Young America's Foundation

Join Our Email List

  • New Guard Inner
  • John Fossil Fuels T-ShirtBy John DiGiacobbe

    As a high school senior in Medina, Ohio and chair of the Young Americans for Freedom chapter on campus, I took initiative to stand up for natural resources on "Earth Day" by wearing an "I Love Fossil Fuels" shirt. 

    Of course, I was proud of the shirt. As I posted on Instagram, "We should be thanking Mother Earth for Fossil Fuels because we owe our lives and livelihood to them."  

    Instead of productively studying for finals, a group of current and former students at my high school took to social media to attack me for my stance on this issue. Clearly these students weren't open to a civil discussion or debate. Leftists claim to be tolerant toward others' views, but these liberal students surely had no intention of openly accepting my stance on the issue. It's ironic how liberals are against bullying, yet they are perfectly comfortable with maliciously attacking those who hold different viewpoints. 

    The outrage over my shirt also highlights the misinformation and propaganda surrounding the environmental movement. In celebrating Earth Day, individuals ought to be thankful for all the good that fossil fuels do. From heating homes, powering cars, and generating new forms of technology, natural resources have created a cleaner and safer environment. In addition, expanding U.S. energy production has the capacity to produce countless amounts of jobs for the American people and reduce our dependency on foreign oil. 

    Still, those on the Left continue to demonize anyone who steps outside the bubble of "Green Energy." Perhaps environmentalists should objectively research the positive impact fossil fuels had on our country instead of mindlessly listening to what their professors and the media tell them.     

    John DiGiacobbe is the chair of the Young Americans for Freedom Chapter at Highland High School in Medina, OH

    Fossil Fuel T-shirt TweetFossil Fuels Cyberbullying Tweet Fossil Fuels Tweet2

    Fossil Fuels Tweet3Fossil Fuels Tweet4

     



    • Readers' Comments

    • are you okay?
      Posted by kenna on 04/25/2014
    • You go John!
      Posted by CD on 04/25/2014
    • Hey John, just thought I might share that my favorite part of this entire article is how you victimize yourself when you were the one to set yourself up for failure. Considering that you don't even know the political affiliation of people on twitter, it's nice that you, once again, attacked liberals as a group. Also, not everyone has finals to study for?? So I don't understand why you would put that in your article, besides to emphasize your point on liberals being terrible bullies. So thanks again for stating in your article that liberals are horrible, malicious people. Ps: If anyone is interested in seeing all the comments on the picture of john wearing his shirt, you should check it out. I guess it's a perfect example of someone(me) attacking him instead of debating.
      Posted by Dakota on 04/25/2014
    • This guy seems to be completely out of touch with how people think. I'm glad he feels like he can generalize all people who disagree with him as nasty liberals, and then try to get everyone to feel bad for him for being "bullied". This is the kind of thing that's ruining our country. Privileged white conservatives with no real opinions besides the ones that their parents spoon fed them. Good luck to you. It's a rough world out there.
      Posted by Peter on 04/26/2014
    • Love the shirt John...and the message as well!
      Posted by Kathy on 04/27/2014
    • People made the same arguments for slavery that you're making for fossil fuels. It's time to move on; touting their past & present success does not make them a viable form of energy for our future. You were raised and live in a Conservative bubble hell bent on protection of the few at the expense of all. You have also done your job to further perpetualize the two party system that has polarized this country. No real change will be made so long as half of the country thinks the other half is (insert derogative buzzword for the other parties' member base). Hurrr Durr look at me in my Sperrys at the Four Season's Biltmore, I'm so connected with the reality of the average American that they should respect my out of touch views. What do I know though? I'm just someone who disagrees with you. (apparently that makes me a propaganda fed a leftist) You'll never change, neither will this country, congratulations on helping corporate interests rape and pillage the once proud and strong American middle class.
      Posted by Nick on 04/27/2014
    • Wait, did nicholas (above) attempt to analogize slavery with fossil fuel use?
      Posted by phil on 04/28/2014
    • It's Nick, and no I didn't. I merely equated the author's statement; "We should be thanking Mother Earth for Fossil Fuels because we owe our lives and livelihood to them." to arguments made by pro-slavery advocates of the time. Just because something has worked for the country or civilization in the past doesn't mean we should look past its moral downfalls. In this case it would be that fossil fuels harm the environment and our Earth as a whole, just because they're abundant in our society doesn't mean they're healthy for future generations. Heroin used to be prescribed as a cough medicine you could order from the Sears catalog. I recently read an article that showed ALEC was working to raise taxes on renewables, so much for that no new taxes idea the right and the Kochs tout daily. The author was a troll and he got a response from the masses worthy of a troll. He garners no respect from the other side of the aisle or society, merely the love of a party base that's struggling for power underneath the crushing weight of its own poor decisions. It takes 5 minutes on this kid's instagram to know that he was raised in affluence woefully out of touch with the realities of a majority of this country. The author is simply regurgitating the talking points spewed forth by the right wing, pro-business' media echo chamber, nothing more. If he ever learns to think for himself he will likely see the error in his ways, this is unfortunately rather unlikely.
      Posted by Nick on 04/28/2014
    • Although I agree that you should have the right to wear that shirt that doesn't mean I agree with the shirts message but regardless it was still a provocative action on your part. If one was to wear an I hate Jesus on a religious holiday, the right would be furious in a heartbeat. Fossil fuels will eventually run out though so enjoy them while they last. Besides the more energy we have such as solar and natural gas breeds competition and allows for the best competitor to prosper so you should embrace alternative energy eventually for profit or for energy. But mind you their must be regulation on such things or else it could have dire effects on the peoples and the environment around them such as underwater aquaphors. And one last thing the XL pipeline is only going to allow for foreign nations such as Canada and Mexico and will only creating temporary jobs in the nation. But nevertheless the US will barely reap any benefits from such things except for temporary jobs and increased profits for foreign countries.
      Posted by chase R on 04/29/2014
    • Nick, it's interesting to see how you ridicule the author to "think for himself" yet you seem to be mindlessly immersed in leftist indoctrination yourself. First of all, you continue to pander class warfare by calling the author out of touch with "Middle Class America." I find that funny because for one thing, without Fossil Fuels, only the "evil rich" and corporations would be able to afford energy. Natural Resources have provided cheap and efficient forms of energy that benefit ALL Americans. We now live in the cleanest and safest environment due to the energy we have. For instance, climate related deaths are down 98% in the last 100 years. We now have immense amounts of technology that allow us to live cleaner lives through new medication that fights environment related diseases, climate controlled homes, water purifying systems etc. Furthermore, the vast amounts of economic opportunity the fossil fuel industry gives to average middle class Americans is incompatible with your argument. Countless amounts of jobs have been created in the last 5 years thanks to oil, and natural gas expanding. Believe it or not, unskilled labor in the fossil fuels industry pays some of the highest wages in the country. Want to see who's really against the poor? Go to West Virginia where northeastern limousine liberal environmentalists are shutting down coal plants that are destroying lives. Your ad hominem attacks on the author only document your blatant one sided perspective on this issue. So what if he has lived a privileged life? You don't know his family situation. Maybe his family worked hard for their money and didn't sit around on their asses pandering for the government to take care of them. The author makes a moral case for Fossil Fuels because they have helped so many people in this country attain better lives. He's not against the poor and middle class, anti-energy liberals are.
      Posted by Collin on 04/29/2014
    • And one more thing, it would cost business's less money if they embraced alternative energy because it is as simple as less energy bring produced which allows for more profits from the companies while allowing for less pollution in the environment. Ever heard of Cap and Trade. If that was enacted, (which it wasn't) the environmental debate would most likely be at a stand still but alas the problem still plagues us.
      Posted by Chase R on 04/29/2014
    • Nick, it's interesting to see how you ridicule the author to "think for himself" yet you seem to be mindlessly immersed in leftist indoctrination yourself. First of all, you continue to pander class warfare by calling the author out of touch with "Middle Class America." I find that funny because for one thing, without Fossil Fuels, only the "evil rich" and corporations would be able to afford energy. Natural Resources have provided cheap and efficient forms of energy that benefit ALL Americans. We now live in the cleanest and safest environment due to the energy we have. For instance, climate related deaths are down 98% in the last 100 years. We now have immense amounts of technology that allow us to live cleaner lives through new medication that fights environment related diseases, climate controlled homes, water purifying systems etc. Furthermore, the vast amounts of economic opportunity the fossil fuel industry gives to average middle class Americans is incompatible with your argument. Countless amounts of jobs have been created in the last 5 years thanks to oil, and natural gas expanding. Believe it or not, unskilled labor in the fossil fuels industry pays some of the highest wages in the country. Want to see who's really against the poor? Go to West Virginia where northeastern limousine liberal environmentalists are shutting down coal plants that are destroying lives. Your ad hominem attacks on the author only document your blatant one sided perspective on this issue. So what if he has lived a privileged life? You don't know his family situation. Maybe his family worked hard for their money and didn't sit around on their asses pandering for the government to take care of them. The author makes a moral case for Fossil Fuels because they have helped so many people in this country attain better lives. He's not against the poor and middle class, anti-energy liberals are.
      Posted by Collin on 04/29/2014
    • You should research the Kyoto Protocol one day. If we would have entered that treaty then maybe we would not have to be debating this right now. People like you should move to China since they have no regulation on any of their pollutants and over sixty percent of their water is polluted. And newsflash, China has regulation on any of its economic factors as well so its truly survival of the fittest. It sounds like a paradise for reactionaries like you.
      Posted by Chase R on 04/29/2014
    • You should research the Kyoto Protocol one day. If we would have entered that treaty then maybe we would not have to be debating this right now. People like you should move to China since they have no regulation on any of their pollutants and over sixty percent of their water is polluted. And newsflash, China has regulation on any of its economic factors as well so its truly survival of the fittest. It sounds like a paradise for reactionaries like you.
      Posted by Chase R on 04/29/2014
    • You should research the Kyoto Protocol one day. If we would have entered that treaty then maybe we would not have to be debating this right now. People like you should move to China since they have no regulation on any of their pollutants and over sixty percent of their water is polluted. And newsflash, China has regulation on any of its economic factors as well so its truly survival of the fittest. It sounds like a paradise for reactionaries like you.
      Posted by Chase R on 04/29/2014
    • You should research the Kyoto Protocol one day. If we would have entered that treaty then maybe we would not have to be debating this right now. People like you should move to China since they have no regulation on any of their pollutants and over sixty percent of their water is polluted. And newsflash, China has regulation on any of its economic factors as well so its truly survival of the fittest. It sounds like a paradise for reactionaries like you.
      Posted by Chase R on 04/29/2014
    • You should research the Kyoto Protocol one day. If we would have entered that treaty then maybe we would not have to be debating this right now. People like you should move to China since they have no regulation on any of their pollutants and over sixty percent of their water is polluted. And newsflash, China has regulation on any of its economic factors as well so its truly survival of the fittest. It sounds like a paradise for reactionaries like you.
      Posted by Chase R on 04/29/2014
    • You should research the Kyoto Protocol one day. If we would have entered that treaty then maybe we would not have to be debating this right now. People like you should move to China since they have no regulation on any of their pollutants and over sixty percent of their water is polluted. And newsflash, China has regulation on any of its economic factors as well so its truly survival of the fittest. It sounds like a paradise for reactionaries like you.
      Posted by Chase R on 04/29/2014
    • Chase R, where in my argument did I ever say I oppose regulation? In order to protect the individual rights of the people, some regulation is obviously needed. I don't think anyone denies that. In reference to China, yes, they do have some issues with their production of energy. Much of the air pollution though comes from dense populations crammed into tiny areas. And in regards to water pollution, the root source of the problem isn't always directly correlated with fossil fuel production. In any regard, "natural" water isn't so great either. Look at Africa (the most underdeveloped place on earth) where people have to walk 2 miles each day just to get water that is ridden with diseases and toxins. If they were to use fossil fuel powered purifying systems, they'd be enabled to drink clean, fresh water. But let's go back to China. Yes, I agree there needs to be some practical regulation, but thanks to the cultivation of energy, China has seen enormous amounts of growth in the last 20 years and has lifted millions of oppressed people out of poverty by giving them efficient energy and secure jobs/opportunity.
      Posted by Collin on 04/29/2014
    • You should research the Kyoto Protocol one day. If we would have entered that treaty then maybe we would not have to be debating this right now. People like you should move to China since they have no regulation on any of their pollutants and over sixty percent of their water is polluted. And newsflash, China has regulation on any of its economic factors as well so its truly survival of the fittest. It sounds like a paradise for reactionaries like you.
      Posted by Chase R on 04/29/2014
    • Well its hard not to say that you yourself do not support regulation when your party and indirectly you complain of the power abuses of the EPA in our nation. One minute you say that energy must be free to grow in this nation and now you say that regulation is also a necessity. Besides most of the energy in china is coal so its hard to say that coal is not the cause behind their terrible water and constant complaints of the Chinese as a result. Besides, water is tainted by chemicals by humans not the earth so that makes no sense. People in Africa have to walk to get water because they have no other sources of water because of the arid environment which has nothing to do with water quality and they are an underdeveloped nation. Besides its hard to access fossil fuels when you have no tools to reach them. Besides China has had growth but now its economy is slowing down and its GDP is only 7.2 percent as of 2013 so their growth is running out. Most of their growth has been due to state funding of the economy anyways so most of that growth is false. Don't let them fool you, they are going to meet their downfall once they finally realize that capitalist economies eventually reach a stalemate and require constant spending of the government in order to survive kind of like our country which is suffering from the effects of industrialization by causing less workers to be employed and cause a permanent unemployed force as the madness continues.
      Posted by Chase R on 04/29/2014
    • Congratulations on using the exact same argument the author did to prove my point Collin. It doesn't matter how far fossil fuels have taken us, proclaiming your love for them on Earth Day is morally wrong. Not sure where the author's compass points but he was clearly trying to anger people. Furthermore; I'd call any person hiding their insecurities through pictures of their preppy clothes on instagram a rich cunt. I'd also call you a cunt if you wore a shirt that said I love guns to a Columbine memorial. I grew up just like this kid, I've even stayed at the Biltmore on numerous occasions. I did not flaunt my wealth publicly like he has, the fact that he does shows he has little respect for the advantages he has been given. His parents may have worked hard, he knows nothing of it yet being only in HS. It's also, nice to know you think all liberals are sitting on their ass waiting for a handout, really shows your true character and mindset. Not that I consider myself a Liberal but for what it's worth... I've started two businesses since leaving high school, the first one was sold before most of my peers had graduated college. I despise the left as much as the right, if you'd realize they're working together maybe you'd be a lot less conservative yourself. Stop with this left/right BS, there are those who seek to keep things polarized and those who wish to bring us closer together, that is all, nothing more. History will not be kind to those who picked their own selfish morals over the well being of the many.
      Posted by Nick on 04/29/2014
    • “Man is the only living species that has the power to act as his own destroyer - and that is the way he has acted through most of his history.” ― Ayn Rand, The Virtue of Selfishness: A New Concept of Egoism
      Posted by J on 04/29/2014
    • Well let's clear this up. First of all, the idea that it is somehow "morally wrong" to wear that shirt on Earth Day. That is illogical, since fossil fuels are from the earth, and unless you want to crawl your ungrateful ass into a cave and die of a horrible disease you should probably celebrate the fact that we have found them and utilize them. Secondly, nobody ever said that regulation is bad, and wearing an I love fossil fuels shirt does not mean that person believes it is bad, maybe they simply believe that we are going way over the top with our obsession with the environment and the fact that our regulations are getting out of hand. Lastly, I want to talk about the issue itself, something that enviro-statists refuse to do since it destroys their argument. Those evil fossil fuels are the reason why we no longer have a miserable existence, and the reason why we have culture, art, and everything we take for granted today. Why? Because surviving is no longer the only thing in our minds, as it is for most other animals on earth. Now most would agree with what I just said, yet they believe we must find renewable energy to power us. Unfortunately, we must face the reality that renewable energy sucks. According to the Institute of Energy Research, which I will reference often, in 2010, federal subsidies for solar power were $775.64 per megawatt hour, for wind $56.29, for nuclear $3.14, for hydroelectric power $0.82, for coal $0.64 and for natural gas and petroleum liquids $0.64. If renewable energy actually did something for the country (which it doesn't), this may make sense. Yet, when one looks at the data for energy produced in the country, wind and solar COMBINE for 1.3% of our energy needs. We should be embarrassed by our government's complete and utter lack of common sense. Even when the government tries to dismantle the free market of energy, it STILL fails. Even when billions of dollars are thrown at renewable energy, it STILL sucks. Yet enviro-statists proclaim it is our moral duty to give away our hard-earned money to renewable energy, which is no more effective then burning the money. Obama's admin. has given out less leases than any other admin. in history, and amazingly we are still creating more energy today then ever. How so? Well it sure isn't from the 11 million dollars per job spent on Obama's atrocious green energy plan, its actually from fracking. Fracking, also hated by enviro-statists, is the free markets answer to the lack of access to the startling amounts of oil we aren't allowed to touch thanks to the government. It has single-handedly carried the economy out of the recession. As anyone who knows a thing about economics understands, creating businesses, and therefore jobs, require two things: cheap energy and cheap labor. Since we prefer not to enslave US citizens into working for nothing, cheap energy is the only way we can maintain our economic power. Yet environmentalists want to destroy that too, and the rest of the world will overtake us if we let that happen. It's also funny how none of them are willing to live without the energy produced for them by fossil fuels. I also want to address the reason why everyone has been so indoctrinated by the environmentalist ideology. First, global warming. Or wait, is it global cooling? Let's not forget when the enviro-statists proclaimed the ice age was coming in the 1980's because of CO2 causing global COOLING. But now it's suddenly global warming? Oh wait, in 2009 the temp. of the earth went down. What should we call it now? Ah, that's right, climate change. Clearly there are some flaws, because I don't think CO2 can cause global warming and cooling at the same time. But this is ok, because isn't that the point of science? Science is not absolute; there are always differing opinions, like the 31,000 scientists who signed a petition stating the global warming is a lie. I'm not saying they are even right, I'm just stating that science is an ever-evolving study of how wrong we are. Remember the one guy who was ostracized for stating that the earth wasn't the center of the universe? That is our culture today, except the one guy is the extremely small minority of people who don't buy in to the indoctrination of the enviro-statists, who seem to believe that majority opinion is always correct. As Mark Twain famously said, ""Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect." I simply don't understand the world enviro-statists are trying to create. Is it a world where only the rich can afford the absurdly expensive cost of renewable energy? Where the poor are forced to live like uncivilized animals? Are we going to let the enviro-statists continue their genocide against Africans by not letting them use DDT to eliminate malaria, as we did here? Are we going to enslave ourselves to our government in order to subsidize solar and wind energy enough to actually do something? Notice that I never once said we should eliminate the EPA or deregulate fossil fuels, that is not the argument presented by the author or by myself, or by any other person who isn't an enviro-statist. Nor did I say that the supply of fossil fuels is limitless, although our estimates for them have always gone up substantially every time we look again. In fact, from 1980-2010, we produced 3 times more oil then was predicted to exist in 1980. On top of that, proved worldwide oil reserves have gone from 692 billion in 1980 to 1.3 trillion in 2009, even after 30 years of drilling. Although coal is dirtier than most fossil fuels, at its current consumption we have enough for 500 years. Oh, and that number will continue to go up as we find more, just like all other fossil fuels. I am proud of the fact that we utilize fossil fuels and still have the cleanest air and water that we have had in a long time. The environmentalist logic is simply disproved by the fact that so called "criteria pollutants" have declined by a whopping 63%, while at the same the generation of electricity from coal power plants has gone up 180%, and energy consumption as a whole has gone up 40%. How is this possible? Trust me, it isn't from the overwhelming 1.3% of renewable energy produced. It is from the market developing new ways to dilute pollution and our time spent studying environmental sciences, something I adamantly support. Also, some common sense regulations from the government have helped, which even the most extreme anti-enviro-statist, which most people would stereotype me as, support. Despite this success, we foolishly listen to the radical scientists who say the world is ending and that we must destroy fossil fuels. It is time to face reality and stop ignoring the facts. Humans are overpopulated in the environment, and the earth wants us dead. It has no feelings, that is just the way and balance of nature. I don't know about you, but I want humans to live, which requires both utilizing fossil fuels and not causing problems which could kill people, which extreme air pollution could do. But we have gone way too radically far to the enviro-statist side, and I fear there will be repercussions if it keeps up. I wonder if life, at least as we know it, will survive their tyranny.
      Posted by Brendan on 04/29/2014
    • Well let's clear this up. First of all, the idea that it is somehow "morally wrong" to wear that shirt on Earth Day. That is illogical, since fossil fuels are from the earth, and unless you want to crawl your ungrateful ass into a cave and die of a horrible disease you should probably celebrate the fact that we have found them and utilize them. Secondly, nobody ever said that regulation is bad, and wearing an I love fossil fuels shirt does not mean that person believes it is bad, maybe they simply believe that we are going way over the top with our obsession with the environment and the fact that our regulations are getting out of hand. Lastly, I want to talk about the issue itself, something that enviro-statists refuse to do since it destroys their argument. Those evil fossil fuels are the reason why we no longer have a miserable existence, and the reason why we have culture, art, and everything we take for granted today. Why? Because surviving is no longer the only thing in our minds, as it is for most other animals on earth. Now most would agree with what I just said, yet they believe we must find renewable energy to power us. Unfortunately, we must face the reality that renewable energy sucks. According to the Institute of Energy Research, which I will reference often, in 2010, federal subsidies for solar power were $775.64 per megawatt hour, for wind $56.29, for nuclear $3.14, for hydroelectric power $0.82, for coal $0.64 and for natural gas and petroleum liquids $0.64. If renewable energy actually did something for the country (which it doesn't), this may make sense. Yet, when one looks at the data for energy produced in the country, wind and solar COMBINE for 1.3% of our energy needs. We should be embarrassed by our government's complete and utter lack of common sense. Even when the government tries to dismantle the free market of energy, it STILL fails. Even when billions of dollars are thrown at renewable energy, it STILL sucks. Yet enviro-statists proclaim it is our moral duty to give away our hard-earned money to renewable energy, which is no more effective then burning the money. Obama's admin. has given out less leases than any other admin. in history, and amazingly we are still creating more energy today then ever. How so? Well it sure isn't from the 11 million dollars per job spent on Obama's atrocious green energy plan, its actually from fracking. Fracking, also hated by enviro-statists, is the free markets answer to the lack of access to the startling amounts of oil we aren't allowed to touch thanks to the government. It has single-handedly carried the economy out of the recession. As anyone who knows a thing about economics understands, creating businesses, and therefore jobs, require two things: cheap energy and cheap labor. Since we prefer not to enslave US citizens into working for nothing, cheap energy is the only way we can maintain our economic power. Yet environmentalists want to destroy that too, and the rest of the world will overtake us if we let that happen. It's also funny how none of them are willing to live without the energy produced for them by fossil fuels. I also want to address the reason why everyone has been so indoctrinated by the environmentalist ideology. First, global warming. Or wait, is it global cooling? Let's not forget when the enviro-statists proclaimed the ice age was coming in the 1980's because of CO2 causing global COOLING. But now it's suddenly global warming? Oh wait, in 2009 the temp. of the earth went down. What should we call it now? Ah, that's right, climate change. Clearly there are some flaws, because I don't think CO2 can cause global warming and cooling at the same time. But this is ok, because isn't that the point of science? Science is not absolute; there are always differing opinions, like the 31,000 scientists who signed a petition stating the global warming is a lie. I'm not saying they are even right, I'm just stating that science is an ever-evolving study of how wrong we are. Remember the one guy who was ostracized for stating that the earth wasn't the center of the universe? That is our culture today, except the one guy is the extremely small minority of people who don't buy in to the indoctrination of the enviro-statists, who seem to believe that majority opinion is always correct. As Mark Twain famously said, ""Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect." I simply don't understand the world enviro-statists are trying to create. Is it a world where only the rich can afford the absurdly expensive cost of renewable energy? Where the poor are forced to live like uncivilized animals? Are we going to let the enviro-statists continue their genocide against Africans by not letting them use DDT to eliminate malaria, as we did here? Are we going to enslave ourselves to our government in order to subsidize solar and wind energy enough to actually do something? Notice that I never once said we should eliminate the EPA or deregulate fossil fuels, that is not the argument presented by the author or by myself, or by any other person who isn't an enviro-statist. Nor did I say that the supply of fossil fuels is limitless, although our estimates for them have always gone up substantially every time we look again. In fact, from 1980-2010, we produced 3 times more oil then was predicted to exist in 1980. On top of that, proved worldwide oil reserves have gone from 692 billion in 1980 to 1.3 trillion in 2009, even after 30 years of drilling. Although coal is dirtier than most fossil fuels, at its current consumption we have enough for 500 years. Oh, and that number will continue to go up as we find more, just like all other fossil fuels. I am proud of the fact that we utilize fossil fuels and still have the cleanest air and water that we have had in a long time. The environmentalist logic is simply disproved by the fact that so called "criteria pollutants" have declined by a whopping 63%, while at the same the generation of electricity from coal power plants has gone up 180%, and energy consumption as a whole has gone up 40%. How is this possible? Trust me, it isn't from the overwhelming 1.3% of renewable energy produced. It is from the market developing new ways to dilute pollution and our time spent studying environmental sciences, something I adamantly support. Also, some common sense regulations from the government have helped, which even the most extreme anti-enviro-statist, which most people would stereotype me as, support. Despite this success, we foolishly listen to the radical scientists who say the world is ending and that we must destroy fossil fuels. It is time to face reality and stop ignoring the facts. Humans are overpopulated in the environment, and the earth wants us dead. It has no feelings, that is just the way and balance of nature. I don't know about you, but I want humans to live, which requires both utilizing fossil fuels and not causing problems which could kill people, which extreme air pollution could do. But we have gone way too radically far to the enviro-statist side, and I fear there will be repercussions if it keeps up. I wonder if life, at least as we know it, will survive their tyranny.
      Posted by Brendan on 04/29/2014
    • Well let's clear this up. First of all, the idea that it is somehow "morally wrong" to wear that shirt on Earth Day. That is illogical, since fossil fuels are from the earth, and unless you want to crawl your ungrateful ass into a cave and die of a horrible disease you should probably celebrate the fact that we have found them and utilize them. Secondly, nobody ever said that regulation is bad, and wearing an I love fossil fuels shirt does not mean that person believes it is bad, maybe they simply believe that we are going way over the top with our obsession with the environment and the fact that our regulations are getting out of hand. Lastly, I want to talk about the issue itself, something that enviro-statists refuse to do since it destroys their argument. Those evil fossil fuels are the reason why we no longer have a miserable existence, and the reason why we have culture, art, and everything we take for granted today. Why? Because surviving is no longer the only thing in our minds, as it is for most other animals on earth. Now most would agree with what I just said, yet they believe we must find renewable energy to power us. Unfortunately, we must face the reality that renewable energy sucks. According to the Institute of Energy Research, which I will reference often, in 2010, federal subsidies for solar power were $775.64 per megawatt hour, for wind $56.29, for nuclear $3.14, for hydroelectric power $0.82, for coal $0.64 and for natural gas and petroleum liquids $0.64. If renewable energy actually did something for the country (which it doesn't), this may make sense. Yet, when one looks at the data for energy produced in the country, wind and solar COMBINE for 1.3% of our energy needs. We should be embarrassed by our government's complete and utter lack of common sense. Even when the government tries to dismantle the free market of energy, it STILL fails. Even when billions of dollars are thrown at renewable energy, it STILL sucks. Yet enviro-statists proclaim it is our moral duty to give away our hard-earned money to renewable energy, which is no more effective then burning the money. Obama's admin. has given out less leases than any other admin. in history, and amazingly we are still creating more energy today then ever. How so? Well it sure isn't from the 11 million dollars per job spent on Obama's atrocious green energy plan, its actually from fracking. Fracking, also hated by enviro-statists, is the free markets answer to the lack of access to the startling amounts of oil we aren't allowed to touch thanks to the government. It has single-handedly carried the economy out of the recession. As anyone who knows a thing about economics understands, creating businesses, and therefore jobs, require two things: cheap energy and cheap labor. Since we prefer not to enslave US citizens into working for nothing, cheap energy is the only way we can maintain our economic power. Yet environmentalists want to destroy that too, and the rest of the world will overtake us if we let that happen. It's also funny how none of them are willing to live without the energy produced for them by fossil fuels. I also want to address the reason why everyone has been so indoctrinated by the environmentalist ideology. First, global warming. Or wait, is it global cooling? Let's not forget when the enviro-statists proclaimed the ice age was coming in the 1980's because of CO2 causing global COOLING. But now it's suddenly global warming? Oh wait, in 2009 the temp. of the earth went down. What should we call it now? Ah, that's right, climate change. Clearly there are some flaws, because I don't think CO2 can cause global warming and cooling at the same time. But this is ok, because isn't that the point of science? Science is not absolute; there are always differing opinions, like the 31,000 scientists who signed a petition stating the global warming is a lie. I'm not saying they are even right, I'm just stating that science is an ever-evolving study of how wrong we are. Remember the one guy who was ostracized for stating that the earth wasn't the center of the universe? That is our culture today, except the one guy is the extremely small minority of people who don't buy in to the indoctrination of the enviro-statists, who seem to believe that majority opinion is always correct. As Mark Twain famously said, ""Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect." I simply don't understand the world enviro-statists are trying to create. Is it a world where only the rich can afford the absurdly expensive cost of renewable energy? Where the poor are forced to live like uncivilized animals? Are we going to let the enviro-statists continue their genocide against Africans by not letting them use DDT to eliminate malaria, as we did here? Are we going to enslave ourselves to our government in order to subsidize solar and wind energy enough to actually do something? Notice that I never once said we should eliminate the EPA or deregulate fossil fuels, that is not the argument presented by the author or by myself, or by any other person who isn't an enviro-statist. Nor did I say that the supply of fossil fuels is limitless, although our estimates for them have always gone up substantially every time we look again. In fact, from 1980-2010, we produced 3 times more oil then was predicted to exist in 1980. On top of that, proved worldwide oil reserves have gone from 692 billion in 1980 to 1.3 trillion in 2009, even after 30 years of drilling. Although coal is dirtier than most fossil fuels, at its current consumption we have enough for 500 years. Oh, and that number will continue to go up as we find more, just like all other fossil fuels. I am proud of the fact that we utilize fossil fuels and still have the cleanest air and water that we have had in a long time. The environmentalist logic is simply disproved by the fact that so called "criteria pollutants" have declined by a whopping 63%, while at the same the generation of electricity from coal power plants has gone up 180%, and energy consumption as a whole has gone up 40%. How is this possible? Trust me, it isn't from the overwhelming 1.3% of renewable energy produced. It is from the market developing new ways to dilute pollution and our time spent studying environmental sciences, something I adamantly support. Also, some common sense regulations from the government have helped, which even the most extreme anti-enviro-statist, which most people would stereotype me as, support. Despite this success, we foolishly listen to the radical scientists who say the world is ending and that we must destroy fossil fuels. It is time to face reality and stop ignoring the facts. Humans are overpopulated in the environment, and the earth wants us dead. It has no feelings, that is just the way and balance of nature. I don't know about you, but I want humans to live, which requires both utilizing fossil fuels and not causing problems which could kill people, which extreme air pollution could do. But we have gone way too radically far to the enviro-statist side, and I fear there will be repercussions if it keeps up. I wonder if life, at least as we know it, will survive their tyranny.
      Posted by Brendan on 04/29/2014
    • Theres a simple test when dealing with the looney left. Ask them if they are willing to stand on their principles and give up everything that fossil fuels have been involved with. I can respect those who embrace this lifestyle from their caves. Just remember theres no using fire as you sit naked in the dark. Fire gives off Co2.
      Posted by bill kent on 04/29/2014
    • First of all no one said it was wrong to wear that shirt it is just provocative to wear a shirt that you know will be offensive to others. You can wear anything you want but consequences occur as a result and that is known and stated in the constitution. We haven't even entered the Kyoto protocol and we are second to china in global emissions so we aren't really overregulated at all. Countries in Europe have adapted a plan to reduce emissions while we just sit and laugh as the temperature of last winter was a degree higher than average and that there is currently a drought gripping half the nation as well as south American countries like brazil. I'm pretty sure we still have literature from the times before electricity and coal like Shakespeare, The Bible, The awakening and the list goes on. Coal is not a necessity, it is a luxury and luxuries must sometimes be replaced in the changing times of the country. We used to have no electricity and now we do. Things change! Besides its hard to judge the true power of alternative energy if companies are too lazy to take risks and actually try other forms of energy. If persons in the past had not taken risks with new products in the past such as computers, cars, and planes the country would be radically different from the country we know today. I don't see how fracking saved this country and even if it did you would have to thank Obama for that for allowing for no regulation on the industry what so ever which is currently being struck down in courts as the industry is forced to pay 2 million dollars to a family who has suffered from the harmful effects of the industry. Besides that Climate cooling was accepted by little renown scientists in the community and has as much facts as a bigfoot living in the wild. Climate is happening. A dipole is currently in the US which is causing for cold weather in the North while causing acrid weather in the west. This winter in the US was the 7th warmest winter globally in all of history! Besides scientists are just stating the facts. This argument of falsities has been seen many times in history such as with Galileo, Da Vinci. People always deny something until it actually impacts their own lives such as new navigation or an enlightened understanding of how the world works. And like I said before, We are the one of the least regulatory nations in the world at the moment so it seems that the only fear mongers are the ones who claim there is a conspiracy by scientists to lie about their work or that if we stopped using coal that suddenly the quality of life would spiral out of control and we would all become monsters like our ancestors who were in a state of anarchy in the past without it and were only able to create such things as the ship, carriage, wheel. Right... and Obamas from Kenya.....
      Posted by Chase me on 04/29/2014
    • Yeah but what does a fire require:Oxgyen. Something your mind isn't getting enough of to understand the modern world.
      Posted by Chase me on 04/29/2014
    • Well that was the response of someone who lost. I apologize for tearing your argument to shreds, but nevertheless I will continue. Did I forget to read the part in the Constitution where you can't offend anybody? Lol. You are killing me. Offending people is a necessity to a civilized society, debate, and discussion. And how does being second in emissions prove we are not overregulated? We produce more energy than anyone else, yet we aren't first in emissions, I wonder why? Oh and did you know that there are hundreds of factors which determine earth's temp? And there are several studies indicating our recent warm trend is due to numerous other factors, including the sun's inconsistent heating? The idea that fossil fuels are the only thing that contribute to global warming is ludicrous, even if they are a factor. Also, companies would be more than willing to shut the enviro-statists up and produce renewable energy. But guess what? It sucks. Just go back to the data I demonstrated about the costs, and you can clearly see why no one is doing it, even if the government is throwing billions of dollars into it and trying to pick winners and losers. And what about the simple fact that pollution is going down and continues to go down, despite fossil fuels growing? Once again, a typical leftist who ignores the facts and tries to make a point by appealing to glittering generalities. And I'm thankful Obama hasn't shut down fracking yet, because he realizes it is saving his economy. As to the law suits, that will happen as we technology progresses. It is unfortunate, but better then living without energy in a cave, and that is also the reason why we have a court system and I applaud them for using it. It also helps to self-regulate the industry from performing dangerous practices. And you are right, I totally think Obama is from Kenya. You caught me. That is the most energy-relevant statement I have ever heard, and I'm impressed as to how you somehow managed to get that out of my statement. Please tell me where your physic powers come from.
      Posted by Brendan on 04/29/2014
    • If you have any sense at all you would I was being ironic by showing how little evidence you actually have to back up any of your claims. Besides since when do people have to shove their arguments down others throats fior people to care. Liberals a more kind and tolerant peoples who are open minded and realize that. Things are always changing in the world. Everything I said was fact. Nothing more or nothing less. Besides god forbid we regulate energy. Geez people might actually have to worry about the effects of their actions around them. And nobody calls someone else a leftist unless they get all their facts and arguments from rush Limbaugh and Fox News. The same people mind you who support a cattle farmer who steals millions from the gov and tries to start a revolt to not pay his taxes. The Republican Party is now just a group of mad men screaming to the American people about mid evil practices such as how government is evil and that war is coming because they fail to understand the modern Soceity. Also since when is being second for the US a good thing! Dosnt. American exceptional ism dictate we rule the world and must rule in all things. Lol. But really the US could be way lower if we actually gave a damn. And I'm not saying humans are solely responsible for climate change but we sure are playing a big part in it.
      Posted by Chase me on 04/29/2014
    • Here you go, here's some facts that will offset all your bollocks of an argument. http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/04/29/3432048/scotus-epa-decision-cross-state-air-pollution/
      Posted by Chase me on 04/29/2014
    • First of all I'm not a Republican, although I prefer them to the nutjobs other side. And my entire argument is based off of research and facts, which all disprove the claims made by think progress. I suggest you read the Institutes "Hard Facts" which is straightforward unbiased info which can be interpreted instead of statist indoctrinating crap. And I don't watch FOX or Limbaugh, I'm a pretty independent thinker if you haven't noticed. I can see you soak in all of mainstream media's lies though. Think for yourself for once.
      Posted by Brendan on 04/29/2014
    • First of all I'm not a Republican, although I prefer them to the nutjobs other side. And my entire argument is based off of research and facts, which all disprove the claims made by think progress. I suggest you read the Institutes "Hard Facts" which is straightforward unbiased info which can be interpreted instead of statist indoctrinating crap. And I don't watch FOX or Limbaugh, I'm a pretty independent thinker if you haven't noticed. I can see you soak in all of mainstream media's lies though. Think for yourself for once.
      Posted by Brendan on 04/29/2014
    • Whose to say my facts are wrong or your facts or your facts are wrong. It's just a matter of subjective relativity. And I do not watch the mainstream media and I do not even watch cable news channels. I just look up facts and stats on websites such as pew research and where it is impossible for stats to be distorted. Is it even possible to distort stats without someone noticing. I highly doubt it. If CNN covers the Malaysian plane story 24/7 im sure they would take to minutes to uncover a scandal from the white house or justice department from distorting examples. IE people claim that Obama has not deported the more illegals than any other president in history but technically he has deported the most immigrants for good rather than allowing for the immigrants to return by taking photo ID and finger prints and identifying illegals when they come back so yes Obama has deported the most immigrants for good WITHOUT a path to citizenship. Another example is that people claim that there are many more African Americans on food stamps when in reality it is skewed since blacks make up a minority of peoples in the nation so in actuality more whites are on food stamps than blacks so be careful. I speak for neither party but for the truth and sometimes the truth hurts.
      Posted by Chase R on 04/29/2014
    • Wearing a shirt that professes love for fossil fuels is one thing. Saying that we owe our lives and livelihood to this addiction is another. How many thousands of Americans have died in battle to ensure our addiction? How many tens (or hundreds) of thousands of non-Americans have died in that same pipeline? Even with dwindling domestic supplies, it is far past the time to move on to more sustainable means of energy, more peaceful ways of procuring it, and more efficient ways of using it.
      Posted by Doc Sarvis on 05/05/2014
    • I want that shirt :P
      Posted by Jessie on 05/06/2014
    Leave a comment
    Name
    Email
    Comment
Copyright 2013 Young America's Foundation | 110 Elden Street, Herndon, VA 20170 | Ph. 1.800.USA.1776 | Fax 703.318.9122
www.yaf.org | www.reaganranch.org | www.nationaljournalismcenter.org