Tuesday, June 13, 2006
A reply from Jessica and my response
Dear Uncle Mike,
I find your opinion unfortunate. I do think Gore is pushing a political agenda - an aganda to encourage more knowledge of and action on environmental issues. Many of the facts that you brought up he actually agrees with in the film. He also is more careful than you are to NOT play the democrat VS republican card. He appears to have an extremely open mind to all sides of the argument and to truly want to work towards an answer whether that is from a place of political power or his own back yard. If you only looked at the website, I do encourage you to see the film (with all political opinions aside). I appreciate your sending the blog and found much of it very informative.
I hope that just because I air on the democratic side, I don't fall into the category of little mental access to reason and reality!! That's just about as powerful as hatred. . .
hope you're well.
love, Jessica
Jessica:
I appreciate your very thoughtful response. I most certainly do not see you in any way as, "falling into the category of little mental access to reason and reality." There is no doubt in my mind that you are a deeply thinking and thoughtful person. That is, in fact, the reason I responded to your email. I value your opinion.
I do wonder about your expressions of some opinions, specifically, “I consider your opinion unfortunate.” Does any opinion that differs from your own become, “unfortunate” in your eyes? Do you see your own opinions, bolstered by a cadre of like-minded friends and family as the “best” opinions, or the only valid ones? I see opinions that differ from mine only as, “different.” But I was educated and trained in the very factual world of science and engineering where benefits and even lives depend on the factual accuracy of the written (and spoken) word. I was trained to examine carefully ALL factors and practical possibilities and as unemotionally as possible before making any judgements. Of course, engineers are subject to human error like everyone else - witness spectacular failures like the famous bridge over the Tacoma narrows - “Galloping Gertie.” Or even the sixty-year battle of differing scientific opinion over whether or not birds evolved from dinosaurs and can even be considered to be, dinosaurs.
“He also is more careful than you are to NOT play the democrat VS republican card.” Al Gore is a highly partisan, liberal Democrat politician with continuing aspirations of high office who has vehemently opposed and condemned Republicans and the Bush administration with angry rhetoric and vile accusations for years. Do you really believe there is any thinking person who does not view this film and his words through the filter of his widely reported political position? Every word he utters, every action he takes is considered with an understanding of his political position. He can hardly utter a word that is not Democrat vs Republican. It is what and who he is. I am a political nobody. Regardless of what you know of my opinions, they certainly carry no weight in the political arena. I believe your words to be evidence you have applied your own "filter" to my words. I believe you may by assuming this is the case as you have no doubt been lead to believe me to be a right wing extremist. That is, of course, an extremely erroneous assumption. If you would really like to understand my opinions, read either of John Stossel's recent books. Stossel, of 20/20, expresses my political views more accurately than almost any other person, or writer, other than Eric Hoffer. I specifically avoided any reference to “Democrat” or “Republican” in my blog except for the factual reporting in the following from my blog:
“My very practical solution could be fully implemented in as little as ten years and with substantial benefits to both the environment and our economy. It would mean ALL our energy sources would be generated within the US with no need for foreign oil. I have sent letters and copies of my book to members of Congress, State officials, environmental groups and a few energy intensive corporations. I have been interviewed about my book on the radio in Florida. The book is completely non-political in its presentation. I have received no response from any environmental group. I had a very unresponsive and totally self serving response from one Hydrogen fuel cell organization. I received two favorable responses from Republican members of Congress and have since been following up and answering their questions. I received no response from any Democrat. I received responses and requests for further information from all but one of the energy corporations I contacted. I received a phone call and an inquiry from an official of the Chinese Communist government. What conclusions would you draw from this about who is truly concerned about global warming and is willing to do something about it?”
Does my question at the end make this a Democrat vs Republican piece? I certainly think not.
I do outline what I see as a significant difference between the left and right in our country. Is this the reason you see it as Dems vs Reps? Is the following not factually accurate?
“The only difference I have noted between left and right in America is that at this time the left has reached a level of expressions of hatred I have not seen in either side in my lifetime. Hatred is a powerful force and it is currently being ratcheted up to monumental proportions. I have even felt such hatred from members of my own family in responses to some of my writings. I credit a combination of that hatred with lack of communication skills and intolerance of differing opinions for these angry reactions. To the best of my abilities, I will not respond in kind.“
In fact, I specifically pointed out, with quite equal condemnation for all, those I see as driven by the lust for power as outlined in this quote from my blog:
“I see virtually no one - in politics on either side of the aisle, on college campuses, in churches, in corporations, in the media, in fact in any positions of power - who are not willing to sacrifice the earth and all that lives on it to satisfy their own greed and lust for power. Apparently, not only does power corrupt, but the mere lust for power brings about the same corruption.”
Finally, and this part struck such a very sensitive nerve that I responded specifically and apolitically: I quote from the website:
“More than a million species worldwide could be driven to extinction by 2050.There is no doubt we can solve this problem. In fact, we have a moral obligation to do so. Small changes to your daily routine can add up to big differences in helping to stop global warming. The time to come together to solve this problem is now – (end of web page)”
My response: “Correct observation! Very wrong conclusion! Extinction of species is certainly a worldwide reality of monumental proportions and devastating effects. However, global warming will have virtually no effect on this tragedy. Expansion of human population and resultant destruction of wild habitat is totally responsible for all but a tiny fraction of a percentage of these unbelievably rapid extinctions. That is the real human crime against all nature - wild plants and animals. This is the true human crisis. How about addressing that?”
I have given lectures on this subject to numerous and varied groups. I have always received the same response summed up by a Chicago radio station that refused to discuss the subject with me on the air. Their reason? “No one wants to hear about these kinds of real, unsolvable problems, let alone talk about them,” a very destructive assumption. This problem and those like it will always be ignored by most. I have rarely met a person willing to discuss it rationally. I have a blog with the text of part that lecture if you care to read it. It has not been given or updated for several years so parts may need to be brought up to present knowledge, but basically it is dead on. Click on http://decimatenviro.blogspot.com to read the first section of my lecture. Should you want to read the entire text, let me know and I will mail it to you. I see this problem as infinitely more important than global warming and certainly more damaging for the earth and all of its life.
Affectionately,
Uncle Mike ¶ 8:28 AM
I find your opinion unfortunate. I do think Gore is pushing a political agenda - an aganda to encourage more knowledge of and action on environmental issues. Many of the facts that you brought up he actually agrees with in the film. He also is more careful than you are to NOT play the democrat VS republican card. He appears to have an extremely open mind to all sides of the argument and to truly want to work towards an answer whether that is from a place of political power or his own back yard. If you only looked at the website, I do encourage you to see the film (with all political opinions aside). I appreciate your sending the blog and found much of it very informative.
I hope that just because I air on the democratic side, I don't fall into the category of little mental access to reason and reality!! That's just about as powerful as hatred. . .
hope you're well.
love, Jessica
Jessica:
I appreciate your very thoughtful response. I most certainly do not see you in any way as, "falling into the category of little mental access to reason and reality." There is no doubt in my mind that you are a deeply thinking and thoughtful person. That is, in fact, the reason I responded to your email. I value your opinion.
I do wonder about your expressions of some opinions, specifically, “I consider your opinion unfortunate.” Does any opinion that differs from your own become, “unfortunate” in your eyes? Do you see your own opinions, bolstered by a cadre of like-minded friends and family as the “best” opinions, or the only valid ones? I see opinions that differ from mine only as, “different.” But I was educated and trained in the very factual world of science and engineering where benefits and even lives depend on the factual accuracy of the written (and spoken) word. I was trained to examine carefully ALL factors and practical possibilities and as unemotionally as possible before making any judgements. Of course, engineers are subject to human error like everyone else - witness spectacular failures like the famous bridge over the Tacoma narrows - “Galloping Gertie.” Or even the sixty-year battle of differing scientific opinion over whether or not birds evolved from dinosaurs and can even be considered to be, dinosaurs.
“He also is more careful than you are to NOT play the democrat VS republican card.” Al Gore is a highly partisan, liberal Democrat politician with continuing aspirations of high office who has vehemently opposed and condemned Republicans and the Bush administration with angry rhetoric and vile accusations for years. Do you really believe there is any thinking person who does not view this film and his words through the filter of his widely reported political position? Every word he utters, every action he takes is considered with an understanding of his political position. He can hardly utter a word that is not Democrat vs Republican. It is what and who he is. I am a political nobody. Regardless of what you know of my opinions, they certainly carry no weight in the political arena. I believe your words to be evidence you have applied your own "filter" to my words. I believe you may by assuming this is the case as you have no doubt been lead to believe me to be a right wing extremist. That is, of course, an extremely erroneous assumption. If you would really like to understand my opinions, read either of John Stossel's recent books. Stossel, of 20/20, expresses my political views more accurately than almost any other person, or writer, other than Eric Hoffer. I specifically avoided any reference to “Democrat” or “Republican” in my blog except for the factual reporting in the following from my blog:
“My very practical solution could be fully implemented in as little as ten years and with substantial benefits to both the environment and our economy. It would mean ALL our energy sources would be generated within the US with no need for foreign oil. I have sent letters and copies of my book to members of Congress, State officials, environmental groups and a few energy intensive corporations. I have been interviewed about my book on the radio in Florida. The book is completely non-political in its presentation. I have received no response from any environmental group. I had a very unresponsive and totally self serving response from one Hydrogen fuel cell organization. I received two favorable responses from Republican members of Congress and have since been following up and answering their questions. I received no response from any Democrat. I received responses and requests for further information from all but one of the energy corporations I contacted. I received a phone call and an inquiry from an official of the Chinese Communist government. What conclusions would you draw from this about who is truly concerned about global warming and is willing to do something about it?”
Does my question at the end make this a Democrat vs Republican piece? I certainly think not.
I do outline what I see as a significant difference between the left and right in our country. Is this the reason you see it as Dems vs Reps? Is the following not factually accurate?
“The only difference I have noted between left and right in America is that at this time the left has reached a level of expressions of hatred I have not seen in either side in my lifetime. Hatred is a powerful force and it is currently being ratcheted up to monumental proportions. I have even felt such hatred from members of my own family in responses to some of my writings. I credit a combination of that hatred with lack of communication skills and intolerance of differing opinions for these angry reactions. To the best of my abilities, I will not respond in kind.“
In fact, I specifically pointed out, with quite equal condemnation for all, those I see as driven by the lust for power as outlined in this quote from my blog:
“I see virtually no one - in politics on either side of the aisle, on college campuses, in churches, in corporations, in the media, in fact in any positions of power - who are not willing to sacrifice the earth and all that lives on it to satisfy their own greed and lust for power. Apparently, not only does power corrupt, but the mere lust for power brings about the same corruption.”
Finally, and this part struck such a very sensitive nerve that I responded specifically and apolitically: I quote from the website:
“More than a million species worldwide could be driven to extinction by 2050.There is no doubt we can solve this problem. In fact, we have a moral obligation to do so. Small changes to your daily routine can add up to big differences in helping to stop global warming. The time to come together to solve this problem is now – (end of web page)”
My response: “Correct observation! Very wrong conclusion! Extinction of species is certainly a worldwide reality of monumental proportions and devastating effects. However, global warming will have virtually no effect on this tragedy. Expansion of human population and resultant destruction of wild habitat is totally responsible for all but a tiny fraction of a percentage of these unbelievably rapid extinctions. That is the real human crime against all nature - wild plants and animals. This is the true human crisis. How about addressing that?”
I have given lectures on this subject to numerous and varied groups. I have always received the same response summed up by a Chicago radio station that refused to discuss the subject with me on the air. Their reason? “No one wants to hear about these kinds of real, unsolvable problems, let alone talk about them,” a very destructive assumption. This problem and those like it will always be ignored by most. I have rarely met a person willing to discuss it rationally. I have a blog with the text of part that lecture if you care to read it. It has not been given or updated for several years so parts may need to be brought up to present knowledge, but basically it is dead on. Click on http://decimatenviro.blogspot.com to read the first section of my lecture. Should you want to read the entire text, let me know and I will mail it to you. I see this problem as infinitely more important than global warming and certainly more damaging for the earth and all of its life.
Affectionately,
Uncle Mike ¶ 8:28 AM
