David Suzuki compares the oil sands to slavery

[T@T]

Originally Posted by 2Stonedbirds

If it wasn't for the industrialization of farming practices and irrigation, southern Alberta would be a desert.

Although the Mad Max-esque hyperbole does sound kinda fun.

I suspect after Oil isn't needed it'll be a deserted desert quick and maybe even before then.

He is without question, however, a complete nutbar in his environmental fear mongering. Some, in the Southern states, would even say "crazy as a rabid coon".

He's not near as bad down there as "the science guy" Billy Nye is he? surely a fear mongering environmental atheist isn't a good fit in the south.

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by T@T

Is climate change real in your world?

Absolutely, and I believe it is man-made.

Ozy put it best, it's a balance.

[T@T]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

Absolutely, and I believe it is man-made.

Ozy put it best, it's a balance.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by T@T

Is climate change real in your world?

It's kind of sad that the only discourse possible on the issue is either:

A) Remove $4 billion a year out of the economy,and give it to clowns like Joe Ceci to 'invest' in non-existent, unidentifiable 'green jobs' and expect that it will eventually solve the problem

or

B) Watch as Alberta and the rest of the planet turns into a uninhabitable moonscape within the next 50 years

[chemgear]

He reminds me of the classic trope of the evangelical televangelist. Doing exactly what he's preaching other people not to do and making tons of cash off the people he's preaching to.

[Lanny's Stache]

Suzuki reminds me of a quote I came across recently:

I’ll believe it’s a crisis when the people who tell me it’s a crisis act like it’s a crisis.

[zamler]

“They’re destroying the very atmosphere that we depend on.”

Wrong David. We are all doing it, you much more than most. Grade A hypocrite arsehole.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by zamler

Wrong David. We are all doing it, you much more than most. Grade A hypocrite arsehole.

I get a sense from him that he feels his status as environmental champion somehow justifies his 'climate indulgences' more than 'regular people.' That's the only way he could possibly actually believe what he says to the degree in which he says it while also acting like he does.

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Although an extreme analogy, I'd rather have a depressed economy than a depraved, sand-bitten desert Alberta with little moisture and wildfires a common, every-day occurrence and toxic gases polluting our air.

However, I guess that's the balance - how much climate change are we willing to tolerate to be a thriving economy.

Well, there is option C. Depressed economy and a sand-bitten desert because we're already doomed or we aren't making a big enough difference.

Anyway, I got sidetracked on this type of debate yesterday, my point is we need to weigh both the social and economic impacts against the environmental impacts. We cannot deal in absolute black and white terms, I think it's more nuanced than most people understand, and that's on both sides of the aisle.

[Igottago]

First of all, I think the slavery comment was in poor form, even though I get what he was trying to say about putting morality first.

Secondly, why does everyone who bashes Suzuki bring up his home in Pt. Grey or properties, or the fact that he travels by plane?
Are environmentalists supposed to live in teepees and travel by horseback to be taken seriously?

He is like anyone else, living in the system that society has collectively created. Doesn't mean he shouldn't have an opinion on what that society can collectively change. Whether you agree with him or not is up to you, but to say he shouldn't have an opinion because he has a big house doesn't make any sense.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by T@T

I suspect after Oil isn't needed it'll be a deserted desert quick and maybe even before then.

It wasn't before the discovery of oil, why would it be after they stop taking it out of the ground? People will always require farming for sustainability and Southern Alberta is a tremendous area for providing such.

He's not near as bad down there as "the science guy" Billy Nye is he? surely a fear mongering environmental atheist isn't a good fit in the south.

"down there" wouldn't have the first clue as to who David Suzuki is, only a certain segment of Canadians are gullible enough to believe he is important enough to listen to or has any value beyond sensationalistic nonsense....or as Trudeau called it, "sanctimonious crap".

As for Bill Nye, I have no clue how popular or not he is other than he was a mainstay on PBS when I resided there.

[PaperBagger'14]

Originally Posted by 2Stonedbirds

If it wasn't for the industrialization of farming practices and irrigation, southern Alberta would be a desert.

Although the Mad Max-esque hyperbole does sound kinda fun.

Very true, if you cross the AB/Montana border at coutts, it's like 2 different worlds.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Igottago

First of all, I think the slavery comment was in poor form, even though I get what he was trying to say about putting morality first.

Secondly, why does everyone who bashes Suzuki bring up his home in Pt. Grey or properties, or the fact that he travels by plane?
Are environmentalists supposed to live in teepees and travel by horseback to be taken seriously?

He is like anyone else, living in the system that society has collectively created. Doesn't mean he shouldn't have an opinion on what that society can collectively change. Whether you agree with him or not is up to you, but to say he shouldn't have an opinion because he has a big house doesn't make any sense.

Nope.

But....when you chide entire industries for their lack of "morality" because of what their product is all the while having zero issues with decimating a provinces economy because that's where the product is found, you best do your part to make it happen His sanctimonious attitude and indeed his carbon footprint is larger than 99% of the population, yet he wags his finger at others for their behaviour.

It's like an old guy with an Export A cigarette in his mouth, yelling and screaming at other people that they shouldn't smoke.

Credibilty matters, and Suzuki has none.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Igottago

First of all, I think the slavery comment was in poor form, even though I get what he was trying to say about putting morality first.

Secondly, why does everyone who bashes Suzuki bring up his home in Pt. Grey or properties, or the fact that he travels by plane?
Are environmentalists supposed to live in teepees and travel by horseback to be taken seriously?

He is like anyone else, living in the system that society has collectively created. Doesn't mean he shouldn't have an opinion on what that society can collectively change. Whether you agree with him or not is up to you, but to say he shouldn't have an opinion because he has a big house doesn't make any sense.

He does it to excess and then preaches to the rest of the rutted populace. If he wants me to take him seriously instead of seeing him as a hypocritical capitalist, who's actually damaging the credibility of his cause, then he should lead the way.

Sell three out of four houses, don't travel by plane, don't rent a huge bus for himself only, open up his investments portfolio and show us that he's selling his shares in the petroleum industry.

But don't sit there and live the life of do as I say not as I do.

He's one of those guys with an enormous footprint of waste and then thinks that buying off sets is actually doing the world some good.

Basically he's a self entitled jerk.

[transplant99]

This is the type of guy he is.

http://fairquestions.typepad.com/ret...-suzuki-1.html

[OMG!WTF!]

I think his comment stems from the fact that all those dummies who work in the oilsands haven't set themselves up as charitable foundations so they all have to pay taxes like a bunch of stupid slaves.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by Igottago

First of all, I think the slavery comment was in poor form, even though I get what he was trying to say about putting morality first.

Secondly, why does everyone who bashes Suzuki bring up his home in Pt. Grey or properties, or the fact that he travels by plane?
Are environmentalists supposed to live in teepees and travel by horseback to be taken seriously?

He is like anyone else, living in the system that society has collectively created. Doesn't mean he shouldn't have an opinion on what that society can collectively change. Whether you agree with him or not is up to you, but to say he shouldn't have an opinion because he has a big house doesn't make any sense.

He sharply criticizes (or worse) people and governments that use and depend on oil or oil based products. What is he doing to change anything? Trying to make people feel bad is not exactly a solution.

The actual truth is our entire economy, comfort, survival, pleasure and everything else in modern society is oil based. And the only way that will change is when those industries are replaced by viable alternatives both economically and practically. At least someone like Elon Musk goes out and tries to change things instead of talking ####, I respect and admire what Musk is trying to do.

I think Suzuki is far more interested in literally selling his message than anything else.

[2Stonedbirds]

Originally Posted by T@T

I suspect after Oil isn't needed it'll be a deserted desert quick and maybe even before then.

As long as people need to eat, I doubt it.

[Frank MetaMusil]

Suzuki actually had a donation site to save Santa from his home melting. Used it on plane gas.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

Do you disagree with the premise? That something more important than economy is at stake so the defense is weak

In that it's a false dilemma, absolutely I do.

To put it another way, "something more than the economy is at stake" does not yield "considering the economy is important" as a weak defense - the conclusion doesn't follow from the premise.

So he has used a really unfortunate analogy to no good end here, and a comparison to slavery... I am not one for censoring offensive speech by any stretch but without saying he can't say that, I find his comments to be in poor taste.