<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
<title>blogTO Recent Comments: Earth Day March Reclaims the Streets</title>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/feed/recentcomments/?9446</link>
<description>Comments recently made in this post on blogTO</description>
<copyright>Copyright 2009</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 07:10:30 PST</lastBuildDate>
<item>
<title>Steve</title>
<description><![CDATA[
Tyler, you sound like an intellect. I mean, at least you're trying to, but somehow I think you're a walking clusterfuck in real life.]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c589021</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c589021</guid>
<category>Toronto, Environment</category>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 May 2009 20:57:51 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>keven</title>
<description><![CDATA[
>Keven: Either we can deal with global warming or we can deal with all of the undisputed environmental problems and end up with the same result.

I can agree with that.  I guess what I'm saying is that it's okay not to subscribe to this idea of 'global warming' yet still be an environmentalist.  The tone of Steve's post -- "What exactly are you people who are so against the "global warming facists" or "ignorant masses" as you like to call them, afraid of. What is it? You don't want to lose your SUV? You're afraid of some curly light bulbs? What?" -- suggested that not subscribing to this theory means you're against the environment and was accusatory and defensive.]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277986</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277986</guid>
<category>Toronto, Environment</category>
<pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2008 09:21:46 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>rek</title>
<description><![CDATA[
Keven: Either we can deal with global warming or we can deal with all of the undisputed environmental problems and end up with the same result.

People who argue that global warming isn't happening or that it's natural never, ever, ever, ever, EVER, acknowledge that there are about 11 thousand OTHER reasons to do all of the SAME things proposed as ways to combat global warming. Deforestation and strip mining aren't ONLY about carbon reserves. Smoke stacks aren't ONLY about putting CO2 in the atmosphere. Get it? We can either change what we're doing in order to combat global warming, or we can make the SAME CHANGES to combat acid rain, landslides, soil erosion, river/lake pollution, toxins in the air, et cetera. Please tell me you understand.

[And there are far more appropriate comparisons to make if you're just trying to get across that someone is making assumptions, comparisons that don't involve genocide.

Godwin's Corollary is when the Nazi comparison is made the discussion is over, and whoever made the comparison has automatically lost.]]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277745</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277745</guid>
<category>Toronto, Environment</category>
<pubDate>Wed, 23 Apr 2008 10:29:41 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>keven</title>
<description><![CDATA[
@Roger

The only thing my statement 'proved' was that Hitler used similiar tactics of assumptions based on stereotypes (assuming everyone that doesn't believe in global warming is a naysayer on environmental issues <sarcasm>is amazingly intelligent</sarcasm>

If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it's most likely a duck.

Godwin's Law is totally irrelevent to this.  I did not call him a nazi OR call him Hitler, I said his BEHAVIOUR was 'hitlerish'.

You can read more about what YOU'RE doing <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_perception">here</a>.

You may want to pay particular attention to the 2nd paragraph.]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277586</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277586</guid>
<category>Toronto, Environment</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 18:16:55 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>keven</title>
<description><![CDATA[
I don't think I've read anybody saying that we shouldn't deal with acid rain, deforestization or reef death, have you?  perhaps you could quote?  Maybe I'm missing something.

What we're talking aobut here isn't so much recycle, reuse etc etc, we're talking about something labelled as global warming, which may or may not be totally unrelated to your above points, but we don't know.  Which IS the entire point.

>keven: I know acid rain is proven and real, that's why I used it as an example of OTHER reasons to change what we're doing to the environment. Global warming isn't the only environmental issue on the table, not by a long shot, but it's the one getting all the attention.

I agree that those are other reasons to change, again nobody is saying otherwise, but what you're saying is something along the lines of:  We should kill all snakes cause some snakes are poisonous and everyone thinks that killing snakes (at the moment) is a good idea (simpson's reference).  At least that's how you're coming across to me.

>but it's the one getting all the attention.

And some of us choose NOT to be reactionary about it and are still doing our part in being consciense of the situation.

From energy to personal consumption and almost everything in between, I'm completely aware of the current state of things and do everything I can to help.  

If some asshat on a blog tells me I'm probably mad cause I can't drive my SUV or whatever other baseless stereotypical assumptions he was making, he deserved my response.

It was not meant as hyberbole, it was literal and not a rhetorical statement.  Me, "calling-out" someone b/c they are stereotyping people based on assumptions is not Goodwin's Law, it's simply defamatory and close mindedness and where prejudice starts (hence the hitler statement).  Would it be better if I said he was acting like Rob Ford?  Would that make it less of Goodwin's Law?  Every reaction has an equal or greater reaction.  That is a fact.  Make baseless assumptions about things and you open yourself up, plain and simple.]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277585</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277585</guid>
<category>Toronto, Environment</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 18:09:10 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Roger</title>
<description><![CDATA[
@ Keven:  Wow, we've finally proven Godwin's Law. Named after Wikimedia?s current in-house counsel Mike Godwin, its premise is that if you argue online long enough, "the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler" will increase.

More on that <a href="http://www.torontolife.com/blog/spectator/2008/apr/08/stephen-brunt-and-globe-and-mail-unwittingly-adher/" target="_blank">here</a>.]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277570</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277570</guid>
<category>Toronto, Environment</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 17:19:30 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>rek</title>
<description><![CDATA[
keven: I know acid rain is proven and real, that's why I used it as an example of OTHER reasons to change what we're doing to the environment. Global warming isn't the only environmental issue on the table, not by a long shot, but it's the one getting all the attention.

So let's say there's no global warming, or it's 100% the sun's fault, or melting is how glaciers reproduce, whatever. That doesn't wipe the slate clean, we still have to deal with acid rain and deforestation and reef death and sudden colony collapse and toxic rivers and on and on.

In the end I think you'll find we can either do what's necessary to fight global warming, or we can do what's necessary to fight all of the environmental issues, and end up in the same, better place.

That was my point. Diane and the "nothing to see here" set attack the global warming issue and forget the arm-long list of other issues that need to be dealt with in pretty much exactly the same way.

Oh, and Keven, where did you read my position on global warming? Go ahead and find something to quote before *you* make up your mind about what other people think.

You Godwin'd yourself, by the way.
]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277566</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277566</guid>
<category>Toronto, Environment</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 16:58:56 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Steve</title>
<description><![CDATA[
Hitler'ish?
good grief.
Whatever. You say you're trying to have a converstaion and then you pull THAT one, and you call me assinine.]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277476</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277476</guid>
<category>Toronto, Environment</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 14:54:31 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>keven</title>
<description><![CDATA[
you need to slow down and breathe.  I can FEEL the vein in your forehead popping out over the internet.

Seeing as you refuse to actually read anything (You either have the worst comprehension EVAR or you're being selective)
I'm simply going to copy/paste what I previously wrote to some of your most current points.

>How exactly, is signing the Kyoto Treaty putting all of one's eggs in one basket?

>In the meantime, YES consume less, support eco-friendly companies, recycle, hug trees etc etc.

>What exactly are you people who are so against the "global warming facists" or "ignorant masses" as you like to call them, afraid of. What is it?

Nobody is against it Steve. No one is calling you "global warming fascists" or "ignorant masses".  Slow down before you type.  

> You don't want to lose your SUV? You're afraid of some curly light bulbs?

- Don't own an SUV and I'm definately not afraid of losing one. 

- My entire house is outfitted with 'curly lightbulbs'

>What? These aren't Manson-Family kids knocking on your door. And really, when have we had any HONEST discussion about Global Warming without Exxon or GE paying a group of scientists off to call Al Gore an "enviro-nazi"?

I believe Dianne was attempting to have an HONEST discussion about global warming.  Leave your conspriacy b/s at the door, it's not very honest at all.

>And amazing, did we get all the facts before this war? Hardly. So, when it comes to sending your kids off to war, forget the facts...but global warming it, "Whoa, now just a minute, I want all the facts".

I'm against the war Steve.  It was an example to illustrate a point.  Don't take things so literally.  I think we should have had all the facts before that too.

It IS possible to learn from our mistakes Steve.  

>I love it when someone is against something they say, "I want ALL the facts". I can tell you cmoking causes cancer, and then you'll find a two-pack a day'er who lived to be 90. I could tell you that being shot will kill you, but you can find someone who survived that too. So, what facts would you like? Melting glaciers not enough? The shrinking ice-cap doesn't bother you? "No, no, I want ALL the facts, I want the sea at my ankles and acid rain eating away at my skin. I don't wanna put all my eggs in one basket". I got news for ya' , all of your eggs are in one basket, unless you can live on Mars. Which scientist will stand up and say, "Yes, it's real" before you finally believe it?

Breathe Steve, Breathe.  We're just trying to have an honest conversation over here about Global Warming.  It's okay that other people have a different opinion than you, but that hardly qualifies your assinine statements of baseless assumptions on how 'we all are'.  Starting to sound a little Hitler'ish Steve.]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277472</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277472</guid>
<category>Toronto, Environment</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 14:37:12 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Steve</title>
<description><![CDATA[
How exactly, is signing the Kyoto Treaty putting all of one's eggs in one basket?
What exactly are you people who are so against the "global warming facists" or "ignorant masses" as you like to call them, afraid of. What is it? You don't want to lose your SUV? You're afraid of some curly light bulbs? What? These aren't Manson-Family kids knocking on your door.  And really, when have we had any HONEST discussion about Global Warming without Exxon or GE paying a group of scientists off to call Al Gore an "enviro-nazi"?
And amazing, did we get all the facts before this war? Hardly. So, when it comes to sending your kids off to war, forget the facts...but global warming it, "Whoa, now just a minute, I want all the facts".  I love it when someone is against something they say, "I want ALL the facts". I can tell you cmoking causes cancer, and then you'll find a two-pack a day'er who lived to be 90. I could tell you that being shot will kill you, but you can find someone who survived that too. So, what facts would you like? Melting glaciers not enough? The shrinking ice-cap doesn't bother you? "No, no, I want ALL the facts, I want the sea at my ankles and acid rain eating away at my skin. I don't wanna put all my eggs in one basket".  I got news for ya' , all of your eggs are in one basket, unless you can live on Mars. Which scientist will stand up and say, "Yes, it's real" before you finally believe it?]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277468</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277468</guid>
<category>Toronto, Environment</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 13:59:00 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>keven</title>
<description><![CDATA[
I don't get the impression that Dianne is saying consume more or do nothing at all.  Quite the contrary.  You seem to be suffering from selective perception.

Let me try to rephrase what she is saying towards another global plight.  Do not go to war before you know the facts.

We don't need to bomb Afghanistan and Iraq to kill a Saudi...  feel me?

If we know ALL the facts we can be much more equipped to solve the problem.  In the meantime, YES consume less, support eco-friendly companies, recycle, hug trees etc etc.  

What we don't need is to put all our eggs into one basket when in the end that basket may be empty in the end.  Think of it this way... What if you're BOTH wrong?  What if our environmental problems are natural, or worse caused by something totally unrelated to this conversation.  That would mean we've spent decades, by then centuries tackling a  non-existant problem in the name of activism and politiks.

All Diane is simply saying is, learn first, prove second, fight third.  Unfortunately (like the Kyoto activist) we oft do this in a mangled order of fight first, learn second, if by then it matters (which it often doesn't), prove third.

> And Diane, your attitude isn't winning anyone over.

You're bad examples aren't going to win anything over.  Acid Rain is real.  Pharmaceuticals in fish are real.  When I say REAL I mean PROVEN.

We haven't even scratched the surface of understanding on our current global climate problem, yet you've made up your mind.  This is much scarier to me then someone like Diane saying she'd rather see the facts first then decide if what the politicians and unrelated activists (jobs not bombs?) are saying is true.

It's called scientific process, or logic or common sense... However you decide to label it.]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277462</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277462</guid>
<category>Toronto, Environment</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 13:31:25 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Steve</title>
<description><![CDATA[
Reality? Good grief. You've proven no one wrong, BTW. OK. Diane, let's say you are right. There is no global warming. So, let's do nothing. Now, 10 years from now it turns out YOU were wrong, (I know, shudder the thought) and by then, it's far too late to reverse  the trend. By all means, keep denying it. Some of us are doing things to conumse less and make this a BETTER place....You can thank us 10 or 20 years from now. We promise not to rub your nose in it (too much).
Dinosaur 1: "What's all the racket?"
Dino 2: "Oh, just a bunch of pre-historic tree-huggers going on about some coming "Ice Age".
Dino 1: "Ice Age? Man, there's just no proof, they're all just brainwashed by that AlGorasaurus."]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277455</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277455</guid>
<category>Toronto, Environment</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 13:11:04 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Diane</title>
<description><![CDATA[
Steve: "Diane, Are you always so condescending? Learning IS fun, you should try it yourself."

I am condescending to people who don't even bother to check their facts before posting, and then insult other people who do.

"Who knows, maybe someday, all of us will ba as "smart" as you even."

Maybe someday, Steve.

"And Diane, I'm not "in a panic", but I hardly see anything wrong with people using and consuming less to reduce waste."

Me either, and I wrote almost exactly that in a previous post that you apparently haven't bothered to read.

rek: "And Diane, your attitude isn't winning anyone over."

I have no expectation of winning over anyone who takes offense at being proven wrong. Reality is not a popularity contest.]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277450</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277450</guid>
<category>Toronto, Environment</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 12:52:26 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>rek</title>
<description><![CDATA[
Something the "everything is fine" crowd never address is why we should continue polluting at these levels. Acid rain isn't something Greenpeace invented with fuzzy math, pharmaceuticals in wild fish isn't some sort of plot to ruin Baystreeters profit margins.

Whether or not, or to what extent, our pollution is changing global temperatures, there are countless other undisputed reasons we need to stop polluting and rethink how and why we maintain that kind of lifestyle.

And Diane, your attitude isn't winning anyone over.]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277442</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277442</guid>
<category>Toronto, Environment</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 11:49:12 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Steve</title>
<description><![CDATA[
And Diane, I'm not "in a panic", but I hardly see anything wrong with people using and consuming less to reduce waste. I am getting tired of seeing people who protest something or hold a sign being attacked as "ignorant". There's nothing wrong with raising awareness and getting people to think about it. Who knows, maybe someday, all of us will ba as "smart" as you even. ]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277422</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277422</guid>
<category>Toronto, Environment</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 10:17:13 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Steve</title>
<description><![CDATA[
Diane, 
Are you always so condescending? Learning IS fun, you should try it yourself.
It's a ripple effect, that "small" pile of garbage and plastic breaks down and gets into the food supply.
]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277421</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277421</guid>
<category>Toronto, Environment</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 10:13:20 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Diane</title>
<description><![CDATA[
"So, that pile of plastic waste the size of the state of Texas floating out in the middle of the Pacific Ocean is no big deal then, right? Yeah, we've had no effect on the environment."

Again, you're having problems with scale. The Earth's surface is 510,000,000 sq. km. Texas is 697,000 sq. km, or 0.0014 of that.

Furthermore, it's hardly a "pile". The density of the matter in the water is too low to be photographed, which is why you can't seee it on Google Earth. If collected, all the garbage would fit into a reasonably large landfill.

And the Pacific Gyre (as this region of blackwater is called) was there long before the Chinese starting dumping their trash into the ocean. Humans just added plastics to the stagnant mass of rotting fish and vegetable matter slowly swirling around in there.

Isn't learning fun?]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277417</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277417</guid>
<category>Toronto, Environment</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 09:56:06 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Steve</title>
<description><![CDATA[
Stop for a moment and try to get your head around the scale of global climate, and you'll see how little of it has to do with human energy consumption and waste.
 - So, that pile of plastic waste the size of the state of Texas floating out in the middle of the Pacific Ocean is no big deal then, right? Yeah, we've had no effect on the environment. 
And yes, Tyler, I do wave you off. people like you bore me with your typical "Oh, you sound like a religious zealot who'll believe anything."]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277408</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277408</guid>
<category>Toronto, Environment</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 08:57:24 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Steve</title>
<description><![CDATA[
"You remind me of a religious zealot... "
Nice try, Galileo (or at least in your mind).]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277402</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277402</guid>
<category>Toronto, Environment</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 08:20:57 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Diane</title>
<description><![CDATA[
"Diane, I think that your viewpoint is ideologically motivated."

Really? How so? 

I'll confess to a deep distrust of politicians, marketers and others whose livelihood depends on manipulating the facts, but that hardly qualifies as an ideology.

And when I see politicians and marketers lining up on one side of this debate, while climatologists and other scientists line up on the other, I'll side with the scientists. That's not really an ideology either.

And when I see the rhetoric of the politicians and marketers devolve into emotional spin (describing others as "global warming deniers" to recall antipathy towards "holocaust deniers")... cheap insults (stating that only "crooks and kooks" would question anthropogenic global warming)... outright lies (claiming that there is a "scientific consensus" in favour of anthropomorphic global warming)... and classic con artists' manipulations (insisting that there is no time for study or debate, that we must act as we are told without hesitation)... well, I feel decidedly ideology-free in comparison to others in this debate.

Here's the sum of my environmental ideology: I feel it is stupid of us to squander resources and to live in our own waste. We have harmed many of our species as a result, and if we continue to live this way, we will harm even more. We must use our heads to make human life on Earth sustainable for as long as it takes for us to expand to other planets, or risk dying out.

Panicking about global warming is not using our heads.
]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277221</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/environment/2008/04/earth_day_march_reclaims_the_streets/#c277221</guid>
<category>Toronto, Environment</category>
<pubDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2008 16:01:50 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>