𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 wasn’t the way to stop global warming.

Just some more evidence that causehead entertainers don’t know what the hell they’re doing.

Over the weekend I watched Earth to America, a celebrity-filled special on TBS about global warming. ’Twas another example that celebrities really don’t know what the hell they’re doing when it comes to big causes. They only know how to entertain, so in this special, they entertained. The song-and-dance number at the beginning of it was stupid; the stand-up comedians were funny; the actors did some announcing (except Tom Hanks, who also played guitar)… and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. came out to talk about how you, too, could get involved.

How? With a “virtual petition.” Hop on the internet and add your name to the bloody thing, and people will therefore know that you are against global warming. Even though you still drive a car that gets 12 miles per gallon, still use incandescent lights (and those ever-popular halogen torch lamps), run the heater whenever the temperature drops below 60° and the air conditioner whenever it’s above 80°. (And I won’t even talk about the overuse of Christmas lights.) Add to this that the special was taped in Las Vegas, a city that uses so much electricity that the sun becomes irrelevant. The irony wasn’t lost on a few of the comedians.

The reason it’s called a “virtual” petition is because it’s not a real one. And even real ones are worthless. Honestly, nobody cares that a lot of people have signed a petition for something… unless it actually carries political weight, like a recall petition or signatures to put a proposition on the ballot. I’ve covered many a government meeting where petitions were presented and subsequently ignored. Besides, everyone knows that talk is cheap. Internet talk is even cheaper. (Including, and perhaps especially, this blog.) So I’m not linking to it.

If celebrities actually want to do something against global warming, I would recommend a few things they could do. They have the money, so they can afford to do all these things. But they won’t, because they’re hypocrites.

1. If a Las Vegas hotel can’t show that its electrical output is decreasing every year, boycott it. Do no shows there. Don’t stay there, don’t go to events that are staged there, don’t even gamble there. And tell everyone why.
2. I don’t care that they drive expensive stretch Hummers; but they should customize every last car so that the engines get at least 45 miles per gallon. And carpool. It makes no sense to have your entourage follow in a caravan when your limo seats 12 comfortably, even in the hot tub.
3. I don’t care that they have giant houses. In fact, that makes it more effective to install solar panels on the roof. And if they get cold, wear sweaters, dangit. Bill Cosby shouldn’t be the only sweater-wearing celebrity in America.
4. Stop heating the pool. Move it indoors.
5. Stop using private planes. Part of the reason why the airline industry isn’t doing well is because too many rich people are switching to private planes. That’s the worst form of not carpooling. I don’t care if your precious schedule is inconvenienced; talk the airlines into more direct flights, and offer them more money to do it. They’ll accommodate you. (And what’s with the idiots who gave John Travolta his own personal 747?)
6. Stop using drugs. You realize how much energy it takes to produce a kilo of cocaine? And that all the money is going towards a drug lord who pollutes more than you do? (Notice how polluted their countries are.) Unless the drug lords cut down their own electrical and gas output, boycott them too.
7. Scientologists need to get audited less. E-meters use electricity, people.

Joking aside, one of the interesting bits in the special was where Triumph the Insult Comic Dog (really, Robert Smigel with a terrible French accent, with his hand up a rubber dog’s ass) interviewed a bunch of Republican congressmen who weren’t big on this global warming idea. They described it as questionable science. However, none of them being scientists, I think they perceive the difference between good science and bad science is that “good” science contributes a lot of money to their political campaigns, and “bad” science asks them to do inconvenient things without paying them to do anything. Or at least giving them a free vacation disguised as a symposium, like the pharmaceutical companies do.

Ever hear of Pascal’s Wager? It’s a bit of logic that Christians try to use on non-Christians, forgetting that humans aren’t logical:

• If God exists, and hell is for those who don’t follow him, then you should follow him.
• If God doesn’t exist, and there is no hell, then you don’t need to follow him.
• But since you don’t know for sure, it’s better to act as if God exists, since following him is a good way to live anyway. Because if you don’t, and you’re wrong, you’re going to hell.

I bring this up because I think these congressmen need a version of the Wager for global warming.

• If global warming exists, and chaos is the result of pollution, then you shouldn’t pollute.
• If global warming doesn’t exist, and there will be no chaos, then you can pollute.
• But since you don’t know for sure, it’s better to act as if it does, since not polluting is a good way to live anyway. Because if you pollute, and you’re wrong, there’s going to be chaos.

Since some of them think of themselves as Christians (which is odd, because Christians are required by God to take care of His planet) this argument might work on them. Or it might not, in which case they’ll realize how ineffective Pascal’s Wager is. It’s worth a shot.