Environmentalist site for kids, is this a joke!?

Question

I stumbled upon this website and I was truly SHOCKED. The site has you (the child) answer a series of questions, then it calculates WHEN YOU SHOULD DIE. Apparently, I was supposed to die when I was 8.7 becuse I'm using to much of the earth resources..

The ABC managing director Mark Scott said the site was not designed to offend certain quarters of the community but to engage children in environmental issues.

I'm not offended, I'm just shocked that they're trying to tell us that the earth is more important than a human life! I'm absolutly flabbergasted!

Am I the only one who feels this way?

Cheak out the site for yourself:

http://www.abc.net.au/science/planetslayer/greenhouse_calc.htm

Answer 1

Yes, it does seem to have a certain tongue-in-cheek humor style to it.  It's apparently a parody of the problem done arguably in questionable taste, in line with the traditions of Monty Python, Saturday Night Live, Beavis and Butthead, Ren & Stimpy, South Park,  Borat, Sponge Bob Square Pants and editorial cartoons in newspapers.  It's probably aimed at 13 to 17 year olds who are accustomed to ironic ways of approaching serious problems and who would recognize that it's certainly not actually advocating that they "should die".  Most South Park and Sponge Bob fans would probably be laughnig pretty hard at the ridiculousness of that absurd suggestion, while getting the implied message that the factors that led to that result are harmful, mocking the way that many people choose to live today.

Humor that "pushes our buttons" is a coping mechnism and a stress reducer,  a way to laugh at things that threaten and scare us, which we otherwise might not bring ourselves to examine closely.  It even enables us to examine our prejudices and blind spots, and our frequent inability to deal with them, so it can be a valuable educational tool.  The site informed me that I used up my share of the planet's resources by age 9.2.  Since I'm having a high impact, I can consider some of the alternatives offered as I took the questions.  That seems pretty positive to me.

In this case it also successfully confronted you, enabling you to think about your lifestyle and the impact it is having on the other 6.6 billion people on the planet.  Objecting to the way it is presented seems like a way of avoiding that topic.  

There is no message there that claims that "the earth is more important than a human life", the site is to point out our impact, so we have the opportunity to save lives.  You object to being educated on that point?  The global warming we're causing doesn't hurt the planet at all, only all life living on it.  

Here's the message I would have perferred to see a site like this leave people with: "What kind of value system advocates allowing one life to act in a highly damaging manner, while damaging all other lives on the planet, even threatening them with extinction?"  That's a little hard to get across in a numerical result like 8.7, but maybe it could be shown graphically, perhaps one pixel on the screen gradually exterminating all others.

By the way, if you were actually looking for a kids' site, here's one that's a lot more straightforward, created by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: http://epa.gov/climatechange/kids/change...

Thanks for the link though.  I'm going to forward it to my 11 year old.  I think she'll get a big kick out of it.

Answer 2

That's nothing.

You should see some of the stuff PETA puts out aimed towards kids.

I guess "get 'em young" is their motto.

On topic though, if it weren't for Earth and its resources there would be no human life so while it might be unnecessary to be a crazy tree hugger, its good to get kids thinking about conservation. This next generation and the one after that are going to be facing bigger energy and water crises than we are.

Answer 3

It does appear that environmentalists do not care who they hurt or how much with their propaganda.

They are unrepentant for the harm they cause, like the damage caused by biofuel.  Increased deforestation to grow crops for fuel and reduced supply and increased cost of food.  No apologies offered.

Environmentalist celebrate the rising cost of fuel due to lack of refineries, power plants, and oil exploration they caused.

Answer 4

I didn't get that out of it, but it was rather refreshing.  Our stuff is so sanitized the brain tends to sag and shrivel.  This actually engages, and that's a good thing.

It wouldn't be the technique I'd use but this was discussed before it was implemented, and I'm sure they decided not to shy away from any controversy it might generate, in fact, it seems they embraced it.

Answer 5

wtf? how would a little kid know all the answers to this?