Live Earth

[walterick]

70707

Live Earth is a 24-hour, world-wide concert occurring on 7 continents involving 150 artists and purportedly 2 billion people. The goal is to raise awareness and create political action to help decrease global warming. The 2 main concerts are occurring in NYC and London. Some of the stars performing are:

US:
Ludacris

KT Tunstall

Keith Urban

Fall Out Boy

Akon

John Mayer

Kelly Clarkson

Dave Mathews

Alicia Keys

Kanye

Bon Jovi

The Pumpkins

Great Britain has:

Black eyed Peas

Chili Peppers

Metallica

Beastie Boys

Pussycat Dolls

Madonna

Foo Fighters

The concert began tonight and currently I am watching the Sydney show. You can watch streaming here: Live Earth streaming

The NYC show starts Saturday at 2:30 EST.

And, in other earth-friendly news, Toyota has pledged to make it's entire fleet of vehicles hybrid by 2020, and has pledged to make hybrid vehicles cost the same as traditional cars by 2010. I say, things they are a changin'

Have fun watching!

[walterick]

HAHAHAHA

So, so far all of the artists have taken a moment out of their shows to stop and say a word or two about global warming, climate change, fossil fuels, etc. All James Hetfield of Metallica had to say was "Make some noise if you give a sh*t!" during the intro to Enter Sandman heheheh

I hope someone else is watching this!

The NYC show just started, I'm watching KT Kunstall right now. You can switch between shows and watch London, Aus, Japan, China, or South Africa. I really enjoyed the Aus show, there were some artists there I am going to look up. And watching the South African show and hearing their music has been an education.

Ok back to the show!

Live Earth streaming

[walterick]

My gawd Alicia Keys has to be the most beautiful and soulful woman in the world!

Dave Matthews Band on now in NYC.

[almo]

Well, Live Earth went over like a ton of bricks. can't say that it upsets me, as I do not buy into the idea of man made golbal warming, and it was hypocritical event anyway.

I wonder what Al will do to try and top this blunder.

[mwfanelli]

Well, Live Earth went over like a ton of bricks. can't say that it upsets me, as I do not buy into the idea of man made golbal warming, and it was hypocritical event anyway.

I wonder what Al will do to try and top this blunder.

Actually, it went over fairly well though not spectacularly. Concerts to save the latest cause are a dime a dozen these days.

Like it or not, global warming is real and the CO2 content is much larger and rising faster than anything ever seen in history. Unless you have another source for all the extra green house gasses, man-made is the most likely source.

[mn shutterbug]

Like it or not, global warming is real and the CO2 content is much larger and rising faster than anything ever seen in history. Unless you have another source for all the extra green house gasses, man-made is the most likely source.

Sad but true. There now is an abundance of proof out there that anyone who doesn't believe it had better start reading.

[schrackman]

Like it or not, global warming is real and the CO2 content is much larger and rising faster than anything ever seen in history. Unless you have another source for all the extra green house gasses, man-made is the most likely source.

Volcanic gasses: http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/Hazards/Wh...as/volgas.html

[walterick]

Volcanic gasses

This is a tough argument, because your link says that while volcanic gasses are depleting the ozone layer, they are also cooling the Earth's surface, not warming it:

"Globally, large explosive eruptions that inject a tremendous volume of sulfur aerosols into the stratosphere can lead to lower surface temperatures and promote depletion of the Earth's ozone layer."

[mwfanelli]

This is a tough argument, because your link says that while volcanic gasses are depleting the ozone layer, they are also cooling the Earth's surface, not warming it:

"Globally, large explosive eruptions that inject a tremendous volume of sulfur aerosols into the stratosphere can lead to lower surface temperatures and promote depletion of the Earth's ozone layer."

There was a Nova epsisode on Global Cooling. In fact, the garbage we throw up (nature, also) is reducing the solar constant by a signifigant amount. Unfortunately, it doesn't come close to slowing down the net temperature gain. But without it, we would be substantially hotter.

FWIW, I don't think that these particles actually deplete the Ozone Layer. In fact, after the worldwide ban on ozone-depleteing propellants and CFCs, the ozone layer has been recovering, albeit slowly.

Global Cooling is a good show, we have it on DVD as part of the two weather classes.

[schrackman]

This is a tough argument, because your link says that while volcanic gasses are depleting the ozone layer, they are also cooling the Earth's surface, not warming it:

"Globally, large explosive eruptions that inject a tremendous volume of sulfur aerosols into the stratosphere can lead to lower surface temperatures and promote depletion of the Earth's ozone layer."

Volcanic eruptions are kind of a double-edged sword.

On one hand an increase in volcanic activity does tend to have a cooling effect, but that is because of the vast amount of smoke and debris that is strewn into our atmosphere and tends to get trapped up there by stratospheric inversion. As this eventually dissipates, the earth warms up. But the ozone depleting gasses emitted continue to contribute to the warming effect. That's why the ozone hole is in the southern hemisphere, because that is where the vast majority of volcanic activity occurs.

They knew all this stuff back in the 50's, as evidenced by my 1950 something geology book. So what we are seeing in terms of "global warming" is simply nature being cyclical.

Now that's not to say I don't believe that there won't be global environmental catastrophe(s) in the future. But this belongs to my religious beliefs, and since I don't wish to go off topic I'll keep it to myself unless asked.

[schrackman]

On a related note, don't be surprised if one day you're told you can't eat steak anymore....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...9/nbeef119.xml

[walterick]

People have already been telling you to moderate your red meat intake for years

Think of it as a choice, with each choice bearing different consequences. Kind of like the Christian perspective that one can choose heaven through Christ or damnation through sin.

[schrackman]

People have already been telling you to moderate your red meat intake for years

Think of it as a choice, with each choice bearing different consequences. Kind of like the Christian perspective that one can choose heaven through Christ or damnation through sin.

True, but I think you would agree it's one thing to choose to moderate one's red meat intake and quite another to legislate moderation or prohibit mass production altogether. Just as it is quite different to choose Christ and salvation or be forced by legislation to a particular church.

Now I know the article said nothing of legislation, but my point was given the extreme agendas of some environmentalists and animal activists, it's not hard to imagine that that is the kind of world they would like to see where you and I are not permitted to the freedom to choose what's best for ourselves.

[mwfanelli]

True, but I think you would agree it's one thing to choose to moderate one's red meat intake and quite another to legislate moderation or prohibit mass production altogether. Just as it is quite different to choose Christ and salvation or be forced by legislation to a particular church.

Now I know the article said nothing of legislation, but my point was given the extreme agendas of some environmentalists and animal activists, it's not hard to imagine that that is the kind of world they would like to see where you and I are not permitted to the freedom to choose what's best for ourselves.

It may seem weird, but I agree with you! I absoulely hate government interference with trans-fat, smoking, seatbelts, gay marriage, abortion, drug use, stem cell resaerch, etc. Too much government!

Gasoline, heating oil, etc. prices should be allowed to rise to their natural levels without any government subsidies (i.e., taxpayer money) whatsoever. When gas is $6/gallon or more and filling up the tank of that self-chosen gas guzzler costs well over $100-$200, the consequences of bad choices will become extremely evident.

Too many people want their rights (a good thing) but never want to suffer the pain of the results that come from poorly exercising those rights (a bad thing).

Hey, I'm old and have no kids. I'll be dead long before the real s**t hits the fan. OK youngsters, all together now: "Thanks a lot mom and dad!"

[schrackman]

It may seem weird, but I agree with you!

Uh oh, Michael, that's twice in one year we agreed on something!

[walterick]

It may seem weird, but I agree with you!

Uh-oh, I guess this makes me the odd man out

If some one else's exercising of their right to eat trans fat, smoke, not wear their seat belts, use drugs, or pollute the air didn't affect ME, then I would agree with you. But, all of those choices affect MY life. And since MY right to life and pursuit of happiness cannot be interfered with by anyone else, it's then the job of the government to protect ME from other people's actions. If someone ELSE eats trans fats, I suffer from their drag on the health care industry. If someone ELSE smokes, I can pay the price, perhaps in the health effects of second hand smoke or at least in the fact that smoke irritates my eyes. If someone ELSE decides not to wear their seatbelt, and dies unnecesarily in a car accident, I may be looking at involuntary manlaughter charges rather than failure to yield right-of-way. And if someone ELSE decides to break into my house for money to buy drugs, *I* pay a price. I agree with you in that people should self-regulate and be left to the results of their own choices. In this, I am for assisted suicide in cases where depression is not present, for instance. But when someone else's stupid, self-defeating behavior affects ME, that is where I draw the line, and that is where I feel the government needs to step up and keep these crackheads in line. So that MY right to life and happiness aren't compromised. And, just for the record, I don't see that I suffer if gays get married or women have abortions.

[mwfanelli]

The problem with the "it affects me" argument is that almost anything anyone does has an effect on your life. You say you don't mind gays getting married. But married couples get benefits, it costs more to supply those benefits, companies either charge you more or lay you off because of the extra expenses.

So many things could be controlled in your world. Forget about driving a vehicle, bad drivers cause many more deaths than trans-fat does. These bad drivers can hit you with no warning ending your life.

Overweight people should be jailed in fat farms because of the drain on health care. People who climb mountains, jump out of airplanes, go to war or shoot a gun...

Oh, oh... photographers must be banned! After all, they may take a picture of me that shows me doing something that will get me in trouble at home, at the job...

Let's also have government control of religion. Religion has killed more people than any other factor in human history. It might get around to killing you and me. Direct effect! LOL: FWIW, I was threatened once by a southern Baptist.

Life is all about change and risk. Eliminate all risk and you no longer have a life worth losing. Smoking directly effects you, it gets into your lungs. Fine, control it. But trans-fat? Seat belts? Really now!

The key to rights is personal responsibility. For example, the fact that someone freely chooses not to wear a seat belt and dies or is severely injured is his/her fault, not yours. As I said above, people want rights which is a very good thing. They must be forced to accept that with rights come responsibility.

Wow, rambling again but I'm in a hurry. You get the idea!

[walterick]

They must be forced to accept that with rights come responsibility.

Wow, I get to pick on that statement alone

Michael, your main statement through all of these threads seems to be "there should be no laws." What's the difference between forcing someone to wear a seatbelt (which translates just to punishing them after the fact if they don't) and forcing someone to accept responsibility? How do you justify forcing people to do one thing while claiming that they should not be forced to do another?

Some of your argments are funny Let's see here...

I didn't say "put fat people in jail." I said "eating trans fat kills people so let's make it illegal." I know you're sensitive to laws being passed to regulate the ways you can hurt yourself if you want, but hopefully you see the plain way in which the passing of these laws makes things better even for you? Should using asbestos in homes be made legal again? How about lead in paint. I suppose the Libertarian cry would be YOU CAN'T TAKE AWAY MY RIGHT TO PAINT WITH LEAD-BASED PAINT but come on, use some common sense here. We're not taking away your right to life & liberty, we're protecting the well-being of the whole by insuring it can't be ruined by the few.

Photographers? Now you're being silly. Taking pictures hasn't been proven in a laboratory to be a cause of death. Where are you coming from here?

"Religion has killed more people than any other factor in human history." Religion doesn't kill people. Religion is a set of beliefs, it can't pull a trigger or build a bomb. To say that religion kills people is a little... irresponsible, to use your word? Holding people accountable for their actions, regardless of their beliefs, is what our laws attempt to accomplish. Making their beliefs the bad guy here removes the responsibilty from the people themselves.

"Smoking directly effects you, it gets into your lungs. Fine, control it." Now you're walking the thin line where you've accepted that something that affects you directly in a negative way should be controlled. Following this logic, all I should have to do is prove that something negative affects you directly and it will be made illegal.

And seatbelts? You said "the fact that someone freely chooses not to wear a seat belt and dies or is severely injured is his/her fault, not yours." Actually, no, this is not right. If I inadvertently kill someone in an automobile accident, I can be held responsible. By "requiring" them to wear a seatbelt, I am saving myself from the headache of their stupid action. Yes, their civil rights get ALL TRAMPED ON but in this case my right to the pursuit of happiness supercedes their right to die stupidly in a car accident.

[photophorous]

I've heard a lot of criticism of Al Gore and the jet flights he takes to give his presentation. I can see how the same logic would be applied to Live Earth. These people are burning lots of fossil fuels on their quest to convince people to stop burning fossil fuels, and that does seem hypocritical.

But, I don't see it that way. I see it as further evidence that we have a problem. We rely so much on fossil fuels that there's no way to do this kind thing with out adding to the problem. Everything we do adds to the problem. Typing these letters right now results in CO2 being released into the environment a few miles from here at the Decker Lake Power Plant.

This topic is being discussed much more now that it was just a few years ago. Every day that goes by I hear more conversations and find more threads like this, and it is directly related to An Inconvenient Truth, Live Earth, and similar events. It's not ideal, but it's working.

Paul

[mjs1973]

Didn't watch any of it. And yes, Alicia Keys is stunning!!!

[adina]

Missed it, we went to a wedding.

[mjs1973]

Before this turns into a global warming debate, did anyone see that James Hetfield (Metallic) was detained and interigated at a UK airport. He was detained because of his "Taliban-like beard".

[walterick]

Yeah, on a normal day I would probably get into a debate on global warming but eh, I kinda don't feel like it.

Global temperature increases occuring alongside global carbon dioxide increases are just a coincidence, gays are bad, spying and torture are good, evolution didn't happen, Iraq had WMD's, yadda yadda yadda.

I didn't hear about Hetfield, that's kinda bad that they didn't recognize him and detained him for the length of his beard...

[Asylum Steve]

Rick, you left out the headliners for the entire shebang, The Police. Which, btw, I'd have to say were thoroughly disappointing.

Very odd choice of songs to perform, needlessly extended versions of them, and only one or two big hits.

Big yawn. Good thing I wasn't waiting the whole day to see them...

OTOH, Pink Floyd's braintrust, Roger Waters, was a delight and a complete surprise. The engimatic Waters, writer of most of Floyd's material over the years, very rarely peforms in public.

His set was fun and enegetic, especially Another Brick in The Wall, which included a local New Jersey youth chorus.

[mwfanelli]

Rick, you left out the headliners for the entire shebang, The Police. Which, btw, I'd have to say were thoroughly disappointing.

Very odd choice of songs to perform, needlessly extended versions of them, and only one or two big hits.

Big yawn. Good thing I wasn't waiting the whole day to see them...

I'm not a fan of The Police but haven't they been disbanded for a long time? A band thrown back together at the last minute can not be expected to be all that good. They would need time together to get the rust off, especially the older members!