Then go here to see the video ('cause it only embeds in half screen below).
Or you can read Michelle Minton's take over at Financial Post!
Matthew Wheeland, an environmental journalist called the holiday “mind-blowingly strange” and pondered if Earth Hour folks are including in their numbers people in countries that don’t have enough electricity to make the choice to turn out their lights. Of course, they don’t have the choice to acquire electricity whereas anyone can choose to stop using human technology if they wish.
...
Of course, there are people out there who appreciate what we are trying to say. For example, Rajesh in India writes on his blog:
“Coming from India where we routinely suffer power cuts due to mixed-market policies of the government, I found this post from The New Clarion fantastic … Let’s use the wavelength of both light and philosophy to keep darkness at bay.”
Green and private conservation are fine. We have no problem with an individual (or group) that wants to sit naked in the dark without heat, clothing or light. Additionally, we’d have no problem with the group holding a pro-green technology rally. That’s their choice. But when this group stages a “global election” — enviros are asking the world’s citizenry to vote Earth by switching off our lights with the express purpose of influencing government policies to take action against global warming — we have every right as individuals to express our vote for the opposite.
If our Human Achievement Hour is at all a dig against Earth Hour, it is so only by the fact that we are pointing out what Earth Hour truly is about: It isn’t pro-Earth, it is anti-man and anti-innovation. So, on March 28, I plan to continue “voting” for humanity by enjoying the fruits of man’s mind.
No comments:
Post a Comment