Mudshot Eyes

The global average temperature is about 1° Fahrenheit higher than it was a century ago. This one degree has caused a lot of fuss, including one of my least favorite vice presidents, Al Gore, winning a share of the Nobel Peace Prize.

The fuss isn’t all bad. I may disagree with the way that Al Gore wants to turn around our pollution problems, but I am glad for the new awareness that has been born from all the hoopla he has created. Unfortunately, many Christians are unable to get past the politics to see the need to take responsibility in caring for creation.

I have lost count of the number of conversations where I thought the topic was our responsibility to care for creation, but within a couple of minutes, we are talking about politics and global warming. Is it possible to have good dialogue with a Christian about the environment without changing the subject to how bad Al Gore and the Democrats are? I don’t want to talk about how to clean up Al Gore, I want to talk about how to clean up our environment. I want to talk about the small steps that I can take to contribute to a larger community of effort. That discussion has nothing to do with politics.

When it comes to the politics of this discussion, I recognize that there are a lot of dollars at stake in the federal government. There is a lot to debate when it comes to the government’s role in keeping clean the air, water, and land of the brave. However, I think it would benefit us to separate the two issues, so that personal responsibility doesn’t get lost in a debate over where to draw political lines.

*This post is a part of Blog Action Day.

“We didn’t feel the nature of the atonement was one of those things you could agree to disagree over.”

- Pod Bhogal
Universities and Colleges Christian Fellowship (UCCF)

What Pod is really saying is this: people couldn’t possibly view the atonement in any other way than the way HE and his group sees it.

It is sad that we have so much effort in the church to squelch theological conversation.

UPDATE: See comments (7/17/2008)

A couple of months ago, I posted an entry on some well-documented information regarding electric car technology. The info came from the web site of a new documentary called Who Killed the Electric Car? For most areas this movie has come and gone, so I’m watching for a DVD release soon.

I think we are at the beginning of a trend toward electric car technology. Gas-electric hybrids barely scratch the surface of what we will see very soon from automobile manufacturers. Tesla Motor’s upcoming release of the Tesla Roadster is more evidence that electric cars are in our forseeable future.

The Roadster is 100% electric, goes 250 miles on one charge, and can reach 60 MPH in only 4 seconds. This particular car is out of reach for normal people who don’t grow money on trees ($100K), but it is a sign of things to come. See what 1 cent per mile looks like at the Tesla Motors web site.

I’ve decided that it is impossible to find out what our government is doing most of the time, whether they are Republican or Democrat. I realize that there are some top secret things that should be kept top secret. That’s not what I’m referring to.

Is there any doubt that under the goverment’s “classified” category there are deals, bribes, and blackmails that would make us shiver? Of course, there is a lot at stake: dollars and lives and oil barrels and children and votes and power and the minds of the people.

We depend on the major news networks to tell us what is going on, but most of their “reports” are a disfunctional hybrid between reporting and editorializing. Writers and media channels continuously resort to extremes, but that is what sells commercials. You think FoxNews is “fair and balanced”? I’m sorry, but to be truly fair and balanced in reporting won’t sell any soap. They swing as far to the right as CNN swings to the left.

I suppose that my only recourse at this point is to do my best to interpret the droning speeches we hear on C-SPAN in an effort to figure out what exactly our government is trying to accomplish.

But who’s got time for that?

Interesting link below regarding electric car technology. The common arguments against widespread use of electronic cars are not founded in the facts. The technology exists that would make this kind of transportation feasible and affordable. Unfortunately, big money and politics prevent it from happening.

Did you know that Americans drive an average of 29 miles a day? That would mean that a person could use an electric car for 3-4 days without recharging it. Why are we not using this technology? This link provides some arguments to consider…

http://www.sonyclassics.com/whokilledtheelectriccar/electric.html

If you want the basics, just click on the Questions and Answers section, or here’s an excerpt…

GM, Ford, Honda, Chrysler, Nissan, and Toyota all developed electric vehicle programs in response to California’s zero emission mandate [in the 90s]—and most ended up crushing at least part of their EV fleets. Even as the automakers launched their EV programs, they undermined their success every step of the way. Why?

Electric cars are a threat to the profitability of the conventional gas-powered auto industry. GM said that it spent more than $1 billion to market and develop the EV1. Not only would a successful electric car program cannibalize sales of conventional cars, but the electric car costs the auto industry in other ways: lacking an engine, it saves the driver the cost of replacement parts, motor oil, filters, and spark plugs. The EV1’s regenerative braking system, in which the car’s electronic controls handled much of the work of slowing down the car, spared the car’s mechanical brake system from wear. Brake parts and repair is a billion-plus dollar industry alone. The EV1’s efficiency was a winner for consumers but a loser for the auto industry.

When GM introduced the EV1, it was years ahead of American and Japanese competition in electric car technology. In the coming years it could have capitalized on its lead by developing these cars and advanced hybrids. Instead GM and other US carmakers would focus on battling with the State of California to kill electric vehicles. The consequences of these decisions reverberate today.

I have quit watching television news. I am no longer watching the people dying, leaders corrupting, riots starting, minorities complaining, majorities minimizing, children disappearing, and skies falling.

Before you accuse me of ignoring the problems of the world, let me explain.

Whenever I’m watching the news I get this sense that I am the audience in an effort to entertain. No matter how horrible the story is, the cameras allow us to anonymously stare at the tragedy. We are given the best possible angles. The closer we can get to the “dirt” the more we want to watch. We quickly become fixated on these images that get us closer to the action and into the story.

Allowing the tragedies of the world to be our entertainment gradually lessens our concern with doing things that help alleviate suffering. I doubt that anyone consciously says that they watch the news for its entertainment value, but it is the nature of television to make things as entertaining as possible to keep people watching. More viewers equals more commercials which equals more revenue.

If we want to know what is going on in the world, we should start reading. It will awaken our mental and moral faculties. We may even decide to focus some of our plentiful resources toward helping those we read about who suffer. Prayer flows more easily when we aren’t surrounded by noise. Consider those “top stories” about music and movie stars who have been accused of a crime. Instead of adding them to the list of fascinating cultural dramas, wouldn’t the victims and the accused benefit from our occasional prayers for them?

I also have a tendency to believe that the problems of the world are only “out there”–in someone else’s life, some other neighborhood, or some other country. Television reinforces this misguided belief.

When the London Times asked for writers to respond to the question “What is Wrong with the World?” G.K. Chesterton wrote this reply:

Dear Sirs:

I am.

Sincerely Yours,

G.K. Chesterton

In Scripture, we discover this link between humbling ourselves in repentance and being empowered by God for action. The Old Testament prophet Zephaniah’s words were to “seek the LORD, all you humble of the land, who do his just commands; seek righteousness; seek humility.”

Let us pay reverent attention to the need in our own soul for transformation. As we do, we will be propelled into purposeful living–inviting change within and initiating change in the world around us.