Gore Sizing Up NYC For Live Earth
The D.C. component of Al Gore's plan to save the environment one band at a time has run into some inconvenient partisan politicking, with Republicans roadblocking Live Earth's petitions to stage its show in the nation's capital. And it's looking like D.C.'s loss will be NYC's ... loss. Via Variety:
Gotham's Prospect Park, Randall's Island and Shea Stadium are among the sites under consideration for July 7's Live Earth concerts to fight global warming.Hearing of this development, New Yorkers erupted in momentary celebration until they remembered the bill included Red Hot Chili Peppers, John Mayer, Bon Jovi, Lenny Kravitz, Sheryl Crow, John Legend, Black Eyed Peas, Akon, Faith Hill, Fall Out Boy and KoRN.The potential sites can all accommodate the estimated 40,000 or more people expected to attend, New York City's Dept. of Parks & Recreation said on Wednesday.
"We're just waiting to hear back from them on what they want to do," a spokesman said.
Organizers had hoped to stage the event at the U.S. Capitol, but their plans have so far been blocked by Senate Republicans. Event organizers say that Gotham has always been a candidate city to host the U.S. leg of the worldwide event; others include Philadelphia.
...
"Not since former Interior Secretary James Watt tried to ban the Beach Boys from appearing on the National Mall has such a misguided effort at political censorship been undertaken by a Republican official," Rep. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) told the L.A. Times.
Posted at 8:57 AM
Tags: Live Earth
-->
-->
![thumbnail: <![CDATA[Gabe And Rich Watch A Movie: Saló]]>](http://videogum.com//img/thumbnails/photos/salo/salo_criterion_8_50x50.jpg)
Can't think of how much more idiotic a 'let's go green' concert could be.
"Right, let's tell people not to fly, not to drive and to be as green as possible. We should rip off the Live8 thing and do a music concert on the east coast of America to tell people about this."
"Who's going to play?"
"How about a load of musicians from the west coast?"
"Sounds great"
"How shall we get there?"
"Let's fly! We should also try and involve people from as far across the country as possible, so tell them all to drive over here to watch it."
"Great idea."
"Then we should all fly back to our mansions and relax in our poorly insulated houses with the heat turned right up. We'll have done something fantastic that will have got us a lot of money and more attention for my film. Then, in a decades time, we (the whole world) can suffer for what our concerts have created - amusement for thousands of people that didn't pay any attention to what we were telling them."
Score = 0
USE ALTERNATIVE ENERGY!
(Gwyneth Paltrow needs the jet fuel.)
Score = 0
yeah, let's talk shit about the person who is doing more than anyone else about these problems. brilliant.
everything in moderation. i don't think anyone is stating that we should live in log cabins and travel by fucking row boats and covered wagons.
yes,it's a shit lineup, but it's pop music, which appeals to the masses - the same ones who will go to this. don't go if you don't want to, but at least respect the fact that someone is trying to help.
Score = 0
i thought the momentary celebration comment was funny.
Score = 0
But JP I thought Al said there was some huge disaster coming in the next 10 years if we don't spring into action...sounds like moderation ain't gonna work if that's the case.
Score = 0
Stephen, you are an idiot. Don't bother letting the facts stand in the way of your opinion, though.
Score = 0
this isn't a bad idea because its wrong to hold a large concert to raise money / awareness about global warming, that is a good thing to do. its a bad idea because, really, is there anyone who wants to see any of those bands, let alone all together at once? how nauseating is the thought of watching the black eyed peas be followed by the red hot chili peppers at some outdoor stadium in nyc? blech.
Score = 0
seriously, it is so disappointing to read commenters on this blog (an audience that i'd really love to believe is slightly smarter than the average bear) spout hateful shit about gore's efforts. for all of our sakes, get a clue.
Score = 0
Mikey nailed it.
Score = 0
Hey Mikey, Gore is a fat hypocrite. If you don't see that, you're as stupid as he is.
Score = 0
It's gonna be cancelled due to snow storms, but global warming will still be blamed.
Score = 0
FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD
Score = 0
Mikey: Smart = unquestionably buying into whatever the global warming industry is selling?
30 years ago "global cooling" was the big scare. It wasn't selling, so they retooled the product.
Score = 0
Nate, I'm glad you know what my opinion is based on one statement. Didn't really reply to what I said, but that's okay cause I just listened to "My Humps" and "Soak Up the Sun" and realized the gravity of the situation.
Score = 0
what INDUSTRY? what are they selling? who is going to make a lot of money when the world wakes up some day and is suddenly green-minded?
i challenge you to name companies comparable to the likes of exxon/mobile that stand to cash in.
Score = 0
You don't think scientists and institutes, hungry for research funding, have some beneficial interest in hyping global warming? (Of course not--scientists are totally selfless 21st century saints and don't take any salary for their work, right?)
You don't think the U.N., always hard-on for centralized control, has some beneficial interest in hyping global warming? (No, bureaucrats are anything but eager for more industries to regulate.)
And how about the feel-good guilt-absolving "carbon credits" business?
It's funny how many people who take great pride in "connecting the dots" pretty much give up after taking the usual shots at Big Oil/Big Pharma/Big Mac.
Score = 0
Oh, I'm sorry Stephen, perhaps you are just a detached hipster who is too cool to care, instead of an actual honest-to-goodness denier. Either way, I stand by my previous comment.
And Bugs Meany, you have to be kidding. Global cooling was totally a media hype product that had almost no scientific basis. If you look into global warming, you will note that the same is not true here.
Score = 0
i think scientists and institutes have been producing some pretty compelling and convincing data supporting global warming for the past 30 years for little more than shrugs and blank stares.
i think bureaucrats aren't sitting in dark rooms greedily rubbing their hands and smacking their lips in anticipation of new regulations. but even if they are i don't care.
and i'd rather see people become billionaires (fuck it, trillionaires) in the "carbon credits" business than the usual suspects in big oil continue disregard overwhelming scientific evidence contrary to their cause in the name of their bottom lines.
this isn't as much about industry (and you seem to be bordering on conspiracy theory, bugs) as it is about the future of the planet.
and even if you want to throw barbs at mr. gore and say his planes use a lot of fuel, at least he's doing something. arguably more than any other single person has done to increase awareness among the voting public that some shit needs to change. pronto.
i'm sorry that you don't agree.
Score = 0
Actually, Nate, I do believe that global climate change is real and that greenhouse gasses are adding to it. What I don't know, and what you'll find a lot of scientists don't know, is if that actually means anything disasterous will occur, as Gore has said or if this may just be a natural occurrence. I am just very weary of any populist media driven scientific/medical crisis.
I don't think there's anything wrong with them doing this concert, but at the same time I don't think Akon is going to make most young (or old) people in the US care if they don't already. See the Vote for Change tour for evidence of this.
Score = 0
>> What I don't know, and what you'll find a lot of scientists don't know, is if that actually means anything disasterous will occur, as Gore has said or if this may just be a natural occurrence. I am just very weary of any populist media driven scientific/medical crisis.
Well said.
And I'm not saying that there's nothing wrong with pollution. But come on--temperatures change. There was an ice age, and then there wasn't.
All due respect to Our Messiah Gore, of course.
Score = 0
"and i'd rather see people become billionaires (fuck it, trillionaires) in the "carbon credits" business than the usual suspects in big oil continue disregard overwhelming scientific evidence contrary to their cause in the name of their bottom lines."
That's good, man, cos Halliburton was one of the biggest lobbyists advocating FOR Kyoto, as they wanted to profit off the trading. So, Mikey, can we all hear a big "GO TEAM HALLIBURTON!" from you on this?
Score = 0
actually, stephen, not well said. here's something to consider:
if the shelf ice (ice that's currently on land, not already floating in the water) in greenland and antarctica falls into the ocean, it will raise global sea levels about 20 feet. I don't know about you, but that's going to put my street in brooklyn underwater. and a lot of people live in brooklyn.
think about the resource strain put on a region when a population is displaced (new orleans, sri lanka are recent examples). and then multiply that by the populations of all the major coastal cities whose sea level elevations are under 20 feet.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/28/AR2006012801021.html
disastrous? i'd say so. i'd say we should be scrambling to do whatever we possibly can to try to prevent that from happening.
and bugs, just to drive this home for you:
the last time there was an ice age, there wasn't nearly such an enormous human population to be displaced. i read somewhere (too lazy to find it) that there are more people alive today than have ever died. EVER. and the population continues to grow at an exponential rate. where are we going to put all those people with 20 more feet of water drastically shrinking our land mass?
can we all stay at your place?
Score = 0
sure matt. go team halliburton. it's a shame they couldn't pull a string or two in the white house.
Score = 0
if global warming is so immediate, so disastrous... i'd move the hell away from brooklyn.
Score = 0
Mikey: I'm only going to repond to you in this post because quite simply, I don't have the time right now to respond to everyone else.
First comment: I apologise for the negative start to this piece first of all. However, as much as everyone thinks Al Gore is doing great for the world, someone recently managed to dig out his home gas bill under the freedom of information act in the US and it came up three or four times the average in the US. He has also made a film that he has to promote, but still, I bet if you looked at the amount of flying he did to promote it it would be the equivalent of flying around the globe a few times.
Yes, he probably then went and off-set it by getting someone to plant some trees. What use is this though? It'll be 20 years before they're of any use and before then they'll probably die with the heat or a hurricane like they're predicting.
Second comment: In my opinion, the threat of global warming probably is real, although I don't consider it to be 100% manmade.
The indstries that aren't going to profit are the ones that aren't in the western world. In my opinion this has been hyped slightly so that the westerners can stay ahead in the money game. Where are people going to have to buy these technologies (wind and solar power generators) from? Many countries are already showing a displeasure that they're not going to have their industrial revolution due to this. Instead, they're going to have to buy from us and skip it and continue to be poor for what we have apparently caused.
Although you hear this, "team of the 100 best scientists" thing thrown about everywhere in the news, they're also silencing hundreds of others that don't agree.
Third comment: I do agree that Gore is managing to get a huge amount of notice, but do you not think if he's so upset about this situation he should lead as an example? I personally hate people that tell you what to do and then do the exact opposite. Does it not make you question the motives a little?
If you look at the only government laws really coming in, they're stealth taxes that aren't going to change anything. Over here we're getting more tax on flying, but it's about £20/30 and not an amount that people are going to stop and actually think, 'can I afford to take that trip in a plane?'. The other popular law coming in is the one on lightbulbs. Let's all change to energy efficient bulbs that we don't tell the public take as much energy to create over the normal ones as they save when used.
The ideas are ridiculous. If the governments really want to make people use public transport more they wouldn't raise the cost of it every six months. When I was a young lad going to high school for the first time the bus cost me 30p, now all of a sudden it's costing in excess of £1.50. That's in a decade. That's not convincing me to want to take public transport. It's cheaper, and more pleasant, to drive.
Forth comment: The ice shelf has been falling for 50 years.... The bigger problem (again, in my opinion) is all the glaciers and skiing villages losing snow.
What we really need to stop 'global warming' from happening is a dictator that is willing to put their neck (like the Chinese have done) on the line to cap birth rates. People are living too long and people are having way too many children for the Earth to really survive. The resources on this planet were only meant to be able to cope with a certain amount of people. We have clearly surpassed it.
Anyway, I'm alright, I'm on a hill...
Only joking, but if you do really fear for your life with this global warming stuff, would it not be sensible to move whilst you can get money for your property than to move when it's too late?
Score = 0
andrew,
thanks for taking the time to write all that out. i'd like to reply in order, if you or anyone is still reading this.
1) if i spent a few hours telling you not to download pre-release mp3 leaks of good records and then you took a look at my hard drive i would understand when you told me to shove off. but i think that's a dangerous argument to apply here. if you think al gore's heating bill is too high, then ignore him and listen to someone else who's speaking the same message. don't fall into the trap of inaction out of spite. here's a fairly extensive story on gore's power bills for anyone interesed: http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/GlobalWarming/story?id=2906888&page=1
2) cars being manufactured in detroit are not fuel-economical enough to be sold in china. i think it's a fallacy to claim western companies across the board are the ones who stand to gain from actions against global warming. furthermore, some western companies like those manufacturers in detroit have a lot to lose. furthermore, technological advances and global economics/politics far beyond global warming policy are rewriting the rules on third world countries' industrial revolutions.
as far as your claim about the science...all credible scientific journals are peer reviewed, which means if a study has integrity and sound methodology as judged by other scientists in the field, it will be published. if you look to these peer reviewed journals you will be extremely hard pressed to find any real scientists claiming that we don't have a huge problem on our hands. there will always be "scientists" commissioned by special interests to give quotes in time magazine, but it's not real science if it's not published in a peer reviewed journal. a good example are all the "studies" that still cast doubt that smoking is bad for you.
3) i can't really comment on the actions your government is taking because i'm not familiar with them, but i'd tell stress again that while gore is unquestionably the most prominent figure saying these things, he is only one of a vast number of concerned people. don't get hung up on him if he rubs you the wrong way. try to step back and look at the big picture -- that gore or no gore, there is a problem that needs to be addressed.
4) the world's booming population is not an unrelated problem, but as you hinted, it is a much more difficult problem to deal with. i personally don't see the american government ever being able to pass a law limiting the number of babies people can have, but i CAN envision them passing enforcing sweeping changes in the way we as individuals and (more importantly) large organizations interact with the environment.
as you concluded with a joke about your living on a hill and again advising me to move out of brooklyn, i will conclude by again asking you to consider the bigger picture here. sure, i can move from brooklyn and probably within a few years i will. but my leaving won't make brooklyn stop being one of the world's most heavily populated areas. and your living on a hill might sound nice until you ask yourself where all the people who live downhill from you are going to go when their dwellings are gone. they are going to come to you.
whether we live in brooklyn or in the himilayas, this is a problem for all of us. that's what i'm trying to say here.
thanks for reading.
Score = 0
Andrew and Mikey, read this:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3869753.stm
Score = 0
from tony's link:
"The data suggests that changing solar activity is influencing in some way the global climate causing the world to get warmer.
Over the past 20 years, however, the number of sunspots has remained roughly constant, yet the average temperature of the Earth has continued to increase.
This is put down to a human-produced greenhouse effect caused by the combustion of fossil fuels.
This latest analysis shows that the Sun has had a considerable indirect influence on the global climate in the past, causing the Earth to warm or chill, and that mankind is amplifying the Sun's latest attempt to warm the Earth."
Score = 0
last time we had multi millionaires preaching poverty at live 8. arent these people the reason for world poverty? now theyre back preaching global warming!!!
theyre the ones flying about the world day in day out using up more air miles in a month than i use in a decade, driving about in the biggest polluting vehicles on the planet, living in huge energy wasting mansions. arent they responsible for the most carbon emissions by any individual people on the planet?
live earth is yet another opportunity to get the kind of publicity and extra record sales that money cant buy. how many of them gave their increased sales from live 8 to charity?
these shows should be boycotted. we already know about climate change as its been all over the news for months. these greedy people shouldnt be allowed to profit from it in the way some profited from poverty through live 8.
instead, why dont people pressure countries such as china to reduce their emissions drastically. why dont other governments help them to do it if its so important or is the whole global warming issue just a large myth exaggerated to generate huge rises in taxes for fat cat governments like the selfish, greedy regime we have in the uk?
live earth should be seen for the patronising cash in that it really is
Score = 0
last time we had multi millionaires preaching poverty at live 8. arent these people the reason for world poverty? now theyre back preaching global warming!!!
theyre the ones flying about the world day in day out using up more air miles in a month than i use in a decade, driving about in the biggest polluting vehicles on the planet, living in huge energy wasting mansions. arent they responsible for the most carbon emissions by any individual people on the planet?
live earth is yet another opportunity to get the kind of publicity and extra record sales that money cant buy. how many of them gave their increased sales from live 8 to charity?
these shows should be boycotted. we already know about climate change as its been all over the news for months. these greedy people shouldnt be allowed to profit from it in the way some profited from poverty through live 8.
instead, why dont people pressure countries such as china to reduce their emissions drastically. why dont other governments help them to do it if its so important or is the whole global warming issue just a large myth exaggerated to generate huge rises in taxes for fat cat governments like the selfish, greedy regime we have in the uk?
live earth should be seen for the patronising cash in that it really is
Score = 0
I think Gore overhypes the global warming threat, but the process is an issue that deserves some attention. I don't think it's fair, either, to appeal to peer-reviewed journals, because science is always correcting itself. To suggest that science has fully arrived at a particular conclusion seems far fetched. I'm sure Copernicus got a lot of flak from his peers when he published his work. But frankly, any kind of appeal to peer-reviewed journals instead of the scientific method itself is consensus science, which is an oxymoron to say "not science."
I do agree with Gore and others that human beings are not removed from the environment, in the sense that what we do lacks environmental consequences. But I disagree that the government should be the one to legislate our own activity. For example, most people don't have choices about what kind of power company to support. That is a government regulation that eliminates free market principles, and thus the choice of the people. I'm looking into buying power from a wind farm, even though it might cost more now, because I value more expensive renewable, earth-friendly power as opposed to cheaper, fossil fuel power.
Score = 0