I am not typically nostalgic, nor can it be sad that I normally engage in profanity laden tirades, but something happened earlier tonight that had me both nostalgic and really fucking annoyed. SO BE WARNED!!!!!
Let me set the stage. The power went out. Everything in the house is run on electric. Ok, fine, shit happens. I needed to get shirts at the dry cleaners and since I couldn't cook as planned because the stove did not work, I decided McDonald's was a good idea.There were about eight cars in the drive thru and one person in line inside.So, we parked and I got in line. I just happened to get in line behind someone with an extensive order. Fine. I finally place my order, the Quarter Pounder with Cheese Meal. The cashier gives me the receipt,asks my name and tells me my food should be right up.
For those too young to know, McDonald's used to actually be a "fast food restaurant". When I was younger you never stood to the side and waited because McDonald's was sooooooooooooo efficient that they had chutes with the burgers ready to be served as you were placing your order. That's right, CHUTES!!! The only time you had to wait in line is when some fucking douche bag ordered a Filet O Fish, which is why you avoided McDonald's on a Friday during Lent.
Then there's the order itself. Quarter Pounder with Cheese. How sad to order that measly fucking burger. The Big Mac was king. As a kid, getting your first Big Mac was almost a right of passage. And it was great. WAS! Not anymore though. Not since they got rid of the styrofoam container.I don't know the science of styrofoam and why it's superior as a container and I don't care. All I know is that the Big Mac has tasted like cardboard ever since. Eating a Big Mac without the magic of the styrofoam container is like watching a version of "Risky Business" where Rebecca De Mornay never takes off her fucking clothes.
It all began with going to cardboard containers and because it was said that styrofoam was not biodegradable and a danger to "Mother Earth". As far as I'm concerned "Mother Earth" can go fuck herself.
What exactly has "Mother Earth" ever done for us anyway? If the Earth is our mother will someone please call child fucking services already? "Mother Earth" has been engaging in disproportionate responses to human behavior for as long as we can remember, so why not put her out of her misery, suffocating her while chowing down on a Big Mac as nature intended? If "Gaia" can't survive "Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun", then I say good riddance to "Mother Earth".
Then there are the fries. Let's be honest, the fries aren't what they used to be. They used to be saltier, and it was great. They're ok now, but a shadow of their former selves.
Finally, there is another source of irritation. The salads. Just like there's no crying in baseball, there were no salads at McDonald's. So what's wrong with salads? Nothing. They just don't belong at McDonald's. Think about it in a modern context. Have you ever heard anyone utter the statement, "I think I'll go get me a salad at "Five Guys"? So, why are they at fucking McDonald's? If as so many people think at present we are living in an age of American decline we must surely entertain the view that it was accelerated on the day salads first appeared on the menu at McDonald's. Salads! Fucking salads.
I don't know how long I was standing there but I was not happy. It sucks to be nostalgic, but damn it I want a Big Mac in a "Mother Earth" destroying chloro fluoro carbon laden Styrofoam container.Screw the Earth, I want a real Big Mac,saltier fries and yes hold the salad.
Featured Links
- Ace of Spades
- American Thinker
- Bad Blue
- Blaze
- CNS
- Creative Minority Report
- Daily Caller
- Federalist
- Fisherville Mike
- Free Beacon
- Gatestone
- HILL
- Hot Air
- Human Events
- JPOST
- Life News
- Life Site News
- MRC
- My Twitter
- National Journal
- National Review
- Pajamas Mdia
- Real Clear Politics
- Red State
- The Lid
- Theo Spark
- Townhall
- Twitchy
- Weasel Zippers
Showing posts with label Gaia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gaia. Show all posts
Wednesday, July 11, 2012
Monday, June 25, 2012
Green ‘drivel’ exposed By James Lovelock
From: Toronto Sun
Two months ago, James Lovelock, the godfather of global warming, gave a startling interview to msnbc.com in which he acknowledged he had been unduly “alarmist” about climate change.
The implications were extraordinary.
Lovelock is a world-renowned scientist and environmentalist whose Gaia theory — that the Earth operates as a single, living organism — has had a profound impact on the development of global warming theory.
Unlike many “environmentalists,” who have degrees in political science, Lovelock, until his recent retirement at age 92, was a much-honoured working scientist and academic.
His inventions have been used by NASA, among many other scientific organizations.
Lovelock’s invention of the electron capture detector in 1957 first enabled scientists to measure CFCs (chlorofluorocarbons) and other pollutants in the atmosphere, leading, in many ways, to the birth of the modern environmental movement.
Having observed that global temperatures since the turn of the millennium have not gone up in the way computer-based climate models predicted, Lovelock acknowledged, “the problem is we don’t know what the climate is doing. We thought we knew 20 years ago.” Now, Lovelock has given a follow-up interview to the UK’s Guardian newspaper in which he delivers more bombshells sure to anger the global green movement, which for years worshipped his Gaia theory and apocalyptic predictions that billions would die from man-made climate change by the end of this century.
Lovelock still believes anthropogenic global warming is occurring and that mankind must lower its greenhouse gas emissions, but says it’s now clear the doomsday predictions, including his own (and Al Gore’s) were incorrect.
He responds to attacks on his revised views by noting that, unlike many climate scientists who fear a loss of government funding if they admit error, as a freelance scientist, he’s never been afraid to revise his theories in the face of new evidence. Indeed, that’s how science advances.
Among his observations to the Guardian:
(1) A long-time supporter of nuclear power as a way to lower greenhouse gas emissions, which has made him unpopular with environmentalists, Lovelock has now come out in favour of natural gas fracking (which environmentalists also oppose), as a low-polluting alternative to coal.
As Lovelock observes, “Gas is almost a give-away in the U.S. at the moment. They’ve gone for fracking in a big way. This is what makes me very cross with the greens for trying to knock it … Let’s be pragmatic and sensible and get Britain to switch everything to methane. We should be going mad on it.” (Kandeh Yumkella, co-head of a major United Nations program on sustainable energy, made similar arguments last week at a UN environmental conference in Rio de Janeiro, advocating the development of conventional and unconventional natural gas resources as a way to reduce deforestation and save millions of lives in the Third World.)
(2) Lovelock blasted greens for treating global warming like a religion.
“It just so happens that the green religion is now taking over from the Christian religion,” Lovelock observed.
“I don’t think people have noticed that, but it’s got all the sort of terms that religions use … The greens use guilt. That just shows how religious greens are. You can’t win people round by saying they are guilty for putting (carbon dioxide) in the air.”
(3) Lovelock mocks the idea modern economies can be powered by wind turbines.
As he puts it, “so-called ‘sustainable development’ … is meaningless drivel … We rushed into renewable energy without any thought. The schemes are largely hopelessly inefficient and unpleasant. I personally can’t stand windmills at any price.”
(4) Finally, about claims “the science is settled” on global warming: “One thing that being a scientist has taught me is that you can never be certain about anything. You never know the truth. You can only approach it and hope to get a bit nearer to it each time. You iterate towards the truth. You don’t know it.”
Two months ago, James Lovelock, the godfather of global warming, gave a startling interview to msnbc.com in which he acknowledged he had been unduly “alarmist” about climate change.
The implications were extraordinary.
Lovelock is a world-renowned scientist and environmentalist whose Gaia theory — that the Earth operates as a single, living organism — has had a profound impact on the development of global warming theory.
Unlike many “environmentalists,” who have degrees in political science, Lovelock, until his recent retirement at age 92, was a much-honoured working scientist and academic.
His inventions have been used by NASA, among many other scientific organizations.
Lovelock’s invention of the electron capture detector in 1957 first enabled scientists to measure CFCs (chlorofluorocarbons) and other pollutants in the atmosphere, leading, in many ways, to the birth of the modern environmental movement.
Having observed that global temperatures since the turn of the millennium have not gone up in the way computer-based climate models predicted, Lovelock acknowledged, “the problem is we don’t know what the climate is doing. We thought we knew 20 years ago.” Now, Lovelock has given a follow-up interview to the UK’s Guardian newspaper in which he delivers more bombshells sure to anger the global green movement, which for years worshipped his Gaia theory and apocalyptic predictions that billions would die from man-made climate change by the end of this century.
Lovelock still believes anthropogenic global warming is occurring and that mankind must lower its greenhouse gas emissions, but says it’s now clear the doomsday predictions, including his own (and Al Gore’s) were incorrect.
He responds to attacks on his revised views by noting that, unlike many climate scientists who fear a loss of government funding if they admit error, as a freelance scientist, he’s never been afraid to revise his theories in the face of new evidence. Indeed, that’s how science advances.
Among his observations to the Guardian:
(1) A long-time supporter of nuclear power as a way to lower greenhouse gas emissions, which has made him unpopular with environmentalists, Lovelock has now come out in favour of natural gas fracking (which environmentalists also oppose), as a low-polluting alternative to coal.
As Lovelock observes, “Gas is almost a give-away in the U.S. at the moment. They’ve gone for fracking in a big way. This is what makes me very cross with the greens for trying to knock it … Let’s be pragmatic and sensible and get Britain to switch everything to methane. We should be going mad on it.” (Kandeh Yumkella, co-head of a major United Nations program on sustainable energy, made similar arguments last week at a UN environmental conference in Rio de Janeiro, advocating the development of conventional and unconventional natural gas resources as a way to reduce deforestation and save millions of lives in the Third World.)
(2) Lovelock blasted greens for treating global warming like a religion.
“It just so happens that the green religion is now taking over from the Christian religion,” Lovelock observed.
“I don’t think people have noticed that, but it’s got all the sort of terms that religions use … The greens use guilt. That just shows how religious greens are. You can’t win people round by saying they are guilty for putting (carbon dioxide) in the air.”
(3) Lovelock mocks the idea modern economies can be powered by wind turbines.
As he puts it, “so-called ‘sustainable development’ … is meaningless drivel … We rushed into renewable energy without any thought. The schemes are largely hopelessly inefficient and unpleasant. I personally can’t stand windmills at any price.”
(4) Finally, about claims “the science is settled” on global warming: “One thing that being a scientist has taught me is that you can never be certain about anything. You never know the truth. You can only approach it and hope to get a bit nearer to it each time. You iterate towards the truth. You don’t know it.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)



