousness and no wonder people are so polarized....and I'd argue, they should be.

I must say, this has been an interesting read - post event. I have to admit, I totally forgot about Earth Hour last night. I had company, made a big meal and was enjoying the companionship.

What I find so interesting is that people appear to be so positional; having an opinion one way or the other. The poll actually gives only two answers out of many possible, almost setting this up as a confrontation. I agree with points made on both sides; I realize one hour won't make a difference wrt the actual energy saved, but there is something to be said about awareness. What that awareness is about, is in my opinion, also something that is somewhat vague. Are we talking about saving energy, reducing emissions, saving the trees - all the things that fall under the overly generalized category of "going green".

For me, I have recognized that there are behavioural changes I can make that make sense (to me); some are motivated by trying to live a responsible life (whatever THAT means) and part motivated by saving money and the like. Personally, I think campaigns like this simply give us an opportunity to reflect on what we've always done and to evaluate whether there are opportunities for us to change.

I don't need to know that using cloth bags at the grocery store is actually doing something positive, I'm ok with thinking I might be helping but I'm pretty sure I'm not hurting more. I like to think that monitoring time of day use for electricity is helping, (it at least saves me money) along with all of the energy efficiency I have contributed to, or plan to. But the point here is that for me, I've reflected on some of my behaviours and made changes because of this increased awareness, like Earth Hour. I don't need to be a card carrying member of the Green Party, or even agree with 99% of the things they say to adopt a change because of the 1% of what they say that does make sense (to me). 

People get positional and defensive when they are told they are doing something "wrong" but with the whole "green" debate there is still ambiguity on what "right" is - on what it is we're even trying to change. Reactions that are labelled urgent but are still without a comprehensive understanding are no wiser than positional attitudes that support the status quo.

Maybe oversimplified...but my two cents.

J


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Macfury said:


> That you sound like you would find yourself comfortable amidst a crowd of latte-drinking tree huggers, mrjimmy.


If they were reasonable, thinking people perhaps I would. Although I tend to not discriminate using tired generalizations.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

med8or said:


> Maybe oversimplified...but my two cents.


Nobody here much cares if people want to sit in the dark for 60 minutes. However they do mind an air of moral superiority, or the expectation that others should see value in this children's exercise.

From the Toronto Star:



> Hundreds of people gathered in Dundas Square to mark the occasion. As the flashing billboards went out one by one, they listened to musicians like Chantal Kreviazuk, and tied notes with environmental hopes to a wishing tree.


Add to that the nonsensical notion that this has anything to do with climate change, another children's fantasy:



> ...Tara Wood, spokesperson for the World Wildlife Fund...said the event was about more than an hour’s worth of energy savings. “We want to show world leaders that the people want action on the climate.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

MLeh said:


> You must really like your lattés to constantly miss the point I'm trying to make about 'actions' versus 'words', and 'long term commitment in lifestyle' versus 'all for show'.
> 
> Can you not see the irony behind wasting electricity 364 days, 23 hours a year on 'steaming the milk' and all the other crap associated with the typical urban lifestyle, and then assuming a perceived moral superiority because of flicking off the lights for 60 minutes?


What makes you think that those who participate in earth hour are 'all for show'? Also, what makes you think that 'urbanites' are all wasteful latte drinkers? The arrogance of your statements isn't lost on me. Your 'long term commitment in lifestyle' versus all those urbanites and their climate theatre. What a narrow approach.

As far as I can see, Earth Hour benefits children the most. The dialog created educates them to the current climate issues. It isn't for those set in their ways, digging their heels in about what we as a society are responsible for. Dialog is always good. Generalizing and pontificating, not so much.

If you reread my posts I wasn't attempting to lure anyone into the Church of climate change. Nor was I disparaging those who felt differently than I. What I was presented with however were a bunch of veiled and not so veiled insults.



> It's an empty gesture done to facilitate liberal guilt over a false premise.





> That's bullsh!t.





> this useless exercise to make a bunch of greens feel good look as silly as it really is.





> This event is actually embarrassing to me





> 'Earth Hour' is just a way for the latté* drinking tree huggers to inflict their brand of 'social consciousness' on the rest of society





> group of boneheads





> I always wonder about the whit of those who willing join in on a patently useless, knee-jerk gesture.





> Kids are young, not stupid - they see through this tree-hugging nothing crap.


I don't see reasonable debate here. Do you?


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

Macfury said:


> > ............ and tied notes with environmental hopes to a wishing tree.


Geez... The gestures just get stupider and stupider.... That tree and the notes will be taking up landfill space on Monday.... XX)


----------



## med8or (Jan 18, 2002)

Macfury said:


> Nobody here much cares if people want to sit in the dark for 60 minutes. However they do mind an air of moral superiority, or the expectation that others should see value in this children's exercise. :



Moral superiority historically has led to great change or horrific outcomes. Although I agree with you that coming across in this way is not only presumptuous but self defeating, there are two sides to this discussion. Let's not forget that those who resist change are also not without a part to play in all of this.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

med8or said:


> Let's not forget that those who resist change are also not without a part to play in all of this.


Change is a neutral concept. If the change is worthless, then those who resist it must maintain their stance. That is their role.


----------



## med8or (Jan 18, 2002)

Macfury said:


> Change is a neutral concept. If the change is worthless, then those who resist it must maintain their stance. That is their role.


I'm not sure I understand the comment about change being a "neutral concept" - my confusion is the term neutral.

I would think that motivations to change or not to change would be far from neutral, regardless of which side you fell.

Macfury, in your previous post you talk about about moral superiority of those who support such things as Earth Day. Above you indicate that "those who resist must maintain their stance", but how do you know that this position is the correct one? Might this not come across as moral superiority to others - I mean, why are you right and those on the other side of the argument wrong?


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

I see honesty in the "quotes" cited though. No sense coddling a failure.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

med8or said:


> I'm not sure I understand the comment about change being a "neutral concept" - my confusion is the term neutral.


The concept is neutral because not all change is beneficial. Therefore resistance to change may be the option that offers the most benefits. 



med8or said:


> Macfury, in your previous post you talk about about moral superiority of those who support such things as Earth Day. Above you indicate that "those who resist must maintain their stance", but how do you know that this position is the correct one? Might this not come across as moral superiority to others - I mean, why are you right and those on the other side of the argument wrong?


I've chewed on the data, tabulated likely outcomes and made my decision. Of course I consider my decision to be superior, but not morally superior. Moral superiority is only a problem when it leads to demands on others to participate in their schemes. I don't require anyone to participate in mine.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

SINC said:


> I see honesty in the "quotes" cited though. No sense coddling a failure.


I see rudeness and ignorance. 

Funny how that works.

And for the record, I would hardly call it a failure. What is it about Earth Hour that you find so threatening?


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

mrjimmy said:


> I see rudeness and ignorance.
> 
> Funny how that works.
> 
> And for the record, I would hardly call it a failure. What is it about Earth Hour that you find so threatening?


I doubt that SINC finds anything about Earth Hour threating per say, just frustrated by an empty "hype" event without any real results to offer even in terms of generating awareness and as has already been indicated a point of separation where those who choose to participate can believe themselves to be superior to those who don't. But that is my take on SINC's position (inflected with my own) so I should stop putting words in his mouth now....


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

screature said:


> I doubt that SINC finds anything about Earth Hour threating per say, just frustrated by an empty "hype" event without any real results to offer even in terms of generating awareness and as has already been indicated a point of separation where those who choose to participate can believe themselves to be superior to those who don't. But that is my take on SINC's position (inflected with my own) so I should stop putting words in his mouth now....


^
Exactly. :clap:


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

screature said:


> I doubt that SINC finds anything about Earth Hour threating per say, just frustrated by an empty "hype" event without any real results to offer even in terms of generating awareness and as has already been indicated a point of separation where those who choose to participate can believe themselves to be superior to those who don't. But that is my take on SINC's position (inflected with my own) so I should stop putting words in his mouth now....


To be so vehemently 'anti' anything shows that one feels threatened. Of what, I don't know. It is remarkable that a event as benign can evoke such strong reactions. Don't you think?

Also, this whole 'superiority' issue. Not quite sure who is being superior here. I think it is just another dismissive tool used to discredit those you disagree with and to silence debate. Perhaps these feelings are arising from your own guilty conscience.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

mrjimmy said:


> To be so vehemently 'anti' anything shows that one feels threatened. Of what, I don't know. It is remarkable that a event as benign can evoke such strong reactions. Don't you think?
> 
> Also, this whole 'superiority' issue. Not quite sure who is being superior here. I think it is just another dismissive tool used to discredit those you disagree with and to silence debate. Perhaps these feelings are arising from your own guilty conscience.


Guilty of what?.... See there is the tone of superiority... think about it....


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

screature said:


> Guilty of what?.... See there is the tone of superiority... think about it....


No need. I think about everything I write. You perhaps should think about it.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I doubt anyone else would have started a topic on "Earth Hour" just to outline its failings--it was only your invitation to do so that had people thinking about its failings at all.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

We're actually arguing about whether people are threatened by earth hour? Man it's all there in black and white. mr jimmy pasted all the funny retorts, it speaks volumes.

After all the tree huggin latte drinkin let your friends spend time with your wife in the dark comments, you just gotta sit back and chuckle.

Oh, and yet another funny math lesson from Sinc. It wouldn't be complete without that.
:lmao:


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

mrjimmy said:


> No need. I think about everything I write. You perhaps should think about it.


So answer the question... Guilty of what?


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

screature said:


> So answer the question... Guilty of what?


You appear to be an intelligent man. I'll leave that up to you to ponder.

My statement was, simply put, that I have encountered in both this thread and elsewhere, no sense of moral superiority from those in support of Earth Hour. Likeminded people were simply engaging in something they believed in or at least thought was interesting.

No one was saying you're a bad person for not participating. But oddly, people in this forum were saying you were *for participating.* Perhaps those paranoid feelings are born of some type of guilty conscience.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

screature said:


> So answer the question... Guilty of what?


Nailed him! He refuses to answer.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

The whole Earth Hour event is akin to Valentine's Day and why my wife and I don't particate in it either.

Some people think that if they treat their loved one well on one "officially sanctioned" day a year are then they are off the hook for the rest of the year. My wife and I treat each other with respect and honour each other everyday of the year. Why should we pay particular attention to one day that "society" and retailers say we should? I should think think that an ongoing state of awareness is more important than an artificially created day could ever generate.

As for the comments that some have stated that it sets an example for our children... well maybe but also maybe it tells them that it is OK to waste energy the rest of the year as long as you participate in Earth Hour. Kind of like the Christian mixed message of confession... I can sin all I like as long as I confess to a priest about my failings and sins.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Macfury said:


> Nailed him! He refuses to answer.


You're too funny.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

mrjimmy said:


> You appear to be an intelligent man. I'll leave that up to you to ponder.


How smug, you were the one to suggest an associated guilt now have the integrity to answer a direct question.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

screature said:


> As for the comments that some have stated that it sets an example for our children... well maybe but also maybe it tells them that it is OK to waste energy the rest of the year as long as you participate in Earth Hour.


Nonsense. My kids and nieces and nephews carry the message (sometimes militantly) throughout the year. It has quite a profound effect on them.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

screature said:


> How smug, you were the one to suggest an associated guilt now have the integrity to answer a direct question.


See original response.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

mrjimmy said:


> Nonsense. My kids and nieces and nephews carry the message (sometimes militantly) throughout the year. It has quite a profound effect on them.


So you speak for all kids and how they interpreting things then...?


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

mrjimmy said:


> See original response.


I did (after you edited it) and it still answers nothing. Guilty of what?


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

screature said:


> So you speak for all kids and how they interpreting things then...?


Well you certainly were. In fact, to that list I can add the children in their school and my neices school. Also, my friends children as well. It's a big deal for them.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

mrjimmy said:


> See original response.


macfury/screature. 2 peas in a pod


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

screature said:


> I did (after you edited it) and it still answers nothing. Guilty of what?


I'm not really sure. Like I have written many times in this thread, I'm amazed at the negative response Earth Day has generated. And all of it basically unprovoked. Those feelings must arise from something, mustn't they.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

the best is the ones that go out of their way to turn all the lights on as if a) it makes a statement, and b) anyone actually cares.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

mrjimmy said:


> *Since when does* In fact, to that list I can add the children in their school and my neices school. Also, my friends children as well. It's a big deal for them.


Since when does:


> *maybe* it tells them that it is OK to waste energy the rest of the year as long as you participate in Earth Hour.


imply that I am saying anything in a generalized objective way??? 
_*
"It's a big deal for them."*_ Sure... so is Christmas. Do they act more Christian because of Christmas the rest of the year?


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

mrjimmy said:


> I'm not really sure. Like I have written many times in this thread, I'm amazed at the negative response Earth Day has generated. And all of it basically unprovoked. Those feelings must arise from something, mustn't they.


They arise from an invitation to state why people are not recognizing it... _your_ invitation.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

screature said:


> "It's a big deal for them."[/B][/I] Sure... so is Christmas. Do they act more Christian because of Christmas the rest of the year?


Wow. It's amazing how dismissive you're being of something you know nothing about. Who's being morally superior again?


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

oh oh here comes the christmas reference again.

David suzuki, the santa claus of earth hour?

Does santa drink lattes?


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

mrjimmy said:


> I'm not really sure. Like I have written many times in this thread, I'm amazed at the negative response Earth Day has generated. And all of it basically unprovoked. Those feelings must arise from something, mustn't they.


You continue to completely dodge the matter... it is really too funny. :lmao:

What is that "something" then....?

Is it because that most , if not all of those who have already commented on their resistance to Earth Hour have already said that they practice year round energy consumption awareness so you know you have no reasonable defence of your "guilty" of something implication?

They have already stated that they practice saving energy at every turn and so see no benefit from such an event. What is so difficult to understand that those who are already "doing the right thing" on a continual basis take exception to being made to feel by others (yourself included, what with the "feeling guilty" assumption/conclusion), who may or may not exhibit such due diligence on an ongoing basis, feel like they aren't "doing their part" or are ignorant if they don't choose to participate in what they feel to be an inconsequential and hollow event.

You asked the question and created the poll and so now it is up to you to accept the results. Either you are being a bad scientist or a zealot, take your pick.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

mrjimmy said:


> Wow. It's amazing how dismissive you're being of something you know nothing about. Who's being morally superior again?


What is it exactly that I know nothing about????

Do you really think I was speaking of the particular kids that you were making reference to and not kids in general for whom Christmas or Earth Hour (or anything for that matter) is a "big deal" but do not follow through on those ideals the rest of the year?

If you do then I am sorry as it was meant as a generalized statement of how many kids (people in general for that matter) do not follow through on the "best intentions" of a given day of recognition/celebration.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Macfury said:


> They arise from an invitation to state why people are not recognizing it... _your_ invitation.


Oh I see. I'm to blame for others rudeness and ignorance.

Gotcha.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

groovetube said:


> *oh oh here comes the christmas reference again.*
> 
> David suzuki, the santa claus of earth hour?
> 
> Does santa drink lattes?


Yep, cause it is a perfect analogy. 

It's beginning to look a lot like Christmas...


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

screature said:


> What is it exactly that I know nothing about????
> 
> Do you really think I was speaking of the particular kids that you were making reference to and not kids in general for whom Christmas or Earth Hour (or anything for that matter) is a "big deal" but do not follow through on those ideals the rest of the year?
> 
> If you do then I am sorry as it was a generalized statement of how many kids (people) do not follow through on the "best intentions" of a given day of recognition/celebration.


You were grossly generalizing and I was stating that in fact, large numbers of children I'm associated it, be it my own family, friend's families and other children in their schools saw this event as a big deal. They also carried it through for the rest of the year. The message is and was not lost on them. They didn't share your cynical view of it being a hollow event. 

Man this is boring.


----------



## MLeh (Dec 23, 2005)

mrjimmy said:


> To be so vehemently 'anti' anything shows that one feels threatened. Of what, I don't know. It is remarkable that a event as benign can evoke such strong reactions. Don't you think?


You asked the question "if not, why". I'm answering the question: I think it's a stupid idea, propagated by people (WWF) who are more about 'fund raising' than anything else.

Nothing 'vehemently anti' about it.

You apparently disagree with my assessment that it is a stupid idea.

But, then, you asked the question. I merely answered it.




> Also, this whole 'superiority' issue. Not quite sure who is being superior here. I think it is just another dismissive tool used to discredit those you disagree with and to silence debate. Perhaps these feelings are arising from your own guilty conscience.


I have the least guilty conscious in the world. I work in the Environmental Industry. I know where change can be made by 'the little people', and it isn't in 'turning off our lights for an hour once a year'. 

Do you know how wasteful our society is on the whole? Do you see the ads for Swiffers and other disposable cleaning products? Do you see cities built around the car instead of pedestrian or bike friendly environments? Do you see highways clogged with commuters every day? Do you see lineups of cars idling in the 'drive through' lane and various fast food establishments? These are all choices made by individuals - individuals who don't see the impact of their everyday actions on the world around them. People who are being told that they can assuage their guilt via 'carbon credits', and participating in 'Earth Hour'.

If you're going to do something, I've always thought, it should be something that is actually productive, not just for 'show'. Earth Hour is all 'show'.

But, carry on.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

screature: He's just babbling now. Don't expect an answer anytime soon. Give him some time to edit his previous posts and he might come up with something later.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

mrjimmy said:


> You were grossly generalizing and I was stating that in fact, large numbers of children I'm associated it, be it my own family, friend's families and other children in their schools saw this event as a big deal. They also carried it through for the rest of the year. The message is and was not lost on them. They didn't share your cynical view of it being a hollow event.
> 
> Man this is boring.


I wasn't grossly generalizing anything if you read my post, you will see that is the fact... actually I asked you yet another question. 



> It's a big deal for them." Sure... so is Christmas. Do they act more Christian because of Christmas the rest of the year?


You chose to interpret it as such.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

screature said:


> You continue to completely dodge the matter... it is really too funny. :lmao:
> 
> What is that "something" then....?
> 
> ...


I'm perplexed as to how you can assume that those who participate in Earth Day are treating it as a one shot deal. Back up your generalizations with facts. 

Also, just because you and others practice conservation at every turn doesn't mean others do. Earth Day is meant to educate. It is not selling you anything nor is it telling you that you are inferior. It is meant to make people pause and pay attention to issues such as climate and conservation.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Macfury said:


> screature: He's just babbling now. Don't expect an answer anytime soon. Give him some time to edit his previous posts and he might come up with something later.


My goodness you're arrogant. But I already knew that.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

screature said:


> Yep, cause it is a perfect analogy.
> 
> It's beginning to look a lot like Christmas...


Perhaps you can elaborate, on how a celebration, with a fabled fat man in a red suit flying around to deliver millions of toys and stuff to everyone on earth, as well as being mostly based on stolen pagan rituals, is a good analogy here.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"Also, just because you and others practice conservation at every turn doesn't mean others do. Earth Day is meant to educate. It is not selling you anything nor is it telling you that you are inferior. It is meant to make people pause and pay attention to issues such as climate and conservation. " A valid point, mrj. Paix, mon ami.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

MLeh said:


> You asked the question "if not, why". I'm answering the question: I think it's a stupid idea, propagated by people (WWF) who are more about 'fund raising' than anything else.
> 
> Nothing 'vehemently anti' about it.
> 
> ...


It was your insulting generalization that was unnecessary.



> I have the least guilty conscious in the world. I work in the Environmental Industry. I know where change can be made by 'the little people', and it isn't in 'turning off our lights for an hour once a year'.
> 
> Do you know how wasteful our society is on the whole? Do you see the ads for Swiffers and other disposable cleaning products? Do you see cities built around the car instead of pedestrian or bike friendly environments? Do you see highways clogged with commuters every day? Do you see lineups of cars idling in the 'drive through' lane and various fast food establishments? These are all choices made by individuals - individuals who don't see the impact of their everyday actions on the world around them. People who are being told that they can assuage their guilt via 'carbon credits', and participating in 'Earth Hour'.
> 
> ...


Sigh. No one believes the one hour is going to make a difference. It is *a symbolic gesture* meant to get people talking and thinking. Thinking about all those things you mentioned above.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"Sigh. No one believes the one hour is going to make a difference. It is a symbolic gesture meant to get people talking and thinking." Another valid point, mrj.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

mrjimmy said:


> My goodness you're arrogant. But I already knew that.


when things get a little touchy he generally resorts to the passive aggressive stuff.

ie:

Mr Jimmy: (message intended for only mr jimmy but I want everyone else to read it cause I can't confront things directly) macfury is a banana brain.

disclaimer: just a joke example. He might a peach brain for all I know.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

mrjimmy said:


> I'm perplexed as to how you can assume that those who participate in Earth Day are treating it as a one shot deal. Back up your generalizations with facts.
> 
> Also, just because you and others practice conservation at every turn doesn't mean others do. Earth Day is meant to educate. It is not selling you anything nor is it telling you that you are inferior. It is meant to make people pause and pay attention to issues such as climate and conservation.


Cause... no one is aware of such issues... they would have to be Rip Van Winkle.

I never said that those who choose to participate are treating it as a one shot deal just that many do, just as there are many "Christians" who honour Christmas but who are not very Christian the rest of the year ( I know this from multitudinous first hand experience)

However, *you* are suggesting to the people here that they are inferior by inferring that if they publicly answered a question and poll that you posted with the "wrong" answer then they have a guilty conscience.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Dr.G. said:


> "Sigh. No one believes the one hour is going to make a difference. It is a symbolic gesture meant to get people talking and thinking." Another valid point, mrj.


Thanks Dr.G. It really is that simple.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Anyone with a conscience rejects symbolism and acts progressively every day, not by foisting a one hour bit of nonsense on the rest of us once a year. Where is the symbolic "practice no lights daily" bit? It seems to be missing, hidden among the fluff that is Earth Hour.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

groovetube said:


> Perhaps you can elaborate, on how a celebration, with a fabled fat man in a red suit flying around to deliver millions of toys and stuff to everyone on earth, as well as being mostly based on stolen pagan rituals, is a good analogy here.


:lmao: :lmao: :lmao: That is what Christmas is supposed to be about... Now I get it. Sorry never mind. :lmao:


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

mrjimmy said:


> Thanks Dr.G. It really is that simple.


No problem. As we said back in the 60's -- "Keep the Faith". Paix, mon ami.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

screature said:


> Cause... no one is aware of such issues... they would have to Rid Van Winkle.
> 
> I never said that those who choose to participate are treating it as a one shot deal just that many do, just as there are many "Christians" who honour Christmas but who are not very Christian the rest of the year ( I know this from multitudinous first hand experience)
> 
> However, *you* are suggesting to the people here that they are inferior by inferring that if they publicly answered a question and poll that you posted with the "wrong" answer then they have a guilty conscience.


Using a common defense employed by a long standing member of ehMac, I said _perhaps they have a guilty conscience._ Thus leaving it up to you or whomever to ponder, debate or dismiss it altoghter.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

screature said:


> :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: That is what Christmas is supposed to be about... Now I get it. Sorry never mind. :lmao:


there's no fat man in a red suit giving out presents? People rushing out to buy people gifts???

I'm still a little fuzzy on the comparison, of christmas to earth hour. I'm all ears.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

mrjimmy said:


> Using a common defense employed by a long standing member of ehMac, I said [_U]perhaps[/U] they have a guilty conscience._ Thus leaving it up to you or whomever to ponder, debate or dismiss it altoghter.


If you suggested it surely you must have at least one contemplated response or do you simply pose random questions without any thought?


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

groovetube said:


> there's no fat man in a red suit giving out presents? People rushing out to buy people gifts???
> 
> I'm still a little fuzzy on the comparison, of christmas to earth hour. I'm all ears.


I think the idea is that some people feel that Christmas has becoming a meaningless event used by 'Christians' to feel good about themselves but then to forget the demands of Christianity for the remaining 364 days of the year. That is what the cynics call truth.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

screature said:


> If you suggested it surely you must have at least one contemplated response or do you simply pose random questions without any thought?


Ah screature, you are wading into trolling waters now aren't you?

There has to be some reason for a response that seeks to insult or discredit the one whose opinion you disagree with. I posted a pile of them a few responses back. Also, moral superiority? That falls just slightly short of paranoia. 

I am genuinely perplexed at the negativity in this thread. The need to hurl insults. I was simply asking a question.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

mrjimmy said:


> I think the idea is that some people feel that Christmas has becoming a meaningless event used by 'Christians' to feel good about themselves but then to forget the demands of Christianity for the remaining 364 days of the year. That is what the cynics call truth.


I get that part, but using a comparison to christmas, really shows the need to grasp at straws. The comparison is ridiculous.

Earth hour, is just about, earth hour. No one buying presents, no fables of big men flying around, no pagan rituals rebranded as christian traditions, it's just stupid.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

mrjimmy said:


> Ah screature, you are wading into trolling waters now aren't you?
> 
> There has to be some reason for a response that seeks to insult or discredit the one whose opinion you disagree with. I posted a pile of them a few responses back. Also, moral superiority? That falls just slightly short of paranoia.
> 
> *I am genuinely perplexed at the negativity in this thread. The need to hurl insults. I was simply asking a question*.


Really? I think you are *disappointed* with the results because you had certain hopes/expectations. No insults hurled by me that I can think of...

Where is the negativity except that the majority won't be participating in Earth Hour of who call into question it's effectiveness/motivation? 

Therein lies the analogy to Christmas and Valentine's Day. To me the similarities are obvious. We take a day/hour to observe that which, if we are true "believers", we should be practising on an ongoing basis. Some do but many, many others honour the day/hour but don't follow through in action the rest of the time. I think It is understandable that some people would be sceptical about such events when so much hypocrisy abounds.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

screature said:


> Really? I think you are *disappointed* with the results because you had certain hopes/expectations. No insults hurled by me that I can think of...


Wrong again. I had no expections whatsoever. What I was greeted with was a pile of (as I mentioned earlier) veiled and not so veiled insults. I truly am perplexed by such a hateful response to something so benign. No points there for you.



> Where is the negativity except that the majority won't be participating in Earth Hour of who call into question it's effectiveness?


All right, all right, I'll post it again.



> It's an empty gesture done to facilitate liberal guilt over a false premise.
> 
> That's bullsh!t.
> 
> ...





> Therein likes the analogy to Christmas and Valentine's Day. To me the similarities are obvious. We take a day/hour to observe that which, if we are true "believers", should be practising on an ongoing basis. Some do but many, many others honour the day/hour but don't follow through in action the rest of the time. I think It is understandable that some people would be sceptical about such events when so much hypocrisy abides.


And I would counter that many many more would be doing nothing if it wasn't for the awareness raising the so called 'empty event' of Earth Hour offers. I don't dispute that some will honour the day and have forgotten the mesaage a week later, but some will not. Some of those peple are the kids I was mentioning earlier. I have seen many parent's reprimanded by their children for not following through on their committment. 

To me, that says something's working. The message is getting through. The idea of doing nothing would be better is mind boggling, isn't it?


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Posting the truth again proves nothing. I said it was bullsh!t and that is the truth from my perspective as I imagine all the other comments are from the people who posted them.

I kind of like the ring of truth to "a patently useless, knee-jerk gesture" too.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

SINC said:


> Posting the truth again proves nothing. I said it was bullsh!t and that is the truth from my perspective as I imagine all the other comments are from the people who posted them.
> 
> I kind of like the ring of truth to "a patently useless, knee-jerk gesture" too.


That's nice. Thanks for sharing.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

You sowed the wind kid, and reaped the whirlwind. If you can't stand the heat, then don't open the door to the kitchen.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

mrjimmy if it's any consolation, 14 people voted they would be participating in Earth Hour, and were presumably a lot more positive about the whole event.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Sonal said:


> mrjimmy if it's any consolation, 14 people voted they would be participating in Earth Hour, and were presumably a lot more positive about the whole event.


Did you enjoy your evening last night?


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

mrjimmy said:


> Did you enjoy your evening last night?


We did. Had the family around the woodstove and watched the older dogs stare in wonderment at the doxie pups as we held them in our arms to keep them warm and snug. :love2:


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Macfury said:


> You sowed the wind kid, and reaped the whirlwind. If you can't stand the heat, then don't open the door to the kitchen.





Sonal said:


> mrjimmy if it's any consolation, 14 people voted they would be participating in Earth Hour, and were presumably a lot more positive about the whole event.


"He that troubleth his own house shall inherit the wind: and the fool shall be servant to the wise of heart.”

Very true, Sonal. Paix, mon amie.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Macfury said:


> You sowed the wind kid, and reaped the whirlwind. If you can't stand the heat, then don't open the door to the kitchen.


I enjoy your melding of a Biblical reference with that of a 1940s monologue. Nicely done. Were you channeling Bogart?


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

So, once again, why not do this Earth Hour thing on Earth Day, April 22, where at least people might be aware of it, being on the calendars and all?


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

mrjimmy said:


> I enjoy your melding of a Biblical reference with that of a 1940s monologue. Nicely done. Were you channeling Bogart?


No, Spencer Tracy in "Inherit the Wind".

YouTube - Inherit The Wind - Spencer Tracy Speech


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

mrjimmy said:


> Did you enjoy your evening last night?


I did. It's always fun to have dinner by candlelight, and it was nice to turn everything off and enjoy the quiet.

Funny when the lights came back on though--it suddenly seemed way too bright, even though it had been just fine before.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Sonal said:


> I did. It's always fun to have dinner by candlelight, and it was nice to turn everything off and enjoy the quiet.
> 
> Funny when the lights came back on though--it suddenly seemed way too bright, even though it had been just fine before.


Same here, which is why we kept the candles going in parts of the house, and then just put on a light or two elsewhere. 

Dinner by candlelight sounded nice.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Dr.G. said:


> No, Spencer Tracy in "Inherit the Wind".
> 
> YouTube - Inherit The Wind - Spencer Tracy Speech


Ah very good. Excellent clip by the way. Very apropos.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

So…uh…guys? Earth Day? April 22?


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Sonal said:


> I did. It's always fun to have dinner by candlelight, and it was nice to turn everything off and enjoy the quiet.
> 
> Funny when the lights came back on though--it suddenly seemed way too bright, even though it had been just fine before.


That sounds great. We enjoyed the darkness and quiet also. So much more intimate. We also had the same experience with the lights. We just ended up keeping most of them off.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

mrjimmy said:


> That sounds great. We enjoyed the darkness and quiet also. So much more intimate. We also had the same experience with the lights. We just ended up keeping most of them off.


I dimmed mine down to about 50%, which seemed to work well.

If I had timed things a bit differently, it might have been good for all of us to go up on the roof deck of my building for the hour, since that faces into the city core--I think most of the large towers would have been dark, though it was pretty chilly out. 

Maybe next year we'll take dessert up there if the weather is warm enough.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

mrjimmy said:


> If so, how?
> 
> If not, why?


You know, if you ask a question, it's only polite to respond when someone gives a decent answer. Like about seven or eight pages ago. 

Earth Day is on April 22. A great day to have Earth Hour, don't you think? Honestly, I heard no promotion of Earth Hour this year save for a blurb in yesterday's paper I happened to catch. Not enough time to alter my plans, unfortunately. The number one goal of any marketing approach is to create _awareness_, which is impossible if people are unaware of what you are marketing.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

fjnmusic said:


> You know, if you ask a question, it's only polite to respond when someone gives a decent answer. Like about seven or eight pages ago.
> 
> Earth Day is on April 22. A great day to have Earth Hour, don't you think? Honestly, I heard no promotion of Earth Hour this year save for a blurb in yesterday's paper I happened to catch. Not enough time to alter my plans, unfortunately. The number one goal of any marketing approach is to create _awareness_, which is impossible if people are unaware of what you are marketing.


Very true. I'm not sure why they're not a combined event. Perhaps they are attempting to cover more ground with the meassage by keeping them separate. I think the message could get watered down if it all took place in one day. Perhaps like the Christmas effect the detractors are so fond of pointing out. 

I think holding Earth Hour quarterly would be an excellent idea. Make people aware of consumption specific to the changing needs of the seasons.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

fjnmusic said:


> You know, if you ask a question, it's only polite to respond when someone gives a decent answer. Like about seven or eight pages ago.
> 
> Earth Day is on April 22. A great day to have Earth Hour, don't you think? Honestly, I heard no promotion of Earth Hour this year save for a blurb in yesterday's paper I happened to catch. Not enough time to alter my plans, unfortunately. The number one goal of any marketing approach is to create _awareness_, which is impossible if people are unaware of what you are marketing.


How about just getting an an honest answer to an honest question... like mine several pages ago... Guilty of what....?


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

fjnmusic said:


> You know, if you ask a question, it's only polite to respond when someone gives a decent answer. Like about seven or eight pages ago.
> 
> Earth Day is on April 22. A great day to have Earth Hour, don't you think? Honestly, I heard no promotion of Earth Hour this year save for a blurb in yesterday's paper I happened to catch. Not enough time to alter my plans, unfortunately. The number one goal of any marketing approach is to create _awareness_, which is impossible if people are unaware of what you are marketing.



Do you really think that people are unaware of this issue? Really?


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Sonal said:


> mrjimmy if it's any consolation, 14 people voted they would be participating in Earth Hour, and were presumably a lot more positive about the whole event.


If all he was looking for was positive commentary, then he shouldn't have asked a question along with a poll asking where people stand... If all you want is to "praise glory" then open a church (Oh wait............ ), but whatever you do, don't take a poll or ask people's opinion, you might just be perplexed/disappointed with the results.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

screature said:


> If all he was looking for was positive commentary, then he shouldn't have asked a question along with a poll asking where people stand... If all you want is to "praise glory" then open a church (Oh wait............ ), but whatever you do, don't take a poll or ask people's opinion, you might just be perplexed/disappointed with the results.


You really miss the point. Constructive commentary, absolutely. Insults? Why bother. 

Perplexed yes. Because it is so incredibly benign. Feel free to reread the entire thread.

Disappointed? As I said before. Wrong.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

screature said:


> If all he was looking for was positive commentary, then he shouldn't have asked a question along with a poll asking where people stand... If all you want is to "praise glory" then open a church (Oh wait............ ), but whatever you do, don't take a poll or ask people's opinion, you might just be perplexed/disappointed with the results.


It is obvious to all that expectations here, as well as the poll itself went 180° on supporters. Now they are tripping on their bottom lips over it while blaming others for honest feedback.

Bottom line is the majority have no use for, nor do they support this nonsense.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

mrjimmy said:


> You really miss the point. Constructive commentary, absolutely. Insults? Why bother.
> 
> Perplexed yes. Because it is so incredibly benign. Feel free to reread the entire thread.
> 
> Disappointed? As I said before. Wrong.


the difference seems lost on them. This has happened before.

So it's back to running out and hugging trees, drinking lattes, and letting friends spend time in the dark with your wife.

There you have it.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

SINC said:


> It is obvious to all that expectations here, as well as the poll itself went 180° on supporters. Now they are tripping on their bottom lips over it while blaming others for honest feedback.


As far as I can see I was asking a question and conducting a poll. I wasn't preaching, nor insulting the views of others. That all came from you and the 'all' you mention above. After which I felt the need to defend the good that this benign educational event generates. Doing so was difficult amidst the mire of perplexing toxicity that was conjured up. 

I'd say the only thing that went 180º was your credibility.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

mrjimmy said:


> I'd say the only thing that went 180º was your credibility.


Not mine, yours along with the minority that support this nonsense as creating awareness.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

SINC said:


> Not mine, yours along with the minority that support this nonsense as creating awareness.


Where I'm from, anyone who cries 'bullsh!t' as a form of rebuttal has little to no credibility.

Enjoy your evening.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

And where I'm from it's considered entertainment extreme when people paint themselves into corners with false expectations, then deny it and blame others for_ their_ loss of credibility.

And I will enjoy the rest of my _afternoon_, thanks.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

SINC said:


> And where I'm from it's considered entertainment extreme when people paint themselves into corners with false expectations, then deny it and blame others for_ their_ loss of credibility.


I sleep just fine thank you. Reread the thread and see where the opening shots came from. No corner painting or denying going on here. I leave this thread enlightened.

Have a good one.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

As do I, but the fact remains that you were shot down by fellow members who do not support Earth Hour and you can't stand it. Your posts have reflected that throughout the thread. Your mirror is somewhat foggy.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

SINC said:


> As do I, but the fact remains that you were shot down by fellow members who do not support Earth Hour and you can't stand it. Your posts have reflected that throughout the thread. Your mirror is somewhat foggy.


Dream a little dream SINC.  

Shot down by insults? Please. I was never looking for support. I am not a recruiter. You and some others on the other hand should dig deep into your psyches and try to undersatnd your anger issues.

Seriously.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Nowhere in this thread did anyone give a valid reason to "celebrate" the Gore Gang robbing from the poor and giving to the rich via Carbon Credit Trading. Nor is there any reason to celebrate governments robbing from the poor via a carbon tax.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

mrjimmy said:


> Dream a little dream SINC.
> 
> Shot down by insults? Please. I was never looking for support. I am not a recruiter. You and some others on the other hand should dig deep into your psyches and try to undersatnd your anger issues.
> 
> Seriously.


As you should reflect on your denial issues.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

I figured the Gore thing would rear it's ugly head at some point. First the tree huggers, then latte drinkers, now we'll go down the Gore road.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

mrjimmy said:


> You really miss the point. Constructive commentary, absolutely. Insults? Why bother.
> 
> Perplexed yes. Because it is so incredibly benign. Feel free to reread the entire thread.
> 
> Disappointed? As I said before. Wrong.


What exactly is the point I am missing... ? Oh but I really shouldn't expect a direct answer to a direct question should I? 

Well I have just finished reviewing the entirety of the thread at your provocation and you know the number of posters that I counted that could even be considered to be insulting....? 4- 5 tops (depending on your sensitivities). So where is the reason to be bothered? 34 said they would not participate and one would assume that the reason more did not speak out is that it was already said... so why bother. 

You say you are not disappointed... fine let us stick with perplexed.

Well as you asked the question and posted the poll, a pseudo scientist if you will, why do you enter into the fray at all? Would that be recommended behaviour for Ekos, Nanos. or Decima, etc. etc. Should you not stay neutral and merely collate the data you receive?

You may say, "Oh, it is just ehMac who cares.", but YOU would be missing the point. If you are truly going to ask people's opinions you don't try and influence them in any manner or another. If you really ever truly wanted to know where people's minds were at you would have accepted the results without any commentary or editorializing at all.

You clearly had an "agenda" and being an "agent provocateur". 

You are really good at it mrjimmy you may have a future in politics.. did you ever think about it? And I am not being facetious... Really. 



> As far as I can see I was asking a question and conducting a poll. I wasn't preaching, nor insulting the views of others. *That all came from you and the 'all' you mention above. After which I felt the need to defend the good that this benign educational event generates.* Doing so was difficult amidst the mire of perplexing toxicity that was conjured up.


Really? You posted your support of earth hour at post #8... we are now at #205.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

mrjimmy said:


> I enjoy your melding of a Biblical reference with that of a 1940s monologue. Nicely done. Were you channeling Bogart?


Something a little more B-grade. Lawrence Tierney, maybe. At least we share a love of language.


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

Apparently anyone who shows some concern regarding our society's profligate energy consumption, and supports symbolic grass-roots actions to raise awareness of this issue is a latté-sucking, granola-chomping, birkenstock-wearing hippie who want's nothing more desperately than to see a Tennessee billionaire become rich at the expense of the world's poor as the result of a bunch of government intervention in the free market.

I'm not only astounded that people who believe this can cope with the cognitive dissonance, I'm in awe of the skills of the oil-industry PR firms who've spun this situation into being the fault of "environmentalists."

It certainly does show the power of the private sector.:greedy:


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Macfury said:


> Something a little more B-grade. Lawrence Tierney, maybe. At least we share a love of language.


Actually, Macfury, I liked Tierney in Dillinger and Back to Bataan.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

bryanc said:


> It certainly does show the power of the private sector.:greedy:


That's right, bryanc, we're all shooting ourselves in the foot because we've been blinded by corporate greed. It's not possible to hold such contrarian views (the majority on EhMac apparently) without being bought and paid for.

Sheesh!


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Dr.G. said:


> Actually, Macfury, I liked Tierney in Dillinger and Back to Bataan.


I thought he was great as well.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

bryanc said:


> Apparently anyone who shows some concern regarding our society's profligate energy consumption, and supports symbolic grass-roots actions to raise awareness of this issue is a latté-sucking, granola-chomping, birkenstock-wearing hippie who want's nothing more desperately than to see a Tennessee billionaire become rich at the expense of the world's poor as the result of a bunch of government intervention in the free market.
> 
> I'm not only astounded that people who believe this can cope with the cognitive dissonance, I'm in awe of the skills of the oil-industry PR firms who've spun this situation into being the fault of "environmentalists."
> 
> It certainly does show the power of the private sector.:greedy:


Generally bryanc I view your posts as reasoned... even if I fundamentally disagree with them, but this post is pure nonsense.... I expected better.... shame on me and the failing is mine...


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

I see mrjimmy as one of those "Battling Bastards from Bataan", fighting against all odds against a force superior in number. I am right there beside him, but shall not get drawn into the war of words in this thread, where everyone has the right to their point-of-view. Of course, saying this might be similar to standing next to "the lady in red" outside of the movie theater, a big mistake for Dillinger. We shall see.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

bryanc said:


> Apparently anyone who shows some concern regarding our society's profligate energy consumption, and supports symbolic grass-roots actions to raise awareness of this issue is a latté-sucking, granola-chomping, birkenstock-wearing hippie who want's nothing more desperately than to see a Tennessee billionaire become rich at the expense of the world's poor as the result of a bunch of government intervention in the free market.
> 
> I'm not only astounded that people who believe this can cope with the cognitive dissonance, I'm in awe of the skills of the oil-industry PR firms who've spun this situation into being the fault of "environmentalists."
> 
> It certainly does show the power of the private sector.:greedy:


even more astounding, is the complete inability to even comprehend what you said as even remotely valid.



> It certainly does show the power of the private sector.:greedy:


hook, line, and sinker!


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Dr.G. said:


> I see mrjimmy as one of those "Battling Bastards from Bataan", fighting against all odds against a force superior in number. I am right there beside him, but shall not get drawn into the war of words in this thread, where everyone has the right to their point-of-view. Of course, saying this might be similar to standing next to "the lady in red", a big mistake for Dillenger. We shall see.


Dr. G. you know I have the greatest of respect for you but... This thread *is* a deceit as mrjimmy clearly has illustrated. To have an opinion is one thing, to ask for the opinion of others and have the fortitude to accept those findings is another.

If this thread were entitled "I am all in Favour of Earth Hour" and then followed by " only those who agree need to reply", I may agree with you, but that is far from the case.

It is one thing to express an opinion and it is entirely a different matter to express it under the guise of asking others for theirs.

As an academic I am somewhat surprised to see that you support mrjimmy's devices as constituting _"one of those "Battling Bastards from Bataan", fighting against all odds against a force superior in number." _


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Finally some indicators of public support for Earth Hour:

From Alberta Global news tonight, Edmonton's power consumption dropped 3% for the hour beating Calgary whose consumption only dropped 2%.

Some support.

Quick math: 97.5% didn't care enough to turn off their lights. Now there are some indicators of what world wide support might be and it isn't pretty.


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

screature said:


> this post is pure nonsense....


How so? It seems that any time any member here posts anything even remotely progressive or sensible with regard to the environment or our unequivocally and irrefutably unsustainable consumption of natural resources, they are quickly denounced as a 'tree-hugger' or supporter of the 'Gore-gang.'

While there is clearly no consensus regarding how we ought best deal with the unsustainable nature of our global economy, it is a simple fact of thermodynamics that we must do so. Even if "global warming" turns out to be a mirage, we consume vastly more energy than is currently being captured by photosynthesis, and we are able to do so only because millions of years worth of that captured energy was sequestered as various forms of reduced carbon compounds in the earth's crust.

Learning that turning your lights off when you don't need them is a small, but necessary step towards solving that problem.

From what I've seen in this, and many other threads, when someone makes these sorts of suggestions, they are dog-piled by a group of vocal proponents of continued-record-profits-for-oil-companies-at-any-expense.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

bryanc said:


> From what I've seen in this, and many other threads, when someone makes these sorts of suggestions, they are dog-piled by a group of vocal proponents of continued-record-profits-for-oil-companies-at-any-expense.


Then with due respect, you failed to read the entire thread. Most who opposed the fluff that is a single hour in a year that is largely ignored by the populace, spoke loudly about it being important to conserve power every day of the year.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

SINC said:


> Finally some indicators of public support for Earth Hour:
> 
> From Alberta Global news tonight, Edmonton's power consumption dropped 3% for the hour beating Calgary whose consumption only dropped 2%.
> 
> ...


This has to be, one of the more absurd attempts at stats and math for you Sinc.

Truly embarrassing. But, whatever makes you feel good I guess eh?

Back to my tree huggin...



SINC said:


> Then with due respect, you failed to read the entire thread. Most who opposed the fluff that is a single hour in a year that is largely ignored by the populace, spoke loudly about it being important to conserve power every day of the year.


Maybe one more try.

I don't think anyone is of the opinion, that if you decided not to participate in earth hour, that you are an arse. Well, all except G-mo that is, but that's hardly surprising.

It's the way it was expressed, the anger, the toxic nature the thread took right away.

It's great that everyone conserves energy all year round. Bravo. But you're dreaming if the entire population does this voluntarily, and events to remind people I don't believe are a waste of time, even if one doesn't specifically participate in one.

No reason for such bile to be spewed really. Or numbers fudged.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

groovetube said:


> This has to be, one of the more absurd attempts at stats and math for you Sinc.
> 
> Truly embarrassing. But, whatever makes you feel good I guess eh?
> 
> Back to my tree huggin...


Yep, I guess when you can't get your head around the fact there is little support for Earth Hour, understanding math is out of the question. I'd be embarrassed too.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

SINC said:


> Yep, I guess when you can't get your head around the fact there is little support for Earth Hour, understanding math is out of the question. I'd be embarrassed too.


It doesn't matter what I think Sinc. I am well aware support isn't overwhelming. But your post was completely wrong. Not only wrong, but embarrassing as I said.


----------



## DR Hannon (Jan 21, 2007)

I suppose that a group hug is out. To many hugging their woodies and other looking on shaking their heads. I suppose there is not a middle ground on such a polarizing subject. 

I just ran out of energy on the subject.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

groovetube said:


> But your post was completely wrong. Not only wrong, but embarrassing as I said.


Not in Edmonton and Calgary it wasn't. You mean to tell us TO did so much better?


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Sinc, it was not 97.5% of the people who decided not to turn off their lights. It's rather simple to figure this out.

This is why discussing this kind of thing is just a waste of time. It's just stupid to even believe that.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

bryanc said:


> While there is clearly no consensus regarding how we ought best deal with the unsustainable nature of our global economy, it is a simple fact of thermodynamics that we must do so. Even if "global warming" turns out to be a mirage, we consume vastly more energy than is currently being captured by photosynthesis...


Stop with the photosynthesis canard. We could exploit nuclear energy that doesn't rely on photosynthesis. We could exploit solar energy that does not rely on photosynthesis. We will exploit these resources as cheap carbon-based fuels begin to run out--which is not now.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

screature said:


> Dr. G. you know I have the greatest of respect for you but... This thread *is* a deceit as mrjimmy clearly has illustrated. To have an opinion is one thing, to ask for the opinion of others and have the fortitude to accept those findings is another.
> 
> If this thread were entitled "I am all in Favour of Earth Hour" and then followed by " only those who agree need to reply", I may agree with you, but that is far from the case.
> 
> ...



Screature, guess I was wearing red. I can't speak for mrj, but I still support the notion of Earth Hour/Day. The "against all odds" are the outpouring of back and forth barbs at/from him. Not sure what my being an "academic" has to do with my views, but I see this "war of words" spinning out of control, which is why I don't partake in trying to spar with others. I have my views, they hold their views, and on certain issues, there is little I can say to change an opinion. So, I just state my views and stand by them.

Still, it seems as if mrj was out there all alone, albeit of his own making and accord. The views of gt were not much help, since they seemed to be off-topic at times. So, this is why I decided to throw in my lot with one of the "Battling Bastards from Bataan". 

I would not have hung in as long as mrj with the back and forth postings. I like the view that some have suggested that conservation of energy and resources is a year-round/life long undertaking that we ALL have to attempt to the best of our abilities. Still, as I think that mrj's initial idea was to see how we might be involved in Earth Hour. The poll was not the best idea. I think that Sonal's posts came closest with the intent, as I can infer, of mrj's initial thread idea. 

So let's just hope we all keep conserving energy and resources however we are able, and remain members of ehMacLand.

Paix, mon ami.


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

bryanc said:


> Apparently anyone who shows some concern regarding our society's profligate energy consumption, and supports symbolic grass-roots actions to raise awareness of this issue is a latté-sucking, granola-chomping, birkenstock-wearing hippie who want's nothing more desperately than to see a Tennessee billionaire become rich at the expense of the world's poor as the result of a bunch of government intervention in the free market.


We are not talking about "_anyone_ who shows some concern regarding our society's profligate energy consumption." 

WWF is an extremist left-wing activist group. Earth hour is a WWF propaganda event, specifically to push the AGW political agenda. Many of the people who object to this particular event have clearly elaborated on how they are doing their part all year long.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

well, if my views on the nonsense that ensued isn't much help, and off topic, I guess I need some more wine.

Comparisons to the fat man in red, and fudged numbers are better conversation?

Cheers.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Macfury said:


> Something a little more B-grade. Lawrence Tierney, maybe. At least we share a love of language.


We certainly do. Although I may often be in disagreement, you've worded it beautifully.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Dr.G. said:


> I see mrjimmy as one of those "Battling Bastards from Bataan", fighting against all odds against a force superior in number. I am right there beside him, but shall not get drawn into the war of words in this thread, where everyone has the right to their point-of-view. Of course, saying this might be similar to standing next to "the lady in red" outside of the movie theater, a big mistake for Dillinger. We shall see.


Dr,G., I am a fan of you as well. Thanks for coming to my side.

Paix, mon ami.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

groovetube said:


> well, if my views on the nonsense that ensued isn't much help, and off topic, I guess I need some more wine.
> 
> Comparisons to the fat man in red, and fudged numbers are better conversation?
> 
> Cheers.


GT, sometimes we all need a little more wine. Thanks for the encouragement.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

mrjimmy, I enjoy the fray and arguing passionately for my views, but I honestly don't despise you.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Macfury said:


> mrjimmy, I enjoy the fray and arguing passionately for my views, but I honestly don't despise you.


I never thought you did. I also don't despise you. I think at times you come across as arrogant and/ or dismissive, but I'm sure you can say the same about me.

I enjoy these debates and ultimately learn from them. For that I say thanks.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

mrjimmy said:


> GT, sometimes we all need a little more wine. Thanks for the encouragement.


And that was my solution to Earth hour... turn off the lights, open up the wine.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

I don't despise anyone. I'm dismissive, impatient, and mouthy at times, but I don't despise anyone.

But I do love, a great bottle of red.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

groovetube said:


> I don't despise anyone. I'm dismissive, impatient, and mouthy at times, but I don't despise anyone.
> 
> But I do love, a great bottle of red.


I sense a bit of Withnail And I here. One of my favourite films.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I want it here, and I want it now!


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

mrjimmy said:


> Very true. I'm not sure why they're not a combined event. Perhaps they are attempting to cover more ground with the meassage by keeping them separate. I think the message could get watered down if it all took place in one day. Perhaps like the Christmas effect the detractors are so fond of pointing out.
> 
> I think holding Earth Hour quarterly would be an excellent idea. Make people aware of consumption specific to the changing needs of the seasons.


Thank you. That's all I'm saying.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

screature said:


> Do you really think that people are unaware of this issue? Really?


Yes. Many people, believe it or not, have other things going on in their lives that they feel is more important than remembering to turn off the lights for an hour at a time someone else figured would be a good idea. If you want to be part of the club, you do exactly as the other members do. But supposing there are actually individuals who had not heard about Earth Hour. Can you really blame them for not taking part?


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

mrjimmy said:


> Dr,G., I am a fan of you as well. Thanks for coming to my side.
> 
> Paix, mon ami.


Thanks, mrj. Remember the battle cry and standard of the Knights Templar --"Beauséant!" (meaning "Be glorious!"). Paix, mon ami.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Ha! I think Earth Hour is still a crock! In Toronto, I thought I saw one house with candles flickering but it turned out to be a TV set.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Dr.G. said:


> Thanks, mrj. Remember the battle cry and standard of the Knights Templar --"Beauséant!" (meaning "Be glorious!"). Paix, mon ami.


Cursed by their unholy rituals, they required no light at all when they were revived as the Blind Dead!


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Macfury said:


> Cursed by their unholy rituals, they required no light at all when they were revived as the Blind Dead!


See, Macfury, they knew that it was smart to turn off the lights when not needed.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

fjnmusic said:


> Yes. Many people, believe it or not, have other things going on in their lives that they feel is more important than remembering to turn off the lights for an hour at a time someone else figured would be a good idea. If you want to be part of the club, you do exactly as the other members do. But supposing there are actually individuals who had not heard about Earth Hour. Can you really blame them for not taking part?


No, not at all.

But those who are saying that they are going to purposely turn on every lamp and light and electrical device they have for the sole reason of making a mockery of Earth Hour... I mean really, that's just kind of mean. 

Absolutely fair and fine to choose not to participate, but why go out of your way to mock?


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Dr.G. said:


> See, Macfury, they knew that it was smart to turn off the lights when not needed.


It's true. They can slaughter wholesale in total darkness.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Sonal said:


> No, not at all.
> 
> But those who are saying that they are going to purposely turn on every lamp and light and electrical device they have for the sole reason of making a mockery of Earth Hour... I mean really, that's just kind of mean.
> 
> Absolutely fair and fine to choose not to participate, but why go out of your way to mock?


A very valid point, Sonal. Paix, mon amie.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Best time to celebrate Earth Hour is between Midnight and 6:00 p.m., when I insist that all lights in the home be turned off.


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

A Native libertarian's perspective.

Caution: language warning.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

FeXL said:


> A Native libertarian's perspective.
> 
> Caution: language warning.


:lmao::lmao::lmao: :clap::clap::clap:


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

FeXL said:


> A Native libertarian's perspective.
> 
> Caution: language warning.


Har! I like his enthusiasm!


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

FeXL said:


> A Native libertarian's perspective.
> 
> Caution: language warning.


:lmao::clap::lmao::clap::lmao:
Thanks!


----------



## imnothng (Sep 12, 2009)

imo. Climate change is inherent in the Earth's system, and will happen with or without us. So kick back and enjoy the ride into the next ice age, or warm age because it's going to happen whether we like it or not.


----------

