# Climb for the climate



## Goblin84 (Jul 11, 2007)

Is anyone doing this?  I am thinking about meeting up and doing one of the easier hikes this weekend.  There are 7 different hikes you can do:

    * Mt. Madison - (Mt. Quincy Adams) - Mt. Adams (difficult)
    * Mt. Jefferson (moderate)
    * Mt. Washington (difficult)
    * Mt. Monroe (moderate)
    * Mt. Eisenhower - Mt. Pierce (easy)
    * North-South Traverse Attempt (extreme)
    * South-North Traverse Attempt (extreme)


I was eyein the Madison hike.  Check out the website, if anything it should be a pretty fun event

www.climbitfortheclimate.org


----------



## dmc (Jul 12, 2007)

GLobal warming...  hmmmm....


----------



## pedxing (Jul 12, 2007)

My gut reaction is to be annoyed by people climbing the Presidential and holding banners that read:   "What would [president's name] do? 
                 Cut Carbon 80% by 2050!"

I embrace the goal - but I'm wary of that kind of preaching on the peaks.   Besides, how do they know what Adams, Washington, Jefferson, Madison, or Monroe would think about that goal?

Maybe I'm just feeling curmudgeonly tonight.

If there was some simpler, less dogmatic symbol being carried - or some simple silent act of prayer or meditation I'd feel differently.  I'm a fan of the flags on the 48  event, but I was opposed to anything that might add a dogmatic, contentious or political tone to it.  A simple act of remembrance and commemoration seems just right.


----------



## Goblin84 (Jul 18, 2007)

Yeah, it is a tough call.  I ended up not doing it simply because it was a beautiful day and I decided to do 50ish or so mile on the road (cycling).  Sounds like the event went pretty well though.

I have a crazy hippie friend that is into all of this stuff.  hence how I found out.  I think he is doing some march from nashua to concord too.  who knows.


----------



## smitty77 (Jul 18, 2007)

pedxing said:


> Besides, how do they know what Adams, Washington, Jefferson, Madison, or Monroe would think about that goal?


Considering that 150-200 years ago the localized pollution in and around indutrial centers was infinitely worse than it is today, they probably didn't think much of it.  From what I've read it was akin to what portions of China look like today with people having to cover their faces to get relief from the smog.  People hear the message, they either don't believe or don't care.

On a personal level I agree things need to change and do what I can within my budget to be green (Water for the garden now comes from a rain barrel hooked to a constant, gravity fed drip irrigation system).  But I'm in the wrong profession to throw stones.  Taking an "environmentalist's" view of our operation:  We rape the earth to process the aggregate, suck crude out of the Middle East to make the binding liquid, pollute the sky heating it all and mixing it, and destroy thousands of pristine acres putting it all down.  But we do it because the _public demands_ smooth roads, big parking lots, and bigger runways to maintain or improve the quality of life.  Our whole philosphy as to what makes up our "quality of life" needs to change, not just how we achieve that quality.  As I write this we're beginning to pave a brand new giant shopping center where an old but enourmous glassware factory once stood.  1/4 mile away sits a vacant Ames department store, and one block from that is a strip mall that will be largely vacant when the Stop&Shop moves to the new complex in the spring.  Where's the outrage here?


----------



## LongStep (Jul 18, 2007)

I mean no offense whatsoever to the readers of this forum but Id like to think that global warming is NOT a political issue.


----------



## JimG. (Jul 18, 2007)

LongStep said:


> I mean no offense whatsoever to the readers of this forum but Id like to think that global warming is NOT a political issue.



Me too, but discussions of it have invariably turned into political flame fests.


----------



## LongStep (Jul 18, 2007)

JimG. said:


> Me too, but discussions of it have invariably turned into political flame fests.




yea lol politics ruin it all!


----------



## pedxing (Jul 24, 2007)

Actually - a walk from Nashua to Concord makes more sense to me.

I wasn't trying to address the politics of it - just the method as it related to the mountains (thought not as much fun).


----------



## Big Game (Jul 26, 2007)

LongStep said:


> I mean no offense whatsoever to the readers of this forum but Id like to think that global warming is NOT a political issue.



It shouldn't be a political issue. It should be based on some sort of scientific observations. But science is politicized. So there is your answer.

And yes, scientifically speaking, the case for man-made global warming caused by the burning if fossil fuels has some support. But the case is largely overstated (and in fact, was a theory first proposed by the "carbon-free" nuclear-power lobby in the 1950s to gain political favor...it has only recently gain become fashionable). 

Not to say there isn't good reason to conserve. The real damage caused by the burning of fossil fuels has to do with the poisons and particulate matter that give us asthma and other respiratory ills and pollute our watersheds. Carbon is harmless and necessary. Soot, benzene, sulfur dioxide, etc are neither. 

I wish this reality would come back into fashion so we could do something a bit more productive than engaging in an expensive errand about something so relatively insignificant  (even if true) and uncertain. We need to address actual air pollution.

But dissent has been shouted down. And in fact, you implicitly characterize any disagreement as  extremely backwards and nearly unfathomable. But just like skirt lengths, scientific beliefs ebb and flow. Eugenics, the relation of head-size to intelligence, man-caused global cooling (fashionable in the 70s) are some of the other theories past their prime. Eventually this one will pass as well. 

In the meantime, the fact that air quality is shortening people's life is inconsequential. The fact that the biggest killer on the planet is diarrhea seems boring. Yet "combating" carbon-dioxide has somehow become the red-ribboned issue of 2007. 

Well, in your defense, at least you are trying to do something positive to protect the environment. I just think your efforts are misplaced in a suspect cause.

Anyway, still, enjoy your hike.


----------

