To celebrate Earth Day, The Washington Policy Center has gone all retro on the subject by taking a flashback to 1970. Get your love beads and Jefferson Airplane albums out.
John Barnes blogs about it here.
"By 1985...air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching the earth by one half" - Life magazine, January 1970...civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind," biologist George Wald, Harvard University, April 19, 1970.
By 1995, "...somewhere between 75 and 85 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct." Sen. Gaylord Nelson, quoting Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, Look magazine, April 1970.
Because of increased dust, cloud cover and water vapor "...the planet will cool, the water vapor will fall and freeze, and a new Ice Age will be born," Newsweek magazine, January 26, 1970.
The world will be "...eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age," Kenneth Watt, speaking at Swarthmore University, April 19, 1970.
We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation," biologist Barry Commoner, University of Washington, writing in the journal Environment, April 1970.
Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from the intolerable deteriorations and possible extinction," The New York Times editorial, April 20, 1970.
By 1985, air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half..." Life magazine, January 1970.
Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make," Paul Ehrlich, interview in Mademoiselle magazine, April 1970.
It is already too late to avoid mass starvation," Earth Day organizer Denis Hayes, The Living Wilderness, Spring 1970.
By the year 2000...the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America and Australia, will be in famine," Peter Gunter, North Texas State University, The Living Wilderness, Spring 1970."
Far out man.
Of course, now we have "peak oil", "global warming", "biofuels" and Al Gore - the more things change, the more they stay the same....
Posted by: John Galt on April 22, 2008 09:36 AMThat was a couple months ago. Couple of days ago, he was discussing how ethanol production using food crops was helping cause food shortages around the world.
A step at a time.
I know I went to the first or second earth day in DC for the purpose of the adventure, not anything like I believed in.
Posted by: swatter on April 22, 2008 09:46 AMEver hear any of these "experts" or their avid supporters say we were wrong and apologize for their stupid projections? A new generation of idiots just takes their place.
I just saw where Stephen Hawking said he thought there was likely unintelligent life on other planets. Well, there is certainly unintelligent life on this one if GW propaganda is now accepted as fact.
In general, we are at the mercy of massive geological, biological and astronomic forces. Volcanoes, Tsunamis, Viruses, Floods, Slides, Earthquakes, Meteors, X-Rays, UV Radiation from the Sun, Hurricanes, etc. The Earth does not need to be saved. The Earth is 4.5 Billion years old and will sluff us off like it has millions of other species.
Common sense conservation and efficient usage of energy make sense only because it costs less and gives us a more healthy life. But there is no impending panic that should require us to suddenly rework our economy such that we have not anticipated all of the intended consequences. The prime example being Biofuels.
There's a very real chance that in coming out of this solar minimum we will see several hard winters, just as we did in the late 70s and early 80s when we came out of the last solar minimum. Like the earth's precession which creates our seasons, there is a lag time between the actual minimum, and the time when the climate turns around.
Imagine the perfect storm of high energy prices brought about by the artificial scarcity of environmentalism, colliding with a couple very hard winters and crop failures, colliding with the Biofuel madness and a lot of food being burned in enviro-nut cars. That equals a lot of starvation. And all of the blood of those dead in the third world will be on the hands of the Progressives and the Greens that pine for Earth Day and foolish anti-man celebrations. And on the government officials and Faux-Green Biofuel Execs who exploited government force to create a market where otherwise none would have ever existed.
This is the day that I celebrate how much I could care less about environmentalists and Progressives. On Earth day, I celebrate human achievement and our heroes who have helped us harness the great unknowns of the Earth to make our lives longer and more comfortable. Celebrate the productive today, not the leaches who live off of those of us who work hard to make and do everything that Progressives and environmentalists take for granted.
Earth Day is non-event.
Posted by: Jeff B. on April 22, 2008 10:19 AM/sarc
Posted by: jimg on April 22, 2008 10:45 AMI used to wear those in soph year at high school.
Posted by: John Bailo on April 22, 2008 10:54 AM~~~
Well yes, it's Earth Day, and this charming young man wants to take out the trash.
Be forewarned this is an appalling commentary by one so young... and yet should we be surprised given the hate fomented by liberals and the far left?
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on April 22, 2008 11:25 AMhttp://mises.org/story/2940
you might compare it to this one on biofuels in the WAPO
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/21/AR2008042102555.html
Notice how the WAPO conceeds "good intentions" to those who are starving millions. I never did, infact what is happening on that front is entirely consistent with what I was saying about the3 subject when Bob (ADM) Dole was rinning for POTUS back in '96.
Posted by: JDH on April 22, 2008 11:30 AM
1. Over regulation of land and building has caused housing prices to go to crazy places. Thanks Democrats.
2. We are not allowed to go get our own (US) oil reserves or refine the oil we have (no new refineries since the last 1970's). Thanks Democrats.
3. We are burning food (corn) as fuel for our cars and driving the cost of food trough the roof. Thanks Democrats.
And the MSM wants us to elect more Democrats to fix the problems they have created. AMAZING!!
Sorry, but that was GW doing. He should have never signed that bill. Major mistake!
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on April 22, 2008 12:52 PMBecause Algore is spending $300 Million in a last ditch effort to convince people that the earth is warming and that it is time to panic, when the data shows that the earth is cooling, and that it's caused by the sun. I don't agree with Gingrich on many things, but if you look at his actual policy statements, he's not calling for destructive economic upheval like the Progressives, he's simply saying do what makes sense to the extent that it is possible.
Real people see that it makes sense to build nuclear power plants that reduce emissions while simultaneously providing very dense energy fuel that can be recycled and provides and abundant source of energy at lower costs. And real people understand that turning off the lights saves them money, that clean air is good to breathe, etc.
But Progressives are interested in political control and class warfare. It's not enough to offer economic incentives for energy savings, or cleaner industry, a Progressive wants caps put on to existing business as a means of statist control. Progressives consisently implement policies that create scarcity, drive costs up, pit factions against each other and create gaps. There's no reason to create an energy divide, but Progressive policy is doing just that. We have the technology to produce abundant low-cost power, but when people like Algore stand to make a lot of money off of biofuel, and very tiny percentage energy generation like wind and solar, than they are more than willing to lie to sell their snake oil.
However the Sun and the Pacific Ocean are not cooperating with the global scare mongering, so what to do? Start a $300 Million ad campaign, and use feel good images like Pelosi sitting next to Gingrich as a substitute for scientific argument and sound policy decisions that actually help people.
Posted by: Jeff B. on April 22, 2008 12:55 PMAs Rush said to the REP's when they took Congress. Don't let the spot lights get to you. I'd say it got to Newt. (dumb)
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on April 22, 2008 12:55 PMIn 1978 Life, Time and Newsweek magazines were reporting drastic climatic changes and we needed to change our dirty ways or: by 2008 temperatures north of 45 degrees will never see high temperatures over 32 degrees and that by 2025 Puget Sound will freeze to a depth of 10' year round and by 2050 Washington will be under 100' of ice.
In the first Gulf War the fammed science guru Carl Sagan predicted that the oil well fires would burn for decades so polluting our atmosphere that it would cause a cooling effect, destroy crops and killing BILLIONS & BILLIONS of people. I am still holding my breath.
In 1995, informed Hollywood types got together and stated that our ocean were dying and all life in the seas would be dead in 10 years. Make mine Sea Bass.
In 1970, we were told that we are logging the earth bare. Then why are there more trees growing in the world today than at anytime in history? Where is a Lorx when you need one?
I could go on and on and on...but you know the truth.
I guess it's the same thing as the various millennialists and religious zealots that have come and gone over the centuries. There's always someone telling us that we're all doomed because of our greed/unholiness/whatever and that unless we change our ways -- and, not coincidentally, do things the way the doomsayer says we should -- we face destruction and eternal damnation. Same crap, different year, different particulars, but it's all the same: Power and control.
Posted by: Frank Black on April 22, 2008 01:57 PMAnd whatever happened to the Ted/Woody claim that the oceans would be "dead" in 10 years? Over ten years ago.
I suppose this explains why I froze my backside trying to get clams on Saturday, and got skunked. Perhaps if we all walked to the beach there'd still be clams.
Posted by: scott158 on April 22, 2008 02:17 PMHayes continues to serve as chairman of the Earth Day Network, which promotes Earth Day observances worldwide. He is president of the Bullitt Foundation philanthropy in Seattle.
Burner is running against Republican U.S. Rep. Dave Reichert in a rematch of their 2006 contest, which Reichert won with 51.5 percent of the vote. His 8th District encompasses much of eastern King County and extends into Pierce County."
I may have some confusion, but I thought that the earth day founder was convicted of murder - or something like that. Is he out on parole?
He doesn't agree with the Green Left at all. But he doesn't want them dominating and monopolizing all policy on the environment.
There are many rational things that we can all do to make the Earth a better place to live that DON'T include higher taxes and fewer cars. If we don't step up to the table, we acquiesce all authority to the illogical Nutroots like Cato.
Of course, everybody noticed how Cato didn't address the Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt (FUD) that is consistently spread by the Left, and threw out yet another non sequitur.
Posted by: Larry on April 22, 2008 02:35 PMWant more refineries? Well you'll have to talk to the NIMBY's about that.
3. You can make bio-fuel out of switch grass, or you could import it tariff free from the sugar-cane rich Venezuela. Something tells me Bush is not going to suck up to Chavez just to get cheap bio-fuel. I don't see acres and acres of switch grass being planted...wonder why? Maybe the farm lobbyists have something to do with it?
Besides if the Oil companies REALLY wanted more refineries I'm sure they could get some with the amount of money they donate to the GOP. I'm sure they're quite happy the price it through the roof.
Have you ever driven through Eastern Washington or Eastern Montana and wondered why there is a lot of BLM land and more deaded land that is not planted? I doubt it. Crops demand water, and if you use the water that you would be using to grow food grade grain to grow feed corn to make ethonol with - guess what smart guy, you don't have it available to grow food with. Government has told farmers and ag investors where they want them using the available resources and people are starving today because of the government you trust so much, Cato. Subsidies are the voice of the government to the market, nothing more, nothing less. What the government said is: plant corn to use for ethonol and we will guarantee you a profit. The government said this too: WTF do we care if people starve because of this. While the government was putting out this message the WSJ and IBD were editorializing on EXACTLY why this was extremely poor policy and EXACTLY where it was going to lead. By the way Bob (ADM) Dole was the point man on this, and I hold the Republican Party as responsible as the Democrats on this. Both sides are run by a faction that could care less what the consequences are, so long as they retain power.
Posted by: JDH on April 22, 2008 03:13 PMFake, computer generated scenes in a fake, computer generated movie, narrated by a fake, computer generated Goracle (PBUH).
The latter is not protected as free speech.
And neither should be the former.
The false and costly preachings of Al Gore etc. and media spokespeople should be subject to prosecution as wreckless endangerment.
A method should be implemented to recover damages to the public.
Remember Alar, asbestos in crayons, now biologically un-available lead in toys, pthallates and bhp in water bottles? All with zero danger, but the world has been frantically mobilized for naught !
We have lost CFCs, DDT and maybe soon the internal combustion engine.
FOR WHAT ???? I want to sue to get back the pinnacles of human creation.
Posted by: Bart Cannon on April 22, 2008 04:00 PMBart, if you were alive 120 years ago would it have been whale oil and buggy whips?
Posted by: BA on April 22, 2008 04:38 PMWho are you?
120 years ago? Buggy whips? Whale Oil? Check your historical timelines.
Make your case against CFCs, DDT and the internal combustion engine.
Posted by: Bart Cannon on April 22, 2008 04:44 PMThere wasn't a stifling regulatory action designed to kill off buggy whip makers due to some perceived global emergency. Something better came along by way of human ingenuity and technological advancement, and guess what, people chose what worked better for them. Electricity and the automobile.
There will be more paradigm shifts in the future as technology and innovation provide more attractive alternatives. You're not going to guilt and shame everyone into behaving the way Al Gore wants everyone to behave. They will switch voluntarily when something better coms along.
You were sounding pretty good for a second there, then made a major fool of yourself.
O-well I had hope!
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on April 22, 2008 04:48 PMI'm not saying that at all...they fund both sides and some groups donate heavily to one side or the other. AgriBusiness is pretty equal....Oil/Gas is heavily GOP, Unions are heavy Dem.
Transportation cost should be the only thing fuel related in the cost of my corn flakes. I want cheap crude oil.
So manufacturing and labor are just rouge elements of your Corn Flake breakfast fantasy? Cheap crude oil is nice, but since crude oil is a non-renewable resource you will eventually dry up, you need something else to transport those Corn Flakes to your table.
Everything has a cost, it's just a matter of figuring out which renewable resource is best for mass production.
From the article:
"Americans want lower gasoline prices, and they understand that refining capacity is needed to drive prices down. But few communities would accept a new refinery in their own back yard. I think Americans will support refineries in general but oppose all specific projects, resulting in a stalemate and little or no new construction."
You're right about my history - I was thinking about the first gasoline internal combustion powered car by Benz in 1885 - 123 years ago, my mistake saying 120 years. I was thinking about the whaling fleet that used to anchor in Meydenbauer Bay, which could only happen after the ship canal was dug, and the overlap between whale oil, kerosene and ultimately electricity.
Damn public education.
I don't think the debate anyway is the positives or negatives about certain technologies - just the notion that ANY of our current technologies represent a pinnacle in human achievement seems I think a bit limiting.
Moving to refineries, I see that gasoline consumption in our state has remained flat over the last ten years (decreased per capita consumption off-setting growth in the number of drivers).
So, in our market is it really refinery capacity that raising prices? How about the reality that we're competing for oil when consumption world wide has grown dramatically, and we're competing with increasingly less valuable dollars...
Posted by: BA on April 22, 2008 05:39 PMDon't these people have any shame? What does it take for these people to get mad as hell that they have been taken for suckers? I guess the old "there's a fool born every minute" really is true.
Posted by: RJK on April 22, 2008 05:48 PMYou ever heard of water rights and water wars? Believe me they are still going on. Water will follow the money, and when government guarantees a profit that is a sure thing. Food crops, always speculative, are more so. Some have bet on food crops going through the roof based upon this information as well, and are profiting handsomely.
Now let's talk the WSJ and IBD for a minute. They have cautioned AGAINST these policies since the early 90's. But they have an obligation to their readers to relay market information too. No? Actually yes. These and other sources of market information were simply letting producers what the market wanted them to know and that includes the information that the government you trust so well anted passed on. They have been "spot on" for two decades on reeporting where all this would lead. The WSJ and IBD are conservative publications. No? Yes they are. Investors don't like volatile markets, they believe in stable steadily growing markets. This interference in the market is what triggered this and even though the writing was on the wall there was little that the producers could do. The government said "YOU WILL," and that is what got us to this point.
Posted by: JDH on April 22, 2008 06:07 PM
Of course Cantwell didn't want to inconvenience the polar bears and caribou in the ANWR and despoil that frozen wasteland with the sordid oil exploration equipment that eventually powers our industrial civilization. One would have thought that Cantwell would have had at least enough sense to keep her big yapper shut. I suspect that soon most people will not give a good goddamn about the polar bears as the price for fillup at the pump gets close to the $100 mark.
However if Cantwell wants to continue her deranged investigation maybe she could start with that jellyfish that is currently occupying the White House. Bush has betrayed just about every principal he was once presumed to stand for. When he first proposed drilling in ANWR several years ago he caved immediately when the Luddites, Cantwell among them, started squawking. He championed the ethanol fiasco and uttered the most inane phrase of his Presidency(aside from "Islam is a religion of peace.") :"We are addicted to oil." Finally he has gone completely over to the dark side by proposing Global Warming legislation.
Bush has delivered us to Cantwell, Gore and their minions. The Anti-Industrial Revolution is about to begin.
Posted by: Bill K. on April 22, 2008 10:38 PMGod told the critters they were good and ordered them to multiply. I am an environmentalist and always will be because I have seen the beauty of nature up close and seen critters here, in the tropics and in the Northland that took my breath away they were so beautiful.
Some of us have to worry about their future, they aren't all doing great, for a number of different reasons all having more or less to do with the success of our own species.
I was raised as a left winger and that goes way back--my great grandfather was a Methodist minister who liked Eugene Debs a lot and World War I not at all.
Still, I'm worried that left wing ideology isn't necessarily going to be the best method to help the critters.
Biofuel is a classic example. The left-led environmentalist orgs are quick to support, and very slow to see the danger in anti-market directives pushing biofuels on the public--(I see some posters are talking about subsidies for biofuels, which there are, but what is even much worse are the mandates which goosestep us blindly into a biofuel economy.)
My plea to all of you is this--can you parse things out a little here? I notice that right wingers can be so contemptuous about environmentalism that they sound like they also are contemptuous of the environment and it's biodiversity.
The critters need you folks to care about them. If you got serious about it, you might do a lot better job than some of their current advocates.
Thanks all and may you see something beautiful in nature tomorrow...
New Left Conservative #1
God told the critters they were good and ordered them to multiply. I am an environmentalist and always will be because I have seen the beauty of nature up close and seen critters here, in the tropics and in the Northland that took my breath away they were so beautiful.
Some of us have to worry about their future, they aren't all doing great, for a number of different reasons all having more or less to do with the success of our own species.
I was raised as a left winger and that goes way back--my great grandfather was a Methodist minister who liked Eugene Debs a lot and World War I not at all.
Still, I'm worried that left wing ideology isn't necessarily going to be the best method to help the critters.
Biofuel is a classic example. The left-led environmentalist orgs are quick to support, and very slow to see the danger in anti-market directives pushing biofuels on the public--(I see some posters are talking about subsidies for biofuels, which there are, but what is even much worse are the mandates which goosestep us blindly into a biofuel economy.)
My plea to all of you is this--can you parse things out a little here? I notice that right wingers can be so contemptuous about environmentalism that they sound like they also are contemptuous of the environment and it's biodiversity.
The critters need you folks to care about them. If you got serious about it, you might do a lot better job than some of their current advocates.
Thanks all and may you see something beautiful in nature tomorrow...
New Left Conservative #1
That's probably because of what environmentalism has become over the last 30 years or so. I make a distinction between conservation and environmentalism. I consider myself a conservationist not an environmentalist. A conservationist takes heed of the old Boy Scout trait of leaving your camp cleaner than you found it and not cutting the bark off trees for no reason. In other words a rational steward of the land. Wetland protection was originally began by Ducks Unlimited, an organization of hunters, not environmentalists. Today's enviromentalists by contrast generally seem to be people motivated by either a sort Gaia worship or socialists using the environment to strip individuals of property rights. (See Al Gore)
Wow, how adorable. Except for one thing. "God told the critters they were good and ordered them to multiply."
Do you know why God told ordered them to multiply? Because those lovely little critters are here to feed and cloth US. Humans are the higher species my friend. The animals and environment our all here for OUR benefit. Not the other way around. I agree, animals are cute. I hate animal labs and all that stuff. And don't get me wrong, I love nature. I love trees and flowers and all animals. But I put humanity first and foremost. If drilling for oil kills some trees and makes some animals have to migrate; so be it. Animals are adaptable. More so then SOME humans give them credit for. They'll be fine.
And as for the Earth Day thing, Liberals need to bitch about something I suppose....
Posted by: Army Girl on April 26, 2008 06:49 AM