<< MELBOURNE FESTERING ~ MAIN ~ THIRD TEST >>
GREEN SCAM
Attention, retarded shoppers! Now you can buy carbon credits to offset the environmental damage created by animals that don’t exist:
Together, Santa’s nine reindeer - Dasher, Dancer, Prancer, Vixen, Comet, Cupid, Donner, Blitzen and Rudolph - produce 3.75 tonnes of greenhouse gas pollution per year.
We guarantee that if you choose to offset the pollution created by Santa’s reindeer, we will reduce CO2 pollution by 3.75 tonnes.
You’ll receive a certificate and special Carbon Neutral Christmas card confirming that you’ve made Santa’s reindeer Carbon Neutral!
Cost: $75. Far better Christmas value via the new ad at left: hot Ducati calendars for all!
(Via Chris S.)
I’m happy to contribute. Here’s my mythical $75. Can I have a real receipt for the ATO please?
What worries me is that this fails to take into account the amount of CO2 expelled by Santa after eating 6 billion cookies and drinking 2000 litres of milk (and several kegs of whisky). That’s about the time he changes outta the red pants and into the brown ones I suspect.
Damn it. I already gave my donation to The Human Fund.
Posted by Infidel Tiger on 2006 12 14 at 03:11 AM • permalinkClimate change - it’s an ecological movement, it’s social activism, it’s the illusion of virtue - cheap, it’s one big damn Ponzi scheme.
Posted by rick mcginnis on 2006 12 14 at 03:14 AM • permalinkI like cars. But I reckon they do contribute to climate change (checkout the full on bushfires here in Oz! And so early in the year too.) so surely its possible to design a electric or hydrogen powered car that looks sic?!
Posted by Bosch,Orlando on 2006 12 14 at 03:20 AM • permalinkMy bad, he’s still watching over us. Domestic blindness I guess.
Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 12 14 at 06:01 AM • permalinkRe cars and climate change:
On a recent thread here someone pointed to a 2003 article that noted 120 million tons of coal seams in China were burning out of control thus adding about 2% of world’s production of CO2. The same article pointed out that this was equal to the CO2 produced by all the cars and trucks in the USA.
If that’s true then it would seem that cars contribute little to climate change. Of course that doesn’t take into account the other climate-changing gases that cars produce such as nitrous oxide.
I have no idea on the accuracy of these figures but it it’s fun to use the same shock statistics against the Greenhouse doomsayers.I saw this letter to the editor published in yesterday’s Wall Street Journal (sorry, no link available):
Regarding your lead editorial about the letter to Exxon Mobil regarding global warming’s “obvious” consequences, I suggest citing the article by Kenneth Green on page 94 in the November/December 2006 issue of The American magazine. It addresses our current knowledge about the 12 significant phenomena identified by the U.N. Climate Panel in 2000. Of the 12 we have significant knowledge on only one. We have little or no scientific knowledge on the other 11, but on that basis we are expected to subscribe to half-baked warming “solutions” such as the Kyoto Protocol, which promises a fraction of a degree atmospheric temperature reduction half a century in the future at the cost of perhaps a 30% reduction in current national GNP.
While we should continue to define the problem, if it exists, solutions are still sometime in the future, if they are ever needed.
Bill Allen Sr.
Placentia, Calif.Very sensible letter.
Posted by wronwright on 2006 12 14 at 06:27 AM • permalinkHas anyone calculated how much unicorns contribute to global warming?
It’s dragons I worry about - coal munching, fire and smoke spewing bastards! Heck, “Smaug” is merely a distorion of the Old English word from which we get “smog”.
Posted by AlburyShifton on 2006 12 14 at 06:29 AM • permalink#4 - hats off, Dave S.
I scared the neighbours laughing at that one.Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2006 12 14 at 06:44 AM • permalink“Bosch,Orlando” has been banned. See the comments in the previous post for details. Now he is free to finish putting together that hemp bicycle.
Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 12 14 at 07:25 AM • permalinkAnd to balance things out, look who has been unbanned.
Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 12 14 at 07:29 AM • permalinkBye bye Bosch. I read his comment at 7 and thought he sounded rather like The Pirate King with his questioning style. He was a tad more aggressive though at that earlier thread.
(Allows imagination to roam freely, and is overwhelmed by sudden beatific vision.
They roam the streets of their cities. They pick up garbage, help old ladies cross the street, and feed parking meters.
Around their necks, a sign.
TROLL IN REHAB.)Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2006 12 14 at 08:14 AM • permalinkSort of O/T
So tell me how long have humans been around recording temps?
2006 will be the hottest year ever for the UK
Soon the Pommies will be growing grapes and making wine around London by the looks of things
Posted by aussiemagpie on 2006 12 14 at 08:16 AM • permalinkThanks Mommy. A pretty carbon neutral certificate in a frame. Can’t wait to tell me friends.
Posted by CrankyNeocon on 2006 12 14 at 08:53 AM • permalinkDon’t laugh! The Holocene Climatic Optimum was caused by phoenix combustion and hippogriff farts.
Posted by Paul Zrimsek on 2006 12 14 at 09:10 AM • permalink“Now you can buy carbon credits to offset the environmental damage created by animals that don’t exist . . . Cost: $75.”
Psssh. What a rip-off. For just a few pennies more, you can buy Premier Authentic Carbon Offset certificates, which counteract not only the mythical carbon emissions of flying reindeer, but the implied future value of carbon emissions of extinct animals, including the moa, the great auk and the carolina parakeet. Order now, and get a special holiday bonus: the Kevin Rudd spinning bowtie. Amuse your friends!
We got the solution to the reindeer warming problem right here.
(Thanks, Dave “Mr. Christmas” Barry.)
And I thought the Tooth Fairy took care of Santa’s reindeers’ carbon emission problem.
That’s just a nasty rumor.
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 12 14 at 11:05 AM • permalinkAlburyShifton wrote:
It’s dragons I worry about - coal munching, fire and smoke spewing bastards! Heck, “Smaug” is merely a distorion of the Old English word from which we get “smog”.
...but if they don’t keep their fire burning, they catch a cold and start randomly setting things on fire with every sneeze.
(“Stupid dragon.”)
Posted by Patrick Chester on 2006 12 14 at 11:06 AM • permalinkSpeaking of reindeer, are there any carbon offset programmes for Lapp dances?
Posted by andycanuck on 2006 12 14 at 11:25 AM • permalink#23 coach -
Wronwright agree, great letter. But, now, come on… there’s not really a town in California called Placentia, is there?
Of course there is. Um, and Bill Allen is a real person too. Why? Don’t they sound like plausibly real people and places? How about The Pirate King? Nothing there to indicate it’s a troll-bot designed to distract Andrea. Right?
Posted by wronwright on 2006 12 14 at 01:08 PM • permalinkI for one and not going to mock this, but rather figure out how to capitalize on it.
Let’s see, for every ten bucks donated by some greenie-weenie, I’ll hold in a fart. Fifty bucks and I take the bus to work one morning instead of driving. One hundred, and I won’t turn my heater on over the weekend. With this scheme, smug environmentalists like Hollywood liberals can still ride in their limos and private jets without feeling guilty and can argue that they’re not being a hypocrite because they paid me not to drive and fart in their place. Everybody wins!
Posted by EmilyJones on 2006 12 14 at 01:15 PM • permalinkHere’s a better idea for off-setting those tons of pollution from nine reindeer who have real work to do: How about nine liberals giving up their dreams of lovely golden retrievers and pet group playtime at the park and canvassing nine homies to give up their addiction to breeding rotweillers for the cause?
I like dogs, but, hey, they eat, drink, poop, poot and require lots of visits to the vet in urban lefty and inner city SUVs. It’s always easier for enviros to go after an abstraction like Santa’s pets than their own.
Something tells me if we follow this back far enough, we’re going to find a Nigerian widow with bilions of dollars to transfer.
Posted by Steve Skubinna on 2006 12 14 at 03:24 PM • permalinkI was invited to a screening of that crap the exVP has bullied the country into believing. I informed the woman that she should take me off her email list because I’m not the least bit interested in her political views. From what I hear, she’s mortified that I’ve been offended. I’m not offended, I’m just not that damn stupid. Thanks for letting me get that off my chest.
I hope you did the job properly, Auntie, and told her to “Stick yer ##$^$^$@# invite where the !#$@%^& sun don’t shine!”
It’s Christmas. Let the inner swearstress out, just a little, now and then.Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2006 12 14 at 07:39 PM • permalink#23 coach;
“there’s not really a town in California called Placentia, is there?”
Actually, it’s about 4 miles northeast of Disneyland. North of Orange, where one of my sisters lives.
They claim (Placentia, not my sister nor Disneyland) that the name comes from Spanish, meaning “pleasant place to live”.
Suuuuure it does. (There’s also a Placentia in Newfoundland, and in northern Italy. Hannibal once slept there.)
On the other hand, they just had their Las Posadas and Tamale festival. I can see the seasonal connection with the inn (posada), but tamales for Christmas?
Thankfully, SwiCap, the Swearstress was in fine form, nearly melted my keyboard. And the cats blushed & left the room. But I was able to focus on being outwardly proper when I actually sent my reply.
I just don’t get it - people with so much more formal education, trained & certified in REAL jobs & careers, & they seem to be dumber than me? That really scares me. Kinda like the ol farts in the store who can’t steer a buggy to save their own lives, but we let ‘em drive a 3000lb machine AND vote. I just don’t get it.
Maybe it’s the flu…
The cats blushed? And left the room?
Auntie, I am deeply, deeply in awe.Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2006 12 14 at 11:17 PM • permalink#27 and #57
I don’t know exactly about the California one, but IIRC the Newfoundland one was named after a Roman Catholic feast day involving the Virgin Mary from when the Portuguese (or Spanish?) fishing fleets went there before the English set-up a permanent colony. (I assume Feast of the Annunciation or another one to do with her pregnancy.)Posted by andycanuck on 2006 12 15 at 01:05 AM • permalinkI hadn’t thought of unicorns - good idea!
We at Easy Being Green figured that if people were not yet willing to put their money behind serious carbon offsets like making a car carbon neutral, it was time to get their attention, with something silly - Reindeer!
Silly concept but serious reductions in pollution.We’re trying to see if we can actually make a viable business out of cutting pollution and our accreditors and auditors are completely anal - its great! To do that we have to find customers willing to pay for cuts in pollution.
Wait till you see what we’re putting out for valentines day.
Rachel Ollivier, Business Manager, Personal Carbon Neutral Products, Easy Being Green.making a car carbon neutralPosted by Rachel Ollivier on 2006 12 17 at 10:38 PM • permalink
Page 1 of 1 pages
Members:
Login | Register
| Member List
Ya better watchout, I’m telling you why:
Scamster Claws is coming for you!