Fight global warming by eating kangaroos?
Saving the planet
Well, top scientists have come to our rescue yet again. Ever since Al Gore began spewing gas about the planet being in peril, top scientists have pushed the fight against global warming to the top of the priority list for politicians and media alike. These white-coated clipboard-holding smart guys (and girls) have maintained a consistent fear report about the coming doom for mankind, to which they add ever-evolving outlandish ideas of how to stave it off or avert it altogether.
The most consistent message is we’re all to fight global warming (a.k.a climate change) by changing our habits. We can car pool, cut off our lights, recycle and buy more fuel efficient cars. We can turn down our heaters and wrap in warm blankets in the winter and run around naked in the summer.
There’s lots we can do, top scientists, politicians and media claim. But today’s report from Australia’s top environmental scientist, Professer Ross Garnaut takes the prize for most ingenuity.
Apparently, Garnaut and his consortium of Top Scientists agree that we should eat camels and kangaroos to help fight global warming. Mmmm … tasty.
By slaughtering the hump-backed creatures and reducing the numbers of those wild Australian over-sized rabbits (a.k.a. kangaroos), we can fill our bellies and fight global warming at the same time, Top Scientists say.
Who can argue with Top Scientists?
Farm Feast: A gassy enterprise
Top Scientists also add that we need to reduce farm animals, like cows and sheep by the millions because all they do all day long is toot and burp (fart and belch for those of you who prefer the crude version). By eating those crude creatures, we will substantially reduce the tooting and burping on the planet (since most of us toot and burp less than these animals, presumably). Of course, that would help to resolve the world hunger problem too. We can herd up loads of camels, kangaroos, cows and sheep and ship them to places where folks are starving. The money we spend to transport the beasts can be perceived as an investment in saving the planet.
Military Munitions
Now, I’m no Top Scientist. Still, I can’t help but wonder if dropping hundred of thousands of tons of munitions (a.k.a. bio hazards) on top of people poses a problem in the fight against global warming? Does launching missiles by the thousands have any adverse impact on the environment? I can’t really know since I’m not an expert, and apparently the experts are far more concerned that I try kangaroo on a stick.
I wonder about all of the millions of miles traveled by our military through the air, on land and at sea … and if all that traveling might use fossil fuels, though I’m not in every tank, plane or ship so I can’t produce the data. But my guess is that the average person with a grasp of elementary arithmetic might conclude that all of the SUVs on the road combined fail to produce as much damage to the environment in a year than the military does in a week.
Yet, not one politician, including Mr. Gore himself, has ever suggested that we stop building and flying massive warplanes, stop dropping massive bombs and basically eliminate the enormous negative impact our military is making on the environment (um, not to mention the carnage caused to people whose top priority is eliminating heat-seeking missiles rather than gradually increasing global temperatures). Top Scientists have failed to warn us of the enormous contributions our military makes each day to the load of greenhouse gases they insist are the cause of the rapidly heating Earth.
Top Scientists
If only Top Scientists were Top Reporters, there might be at least one journalist willing to produce a report that provided insight into which industries produce the most greenhouse gases. If Top Scientists were Top Politicians, maybe one would get elected president and recognize that starting wars based upon false pretenses, deceit and ulterior motives could cause damage to the environment. (It’s obvious that no one cares that such decisions create orphans and widows by the thousands … and corpses).
I wonder if Top Scientists know about the enormous amount of fossil fuels the military uses and the resulting greenhouse gases it expels each year? Top Scientists sure seem to be worried that I consume more camel and kangaroo to save the Earth. Of course, if I do my part, then Top Scientists might turn their attention to lower priorities on their list … like asking the military to try and cut back on the bomb-dropping by 10 percent over the next 10 years.
If we got really creative, we could just feed our military service members all the camel and kangaroo meat they could eat! Now, that’s killing two animals with one idea (from a Top Scientist, of course).
Stop Traveling and Save Mother Earthball!
Like the military, the transportation industry gets a pass too from Top Scientists, Top Politicians and Top Reporters. And while the transportation industry, oil, utility companies and military all together contribute more greenhouse gases in a single year than you, me and everyone we know will ever contribute in our lifetimes, the focus is on us changing the way we live while the military can continue to contaminate water, land and air resources at will. The transportation industry, NASA and the oil and utility companies can all just keep doing their thing while you and me huddle under blankets to save the planet.
I shouldn’t be too cynical, though. By refusing to ride planes, train or automobiles anywhere, we could all grind the entire transportation industry to a halt. Truckers could tell corporate agriculture farmers to sell their wares locally and that would eliminate a ton of trucks running across the nation.
And by killing our transportation industry, we can help save the planet. Brilliant!
But I haven’t heard the Top Politicians and Top Scientists calling for the elimination of airlines, trains, trucks and the travel industry. Isn’t that an obvious choice over asking me to buy an over-priced hybrid after I lose my house to government mortgage fraud and get laid off by a massive down-sizing of all industries? I suppose with lots of time on my hands I could join the military and be assured of three square meals a day … with as much camel and kangaroo meat I can stomach.
Of course, if the military continues to kill people, who will be around to eat all the camels and kangaroos that are being served up by Top Scientists?
Ultimate Solution: Declare War on Global Warming
Perhaps if we just declared war on global warming and made it a phantom terrorist, we could narrow down all those folks who weren’t complying with the war on global warming and cut off their electricity, take away their SUVs (replace them with tricycles) and force-feed them camel burgers until they puke.
We have to be sure that everyone has their priorities straight, right? After all, who can argue with Top Scientists, Top Politicians and Top Media fear mongers?
Not me.
Posted on January 4th, 2009 by MikeGreen
Filed under: Truth about the economy
Better still as Kangaroos are actually shot in the paddocks at nite rather than trucked to a slaughterhouse ( more humane less stress) you could just send your troops over here and they can shoot Kangaroos.
with a people population of only 20 Million and 200 Million Kangaroos we are going to need some help. Seriously though Kangaroo meat is excellent both for the environment and your health. A lot of athletes and bodybuilders use it to lose weight and build muscle you can read about it at http://www.naturoo.com.au
+ We should be more concerned about Global Warming and Climate Change because Typhoons are getting much stronger and there are greater incidence of Flooding. take for example the recent Typhoon Ketsana which devastated some countries in South East Asia.
Kangaroo taste like a high quality beef. I think Jack-in-the-box got in trouble once for selling it as beef. Tasty stuff.
The effects of Global Warming is getting much stronger these days. We should concentrate more on alternative energy to reduce carbon emissions.