13 Sep 07
Originally posted by mdhallAgain you resort to personal insults .... but whatever turns you on.
Way to dodge thinking again.
Now I can happily label you as "Troll" and ignore your comments.
Anyway if you call this nonsense 'thinking' :
More Humans = More Resources Required = Bigger Strain on 3rd World Labor = Wider spread between Rich|Poor = Violence in 3rd world countries = Human genocide (Rwanda) = No time to grasp why the extinction of other life forms is so essential to our own well being (Biodiversity) = Mass Ignorance.
..... then I am happy if you choose to ignore my comments.
13 Sep 07
The post that was quoted here has been removedThere are two issues here. One is what does it cost and the other is why she should bother.
I think the second is obvious. Unless she's a complete selfish b****, she'll understand that the final effect of a large majority not caring is very negative. We create much more garbage than the time it takes for the biodegradable elements to...well...biodegrade and other types of garbage are not even biodegradable. Obviously this is not sustainable. Of course, one can say that technology evolves and one day this won't even be an issue as we can turn a pile of garbage into a beautiful meadow. Maybe. But should we risk it? What will the world her grandchildren will live in look like? Does trying to avoid that risk sound like a luxury?
The first (what does it cost her?) is also a clear "not that much, actually". It's true that recycling may not be the only possible solution but it's one that is actually not very costly. The real cost of separating garbage is only in terms of time and its incredibly marginal and walking or driving to the bins is no more than 5 minutes in every major city. The only main difference is that people need to get used to it at first. It strikes me then as pure and simple laziness to not do it. It's not like her children will be worse fed, or her house chores will be much harder.
13 Sep 07
The post that was quoted here has been removedYou raise a good point.
The last thing we need is for preserving our environment to become a class war, because it is an imminent threat Humanity faces together.
If you do not understand why recycling is so important to all people despite income levels please do some research on a land fill near you, or maybe take a cruise to see one of Humanity's wonderful floating islands of garbage [http://www.vestaldesign.com/blog/2006/08/oceans-of-garbage.html].
Class separation is a problem Humanity can and has lived with since the beginning. Landfills poisoning our own habitat is not.
13 Sep 07
Originally posted by PalynkaLet me say over what I said hopefully in clearer language.
Fallacy of false dilemma. Look it up.
I have no problem with environmental concerns and would wish that all the flora and fauna would survive for thousands of years. I certainly agree that if possible smaller issues should be addressed even though bigger issues cannot.
Those who have the ability (time and resources) to be concerned and to address the problem of environmental degradation should do so as best as they can, without condemning the 3W countries for trying survive which is what the initial post did.
13 Sep 07
The post that was quoted here has been removedshe wouldn't understand that she has the power to change.
Why not?
If you left school at 15 and work 12 hour shifts in a factory, or raise 3 kids by yourself on benefits, your priorities are different.
I agree, but if these habits are entrenched, the real cost is almost zero.
Preaching at people from different social and economic backgrounds won't save the gorillas.
I think that if we actually succeed in helping the people in those countries (or even better they manage to succeed without help) they will start caring for the natural heritage of their country. I don't think that people kill gorillas for fun (except a few deranged hunters). This is obviously the best way.
So, no, your rant isn't all that misguided, just that the two things are in no way contradictory...
13 Sep 07
Originally posted by mdhallI miss the grape ape. They could use vans to skate around on.
Gorillas head race to extinction
By Richard Black
Environment correspondent, BBC News website
Gorillas, orangutans, and corals are among the plants and animals which are sliding closer to extinction.
The Red List of Threatened Species for 2007 names habitat loss, hunting and climate change among the causes.
The World Conservation Union (IUCN) has i ...[text shortened]... .stm
-------------------------------
Very sad times we live in.
13 Sep 07
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterDon't you remember how THAT worked out? Not even an Australian Outback Bloke could handle those things, and they are the toughest men on the planet! Except of course for the USMC.
Aw hell -- if we can clone dinosaurs like in Jurassic Park, then what's the problem?
14 Sep 07
Originally posted by mdhallDang it, if I had such a doom and gloom view of the world then = depression.
Life on earth functions on biodiversity.
Less biodiversity = more vulnerabilities amongst livestock and agriculture to adaptive virulent disease which are evolving at an alarming rate due to popular pharmaceutical defenses (a new anti-virus takes Humanity years to develop, a Virus goes through a generation in a fraction of the time) = increasing % for Pandem ...[text shortened]... people become depressed and careless when they follow the modern lifestyle programming.
Fortunately I don't, there's good everywhere, more people living longer healthier lives, more people living more freely than ever before, greater trade meaning more people in poor countries are trading themselves into wealth, all good stuff.