Sensible Erection | Planet Slayer

Saturday, 31 May 2008

quote [ When you’re done, click on the (skull and crossbones) to find out what age you should die at so you don’t use more than your fair share of Earth’s resorces! ]

Hey kids! Figure out at what age a miserable pig like you deserves to die! I got 6.1 years old.

[by Periander@9:15amGMT]

Comments

Saint_Marck said @ 9:24am GMT on 31st May [Score:3 Underrated]
4.6, lol

What a miserable sort of propaganda to target children with.

Saint_Marck said @ 10:53am GMT on 31st May
Whatever, I have a right to exist and try to drink up everyone else's milkshake, I don't feel guilty about it.

There are no viable alternatives to fossil fuels, "green" products are just that: products to make you feel better. The other planets are melting too (global warming is solar.) CO₂ emissions are a joke (plants breathe it in.) Putting carbon back into the cycle is harmless (the earth was once covered by massive jungles.) And carbon credits/carbon footprint/carbon are all guises of the global elites' human depopulation agenda.

So, no, I don't feel guilty, and I don't bother to recycle (another useless "feel good" measure.) I just hope this wonderful modern age of innovation and technology that oil has blessed us with will last long enough for us to develop solutions like thermal depolymerization (recover the landfills.) We just need to find something new to burn, maybe methane hydrate?

chdb said @ 11:53am GMT on 31st May [Score:1 Underrated]
Wow, a comment that's a laundry list of disproven and crap global warming denials gets +1 Insightful?

Saint_Marck said @ 1:24pm GMT on 31st May
I don't see where it's disproven.

spazm said @ 2:16pm GMT on 31st May
Quite true.

Homer Simpson said @ 12:28am GMT on 1st Jun
The point is Never Try

KropperPrime said @ 1:03pm GMT on 31st May
Just consume less, eat less, buy less.

You do not need/merit all these things.

jaxtraw said @ 12:03am GMT on 1st Jun
You don't "need" the internet or sensible erection either. So why are you here?

Jewbacchus said @ 1:22pm GMT on 31st May
girl, you crazy.

ohjesus said @ 6:45pm GMT on 31st May
lol what
what about nuclear energy?
Just because something else consumes CO2 doesn't mean we can produce as much as we'd like
recycling makes sense because we done have to cart it away to landfills or dig up more shit to manufacture
i'm not much of an alarmist for global warming [if we're fucked we're fucked for ten other reasons first] and this post is awful, pure dadaist nonsense
but yeah wtf to your comment

KropperPrime said @ 1:02pm GMT on 31st May
Because you prefer the normal CONSUME and OBEY propaganda?

Larvae said @ 9:30am GMT on 31st May
5.4... I should have died 27 years ago. apparently the wife is glad I didn't, at least.

MrZeroPing said @ 9:35am GMT on 31st May
I scored 27.8. That means I have 3 more years to live. Better make the most of it.

ComposerNate said @ 9:35am GMT on 31st May

Periander said @ 9:38am GMT on 31st May
Damn you, you're missing the point! The point is to try to guilt some capitalist pig larva into offing themselves before they get the chance to mature!

ComposerNate said @ 9:58am GMT on 31st May
*tries harder*

Khafra said @ 11:11pm GMT on 31st May [Score:1 Funny]
Shouldn't they be encouraging bullying in schools and emo rock, then?

orcasha1 said @ 9:45am GMT on 31st May
25.1.

The problem is I'm now 25.6...

snowfox said @ 10:21am GMT on 31st May
18.6 but I'm already 21.5

Jewbacchus said @ 9:46am GMT on 31st May
22.4

Aidentas said @ 9:53am GMT on 31st May
48.1

mrslippyfist said @ 10:29am GMT on 31st May [Score:1 Insightful]
Hippy.

elbandito said @ 9:59am GMT on 31st May
I used all my carbon by the time I was 9.1 years old.

But I went through and marked myself as pretty much resoundingly average. I don't actually go out of my way to save the environment. I don't recycle, because I don't actually have all that much to recycle.

I'm 33... so I shouldn't really complain about the cost of living, because I've gone almost 4 times 'around the clock'. Awesome.

elbandito said @ 10:02am GMT on 31st May
Ah fuck, I've come away from this feeling terribly guilty about 'my share' and how much I've used. If someone had come up with this concept before I was born, taught me about it when I was just walking, perhaps THEN I'd be all good.
But I'm being told NOW what a fat pig I am... well, y'all can go fuckyourselves. I'm going to destroy this planet. And I'm taking you all with me.

snowfox said @ 10:24am GMT on 31st May
Their car question is a bit fucked. I do drive a car when I need to go somewhere but I only go somewhere once a week or so. Then they talked about organic waste, no compost pile here but I do recycle glass, paper and plastic. They also ask about meat, but theoretically I could be living in a unabomber style shack and killing deer and squirrels, which already exist regardless of whether I eat them.

The test is cute, or whatever, but it hardly serves as a reliable means of telling if you use up too much shit.

snowfox said @ 10:26am GMT on 31st May
They also don't ask the size of the yard (water consumption), whether you cook or buy all your food prepackaged, whether you have a swimming pool, whether you use gasoline in something that isn't a car (like a boat or a riding lawn mower).

Anyway, silly test.

happyman said @ 10:07am GMT on 31st May
4.2

but it's flawed seeing as I spent a lot of money last year on installing solar panels, yet it still counted as not being environmentally friendly. Meh, go figure, you can't please the internet.

Saint_Marck said @ 10:44am GMT on 31st May
Do you have any idea how many resources went into creating those high-tech solar panels?

happyman said @ 11:30am GMT on 31st May
yeah i know, but it allows me peace of mind to have electricity for the coming zombie onslaught.

JOECAM said @ 10:09am GMT on 31st May

foobar said @ 10:10am GMT on 31st May
I really hate these things. They don't offer any real solutions, they tell people that there's no hope and any sacrifices they do make are entirely pointless.

In many ways these people are far worse than the SUV driving carbon gusslers.

Khafra said @ 11:10pm GMT on 31st May
To be fair, respected climatologists are also saying there's no hope, and that the best choice is to enjoy the time we have left with our families and friends.

noiseloop said @ 10:37am GMT on 31st May
I have been granted eternal life by the internet. Interesting.

Todomanna said @ 10:46am GMT on 31st May
53.7

Finally, being a hopeless shut in means something!

Viking_Biochemist said @ 10:47am GMT on 31st May
That's fairly retarded. In the "what would you use?" section, most of my answers would be "neither." What sort of heater? None. Which sort of Queensland island holiday? Neither, I'll drive 150km to the Blue Mountains and go camping there. Solar hot water? I live in a rented unit, asshats, I can't get solar hot water.

And who the fuck exactly is this "average Australian" who spends $10-15K a year all up?! I'm a student on a $20K government stipend, and I spend that much for chrissake. And oh, all the money I spend is evil unless I'm "investing in green companies", because of course on $20K a year I'm going to be investing in startups.

Fuck it, I live in a smallish inner city unit with no heating or air-con, new efficient appliances, I cycle most days and use a 10 year old small car for long trips shared with at least one other person, I eat mostly vegetarian, I go on local bushwalking holidays and I don't buy much except food. Oh, and I plant lots of stuff. But no, because of some incredibly oversimplified scale, the fact that I live in Sydney and therefore my goddamn rent is at least $10K a year, and the fact I don't like buying second hand shoes for my one pair a year, I'm only marginally better than "average", based on data which as far as I can see is entirely made up. Good work, ABC, in being complete sanctimonious dicks.

Viking_Biochemist said @ 10:51am GMT on 31st May
Wait, what the fuck? Why does bike/walk score worse than getting a train, which scores worse than a fucking taxi? Seriously, what the fuck? And a fuel efficient car scores worse than an average one, which is the same as no car at all?

This is a stupidly thought out piece of shit.

arteitle said @ 11:37am GMT on 31st May
A fuel efficient car scores better than an average one, but I agree with your WTF sentiment regarding the scoring of bike/walk worse than bus/train worse than taxi.

MrZeroPing said @ 12:55pm GMT on 31st May
Their reasoning is that by saving money using your bike you are spending that money else where. According to their "data" AU$1 = 1.6g carbon. So their logic is that if you commute using a taxi you have less money to spend thus using up less carbon.

Viking_Biochemist said @ 1:01pm GMT on 31st May
That's fucking retarded.

The money I don't spend on petrol I save. Unless saving money is also making baby Al Gore cry... I suppose by cycling I also breathe more, and that releases CO2. I should try not to breathe as much.

Viking_Biochemist said @ 1:30pm GMT on 31st May
Actually this also sort of explains why so many USians are scoring very well on this - the cost of living in Australia is quite a bit higher. After spending six months in downtown Seattle, my parents estimated that rent was about 2/3 what they would have paid for a similar place in Sydney, groceries were about 1/2 as much and fuel was 1/2 as much. So if they're scoring it on dollar terms, Americans are going to have a considerable advantage. Everything in Sydney particularly is very inflated - average rent for a 2-bedroom unit in my OK suburb is $2500 a month. Nice work trying to spend less than $10K a year there...

DirtyBirdy said @ 11:00am GMT on 31st May [Score:1 Insightful]
It should also tell everyone to have 0 children.

aciel2 said @ 11:02am GMT on 31st May
-3.7 tonnes CO2. Apparently that means I get to live forever.

"Were it so easy."

AnbuDemonos said @ 11:06am GMT on 31st May
You should die at age 19.7

Already living on borrowed time. I guess it's easy to scare children though.

Context said @ 11:16am GMT on 31st May [Score:2 Insightful]
Shit like this makes me want to start a tire fire.

Context said @ 11:17am GMT on 31st May [Score:1 Insightful]
Even so, I don't think Periander deserves any downmods. It's pretty clear he finds this as ridiculous as the rest of us.

DungeonKeeper said @ 11:23am GMT on 31st May
I'll throw in my four, then i will be reducing my carbon emissions because i wont be driving anywhere. right?

jaxtraw said @ 11:28am GMT on 31st May
18.6. It was a good year, but not so very good as the previous one.

Gunslinger said @ 12:30pm GMT on 31st May
Missing options that I could have benefited from:
1. Car - infrequent user.
2. Fuel efficient vehicle.
4. Single room of a town house.
6. Terribly low energy usage. Heating + 700W PSU + Monitor. No standby.
10. Besides tuition, rent and cheap food, I spent virtually nothin'.

Gunslinger said @ 12:32pm GMT on 31st May
Ah, fuel miser. Feh, Latin.

Viking_Biochemist said @ 12:40pm GMT on 31st May [Score:1 Underrated]
I can't believe I'm still pissed off about this bullshit.

Why the fuck are they wasting their time pissing off individuals over trivia when there's so much actual real stuff that can be done? How about encouraging people to lobby our useless government and donate to private organisations to, for example, build some big solar farms in western NSW so we can run our lights without carbon emissions? Or build proper freight rail, run off said solar, so we can get food and goods around without carbon? Or build proper high-speed rain up and down the east coast so I can get to Melbourne without flying in less than 24 hours? Or buying back clapped out farmland and reforesting?

You know, stuff that would actually make a difference, instead of telling me I'm an environmental vandal because I don't want to sublet out my study and I need to live in a city with high rental costs because, as a research scientist, I can hardly live in WoopWoop?

Fucking bullshit. I've been getting increasingly irritated with ABC science for some time, but I'm actually going to send them an abusive letter over this. It's just so fucking counterproductive.

KropperPrime said @ 1:05pm GMT on 31st May
Because the problem is not the government, it's the people.

People always get angry if you tell them it is their fault.

Well it is.

Todomanna said @ 1:26pm GMT on 31st May
Government tends to be composed of people, unfortunately.

kang said @ 8:53pm GMT on 31st May
As well as soylent green.

Mmmm. Soylent green....

Viking_Biochemist said @ 1:32pm GMT on 31st May [Score:1 Insightful]
Right. And me quitting my job, moving to the country, sharing a house with 10 unemployed hippies and growing my own vegetables is going to save how much CO2 compared with the sort of projects I mentioned?

Individual savings are not going to solve this problem. Big changes in how national infrastructure for power and transport are run are what is going to solve this problem.

KropperPrime said @ 1:35pm GMT on 31st May
But if people lived less like pigs, we wouldn't need as much tech to correct the effects of their behavior on the world.

We are also overpopulated.

Viking_Biochemist said @ 1:45pm GMT on 31st May
My point is that I scored very badly despite trying very hard not to live like a pig, basically because rents in my city are high and therefore I have to spend a fair bit of money.

As I've said, I live in a small unrenovated 1960s unit with CFL lights, efficient appliances that I hardly run, no heating or cooling, a small efficient car, I cycle to work, I don't fly much, I try to buy locally produced food, I don't eat much meat, I hardly ever buy clothes/shoes/bullshit, I try to fix stuff that breaks... but rent is high, so apparently I'm a horrible pig.

KropperPrime said @ 2:05pm GMT on 31st May
It's an indirect way of saying you should not live there.

High rent means overpopulation. Most of the time.

Silent said @ 10:48pm GMT on 31st May
The town I work(ed) in has higher rent than many parts of London because it's a commutable distance, so you're right, it's only "most of the time" cause a good portion of the rest of the time they jack up the cost of things because it's nice/convinient/what ever else reason they can give you.

Viking_Biochemist said @ 3:39pm GMT on 31st May
In Sydney, high rent means high property prices caused by negative gearing rules, which make buying real estate to speculate cheaper than buying real estate to live in.

And it's hard to find work as a molecular biologist in small towns.

KropperPrime said @ 5:08pm GMT on 31st May
Capitalism strikes again!

lilmookieesquire said @ 7:53pm GMT on 1st Jun
Actually it's more of a technological/structural problem then capitalism per se :p

CerealKiller said @ 10:06pm GMT on 1st Jun
Personally I think this thing is unfair to pigs

KropperPrime said @ 1:00pm GMT on 31st May
32, still got a few good years ahead of me!

Nihil said @ 8:38pm GMT on 31st May
No, no, trust us, you should off yourself right now for unrelated reasons.

spazm said @ 2:17pm GMT on 31st May
8.1

I R ZOMBEE!1!!

kitten said @ 2:48pm GMT on 31st May
21.3 years... which is exactly how old I am at this moment. Freaky.

Periander said @ 2:50pm GMT on 31st May [Score:1 Funny]
Time to die.

atter_cob said @ 4:22pm GMT on 31st May
What a stupid website. This sort of shit does not help the environment... it does just the opposite. Instead of motivating people to do stuff that matters, it makes a dumb game that at best does nothing, and at worst encourages "greenwashing" behaviors that are counter productive.

yasha said @ 4:33pm GMT on 31st May
i should have died at 1.2yrs old. beat that, hippies!

. . . and, this propaganda didn't work all that well on my kids. my 5yr old loved it, and went around all evening singing "piggy POP! piggy POP! let's play piggy POP!" which the point is, she liked making the piggy pop ergo she was taught to consume, consume, consume.

Eon Bleu said @ 5:05pm GMT on 31st May [Score:1 Insightful]
This is shit. Apparently, if I spend >100k a year I can live forever. If I spend <10k a year, I should die when I'm 28. So according to this, the 3rd world should die by 30, and if you make enough money in the US and live like me, you should cryogenically freeze your head so you can live eternally.

gough said @ 5:26pm GMT on 31st May [Score:1 Funny]
39.1!!!

which isn't too bad, and my son would be 16 by then

What? it's not legally binding?

Vampire_X said @ 7:06pm GMT on 31st May
hm, 10.8

however the test is no just shit, its straight shite

drorpheus said @ 1:13am GMT on 1st Jun
Pfft, fuck the rest of the world, there's not enough resources for 6.5 billion people regardless of how we live.

jedmitchell said @ 2:22am GMT on 1st Jun
yeah, that's just a very poor set of questions. and the mechanics tabulating your score are ridiculous. I get a better score commuting by train/bus than I do by walking/biking?

Kat said @ 4:43am GMT on 1st Jun

Hmm. Apparently I can live forever. Ah well.

mischa said @ 1:17pm GMT on 1st Jun
WTF does spending 100K vs 10K have on CO2????

lilmookieesquire said @ 8:06pm GMT on 1st Jun
They assume the money you spend go towards bad bad things.

Look at the calculator FAQ by clicking on the dog.

lilmookieesquire said @ 8:05pm GMT on 1st Jun
This is great! By proxy... the more people I kill, the longer I can live!
Oh KropperPRIIIIiiiiiime~~~~~

lilmookieesquire said @ 8:07pm GMT on 1st Jun
From the site:

Riding a bike is the most greenhouse-efficient form of transport – and you get fit, too.

but taking the bus lowers your score even more.

Ronin.ca said @ 10:53pm GMT on 1st Jun
I can live forever...