Guess who’s building an Ark on top of Mt Ararat in Turkey now?
Normally, I like the goals of Greenpeace, but I have to wonder what blissed-out ditz thought that the appeal to fairy tales from an overrated book was a good tactic.
Pharyngula
Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal
What I find funny is that they’re building it on ground no conceiveable amount of ocean rise will ever reach.
Then again, maybe that’s smart–as the thing couldn’t possibly float for long, anyway.
I hope they included a compactor to load up all of the animatronic baby dinosaurs.
Wow. It’s not even to save endangered animals, or to save Greenpeace members…it’s a symbol of climate change.
How many people pass by the top of Mt Ararat and will become reflective on how the earth is getting warmer?
I don’t think this works even as a P.R. stunt.
Concidering how many idiots this type of protest will appeal to, I’d say it’s good framing (GASP! Oh, no! I used the word!)
Wasn’t it Greenpeace who thought it’d be a good idea to dye living baby harp seals blue to thwart fur traders, but assisting polar bears?
http://www.greenpeace.org/international/news/harp-seal-hunt
I think it’s a clever tactic to link the liberal-alarmist, anti-industrial fairy tale of Global Warming to the well-known fact of The Flood. There does seem to be a correlation between GW denial and right-wingedness (and associated religiousity). Maybe it’ll open a few eyes, or get a few mental bilge-pumps working, and…
Oops. Scratch that thought. Floodists know that God promised never to destroy the Earth by Flood again. What a conundrum!
I suggest they place a Betamax copy of Waterworld on top of Mt. Everest instead. That’ll change some minds!
Bizarre. If they’re doing it as a PR stunt to symbolize the threat of global warming and oceans rising, wouldn’t building an ark where someone will actually see it make more sense?
Let’s face it, most of these hippies are well intentioned but that is all and don’t give any of their intentions more than a minutes thought.
Why is it listed under “Science News” and why does it say the ark is being rebuilt?
OT: Former Gonzales aide admits “crossing the line”
LOL! Maybe Satan made her do it.
On their website you can click on their Core Values and notice how they use the words “peaceful” and “non-violent” to describe what they do. Har-dee-har-har. Non-violent indeed.
PZ, normally you like their goals? I guess there’s a distinction there between goals and means, but still. Ugh. As a former founder said of them (paraphrasing here) “They’re a bunch of scientifically illiterate thugs!”
See, I recently cancelled my memberships with the (Australian) Wilderness Society and Amnesty International; for several reasons (including financial and I’m about to take a big hit in my income), but ONE of them was because I was starting to have more respect for Greenpeace, because rather than stading around and holding candles in vigils, Greenpeace actually DID something ACTIVE.
… now, I see, they’re just into the symbolic activities (also).
… and what’s more, using bloody stupid symbology.
Thank you, Greenpeace. Thank you, for showing me that there IS a better cause to which I can be diverting my money – my own savings account.
From the Fine Article: “”This is directed mainly at the politicians of this earth, to world leaders who are primarily responsible for the climate catastrophe which is taking place and for the solution,” said Wolfgang Sadik, campaign leader for Greenpeace, which is behind the project.”
… which is why the political summit is in Germany and the Ark model is in TURKEY. Respect factor 2 and dropping, Mr Sulu.
… DOVES will be released to echo the symbology of Noah’s scout dove?
FTA: `”A boatbuilding master said they would not have the courage to do this given the short period of time,” said German carpenter Rainer Brumshagen. “But I had the feeling that it could work.”
“It all feels very good with the energy people are bringing here, uniting those from different countries to work together.”‘
… oh, wow. I have one word in two contexts: “WOO”.
Never before have I ever wanted Greenpeace to fail at something. And fail miserably. Dismally. Catastrophically. Humourously. Deservedly.
Sheesh. Woo.
What’s next, crystal palaces atop Mount Olympus for the Greek pantheon to live in? Will they stock the larders with ambrosia and nectar?
What about Jacob’s Ladder? Do the plans for it still exist?
If the budget gets tight they could reconstruct the Burning Bush.
It makes about as much sense as Greenpeace’s consistent opposition to one of the few actions that could slow down global warming. Ie: build nuclear reactors to replace fossil fuel electric generation.
It seems fitting to surmise that Greenpeace would use this as an allegory for impending rise in sea levels. I wonder if raising the Sea level would effect the temperature at which water boils at differing altitudes!?
Once Greenpeace have abandoned the stupid thing, fundies can go and ‘find’ it and prove Genesis true, ignoring the unbiblical cross-head screws holding it together.
If you’re looking for an example of how NOT to frame a science issue, this would be it.
Oh God, a stunt thought up while inhaling smoke from some beautiful green herb.
“We need a symbol that will speak to all the world.”
“How about a giant marijuana leaf scorching, while waves lap at its petiole?”
“Ha ha, yeah, that’ll turn the fundamentalists around.”
“What about building their ark to escape the rising waters, then?”
“That might get to those anti-science buggers. Let’s have twenty more bong hits, and make our plans.”
Next morning:
“God, I’m so wasted from last night. But that idea about the ark really was a good one. See what “God’s” green earth and pungent herbs will do for one’s mind?”
And it goes from there, with Greenpeace building a shrine to fundamentalism, and “God’s” promise that the seasons will always return as before. Hey, but the planning was just great.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/35s39o
Hey! I inhale that beautiful green herb frequently, and it doesn’t cause me to come up with stupid shit like this.
I seem to recall that the current top-dog at Greenpeace is a former evengelical Christian fundraiser. Maybe that has more bearing on the matter. Greenpeace is not a “hippy” organisation, it’s an agressive fundraising machine, and has been for some years.
Shit, are you people ever going to get over the 60s?
I have always thought of Greenpeace as a semi-religious sect and this just tends to confirm it.
How is this NOT an example of “good framing” according to C&M? It seems to me that this stunt fits their concept of framing perfectly.
…
…
I wonder …
A few years back, I started to hear that certain Christian sects were suddenly waking up to the fact that God wanted them to protect and save the Earth.
Gone was the pervasive old Genesis 1:28 “Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.” The new mantra was “God says we should take care of His creation!”
At the time, I was only about half pleased with the news. It was like the shepherd on the next farm saying “Hey, look! I trained this wolf to take care of my sheep! Think of it – not only will he take care of the sheep himself, but no predator alive will screw with a huge WOLF!!”
I was happy to see that environmental sensibilities had finally filtered down to the ranks of the conservative late-adopters. Still, it worried me to hear them coming out and saying God wanted Man to cherish the Earth. You don’t cherish the Earth because God orders you to (possibly under threat of eternal damnation); you do it because it’s a good, RATIONAL idea. I couldn’t see exactly what the problems would be, but I knew there would be some.
I’ll bet this is one of them. The Christianists have back-infected the environmental movement and have started to exert significant influence over Greenpeace, so much so that this stupid off-message idea now seems reasonable to whoever’s making the decisions.
…
…
‘K, maybe it was booze, or what you say, I don’t really care.
But if you don’t come up with shit like that, how good is your pot? I used to think up stupid shit like that all the time, part of the fun of it (no, I don’t do that any more).
Where my little parable might fall apart is that I don’t remember thinking that those were still good ideas after the effects were gone, or actually, I usually got more sense even while I was stoned. Still, I knew some of the idiots who did think their stoned thoughts were a guide to life, so I don’t know about those Greenpeace dudes….
Your best argument is that they’re pretty much mainstreamed petty bourgeois types now, and I don’t know of any drug that can counter the ill effects coming from that.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/35s39o
Well, it’s kind of a weird publicity stunt, but really PZ, “appeal[ing] to fairy tales” is big business nowadays. Just look at Disney. And I don’t think the Bible is overrated, it may be badly-written in parts but it still collects some of the best fairy tales and mythological stories around and serves as terrific fictional inspiration.
But if you don’t come up with shit like that, how good is your pot?
I’m very well practiced. Stupid ideas, fits of the giggles, and uncontrollable munchies are for amateurs and part-timers – just like copious vomiting and falling down stairs are for amateur drinkers.
Anyone who takes the industry-sponsored wingnut ravings of Patrick Moore seriously has bigger scientific literacy problems than Greenpeace.
It’s actually a very successful use of symbols, judging by how much press attention the Greenpeace stunt has gotten.
This summer’s Evan Almighty features an ark with Biblical specifications, and according to the director, a theme of the movie is humanity’s stewardship over the earth.
Between the Greenpeace and Evan Almighty arks and Gore’s mention of Adam and Eve in a global warming talk, increasing discussion of climate change by Christian clergy (including conservatives), and EO Wilson’s direct appeal to the religious community, there seems to be the makings of a new Abrahamic-themed environmental consciousness. Perhaps even a new Great Awakening synthesizing environmental activism with religious activism.
It’s actually a very successful use of symbols, judging by how much press attention the Greenpeace stunt has gotten.
This summer’s Evan Almighty features an ark with Biblical specifications, and according to the director, a theme of the movie is humanity’s stewardship over the earth.
Between the Greenpeace and Evan Almighty arks and Gore’s mention of Adam and Eve in a global warming talk, increasing discussion of climate change by Christian clergy (including conservatives), and EO Wilson’s direct appeal to the religious community, there seems to be the makings of a new Abrahamic-themed environmental consciousness. Perhaps even a new Great Awakening synthesizing environmental activism with religious activism.
It’s actually a very successful use of symbols, judging by how much press attention the Greenpeace stunt has gotten.
This summer’s Evan Almighty features an ark with Biblical specifications, and according to the director, a theme of the movie is humanity’s stewardship over the earth.
Between the Greenpeace and Evan Almighty arks and Gore’s mention of Adam and Eve in a global warming talk, increasing discussion of climate change by Christian clergy (including conservatives), and EO Wilson’s direct appeal to the religious community, there seems to be the makings of a new Abrahamic-themed environmental consciousness. Perhaps even a new Great Awakening synthesizing environmental activism with religious activism.
It’s actually a very successful use of symbols, judging by how much press attention the Greenpeace stunt has gotten.
This summer’s Evan Almighty features an ark with Biblical specifications, and according to the director a theme of the movie is humanity’s stewardship over the earth.
Between the Greenpeace and Evan Almighty arks and Gore’s mention of Adam and Eve in a global warming talk, increasing discussion of climate change by Christian clergy (including conservatives), and EO Wilson’s direct appeal to the religious community, there seems to be the makings of a new Abrahamic-themed environmental consciousness. Perhaps even a new Great Awakening synthesizing environmental activism with religious activism.
It’s actually a very successful use of symbols, judging by how much press attention the Greenpeace stunt has gotten.
This summer’s Evan Almighty features an ark with Biblical specifications, and according to the director a theme of the movie is humanity’s stewardship over the earth.
Between the Greenpeace and Evan Almighty arks and Gore’s mention of Adam and Eve in a global warming talk, increasing discussion of climate change by Christian clergy (including conservatives), and EO Wilson’s direct appeal to the religious community, there seems to be the makings of a new Abrahamic-themed environmental consciousness. Perhaps even a new Great Awakening synthesizing environmental activism with religious activism.
It’s actually a very successful use of symbols, judging by how much press attention the Greenpeace stunt has gotten.
This summer’s Evan Almighty features an ark with Biblical specifications, and according to the director a theme of the movie is humanity’s stewardship over the earth.
Between the Greenpeace and Evan Almighty arks and Gore’s mention of Adam and Eve in a global warming talk, increasing discussion of climate change by Christian clergy (including conservatives), and EO Wilson’s direct appeal to the religious community, there seems to be the makings of a new Abrahamic-themed environmental consciousness. Perhaps even a new Great Awakening synthesizing environmental activism with religious activism.
I apologize for the above hiccup. It was a glitch on my end, I think. My bad.
Is anybody keeping count of how many Arks are under construction? The one still being built (for the last 20 years) in western Maryland is with 10 minutes drive of all the people in America who care.
s anybody keeping count of how many Arks are under construction? The one still being built (for the last 20 years) in western Maryland is with 10 minutes drive of all the people in America who care.
This is no aberration. Greenpeace and the whales are deadly enemies of squid and must be destroyed!
I’ll only say this once!
This is no aberration. Greenpeace and the whales are deadly enemies of squid and must be destroyed!
I’ll only say this once!
Or maybe twice.
This is no aberration. Greenpeace and the whales are deadly enemies of squid and must be destroyed!
I’ll only say this once!
Or maybe twice.
Or three times perhaps. The system is acting up.
This is no aberration. Greenpeace and the whales are deadly enemies of squid and must be destroyed!
I’ll only say this once!
Or maybe twice.
Or three times perhaps. The system is acting up.
This is pretty funny, coming from a professional pot-smoker. ;-)
See, I recently cancelled my memberships with the (Australian) Wilderness Society and Amnesty International; for several reasons (including financial and I’m about to take a big hit in my income), but ONE of them was because I was starting to have more respect for Greenpeace, because rather than stading around and holding candles in vigils, Greenpeace actually DID something ACTIVE.
… now, I see, they’re just into the symbolic activities (also).
… and what’s more, using bloody stupid symbology.
Thank you, Greenpeace. Thank you, for showing me that there IS a better cause to which I can be diverting my money
Troff: Yes, although I’d give it to the Cancer Council or the Fred Hollows Foundation. Every time I am approached by Amnesty or Greenpeace volunteers, usually very pretty female university students, I tell them bluntly no, I admire their efforts and their own dedication to the cause of environmentalism/releasing nonviolent political prisoners, but their bosses have a different agenda, and because of that I cannot give them my money.
I had thought for years that Greenpeace was selective in its causes (though Amnesty also tends to be interesting these days, in terms of whom it shouts about the loudest); now I know it is intellectually rotten to the core.
Without irony and in all honesty, thank you all for this information; you have justified my cynicism.
Anyone who takes the industry-sponsored wingnut ravings of Patrick Moore seriously has bigger scientific literacy problems than Greenpeace.
Even an industry-sponsored wingnut can be right sometimes.
Your Greenpeace membership dues paid up this year? Heh-heh. ;^}
Just a minor note: You do know, don’t you PZ, that the ark is not being built on top of Mt. Ararat?
That really wouldn’t make sense from a PR standpoint, though I’d prefer if it was being put there.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/35s39o
Quick, somebody run up there and construct a wooden French commando raft.
Greenpeace has become a money-grubbing headline-seeking egocentric bunch of twits who end up doing more harm than good for environmentalism. But enough what some of the founders say, what’s my opinion? Pretty much the same. They engage in useless publicity stunts and don’t think about their actions very much.
Classic example: their opposition to the seal hunt. They claim that of course it won’t effect Inuit (who hunt adult seals), which of course Inuit don’t believe since that’s what was said the last time and we’re still dealing with the social reprecussions thirty years later. So the one group that’s probably most symbolic of the effects of global warming, Inuit, get shafted by Greenpeace.
i wouldn’t call it and “appeal to fairy tales from an overrated book.”
it’s invoking a very well-known and commonly understood image, symbolically, taken from a book that happens to be on the all-time best-seller list.
even though most people (apparently) haven’t actually read the bible, they all know this story. and they know that greenpeace means to say the world is in danger. and they are doing it with the common popular association, mt ararat, where everyone thinks noah’s ark should be.
of course, if anyone had paid closer attention to the text it says “mountains of ararat,” ararat being a kingdom contemporary to when the book was written (as seen elsewhere in the bible). the fact that there is a mountain today called by the same name is probably a coincidence, or derived from the same name at best. even if the story was true (it’s not), that’s entirely the wrong place.
but i don’t know that i’d call it a “fairy tale.” it serves a different function than that — i would call it “folk history” or “traditional history” or “mythological history.” it’s where the people who wrote the book thought they came from, according to their traditions. it’s part of two great ancient hebrew epics (“j” and “e”) regarding the origins of the hebrew people. in that respect, one might compare them to virgil’s æneid, though in style they’re more like other ancient near eastern literature, like gilgamesh.
as for “overrated” i would say “misunderstood.” parts of this particular library of text we call “the bible” are quite interesting from a historical and literary perspective. parts are kind of dull. but it’s certainly not the book fundies claim it is — it’s like they’re reading a completely different book. your claim that it’s “fairy tales” is probably more accurate than their fairy-tale claims.
Greenpeace’s dogmatic agenda just makes other good green movements look bad. In my country (Finland) they also get a largely undeserved piece of media time on almost every enviromental issue. They spew tons of lies and falsehoods and won’t reveal their finance.
http://www.greenpeace.org/international/press/releases/ITERprojectFrance
Also I don’t like many of their campaigns, like the ones against nuclear power, usage of forest and GMO.
Patrick Moore, a former member of GP, has rightly critized the organization.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Moore_(environmentalist)