Was it wrong to have Live Earth?
Answer:
Not at all. The "criticism" has come from two sorces
a) People who are supportive--but whoknow that events like this can be effective--but that they don't always have the hoped for impact. These are the sort of "feet on the ground" realists that every movement needs--they keep the idealismfrom wandering off into impractical utopianism. :)
b) the same people who have been blocking and ridiculing those of us who are trying to make a difference. These people don't care about the environment--they only search out any target to belittle and ridicule. They are hypocrites and fakes.
Here's an exxample: there have been posters here (on Y/A) "criticizing" Al Gore for "wasting energy" by traveling around the world promoting environmental action. The fact--as anybody with any common sense knows--is that first, to do this he has to travel, b) jet aircraft are the only means available and c) a public figure (and former Vice-President) CAN'T just hop on a commercial jet the way the rest of us do.
But they take a logical and appropriate activityy and try to twist it to discredit a man who is a better human being than any of them can ever hope to be.
Here's a good rule of thumb: if trash like those leveling that kind of "criticism" against the LiveEarth project or against people like Gore don't like something--you can bet its probably a good idea--or at least not a bad one.
And the only proper response to these bullies )because that's what they are) is to stand up to them and tell them to go to hell.
i dont think it was wrong.. i just think the way people got there was way off. hundreds of thousands of cars wasting gas to get there, private jets polluting the air.. maybe next time they should hybrid everyone to the concert center. the singers dont practice what they preach.
It's not a question of right or wrong. The thing is it was counter-productive and likely caused more carbon emissions than it will ever prevent.
I don't think that would have anything to do with the bands singing. Every person there is responsible for themselves and they know that the moment they bought the ticket. The way people act while there, even if it wasn't them, is not there fault, nor is it the fault of the band.
No. They really did help the world. It's just that people are too riled up to look at the facts.
The Live Earth concerts did realease a lot of CO2 emissions, just to have the concerts, but think about this: They made their venus green, up to LEED standards, and they also gave out tons of easy tips, and stuff, to help make everyone attending or watching to be more greener. Now, at least everyone of those people that watched or attended them, know how to be green, in an easy way, and they'll be likely to do it.
So they may have let out a ton of emissions to have the concerts, but it also prevented even more tons of emissions from being released into the atomstphere. Sometimes you have to take a big risk to increase awareness. What they did was help. It wasn't perfect, but it was still good.
Most of the criticism of Live Earth is simply based on ignorance. People assume that it was a very energy intensive and wasteful event without bothering to check and see if that's really the case. You can see it's not by reading the Live Earth green policy:
http://www.liveearth.org/green_policy.ph...
The event did a good job raising awareness of global climate change, so its net effect was definitely positive.
Hey, you have to start somewhere.
In order to solve a problem, one must acknowledge that said problem exists.
Live Earth was a way to raise awareness of the problem of climate change, not solve it. It did mention ways to help solve this problem, and ways that will help the average person save money as well.
For instance, changing to compact fluorescent light bulbs may cost a bit more in the short term, but over their lifetime, which is many times that of their incandescent cousins, they will cost less to operate. They use one third the energy of incandescent bulbs, and have a much longer life than those other bulbs. Recycling may be a bit more work, but say that you took all of your cans to a metal recycler, and sold them. You could actually make money on what once was your trash.
There is a necessary level of awareness that must be reached before any problem is resloved. I think that Live Earth made a good attempt at raising the awareness of many younger people, who might not have been aware of this dilemma we all face.
Yes it was wrong.
It wasn't wrong to have them. As others have noted, the event wasn't nearly as wasteful as many people want you to think. I think it was a little silly though. I expect the live Earth concerts to have exactly as much effect on global warming as the song 'Ebony and Ivory' had on racism. Or the same way 'Live Aid' got rid of world hunger.
It's one thing to make people aware of a problem. It's another entirely to make them care.
The answers post by the user, for information only, FunQA.com does not guarantee the right.
More Questions and Answers: