Environmentalists are fucking liars or Al Gore Shut the hell up

I was just thinking back over the last twenty years of Environmental doomsday predications and it occurred to me...

Every five years we have another glamorous cause supported by media and celebrity that disappears when the new cause comes along. It begs the question, did we fix the problem so we were able to move on? OR was the problem so overblown that Environmentalists were proven liars and we had to find a new cause?

Personally I think it is a column A and a column B situation. Environmentalists, like everyone else, have an agenda and lie to get their point heard.

Let's recap shall we, I don't know where to start exactly for reasons of a faded memory, but let's say that 20 years ago industrial smoke stack pollution was going to ruin us first. The government of Ontario and Canada passed regulations requiring scrubbers on smoke stacks to remove large percentages of the pollutants. GREAT news, it worked - that is what we will put in column A, legitimate pressure brought about change and things got better.

But to add something to column B, at the same time (roughly) we were told the real issue was acid rain. Remember acid rain? It was going to burn the trees and eventually water would fall from the sky and burn your skin. That is why this is a B, the alarmists told us this tale and then within ten years the issue disappeared. Is it over? I have no fucking clue because nobody talks about it anymore.

Then we were told that CFC's were going to kill us all. In truth I think it was kids huffing cans of Pam that brought an end to CFC's, but let's say for arguments sake that it was a "hole in the ozone issue". Fuck the rain in the sky, the atmosphere is literally disappearing.

Okay so on this issue we have a column A and a big, fucking huge column B issue.

Column A gets the end to harmful CFC's and wasteful Styrofoam etc, but this all hinged on this "hole in the ozone theory". You remember back until say 1992, every year they told us fucking daily about a hole in the ozone. It's bigger, it's moving, and to quote a Jean Claude VanDam movie “oh my god there are two of them”, etc. Well that was blamed at least in part on CFC's. Every time we broke up a Styrofoam cup we made the hole bigger, Remember? That is how they brought the point home, it was your fault coffee drinker. Inn addition to all that we all had to change our air conditioners and fridges etc. CFC free was on everything we bought.

The issue was so heated, particularly the Styrofoam problem, that McDonald’s stopped using Styrofoam packaging. The issue actually cost the world a sandwich - The McDLT - hot side hot, cold side cold deal. This was "THE" issue, THE FUCKING OZONE HOLE.

Then guess what, surprise surprise, the issue disappeared. Did we solve it? No not really, but one year, for reasons nobody properly explained, the ozone hole disappeared. Seriously, it went away. At the time scientists told us that this was a normal occurrence that has probably happened before we were ever aware of the problem, but that we shouldn't be overconfident because it could come back just as easily as it left.

So what's the status? How the fuck should I know? Like everything else once it isn't a hot issue people stop talking about it. So scientists and environmentalists are as guilty if not more so of dropping the ball on this one because they scared us shittless, the thing disappeared and then boom they never talked about it again.

Note: There is something called credibility you scientists and environmentalists. Creditability, now I remember, speaking of, Sting, yeah the guy from the police.

It isn't all Stings fault, Bruce Cockburn is guilty too, but these two douche bags scared us on a nightly basis with a commercial that told us the worlds "lungs" were being burned and cut down at a rate on an acre a second or something and that by 2010 the Amazon rainforest would be gone.

This unfortunately is a Column A and B, I wish it was just a B, but world financial institutions and foreign governments puts enormous pressure on the government of Brazil to stop burning the rain forests and they did so that was a big win, except for the fact that the environmentalists were lying.

The picture of current destruction that Sting was holding up to show us what had already been done was a fabrication. There were arguments about the size of the lie, but it was basically agreed that that was a very liberal forecast of a 20 year projection. Not what the Amazon looked like today. The 2010 image was even worse. It was as though cartoon villains ruled the world. Even if they did the situation might reach one tenth of that in 20 years. They lied and lied on their lies and got caught.

So yeah, the lobbying stopped the problem, but you could argue that Brazil just burnt that fucker down to get money, so really they win, the environmentalists lied and the earth still has its lungs.

At the same time as Sting is using his fame to lie, Cockburn is singing the highly forgettable "if a tree falls in the forest" because it was cool to sing environmental bullshit and trees were HOT. Clear cutting and the death of old growth forests were on everybody’s lips. Remember when the famous Black forest (yes like the cake, thick and dense) was dying and we all had to save it? Probably not because well it’s fine now. Trees today, how are they faring? Who fucking knows, nobody talks about it. A minor column A point could be the increase in urban green space. IF nothing else our "Tree" period got us nicer parks in urban settings so that works for all of us.

But these fuckers lied and took your money for legal action in a situation where there was in fact no longer a problem. Especially not the problem they were advertising.

So we went through the acid rain, the CFC's, the Ozone hole and the collapse of the world's key forests, where were we off to next? Oil spills. That's right, remember those? Every fucking week someone ran a tanker into something and ruined the world. What happened, don't they do that anymore, or is it an issue that we are upset not because of the environment effects, but the fact that some idiot wasted a perfectly good tanker of oil? Truthfully, the effected areas that they told us “would be ruined forever” have recovered despite the fact that most of them are still covered in oil. What does that mean? I have no idea, but it makes apocalyptic statements about oil spills pretty hard to sell when we go to Alaska and see otters happily swimming beside an oily rock.

Today's issue is in development right now and the message just isn't getting through the way it once did but let's follow the progress. We can start with the dreaded UV index, basically the sun is now burning us to death. Problem is when I was 6 in 1979, I got the worst sunburn of my life. 10 years later a friend of mine got 2nd degree burns working an air show. So yeah I guess people get sunburns but what was true in 79 was true in 89, and is truer still today. You stay out in the sun all day long with no shirt and your ass is going to get burned. I recovered, I never did it again and I like to think it has more to do with judgement and experience than what some idiot tells me is environment Canada’s definition of a bright and sunny day. Now I haven't had a bad burn in years, but the UV index is suddenly a factor in my daily life.

At least I know that the sun is bad right, except that we have just been told that unprotected exposure to the sun is good for you. So that story is total bullshit too. Facts are simple, if you stay outside in the sun for too long you are going to get burned. The speed and severity depend on the person. Trust me when I say my pail English skin burnt just as easily in the 1970's as it does today I ain't lying, and when I say my friends skin with its sun enhanced Indian blood red tone is dark and ample with limited exposure to the sun, I ain't lying. He just doesn't burn, it's genetic, not exposure related. I burn, he doesn't, no fucking UV index is going to change that. This is just another fear mongering tool for assholes to sell the bigger issue.

Today's flavour is "Global Warming"

Being in Canada, this is the hardest sell the world has ever seen. Let it get warmer, I don't give a fuck, I am going to burn anyway. The bigger/real problem is that it is happening and there is really no viable solution. I say viable because the West is not a corrective solution anymore. With the economies of China on India coming on line, it doesn't matter a lick what we do because these two countries burn cow shit and coal for heat and can't wait to buy a car. In other words, we fucked the environment up and now have no power when it comes to not letting them fuck it up worse. Why? I need Chinese manufacturing more than I need cold winters.

The other big sell issue is that they say it is a big issue today, but when we talk about climactic change nobody can deny that it happens regardless of what we do. Do we speed it up or affect it? Maybe, but listen carefully to the news when they say that today is the hottest day on record because they will also say "breaking the old mark set in 1952". So what does that mean? We broke a 50 year old record by .5 degrees and we are all supposed to stop driving our cars?

I am not going to question the validity of global warming or its partner the polar ice caps, or the currents or the jet stream because I don't know anything about it, or care really. This is an old joke but a good one. The earth’s temperature has risen by 2 degrees since 1900 and they expect it to climb another 1 degree in the next 100 years. Who fucking cares, this is an issue I can solve by rolling up my sleeves or taking off my sweater, I'll adapt

That is the real hard sell. It is not a noticeable difference and I will be dead before it goes up half a degree. They try and link it, although it is not possible to do so, to major environmental catastrophes in the last ten years, except, those fucking things always happen. People right books about bad tornado seasons, or tidal waves or mudslides etc. The great storm of 58, or the flood of 31 these are the stories that our current stories will become in 50 years. These things are not new and a percentage increase in their frequency is not a reason to set off an alarm. The problem?

They do it anyway, so while they push the latest issue, I look for answers on the topics they’ve already dropped. They achieve nothing real except for scaring the shit out of us and then they just walk away. A week later they reappear and tell us to be scared of something else.

Fuck off, I am driving to the cottage to use my 100hp bass boat on my dying lake. Then I am going to use a charcoal grill with lots of lighter fluid, eat off Styrofoam plates and remember to good old days when it was too cold to swim in late august.

Point being. Leave us alone, when it's bad enough, we'll all notice. We won’t need some Poindexter to tell us that there is a problem.

Why people should get fired

I just heard a story about a guy who told one of his employees who was wearing jeans to work on Casual Friday that he quote:

"Just set his career back 3 months."

Fair enough I guess, take your holidays, burn the summer and you're right back on track career wise. I won't say where, who, or what about the idiot that said it because I don't want the people of France to fire me. More importantly that is not what I am writing about. I just want to say that if your boss judges you soley by you Friday attire, find another job.

I was watching TV and a nameless morning show went through a summer work wardrobe series for guys and girls to help you avoid looking unprofessional. Again, I have never been rich enough or cared enough to worry too much about my attire. I don't dress like a bum, but nobody will ever mistake me for being Italian (fancy cloths reference).

So while watching this show I tied it to the "jeans setting back your career" comment, I thought about what I would fire someone for, other than the obvious laziness and incompetence which is apparently forgivable as long as you don't wear jeans. Put your money where your mouth is, I said to myself, why would you can someone for non-performance related reasons?

I have already written about bathroom behaviour and I will stand by those statements. Certain behaviour in there should get you canned...sorry, but as for my number one reason to fire someone not related to performance (as dress code is never related to performance, in fact the better they dress the lazier they are guaranteed. They believe looking the part is sufficient.)

Elevator usage.

That was out of nowhere, but I promise it is going somewhere.

I would fire anyone who got onto a full elevator on the ground floor and pressed 2.

I am not kidding. Show up to work in a bathing suit for all I care. Don't join in on things, do your job and go home. Perfect. But if you get onto an elevator after someone, don't even ask what I would do if I held the door for someone who did this, and press the second floor, I will pass you a pink slip.

I think you could pretty much draw ever conclusion necessary from that simple action to figure out that that person is not the employee you need.

A) They are lazy.

This is a fact. Most of the time, in all well designed buildings, you have to walk past the stairs to get to the elevator. Basically, the walking you do to get to the elevator is on par with the effort required to walk up twenty steps, but this is where laziness comes into play. These people genuinely don't want to put in the effort. That should speak volumes about what they are going to bring to the table in a work setting.

B) They are wasting the time of everyone in the building.

You are going to be trapped in that elevator for an extra 30 seconds to a minute because of that asshole. That is every day, 250 days a year, call it 30 seconds per day, 125 minutes annually, rounded down to 2 hours per person every year that fucker burns.

C) This is just a symptom of something else

This is a much more general point, but "Generally" speaking these people smoke, or over eat or have health issues related to their laziness. They are wasting time and lazy, but they are also more than likely abusing sick leave, or killing an hour everyday smoking in front of your office.

So to me it is simple, fuck wardrobe, fire people who use the elevator to go up or down one flight. You want to set your career back three months with me? Press 2.

A ramble about Hip Saturday nights

To quote a fine Canadian band:

"It's not the band I hate it's their fans"

Just saw a Tragically hip show on Saturday in St.Adele, Quebec. I love the band, still do, always will. It isn't blind love though, the shows aren't as good as they use to be, some of that is lost hype, but the rest is just that the shows aren't as good. Saturday night the badn was awesome, but Gordie was a bit weak. A big problem is when the Hip hit their heights "Trouble at the hen house"(Arena tours, back to back sold out nights, headlining festivals, Satrurday Night Live etc.) Gord Downie picked up a guitar. Why, I will never know, but this much is sure, as soon as he straps on the acoustic the song they are about to play is going to be a waste of you time. The man has a imagine (dancing fool, poet, lunatic) and the guitar destoys it, it tames him for no reason because I defy you to hear him playing it at any point during a show. Oh it's in his arms, but you WILL NOT hear his stringed contribution. I doubt the thing is even plugged in. The band already has 2 guitarists, who thought giving him one was a good idea?

I am totally off topic.

Disregard the problems, I love seeing the hip live, but I fucking hate their fans. Apart from literally hating everybody regardless of situation, I actually dipise these people. Saturday night I had the usual things to hate, such as the buff dude who refuses to where a shirt, the old guy who tells me that I haven't seen the hip until I've seen them in (insert name here)...actually this is a good place to stay on topic, but go off a little bit.

Saturday night I met the "you haven't seem'em until" and he was a old fucker (another group to hate) who happened to be an American (hate American Hip fans) and his deal was that apperhently after 30 or so Hip shows in a variety of cities and venues, including I might add, seeing them touring their first album at the Tulip Festival in Ottawa (totally by accident and I forgot entirely until a shit swaping story a few years ago) he felt I had never seen the Hip because, this is where it gets great, I had never seen them in the States.

Was he fucking kidding? Sure I would love to see them play a small show in a bar, but I would like there to be a few people in the room when they play. He assured me the best part of the experience was that there was nobody there.

I imagine seeing them play in Kingston is something to behold and somehting I would like to do sooner rather than later, but fuck. It's always better in the US of A. These people ignore the Hip and have made Lyndsay Lohan a STAR, but I should take this assholes advice and see a Hip show there because it's easy to get a seat? After you read the rest of this you might think it will be better for me.

To go way off topic the USA has made the following Canadian artists superstars since 1988 while ignoring the Hip

-The Barenaked ladies (I just shit my pants)
-Avril Lavinge (I just ate the shit in my pants)
-Celine Dion (fuck, shit, bitch, fuck, shit...)
-The Moffats (seriously, nobdoy said it had to last, but they were big)
-A Simple plan (the worst music ever recorded, after each album they shot the engineer and producer to try and stop the plague, no luck)
-Alanis Morrisette (my hatred for her has died down, but we have to accept that she is nowhere near as talented as the Hip)
-Nickleback (remember what I said about A Simple Plan well TIMES ONE BILLION for these assholes)
-Nelly Furtado (I'm like a bird was great, that's it, she has probably sold 10 times more albums than the Hip just because of the USA)

So take that list that I have just given you and consider whether or not you would take the advice of a yanky on where to see a Hip show.

Back to the hating the fans. Douche bags with no shirts, assholes with tales of glory and of course blond girls who have no fucking clue what they are watching, yet still require their shirtless boyfriends to put them on their shoulders so they can wave hands back and forth (totally out of sequence with the band I might add). What the fuck is going on? Ladies, unless you are on the shoulders to flash your boobs, get the fuck down.

Worst of all is the 40 year old guy and his forty year old friend and his forty year old wife and her forty year old friend who go to the show. (short version, the 4 forty year olds) Why are they the worst? Because no matter what happens, they treat that mediocre show as the greatest night there ever was and that will ever be. Their faces are strained like a dump waiting to happen. They are forcing the fun so hard it ruins my fun. Spotting them is easy, they will drink three beers, and immediately appear drunk. Lips to the glass, first sip, hmmered, no joke. They are acting. Smoking joints...opps, not smoking them, holding them in their hands and occassionally waving as though they were conducting a orchestra, putting them in their mouths and leaning into on another to sing the lyric of the song they sort of know. This is the greatest night of their life. I can't take my eyes off of these people because none of them are actually having a good time. They are just trying so hard to show one another they are having a good time. Seems like a small thing, but let me tell you, when you aren't drunk enough it makes you so fucking sour.

The final thing I hate, not the last, the final for this post, is the people who cheer when they play New Orleans is Sinking. Girls go bananas, guy rush the stage, people sing along, oh the humanity. I hate that fucking song. Even before I was an actual fan, I hated that song and the video. I came around a bit when they used it as a way to field test new material in a kind of medley, but they don't do that now so I am back to hating it. That album has 11 songs on it and 7 of them are head and shoulders above New Orleans. Plain and simple. But do the hip play them? Like fuck, because they are legally required to play that shit song by the guy with no shirt and the girl that doesn't know another song.

Hip fans, you're ruining it for all of us.

Ottawa restaurants suck, according to some bitch from the Gazette

Just read a "city up in arms" piece about some bitch from Montreal who thought it right to trash Ottawa's restaurants after a less than successful Canada day experience.

A) fuck off bitch.

No, I am serious

B) it was Canada day.

That means it's time to bend over because where restaurants are concerned, everybody is a tourist and we all get raped by a plate of shit food. Imagine expecting tight service and good prices on the busiest day of the year in a downtown eatery. So sorry your majesty.

Why paint the whole town with the same brush because this turd had trouble in one place? Now you can see why she is a food critic and not the political editor. "Breaking news, the Big Slam is back at Deny's, I need you on this now!"

Admittedly, Ottawa isn't the epicentre of culture, but I don't want to hear any shit from a bitch who writes for the Gazette (Lesley Chesterman). You wouldn't wrap fish with that rag, let alone take advice from it.

As for the restaurants, she has a point. A city of almost 3 million probably does have more restaurants than a city of barely 1 million, but I'll tell you this about that. I have eaten plenty of shit in tight assed pretentious "boits" in Montreal, and I am glad this city has less $80 a plate fancy toilets than what should be the greatest city in Canada (except that it continually teeters on the edge of bankruptcy because it is full of stupid fucks).

I love Montreal, but it is more vacation than actual city. Nothing seems real and when you leave you feel like you are actually living a real life again. Same for their restaurants. Put the sauce here Pierre and can you get me another beer, no sorry, I didn't bring my own wine.

basically, a city that is famous for losing everything (more later) and "shaved, salted, loose meat sandwiches" has no business throwing stones. Beaver tails or smoked meat, pick your loser.

Yes, Montreal has more overpriced white table clothed establishments with assholes getting you a table. Cool and the gang. BUT that is where the ride ends because Montreal also has a few issues.

-They are still paying for the 1976 Olympics.
-They still brag about Expo 67.
-They LOST THE FUCKING EXPOS.
-Their city streets are at least the worst in the developed world.
-One night EVERY SINGLE MAJOR CANADIAN BANK packed up its headquarters and left town.
-They elect the PQ and the Bloc on a regular basis (no grasp of reality, I wonder if there is a connection with the banks)
-The city literally stopped developing in 1979, not exactly the most attractive period in modern architecture. -Those classy restaurants are generally directly across from, or neighbours with, titty bars. (not really a problem, but some might take exception)
-They named a street after Rene Levesque and their airport after Pierre Trudeau. If you can find two people who have done more damage to the image and economy of Quebec I'd like to hear it.
-The ciy's employees are some of the most corrupt in the country. Already this millennium they have had a parking ticket scandal, a snow plough scandal (didn't know they had any) and a street repair scandal.

So like I said enjoy your restaurants, but when you get home and have to walk up three flights of fire escape to get to your door because building designers in your city seem incapable of creating an "entry" think of what those precious restaurants have cost you.

Couldn't get a decent meal in Ottawa bitch, well I don't see a decent life in Montreal.