Much to the chagrin of my mother in law (who believes that exercise is a universal panacea) I have never been into any activity that in anyway resembles exercise just for its own sake, I don’t mind taking a constitutional stroll or enjoying the practice of yoga I can see that there are benefits from both. However when it comes to the notion of sitting on an exercise bike or running on a treadmill I can think of nothing more tedious that running or peddling in one place. To my mind if you think that running or cycling is good for your health then get out there and pound the pavement or explore the roads around where you live. Better yet why not integrate your exercise into your everyday life by walking or cycling to work?
It seems to me that attending a gym has become a part of many of the lifestyles of our urban elites they will and this fact has always rather tickled my funny bone because there can be nothing less environmentally friendly than the energy intensive gymnasiums with their rows of energy sucking machines, heated swimming pools, and air-conditioned exercise rooms. That at least one gym is aware of the issue and that they have done something to harness all of that energy expended on exercise machines should gladden the hearts of every Latte sipper out there.
If I can take a moment to channel the spirit of the blessed bananas in pajamas by saying “are you thinking what I’m thinking?” its obvious to me that if all of the Warministas were to be, er, “encouraged*” to each devote say ten hours a day peddling on exercise bikes like the ones in that Oregon gym and the resulting energy fed into the grid we can just imagine how that would help reduce our GHG emissions. The real upside of this scheme is that if This country were to fail to meet its GHG savings target then we could legitimately blame the Warministas for not peddling hard enough! Of course some of them may complain that it should be the ordinary citizens who should be making the sacrifice for Gaia but that would be to impose their religious faith upon unbelievers and that is just, well, unAustralian.
In an earlier age the truly faithful would scourge themselves and reject all earthly pleasures for the sake of humanity’s salvation this made sense to a world in the sway of the Christian theology so by the same logic it makes sense that in an age of the Green faith that we should expect nothing less than row upon row of the Warminista faithful peddling like crazy so that we sceptics can sit back and watch our 50 inch plasmas while or our electric car batteries are charged and our planet saved …
They would do it if their faith is as strong as they claim…
but then again I have always suspected that there is another agenda in play from those who claim to be acting in the name of Gaia…
*Their priests would use some organic pointed sticks to gee up the slackers
When I first joined the blogosphere, I would occasionally annoy lefties by commenting on particular lefty blogs in order to cause controversy and have a bit of fun. What amazed me was how quickly and unjustifiably accusations of stalking would come from the bloggers and commenters opposed to my views.
The silliness of such souls is indeed amusing. I have always assumed that they make such absurd allegations because they are weak souls who cannot withstand having their views vigorously challenged by others. Tolerance is generally a sign of strength, and intolerance a lack thereof.
Last week, I experienced a little deja vu. After listing some humorous suggestions as to what a carbon tax might entail according to its critics, and Jeremy inviting his readers to do the same (“What have you heard? What would you like us to believe you’ve heard?”), I innocently commented that I had heard that it would not make a difference to temperatures or the environment, and added that “Surely this can’t be true?”. My comment was immediately placed in moderation.
Not amused, Jeremy wrote me an email minutes after I had left the comment:
Really? I’ve heard you’re a creepy, obsessive stalking troll I should ignore.
Don’t bother sending any more comments.
To which I replied:
You seriously aren’t suggesting I have been stalking you?
I didn’t get an answer so that, so I must presume that really Jeremy thinks I have somehow been stalking him.
For some reason, Jeremy has decided not to test his wild allegations in a court of law, in spite of the fact that he has recently threatened to sue me for defamation and could easily do so were he so minded, given that he is a barrister by occupation. Readers of this blog, particularly Jeremy himself, may be interested to know that in Queensland, one can now sue for stalking.
Meanwhile, whilst its true that I have written a few posts about Jeremy’s intellectual dishonesty and mistakes inter alia, the reality is that my efforts on him pale into insignificance compared to his efforts when it comes to Andrew Bolt, his favourite blogging topic.
Jeremy, as is well known, was the blogger behind ‘Boltwatch‘, which allegedly was “Where Andrew Bolt‘s Deranged Polemic… Gets What’s Coming To It”. After a couple of years, that was in turn replaced by “The Blair Boltwatch Project“, a blog which was devoted to criticising the blogs of Bolt and Tim Blair. Now Jeremy blogs at Crikey’s Pure Poison, and in spite of the fact that the blog supposedly is concerned with exposing “intellectual dishonesty”, it is in fact little more than another blog devoted to Bolt.
As JF Beck has just pointed out, Jeremy has also been calling up on MTR talkback radio as ‘Jeff of Mulgrave’* in order to debate with the object of his intense interest. In contrast, I am pleased to say that I have never called Jeremy or attempted to call him, in my name or another. Nor have I ever created or been a member of a blog primarily involved in criticising him.
For the record, I don’t believe that Jeremy’s continual interest in Bolt amounts to stalking. But before quickly and flippantly accusing others of stalking him, Jeremy should consider how such charges are inconsistent with the view that he is not stalking Bolt. In the end, publishing numerous posts that are critical of the views of another, in itself, cannot possibly amount to stalking.
*(Link added by Iain)
As far as I understand it the point of this sort of “protest” is to make it clear just how vulnerable cyclists are to injury when they mix it with the traffic on the streets of our cities. The thing is, doing this sort of thing once may have some novelty value and may make the desired point but repeating the nude ride every year it has absolutely no value in making their point. All it does is give the exhibitionists among the latte sipping set an opportunity to wave their danglely bits at the general public. Frankly if you are going to do this sort of protest can you at least try to make sure that the ‘activists” who become the “face” of your message are at least reasonably good looking ?
On the strength of the public image presented by the people in this photo I reckon that there is no better course of action than making Nudie rides by ugly people a capital offence, with the sentence to be carried out immediately, with extreme prejudice…
I personally love the way that a civil society will allow and even encourage the expression of the public will by way of peaceful protest, However there is no getting away from the fact that. there are some types of protest that only ever succeed in pissing people off enough that they may do something stupid:
Hmm what is really stupid is that this chap was unable to make a single fatalalty dispite injuring 40 loonies…*
But to be realistic when these sorts of “protests” have been held here or in Europe there has been only annoyance and dare I suggest it the desire to do what the Golf driver does in the vid. But don’t “critical mass” realise that there is a fine line between making your point and doing more harm than good for the promotion of bicycles ?
Hmm maybe they don’t ….