Just have to vent.
Just so people are clear, I am fully onboard with everything having to do with saving wildlife, keeping the environment clean and moving to renewable energy. I find wind, tidal, solar and nuclear power all fascinating and the sooner we get off burning oil and coal the better.
I also love "Time" Magazine. I read most of the articles in it when it comes every week and I think if anyone wants to appear smart, all they need to do is read "Time" cover to cover every week. You'll have a full grasp of social issues, trends, politics, wars, starvation, emerging nations - you name it. All you need to know about the world is in there. I love it.
Just to make that perfectly clear.
What I hate is fear mongering.
The latest issue of "Time" magazine has a cover that states "Vanishing Act: How Climate Change is causing a new age of extinction."
The main focus of the piece is on Madagascar and its unique ecology, that like Australia and the Galapagos Islands, is a Darwinian playground.
Do you know what is causing the mass extinction of species in Madagascar? As detailed in the article? The loss of 80% of the forests of Madascar due to human logging.
WTF does that have to do with climate change?
So how do they work climate change into it?
"Through our growing numbers, our thirst for natural resources, and most of all climate change- which by one reckoning, could help carry off 20% to 30% of all species before the end of the century-"
"By one reckoning" means - "Using the most extreme example I could find"
"End of the century" means - "We're going to predict what's going to happen 91 years from now."
"Most of all climate change" = Forget the 80% deforestation, that's not important, what's really important is CLIMATE CHANGE! BOOGA BOOGA!"
I think extinction is a horrible thing and we have lost some truly amazing animals. But please, tell me how to save the forest from being razed and how to stop human encroachment on delicate lands, don't try to push an agenda that has nothing whatsoever to do with the facts and taints what could have been an otherwise engaging article.
After "Fragmented habitats are problematic because many endangered species wind up trapped in green oases surrounded by degraded land. As global warming changes the climate, species will try to migrate..."
Really.
How about focusing on expanding those green oases and looking for real solutions and preventing this from happening in the first place instead of just screaming "GLOBAL WARMING! and "CLIMATE CHANGE" like it's responsible for the latest hurricane to your kid getting a D- in school.
Seriously, this is getting pathetic. I wanted to read an article on saving the animals of Madagascar and instead I got "Climate change will be responsible for more animal deaths than 80% deforestation of Madagascar."
I couldn't even finish the article.
I also love "Time" Magazine. I read most of the articles in it when it comes every week and I think if anyone wants to appear smart, all they need to do is read "Time" cover to cover every week. You'll have a full grasp of social issues, trends, politics, wars, starvation, emerging nations - you name it. All you need to know about the world is in there. I love it.
Just to make that perfectly clear.
What I hate is fear mongering.
The latest issue of "Time" magazine has a cover that states "Vanishing Act: How Climate Change is causing a new age of extinction."
The main focus of the piece is on Madagascar and its unique ecology, that like Australia and the Galapagos Islands, is a Darwinian playground.
Do you know what is causing the mass extinction of species in Madagascar? As detailed in the article? The loss of 80% of the forests of Madascar due to human logging.
WTF does that have to do with climate change?
So how do they work climate change into it?
"Through our growing numbers, our thirst for natural resources, and most of all climate change- which by one reckoning, could help carry off 20% to 30% of all species before the end of the century-"
"By one reckoning" means - "Using the most extreme example I could find"
"End of the century" means - "We're going to predict what's going to happen 91 years from now."
"Most of all climate change" = Forget the 80% deforestation, that's not important, what's really important is CLIMATE CHANGE! BOOGA BOOGA!"
I think extinction is a horrible thing and we have lost some truly amazing animals. But please, tell me how to save the forest from being razed and how to stop human encroachment on delicate lands, don't try to push an agenda that has nothing whatsoever to do with the facts and taints what could have been an otherwise engaging article.
After "Fragmented habitats are problematic because many endangered species wind up trapped in green oases surrounded by degraded land. As global warming changes the climate, species will try to migrate..."
Really.
How about focusing on expanding those green oases and looking for real solutions and preventing this from happening in the first place instead of just screaming "GLOBAL WARMING! and "CLIMATE CHANGE" like it's responsible for the latest hurricane to your kid getting a D- in school.
Seriously, this is getting pathetic. I wanted to read an article on saving the animals of Madagascar and instead I got "Climate change will be responsible for more animal deaths than 80% deforestation of Madagascar."
I couldn't even finish the article.
Yo J, did you send Time a letter?
ReplyDeleteNo. I figured there was no point.
ReplyDeleteIf you have a Time subscription, did you read the article last week about the debt collectors in Spain dressing up like Abraham Lincoln or Mickey Mouse and all that? What is all that about? Have you seen that going on where you live?
ReplyDeleteJ, you're right about sending the letter. It will likely be ignored, or laughed at.
ReplyDeleteOr..maybe just maybe there will be a word, a sentence, or phrase that will trigger something in someones brain. That someone then takes your letter to a junior editor or reporter that just happens to have an important daddy, so he is not afraid to rock the boat a bit.
He does some research, and BAM there is a cover story on TIME "Global Warming is HORSESHIT!"
Jamie Time is a left leaning magazine. Last year they printed an article about "climate change from the skeptic's point of view." It couldn't be anything but that. It was some of the worst writing I've seen in a long time.
ReplyDeleteAs a liberal you should be careful about stomping on liberal fundamental believes. They hate that more than anything else and will tear you apart. (Just ask Bjorn Lomborg.) If you're not careful you might discover that liberals have alot of things wrong.