Missing System Tray (Notification Area) Icons in Windows Vista Morris Iemma

Live Earth in Seven Continents?

July 7th, 2007 at 05:12pm

It has been interesting this afternoon noticing that virtually the entire media has commented that the Live Earth series of continents are being held in seven continents concerts…but, that can’t be right…let’s list the continents.

1. Australia
2. Asia
3. Europe
4. Africa
5. North America
6. South America
7. Antarctica

And the Live Earth concerts are taking place in:
New York (North America)
London (Europe)
Sydney (Australia)
Rio de Janeiro (South America)
Tokyo (Asia)
Shanghai (Asia)
Johannesburg (Africa)
Hamburg (Europe)

Update: Mick has pointed out in the comments below that there will be a pre-recorded concert in Antartica…I stand corrected, but I still think the whole thing is a gigantic waste of time…probably great for the fans of the bands which are playing at the concerts though. End Update

All the continents except for Antarctica…so it’s only happening in six continents. That then brings me to the question of who is the source of this erroneous seven continents figure…with this many media outlets using the line, it almost has to be the publicist, and the Live Earth website confirms it:

Live Earth is a 24-hour, 7-continent concert series taking place on 7/7/07 that will bring together more than 100 music artists and 2 billion people to trigger a global movement to solve the climate crisis.

I can’t say that I’m entirely surprised that Al Gore is using inflated figures to promote this series of concerts to promote a questionable cause (and if carbon emissions really are to blame for climate change…how much more than usual is this concert series producing?).

Further Update: Mick also points out that the concerts are apparently carbon neutral. Someone must be making an awful lot of money selling those carbon credits! End Update

I, for one, am enjoying the cold and the rain!

Samuel

Entry Filed under: General News,Samuel's Editorials

Print This Post Print This Post

20 Comments

  • 1. mick  |  July 7th, 2007 at 5:44 pm

    All 7 continents are having concerts Samuel.

    Read this -> http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22026604-23109,00.html

    Also, every concert will be carbon neutral, and the point Al Gore makes is what would people be doing other than attending a carbon neutral concert?

    It’s a huge event and I think it’s fantastic. Just wish I was there.

  • 2. Samuel  |  July 7th, 2007 at 6:07 pm

    Thanks Mick, I’ve posted a couple corrections.

    I still think it’s a giant waste of time, but I suppose you wouldn’t have expected anything less from me, after all I don’t believe humans are the main, or even much of a, contributing factor to the change in climate.

    “The Earth’s climate is always changing”.

  • 3. donescobar  |  July 7th, 2007 at 6:17 pm

    Typo in the first paragraph Sam.

    It should read “the live earth series of concerts”, not “series of continents”.

  • 4. John999555  |  July 7th, 2007 at 6:41 pm

    I shan’t be watching it.

  • 5. Samuel  |  July 7th, 2007 at 6:55 pm

    Thanks donescobar.

    Neither will I John.

  • 6. Frankster  |  July 7th, 2007 at 8:29 pm

    For anyone who’s getting it down on their Foxtel IQ, it’s gonna take 40% of your disk space. Fact! 🙂

  • 7. John999555  |  July 7th, 2007 at 10:31 pm

    And let’s keep in mind that it’s carbon DIOXIDE that needs to be reduced …… not carbon per se.

    If the aim is “zero carbon”, then we would need to remove ourselves from the scene, as all life on earth is carbon based.

  • 8. Samuel  |  July 7th, 2007 at 10:41 pm

    On the subject of Carbon verse Carbon Dioxide, I can honestly plead guilty to the rather silly act of deliberately abbreviating Carbon Dioxide to “Carbon” when writing about it.

    It doesn’t change my opinion on the reasons behind the changing climate though.

  • 9. Samuel  |  July 7th, 2007 at 10:42 pm

    Incidentally, welcome back John.

  • 10. donescobar  |  July 8th, 2007 at 12:45 am

    No boys, its not just carbon dioxide.

    Its carbon monoxide and clorofluorocarbons as well.

    This is why the term “carbon neutral” is used.

  • 11. John_Barnes  |  July 8th, 2007 at 8:55 am

    It’s interesting to note that the biggest offender of the so-called “Greenhouse Gases” is Methane, a ‘non carbon’ emission.

    Methane stands accused of causing more “global warming” than carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, and hydrocarbon emissions.

  • 12. albona  |  July 8th, 2007 at 9:19 am

    Here’s a few interesting stories…http://www.tennesseepolicy.org/main/article.php?article_id=367
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/28/AR2007022801823.html
    http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/house.asp

  • 13. Clayton Northcutt  |  July 8th, 2007 at 1:24 pm

    If the climate is always changing Samuel, you’re saying we should do nothing, even if we have the power to change where it is going to a more suitable and livable state?

  • 14. Pen 15  |  July 8th, 2007 at 1:48 pm

    I’m guilty of abbreviating “Carbon Dioxide” too. I shorten it to “crbn”

  • 15. Samuel  |  July 8th, 2007 at 2:29 pm

    Clayton, we don’t have the power to change the climate, and if we did, wouldn’t exercising that power be exactly what you are trying to stop? Human interference with Earth’s climate.

    I’m not against cutting down on pollution, because I agree that the world would be better with less pollution, but forcing draconian and economically irresponsible cuts to pollution under the false pretence of preventing the planet from getting warmer, is downright ludicrous.

  • 16. Samuel  |  July 8th, 2007 at 2:33 pm

    It’s interesting to note that the biggest offender of the so-called “Greenhouse Gases” is Methane, a ‘non carbon’ emission.

    Clearly it is easier for the alarmists like Al Gore to blame modern industry than to accept that all of the wildlife should take the majority of the blame for emitting all of that methane.

    Accepting that, would mean accepting that global warming is a natural phenomena.

  • 17. John_Barnes  |  July 8th, 2007 at 3:01 pm

    From Wikipedia –
    “Significant quantities of methane are also produced
    by cattle — not by flatulence, as is commonly
    believed, but 95% through belching. The livestock
    sector in general (primarily cattle, chickens, and
    pigs) produces 37% of all human-induced methane”.

    Something needs to be done about belching animals !

  • 18. Pen 15  |  July 8th, 2007 at 11:48 pm

    I say we eat them all!

  • 19. donescobar  |  July 9th, 2007 at 3:37 pm

    It’s interesting to note that the biggest offender of the so-called “Greenhouse Gases” is Methane, a ‘non carbon’ emission.

    Methane stands accused of causing more “global warming” than carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, and hydrocarbon emissions.

    Er, John. Methane IS a carbon emission, and it IS a hydrocarbon. In fact its two constituent elements are hydrogen and carbon.

    In fact, methane, at 75% carbon by mass, has almost three times more carbon than carbon dioxide which has just 27% carbon by mass.

    Comments like John’s exemplify why its so important to educate ignorant people about climate change.

  • 20. John_Barnes  |  July 9th, 2007 at 4:47 pm

    Non-carbon emission means non-carbon dioxide emission.


Calendar

July 2007
S M T W T F S
« Jun   Aug »
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031  

Most Recent Posts

Search Blog or Web

Login/Logout

Ads By Google


Blix Theme by Sebastian Schmieg and modified for Samuel's Blog by Samuel Gordon-Stewart.
Printing CSS with the help of Martin Pot's guide to Web Page Printability With CSS.
Icons by Kevin Potts.
Powered by WordPress.
Log in