The Race for Survival

Hang in there, Tony. We are just about to change some things in the capitol city. Maybe things will turn your way shortly.

Loved the Hemingway stories. I remember when he wrote The Old Man and The Sea in the fifties and it came out in installments in The Saturday Evening Post magazine. I couldn't wait for each succeeding issue. You make good arguments. My brother and I in our teen years developed a habit of spearing each other's ideas with whatever piercing wit that we could conjure on the spur of the moment and I didn't mean to harm a stranger with this old habit.
Good luck on the sale.

I find it appalling that the future of our planet is so politicized. Less than a year ago I supported the Bush Administration 100 percent, except for environmental issues. However, my tolerance threshold was finally eclipsed on several fronts, but I will maintain focus on this story. This administration's environmentaal record is abominable and the description of the behavior of former deputy assistant secretary Julie McDonald borderline criminal. Thank goodness for the sexiness of polar bears if that's what it takes to abate the continued erosion of our animal and plant life for monetary profit and pleasure hunting.

Tony Troiano
Nashville, TN

I'm on the other end of the spectrum (a year of college left to go), and my idealism often gets ahead of me and I make poorly formulated and ill-conceived arguments. But in the past couple of months, I've read Hemingway's The Sun Also Rises and Kerouac's The Dharma Bums, and I can't think that despite all of the "choices" given to us by advances in technology, etc., we are no happier and certainly no more free than they were. Definitely you have to ask "Well, how far back to you go," because like you said, arguing against the invention of the light bulb is asinine. If one can somehow find a balance though, it seems as if you have, and I'm very glad for you.

I also live in the country, and my family is trying to sell some property. A young-ish couple came to see it a few weeks ago, and the wife was actually repulsed that the mall was so far (25 minutes) away. She was basically saying, "How can you possibly live like this!?" How important can shopping possibly be to someone? That's partially what inspired me to ask "Do you think we're missing the point" in my first comment.

I just read an article in Parade Magazine about the possiblity of new and faster trade routes opening in the Artic thanks to global warming. How scary is that? Prioritize polar bears and even our own existence with vast profits on the horizon? What a shame it has come to this.

The global warming issue boils down to the large majority of the world's scientist, concerned about long term consequences, in confrontation with the business community concerned with short term profits - and we have a history of bribery and intimidation for those scientists who disagree with this administration. The business community is effectively subsidizing right wing propagandist like Krauthammer, Coulter, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, etc. to misrepresent the facts. A lot of gullible followers are buying into the propaganda hook line and singer. These propagandists are making millions (just a minor conflict of interest) misrepresenting the facts to a gullible public to protect the profits of the speical interests groups. And if the scientific community, written off by Krauthammer as a bunch of elitists, is correct, we are in for a long series of disasters that may make the holocaust and WWII look insignificant in comparison. But for now, quarterly profits rule, and we are not likely to address the coming disasters until it is too late.

Believe it or not, there is science behind this listing, not propaganda from "activist whackos" or even "ignorant environmentalists" but educated scientists with advanced degrees. Whether or not global warming is anthropogenically mediated is the issue, not whether or not it exists, because all scientists (yes ALL) are in agreement that the Earth is warming. (you are completely correct perpetualtruth) Slowly but surely species are going extinct (whether because of humans or not), do you think humans are immune? I sure hope so, but strongly doubt it.

Believe it or not, there is science behind this listing, not propaganda from "activist whackos" or even "ignorant environmentalists" but educated scientists with advanced degrees. Whether or not global warming is anthropogenically mediated is the issue, not whether or not it exists, because all scientists (yes ALL) are in agreement that the Earth is warming. Slowly but surely species are going extinct (whether because of humans or not), do you think humans are immune? I sure hope so, but strongly doubt it.

I think the debate is not if global climate change is happening, but over whether or not it's anthropogenic, yeah?

Either way, there will be consequences of climate change that shouldn't be ignored just because we're not causing it. The difference is in the approach.

comment to dilligaf.... ummmmm... what?!?!? Thousands of scientists have NOT proven that global warming does not exist!!!! The opposite is true. It is proven over and over again that it is COMPLETELY true.
I think you should go live in the polar ice caps, so that when they break free you are swept out to see.... then maybe you'll believe global warming really does exist.

Great, more propaganda by ignorant environmentalist. They somehow got the polar bear on the endangered species list, but they didn't report to the governing body that granted this action that the polar bear population is greater than it has been in many years, and is still growing. These are the same people that claim that vehicle emissions are the main part of this so called Global Warming. Too bad you can't prove it, and to bad thousands of scientist have proven that it doesn't exist. Oh, you're still worried, then you need to petition PETA to organize a mass slaughter of the bovine population, since they have been proven to damage our environment more than our transportation system. Wake up people, you're sheep being handed ideas from people who don't know anything about the subject. That???s why you will vote for Obama.

Even though their population has increased five times to the current 25,000 since 1972 when it was a low of 5,000 worldwide, Polar Bears have been placed on the endangered species list. Seems to me that a species should be dwindling in numbers to be included on the list, but since when has that kind of logic stopped activist wacko's before?

What I believe we will find in 50 years is that the current climate changes - that are reported on as the end of the world - will end up being exactly what scientists are beginning to move towards ??? a SUN CYCLE. This is more realistic especially since there is more evidence that other planets in the solar system have experienced warming too.

Check out this new documentary which contrasts the global warming fantasy world of Al Gore and James Hansen with the factual findings of real-world science.

LINK: http://www.co2science.org/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=29

Well olderwiser, I think that was a little heavy-handed, but point well taken, and your wit is actually impressive. I didn't mean to come across as prophetic, and I'm not even sure that I buy my own argument. But the fact is that according to many surveys, Americans have been getting progressively less happy since the '80's. Peter Whybrow said it best when he wrote "Americans are not as happy as they are rich," and he points out that even as our GDP has rapidly increased, the most prescibed medications in America are those that treat depression, hypertension, and other stress-related ailments. All I'm asking is if continued destruction of the earth, in this case symbolized by the polar bears, is worth the expected benefit we receive when it might not actually be all that beneficial.

And thank you, too, Newsweek, for the forum than brought our saviour, perpetualtruth, who will lead us to our happiness, and best of all, away from our guilt.

We melted her ice, and the picture of the mama bear and the precious baby bears remind us of the innocence that we destroyed with the heat of our light bulb. Now we regret the trek from darkness that we made to get away from the boredom of our aboriginality. Having lost the happiness that we had shivering in the dark, we feel guilty in the warmth of our unhappiness in pursuit of the $15. Help us, perpetualtruth, to return to the cold and darkness of our primitivity. Mama bear thanks you, too. And the cubs. They thank you, too. Best of all, we can shed the guilt.

How can we recapture the ultimate happiness that we lost by logically constructing our capitalism so that we logically acted within its structure to destroy that ultimate happiness? We have broken the light bulb that we invented and await the light that you will shine for us into the future, perpetualtruth. We thank you in advance for this guidance.

The turning point was the light bulb. The days were just not long enough for us to do our malicious and intentional dirty work, so we invented the light bulb to help us construct the means of our unhappiness. Please tell us what to do now, perpetualtruth.

You are right, perpetualtruth. We have missed the point and must be truly unhappy with our lives. We just deliberately sat down and constructed capitalism so that we could logically act within the structure that we deliberately constructed in order to not achieve our ultimate happiness. We really just wanted the $15. The earth was just lying there in its innate virginity and we couldn't stand it. We tried aboriginality and it was too dull. So, we confess. We done it.

How many people who have made comments here are truly happy with their lives?
Do you think maybe we're missing the point? I believe that our society (and capitalism) are constructed such that individuals acting logically within its structure act contrarily to their own ultimate happiness, and all of the comments arguing in favor of destroying the earth just a little bit more so everyone can save $15 does nothing but convince me that I am right.