She’s a celebrity. Of course that must imply that as a celebrity she must be an expert on global warming. Also, of course, being a celebrity, she deserves preferential treatment as in because she says so, it must be done.
In case you’re wondering what I’m talking about, I’m bringing your attention to Cheryl Crow and her friend, Laurie David ambush of Karl Rove at the WhiteÂ House Correspondents’ Dinner and they made much of Rove’s dislike of being
held against his will touched when he turned away from them rather than argue.
And what’s our
expert’s celebrity’s solution to global warming? Why we should use less toilet paper. Why doesn’t she do less tours using up so much fossil fuels and electricity for equipment to make her sound great onÂ stage or to make it a “show” with special effects and lighting? Or are the 6000 bulbs they gave out supposed to offset her carbon footprints?
The point is, these people have no clue about global warming. They are reacting to emotional trash. Scientists can’t agree on global warming but we’re expected to listen to these celebrity experts?
This fall in the same category of Rosie O’Donnell’s claim that fire doesn’t melt steel. Steel melts at 2800 degrees, it is weakened at 1500 degrees… with the kind of weight posed by the WTO buildings, weakening is all that is necessary for the collapse.
However, there are some steps that can be taken here in the U.S. Stripmining in West Virginia alone has raped 300,000+ acres of forested mountains, polluting waterways requiring chemicals to clean up, if they bother,Â and robbing wildlife of natural habitats. That, to me, constitutes a greater ecological disaster than using a few extra squares of toilet paper, which is biodegrable, by the way. Oh, wait, isn’t that Robert Byrd territory? It must be Bush’s fault, then. Never mind that it’s been going on for more decades than I’ve been alive (and I ain’t that young).