Quote:
Originally Posted by j10asen
Politics may not be the answer to restoring our environment but we do need some type of formal governing body that can. If we abandon that we will have anarchy and that would never produce controls to restore our Eco-system.
|
I don't agree (Surprise, surprise)
We are nowhere near being close to anarchy or endorsing anarchy. We are much closer to totalitarianism.
My view is that I don't accept the premise that we have to "restore" the environment. Restore it to what? Who is "we"? Can we really? How much can we control? Does the other 95% of the world care as much? What should the focus really be? Maybe Starvation, HIV and Malaria are more of a threat than a phoney global warming scare. At least we know those are real. Maybe starvation in Africa can be helped by teaching them good farming practices with irrigation, fertilization and pest control and animal husbandry instead of telling them that they're doomed (by calling them climate refugees) because
we ruined the planet with global warming.
Quote:
Originally Posted by j10asen
I do know this is a very difficult task to accomplish and is beyond my comprehension.
|
To me, it's not that tough. First, if you accept that Al Gore has lied in that last post I provided, what else has he lied about? He's the face of "climate change". Al Gore and the IPCC no longer have any real credibility with real independant scientists. Politicians still hang on their every word. But that's because it feeds the agenda.
Take out politics and look at reality and the course is clear. We take care of our environment the best we can keeping in mind that we only control so much.
What the global environmentalist extremists want is for everyone to reduce our standard of living. That's the wrong way to go. Prosperity and wealth foster good clean environments.
Think about it. Who cares for, and takes care of the environment better than free and prosperous people? Where are the worst conditions? Poor 3rd world countries.
So while we say we won't drill in the Gulf of Mexico (as an example) because it'll "hurt the environment", a different country drills it's hole right next to where we were and sells us the oil anyway. Chances are, that country does not have the same care for the environment that we do. So if you (or others)
really cared about the environment, you'd want the U.S. doing the drilling instead of a dictatorial 3rd world country that could care less about anything related to the environment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by j10asen
Perhaps we need to accept that everything has a life-cycle and Earth is on the downward part of it's life-cycle.
|
I don't agree. I don't believe that anyone knows the limits of humankind, it's creativity, resourcefullness and ability to grow. We also have no idea what the Earth can stand, what it still holds in store for us and what it's capable of providing us.
But we first have to deal in facts and science, not scare tactics and politics designed for world-wide wealth redistribution.
I'm optimistic, as long as we don't stand in our own way.
