Cleaning Our Atmosphere One Molecule At A Time

Put A Candle In The Window…

… just don't light it.

Get this, a hot off the presses new article starts off:

"In a campaign that has spread like wildfire across the Internet, a group of Israeli environmentalists is encouraging Jews around the world to light at least one less candle this Hanukka to help the environment."

Wildfire? That's right, an electronic one, ya schmuck.

As I keep pointing out, there is nothing too small for warmalarmists to want to regulate, and today brings us the stupidest one yet (though it certainly won't be the stupidest of all time, I guarantee you).

"The founders of the Green Hanukkia campaign found that every candle that burns completely produces 15 grams of carbon dioxide. If an estimated one million Israeli households light for eight days, they said, it would do significant damage to the atmosphere."

Why not? I mean Jews couldn't light candles during the London Blitz… or in Auschwitz, right? Yet they got through that just fine, so the group only wants people to burn one less candle to save the planet, what's the big deal?

Now we're down to saving grams? Can molecules be far behind?

"Save the last candle and save the planet, so we won't need another miracle," said Liad Ortar

Which raises the question: Why, are miracles even more polluting?

Well I don't normally celebrate Chanukah, but you can be sure I will this year. And I'll be burning plenty of candles… you know, so Jews won't have to.

"They should encourage people to light one less cigarette instead," Avraham Ravitz said.

Now, if you're a Jew who smokes, and the wife won't let you light up in the house, so you bought an outdoor propane heater because it's cold on the last day of Hannukah*, you're either screwed or screwing the planet.

Rabbi Benny Lau: "This makes religious people think incorrectly that anything environmentalist is against them. The damage ends up being a thousand times the benefit. Tikkun olam must be done by adding more light and not by adding more darkness."

The Rabbi then added, "I'm aware of the irony there, ya putz."

If Nazis were cremating Jews today, do you think Green Hanukkia would be encouraging them to burn "at least one less" to save the environment?

*Unless you're in Argentina

———-

Meanwhile, James Taranto had this to say about another environmental disruption I reported on recently:

"Back in April, we noted a Puffington Host post by Laurie David and Sheryl Crow, who boasted of having harassed Karl Rove (over his failure to address 'global warming'). In June, the New York Post's Page Six reported: 'The inconvenient truth for Laurie and Larry David is that their marriage is over.' Inconvenient in more ways than one! As for Sheryl Crow, she is 45, has never married, and, according to the Internet Movie Database, last year broke off her engagement to marry boyfriend Lance Armstrong. If Crow and Mrs. David are unwilling to make a few lifestyle sacrifices for the sake of the planet, what business do they have making demands of Karl Rove and the rest of us?

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Advertisements

About tedwest

A longtime veteran of comedy and political forums, I decided that I needed a more restful venue because... well... I finally hate everybody. Except my wife that is... and my ex-wife.. and... no, that's about it. I lead about as simple a life as one can, preferring activities that include anything that doesn't involve going out and seeing YOU! And I particularly enjoy what I call "Get the Bitch" movies on Lifetime. You know the ones where the intended victim finally does something so incredibly stupid that she forfeits her right to live, and from that moment on you're rooting for the stalker. Of course, it rarely works out the way you want, but when it does, the feeling you get is... well, there's nothing else like it, other than, maybe, eating chocolate chip cookies. Oh, and I'm proudly anti-wildlife, both foreign and domestic, and anti-environment - especially foreign environments. I think Howard Stern put it best when he said, "If fifty percent of the population died tomorrow, I can live with that." And I feel the same about the other fifty percent, so together, we've pretty much got it all covered.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Cleaning Our Atmosphere One Molecule At A Time

  1. This is trivial pursuit to the max. Ted you should post this entry on the Global Warming Group also.

  2. TedWest says:

    Thanks Zak, but I told Dox I wouldn't post my stuff there anymore because I felt I was disruptive. He wants it to be a serious examination of "warming," and not only am I still waiting for something serious to be said, I can't even write the word without quotation marks.

  3. LOL, I like Dox he's a good guy. The Global Warming crowd needs a good "Deprogrammer". This entire debate smacks of an ersatz religion, models are created to prove the theory and discussing the topic is drawn as narrow as possible. Arguing a differing view is almost like going to the Vatican and debating if Jesus Christ was indeed the Son of God. However, Dixy Lee Ray and scientists like her have arguments just don't expect to read them in the Los Angeles Times or see them thoughtfully discussed on CNN.
    http://www.historylink.org/essays/output.cfm?file_id=601

  4. TedWest says:

    You just reminded me of a show I saw recently, an episode of the Dead Zone in which the Vice President was speaking to some kids at a picnic (I know), and he said this… (approx) "In a few short years when you're in high school, the damage to the environment will have doubled."
    Now I've heard a lot of absurd things masquerading as facts, but this one, even in a fictional drama (or perhaps because of it) cause my jaw to drop.
    And it's not just the people I cite here who say such outrageous things, it's people who claim they actually know something and report "statistics" as facts that really anger me.
    I wasn't exaggerating when I said I have yet to see a single fact. Literally nothing that's been found, observed, or calculated to date is an actual fact at this point.
    Yet they get upset with the "deniers," and my point is that we are the ones who should be angry and who should shun these people, at least until they have something that's legitimate show us.

  5. TedWest says:

    Take heart, my good man, environmentalists are rethinking the whole incandescent-fluorescent thing as we write, and there is a magnificent commentary today that addresses your other points. I'll be commenting on it shortly and provide the necessary link.
    And I chuckle when I hear about trying to get people to convert to fluorescents. I've been using them almost exclusively since 1993, and I've only had to change about a half dozen bulbs in all that time…
    … but I'm curious, what did you mean "recycle?" I just put the tubes in the trash bin and tap them with a hammer.- all gone!?!

  6. CNBC interviewed a woman who broke a fluorescent replacement bulb in her daughter's bedroom so she called up some expert on how to dispose of the spill. It's classified as a hazardous waste! Beware!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s