[pf] Why do people believe these guys? US President & Vice-President.

· I've finally been able to get onto this computer again, to start my May
environmental news compilation (previous one:
http://davd.tripod.com/GrRR-010430_titles.html#top ).

{· And by the way, one of our two hard-drives is screaming this (cold)
morning, and since the computer isn't mine, I'll mention the "about to
fail" symptom to wife and son, once, and leave it to them to do something
about. I may be off-line for some days if it actually fails before they
replace it.}


· This e-mail is about a couple of paragraphs at the end of one of those
early-May news reports:
http://ens.lycos.com/ens/may2001/2001L-05-03-04.html .

· The article says:
  “Vice President Dick Cheney, a former oil company executive who heads the
energy team, said earlier this week that the country cannot rely on
conservation and renewable energy to feed its energy needs. 
  "What the Vice President and I understand," Bush said today, "is that you
cannot conserve your way to energy independence. We can do a better job in
conservation, but we darn sure have to do a better job of finding more
supply. It is naive for the American people and its - and those who purport
to speak for the American people, some of those - to say that we can be
okay from an energy perspective by only focusing on conservation. We've got
to find additional supplies of energy."”

· Many of you reading this (and I include those who don't post) will
believe that those are the only two options.

· If it wasn't that I guess Bush actually believes what I quote him as
saying, I would call this another example of:

 . . . . . . The Big Lie.

· That is, influential people repeating a statement often enough that
"everyone" accepts its truth.

· It simply _isn't_true_.

· _Constant_ energy supply (_no_ "additional supplies of energy") is
certainly an option, while the population changes little.
  And IMO, the obvious option, given how much interference with the world
energy supply creates currently.

· Further, _I_ have the "radical" belief that the US _reducing_ its energy
supply from its current highly excessive amount is necessary for an
approach to a sustainable future. (I gave the URL of a graph illustrating
how excessive it is, e.g. in comparison with Europe, some time ago.)


· Where do Americans get the idea that their way of life has to continue;
using more and more of just about everything?

· We all, Americans as well, live on a round globe; we know most of what
there is here on earth. It's obvious to _everyone_ that there are limits,
and if the US wants more and more, it means (later if not right now), that
other people and other living things are trying to make do with less and less.

· There are only a few cases, mainly energy, where more and more is
possible, but that's _only_ by using the huge amount of _solar_ energy
arriving free at the earth's surface. There are limits to that, but they
are a very long way off compared with almost everything else that
Americans, like babies, want more and more of.

· Too bad if you're offended - it has to be said.

David.
(David MacClement) davd@ihug.co.nz 
http://www.geocities.com/davd.geo/index.html#top
************************************************

==^================================================================
EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://igc.topica.com/u/?aVxifP.aVx3Cb
Or send an email To: positive-futures-unsubscribe@igc.topica.com
This email was sent to: archive+pfvs@csf.colorado.edu

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================