Letters posted here are associated with the following Salon Premium Member:

gzuckier

Published Letters: 948
Editor's Choice: 18

Wednesday, August 29, 2007 08:26 AM
Original article: Hot air

"This culture is unsustainable. Period"

Indeed. To focus back from the trees onto the forest, for a minute; all energy on earth comes from one of two sources. By far the smaller is nuclear decay of radioactive minerals; the rest is from the sun, directly or indirectly. From a sailboat to beefsteak. Leaving aside nuclear power (which may appear "almost limitless" to us now, but of course fossil fuels appeared almost limitless when we started using them intensively), if we are using energy faster than the sun can supply it to the earth, even assuming 100% efficient capture, then we are unsustainable. Seems obvious.

So... we are taking the solar energy captured by the incredibly lush vegetation of the carboniferous period over thundreds of millions of years and stored as carbon buried underground, and using it all up over perhaps one century. How in the world could that be remotely sustainable? Capturing more of the current solar output by giant plantations for "renewable energy sources", plus solar power, plus wind power, plus tidal power, doesn't begin to fill in the predictable shortfall at the end of the fossil fuel era. (This is not a new concept; look up "Dyson sphere"). I would imagine most folks would be smart enough not to buy into a thirty year $20,000 a month mortgage because they won a million dollars in the lottery.

Whether the end comes by greenhouse gas accumulation or by just plain running out of gas, we're heading for the brick wall, full tilt. Wouldn't it be prudent to start braking as early as possible, while we can still use our fossil fuel windfall to engineer our way into a sustainable future? By gradual changes to our "lifestyle" which can be abandoned if they don't work out for whatever reason, and something else tried, rather than a bunch of hurried draconian orders on a do-or-die basis?

This is nothing that can be done by individual actions, any more than, say, prosecuting a war overseas; a central body needs to set goals, monitor progress, and coordinate activities for any hope of even partial success. If the government fails to do so, who knows; a grassroots organization might rise and seize control, if the general public becomes alarmed enough; we're entering the realm of science fiction here. I doubt I'll be around to see it, but I'm not entirely sure we'll make it, judging from the current state of affairs.

Wednesday, August 29, 2007 08:41 AM

rethinking the issue

Used to be, I would have been 100% in favor of this idea, but since then the "debate on global warming" and its demonstration that there are several million, at least, people out there who feel they are so much smarter than professional scientists that they can pretty much see the Truth in any field within a couple of minutes, and proceed to clutter up the internet with their concrete certainties has somewhat altered my feelings on the subject. (I note you're reviewing Lomborg's book currently).

Thursday, August 30, 2007 10:22 AM
Original article: Hot air

luddites!

Don't you understand? This global warming hysteria is all that stands between us and the use of fossil fuels as a cheap, clean never-ending source of energy, gladly provided by cheerful and friendly foreign folks who are more than happy to make friends with people of another religion and nationality by giving them their only salable natural resource at prices below what the traffic would bear. Darn you!!

Tuesday, September 4, 2007 07:57 AM

synagogue can relax on this one

Like the others have said, covering the head, whether with a kippah or yarmulke or a Stetson, in synagogue is not a religious requirement so much as a tradition. The Orthodox traditionally cover their heads everywhere, not just in synagogue; that also is more of a tradition than a law from On High.

That said, while I can understand how the synagogue might mandate headgear for members or visiting nonmember Jews, it's not clear that requiring nonJews who attend to obey a tradition which is not one of the "Noahide laws" required of nonJews (i.e., don't murder people, that sort of thing) contributes to anything. They wouldn't require a visiting nonJew to get circumcised, I hope.

There's a growing feeling that punishing mixed marriages in various ways will not benefit Judaism as much as welcoming them in the hopes that they or their children will find a comfortable home in Judaism.

Tuesday, September 18, 2007 07:57 AM
Original article: Limitless wrongness

I think i saw this movie at 2 AM once

"Hail Petraeus Maximus! How fares the war?"

"Hail mighty Caesar! The barbarian tribes are in defeat! The borders of the Empire are once again secure!"

Tuesday, September 18, 2007 08:00 AM

Lost opportunity.

I miss MST3k.

Most Active Letters Threads

740

The commendably missing element from Obama's speech

There was no pretense that human rights is our goal, or the likely outcome, in escalating the war
415

Do Obama officials know what his Afghanistan plan is?

What explains the completely contradictory statements from key aides on a central plank of the war strategy?
407

America's regression

It's almost impossible to find a nation with as many torture advocates as the U.S. has.
332

Palin: Birthers have "fair question" about Obama

Of Obama birth, the ex-governor says, "the public is still, rightfully, making it an issue" (Updated)
211

The poster boy for progressive self-delusion

Read Hayden's 2008 Obama endorsement to remember the way the left sold our centrist president to itself

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon