Live Earth !

Is there a Live Earth concert in your city ? Not mine, but I'm following the concert on TV.
I feel everyone should do their part & try to convince & spread the message to at least 10 people around them.
I'd like to think that I'm already leading quite an environmentally sound lifestyle. I don't own a car, no air-conditioner & I've never shopped much for clothes or electronics items etc. But there's still much more I can do.
I don't think I'm 'strong' enough to go vegetarian, but I'm trying to cut down on meat consumption.

I don't own a car, no air-conditioner & I've never shopped much for clothes or electronics items etc. But there's still much more I can do.
I don't think I'm 'strong' enough to go vegetarian, but I'm trying to cut down on meat consumption.

Click to expand...

well now..lets see..
I've owned about 25 cars in my life. I only have one now. If I lived in a city like New York I would not have a car...Hummm let's see.. Two houses. It's 90+(32c) outside..so guess what. The "AC" is running all day. I have a closet full of clothes and shoes..I eat meat. Lots of meat!!! We have 2 cell phones, two cordless phones. one computer, two tv's. DVD, CD player and VCR. One other stereo..Lots of large and small appliances. i.e. clock radio, microwave, toaster, food processer, electric skillet, blender, electric mixer, coffee maker, garbage disposal, electric stove/oven & refridgiator...etc..Plus I have some portable medical equipment..blood pressure monitor and blood sugar monitor. Both battery powered...

I flush the toilet everytime I use it With lots of toilet paper. I take a shower everyday..sometimes twice a day..In other words I'm no hippie..I'm normal I hope Al Gore does not sick his hippie enviromental tree hugging friends on me!

We do re-cycle as much as possible...I don't smoke or drink any type of liqour. We eat fresh vegtables from my wife's parents farm..We got some fresh cucumbers and zuchinni today...

Come on now Popeye, this is much more than just Al Gore & tree hugging hippies.
My city has excellent public transport, so I guess I can't judge people who need cars to get around.
It's about 32C outside here as well but I'm lucky my place is very high & windy. I only feel the need for AC a few days in a year.

well No live earth in Here, and Generally I will join Roger Daltrey in his obinion when asked why didn't the Who participated in them: Its complite rubbish. You cannot change anything by wasting huge ammount of energy to play charity music...
But I watched some of the shows, mostly to see Wolfmother, who did give one hell of a performance and showed that the current generation migth have some hope left in terms of musical taste...I tryed to stick untill I see Roger Waters, but it begun to be too late, and New Yorks concert wasent even started...

But as for the global warming, I have knew it existence since I was 8 or 9 years old, and that was in early 90's so the way how people present this as some sort of "New" threat seems bit odd.
But how to figth agaisnt it? The concert and its subsiders present lots of acts that common consumer can do by his own choice, but I found them tailored to people living in those parts of US and Europe, where the summer AC usage brings up the power peak, but in here, most power plants "sleeps" during the summer, as the demand of electricity is so low...but in winter times, its opposite.

In overal the capitalist system and its religion of economical growth that is worshipped by mindless consuming and believing to the fundamental dogma that the elements of this growth are unlimited is the one and only barrier preventing us to do anything meaningless to save the earth.

Being vegetarian has nothing to do with it (unless you want to present "cool image") imagine all what would it like to feed 6 billion people with plants solely...Beeing green doesent help in long term either, becouse the issue is completely political and "Green" isen't an ideology, but a collection of issues brougth together to look like one. In the long run, Green parties are the worst scam that democracy can offer to the voters, becouse you know that they will hug trees....but you have no clue what soever what they feel and think about other issues, such as labor and social issues.

Someone had said that the window of oportunity to make the changes needed to stall the warming process is ten to twenty years, and you can all imagine would the global power of money and capital fall in that timeframe

Schumacher said:

Come on now Popeye, this is much more than just Al Gore & tree hugging hippies.
My city has excellent public transport, so I guess I can't judge people who need cars to get around.
It's about 32C outside here as well but I'm lucky my place is very high & windy. I only feel the need for AC a few days in a year.

Click to expand...

Basically I was making light of the whole situation by pointing out as a "typical American" this is some of what I have. And it would be difficult for many folks to give up their "stuff"....Everyone on Earth needs to come together to take better care of this planet we call home..

One thing I forgot to point out ..I go to san Diego about once a year..That's 2100 miles(3379km) from here..Guess what? You can't walk or ride a bike there!

If I lived in Singapore I would not need a car. Beautiful city with fantastic public transportation. I was last there in 2001....

We had something much better then live earth!

Will Full Force Summer Open Air 2007!



after 4 day's there was a 10-20cm layer of garbage at the ground wich was stomped by 160.000 feets and later became carpet!

It's pretty interesting how the traditional media is labeling Live Earth a ratings failure.

LiveEarth was highlighted all day on UniversalHD and Bravo, each on roughly a 2 hour delay from the live show, and only showing highlights from select artists. NBC did a 3 hour recap on network television. As far as I know a similar format was used in the UK. Some have blamed it on profanity, poor artists, and hypocrisy. I think the real reason why traditional media thinks Live Earth was a failure is because they only know how to measure its success in the traditional media itself.

The broadcasts weren't on network television (save for recaps), had commercials every ten minutes, interrupted artists to show short films, and all in all didn't connect viewers with the concert experience. It's kind of like Sportscenter, with highlights from action around the league. Meanwhile, two places had thorough and complete coverage of the event: XM Radio and MSN.

XM blocked out 6 channels for the concerts, each one playing a live broadcast of each respective ountry's concert. In addition, another channel was "All Acess", providing highlights from all of the concerts and announcing when each artist was performing. Ex: "Damien Rice just took the stage on channel 42 if you're interested" which was definitely a major convenience.

In the meantime MSN also broke records with over 10 million people watching the concerts online. By July 8, MSN also had every artist and concert archived and organized for reviewing on-demand. ()

Given the option, where would YOU have watched the concerts? On a commercial-filled generalized stream that lags 2 hours behind, or on a live customizable stream online or via satellite? The answer's quite obvious, and strikingly explains the ratings failing. Live Earth was billed as a failure because people didn't sit in front of a TV and let producers pick which songs we watched and from which artists. Producers figured 18 year olds would rather see Kanye West instead of Bon Jovi, or Linkin Park 3 times in a row rather than a full set from Metallica.

To be sure, there's a generation gap. If you get your news in other places besides sitting in front of CNN waiting for Wolf Blitzer to tell you what's going on, you already know about it.

In Singapore, they showed it live almost non-stop. But I also didn't like the music much, the more important thing is to get the message across.

Schumacher said:

In Singapore, they showed it live almost non-stop. But I also didn't like the music much, the more important thing is to get the message across.

Click to expand...

Ok...here's my two cents and then I will shut up about this.

How are the artisits getting around to the concertts? Sailing?

How does Gore get around to his speaking engagements? Bicycle?

I am sick and tired of seeing such hypocracy regarding these issues from individuals trying to tell the rest of us how to live. We had a bumper sticker in Montanan for the years I lived there. It read,

"Environmentalists! Weclome to Montana! Park at the border and walk in"

This was very popular because of their tendancy of those folks to fly in and then rent the biggest SUVs for their travels, while indicating that the rest of us had to cut back.

I live in the intermountain west here in the USA where conservation is a way of life. I am still grateful for my quad cab (what we used to call a crew cab) V8 pickup truck to haul my assorted tools...and kids and grandkids around...and the four wheel drive for winter travel...or mountain travel when I hunt Bambi's uncle, shoot it, skin it, and eat it.

I am also grateful for AC when it is 108 degrees out like it was last week, and for nice warm showers for a good 20 minutes when I come home tired and sore.

I pay for these things, and they are not cheap. But I work hard so I can afford them and plan to pass on the same capability to my kids and grandkids.

Having studied it somewhat...there is really no credible evidence that mankind is contributing to global warming in the least...at least in any major or catastophic way. The move for this, IMHO, is much more political and ideological than it is scientific. These ebbs in temperature and climate have been going on for tens of thousands of years and more.

Just recently they announced that one stretch of time was indeed the hottest that they hypothesized for some ten thousand years. How do they know this for sure is my first question? Based on what measurements...and how close were the thermometers to the exhaust vents of AC (as was shown in one recent flawed study). I saw in Klamath Falls, OR, in 2001 how scientists with an agenda can create what I call junk science to get politicians and judges to knee jerk react to them and destroy the lives and livelihoods of thousands of people in the name of this ideology...and all when it was absolutely unneccessary and built on the lie that the sucker fish in a particular watershed were indangered when anyone who lived in the area knew that first, they were not endangered, and second, that the moethod of preserving them (turning off all irrigation water to 1500 farming families in order to maintain full reservoir) was not a valid way of preserving them in any case.

But id digress...My second question would be, if indeed they are correct about it being as hot now as back then, ten thousand years ago, what happened over ten thousand years ago to make it so hot then, when mankind was not in the least industrialized?

Such cycles have been going on for far longer than what we can measure or scientifically test. One really really powerful volcano is capable of putting out more hyrdrocarbons and other pollutants over a few months time than just about all of mankind's contribution in the last one hundred years combined...and yet the planet survives as does life on it.

Do not get me wrong. We should all try and do our best to practising good conservation and common sense protection of our ecosystem around us...we just do not need to go off the deep end, and we do not, IMHO, need to be too alarmist over it given history.

But that's just my own opinion and what I teach my kids.

With TV images of rubbish at the concert sites, it can easily be said the organization could have been done better.
But attacking the message of saving the environment by questioning how much CO2 the concert itself produced is nothing but diverting attention from the issue. This can be simply countered by the fact that any kind of venture/investments/business requires effort/finances to be put in initially before benefits can be derived later.
One puts in initial capital in the hope of getting profits later....... the concerts produced some CO2 now for greater goal of sending the message across.
I don't think such concept is hard to understand at all.

As for the scientific proofs. World scientists at the recent UN convention have agreed the global warming is real & human is responsible. And the fact that by far the majority of the world signed on to the Kyoto protocol showed most governments believes it's real. The debate now is which country should contribute how much to the solution.

Even if we still think there's only 10% chance those scientists & governments are right, we should still act now as an insurance when studies have put the costs of such actions at less than 1% of global GDP over a few years.
People routinely spends more as a % on insurances on far more remote risks.