# Chen019: A bigger fool that follows other fools **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [June 18, 2011, 4:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-a-bigger-fool-that-follows-other-fools/585909 "2011-06-18T04:40:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 13
**Author:** ![Chen019](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f19dbf/32.png) [@Chen019](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chen019)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2011, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-a-bigger-fool-that-follows-other-fools/585909/241 "2011-06-26T22:04:31Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > "We already established that you were an idiot for thinking Brown was helping you more. Brown does not look at curving immigration as a solution, but notices that immigration is a symptom for not dealing with the main issues. Fail. [In 2006 Brown observed that the US population reaching 300 million was bad news for the environment](http://www.earth-policy.org/plan_b_updates/2006/update59). He also considered 400 million would be bad too. [US population growth is driven significantly by immigration.](http://articles.philly.com/2011-03-27/news/29194909_1_immigration-population-growth-illegal-aliens/2) Therefore reducing immigration is one way to address population growth in the US & alleviate the environmental damage that it causes. You would need an expert to tell you that if you go outside in the rain you get wet. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2011, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-a-bigger-fool-that-follows-other-fools/585909/242 "2011-06-26T22:17:22Z")
> [@Chen019](#): > > Fail. [In 2006 Brown observed that the US population reaching 300 million was bad news for the environment](http://www.earth-policy.org/plan_b_updates/2006/update59). He also considered 400 million would be bad too. Obviously the part that where he reports that reducing poverty is the key was ignored. But then we already knew you would heroically manage. 🙂 > [@Chen019](#): > > You would need an expert to tell you that if you go outside in the rain you get wet. 😃 You only become an expert at showing all what a dupe you are. [http://www.newcomm.org/images/stories/ATB/rme\_paper\_final.pdf](http://www.newcomm.org/images/stories/ATB/rme_paper_final.pdf) > [@](#): > > To address climate change is to > address the social structures that have > created it. This paper provides a realistic > and humanistic perspective on the > connections between climate change > and US immigration, and argues against > the notion that people, and especially > immigrants, are necessarily bad for the > environment. The paper will illustrate, > on the contrary, that immigrants are > disproportionately harmed by environmental > degradation and climate > change, and are key players in the creation > of alternatives to highly consumptive > living. Global warming today is an > anthropogenic process to which the > world has stood witness without > assignment of accountability. > The major industrial players—large > carbon consumers and policy makers at > the heart of fossil fuel industry—must > be held accountable, while the environmental > movement leads the country > toward a greener future. Scapegoating > immigrants for environmental ills will > not be part of the solution. While the > harmful effects of climate change cannot > be undone in the short term, the > social and political responses to these > effects are within the control of society. > This is an empowering reality and will > require environmentalists to consider > the immense social consequences of > environmental degradation. > [@](#): > > Conclusion > > The focus of environmentalists, then, should not be on closing borders > and blaming others for a changing climate, but on curtailing a system > that consumes freely with little regard to global impact. ---
**Author:** ![Chen019](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f19dbf/32.png) [@Chen019](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chen019)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2011, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-a-bigger-fool-that-follows-other-fools/585909/243 "2011-06-26T22:18:34Z")
> [@Chen019](#): > > Fail. [In 2006 Brown observed that the US population reaching 300 million was bad news for the environment](http://www.earth-policy.org/plan_b_updates/2006/update59). He also considered 400 million would be bad too. > > [US population growth is driven significantly by immigration.](http://articles.philly.com/2011-03-27/news/29194909_1_immigration-population-growth-illegal-aliens/2) > > Therefore reducing immigration is one way to address population growth in the US & alleviate the environmental damage that it causes. > > You would need an expert to tell you that if you go outside in the rain you get wet. 😃 Any response to the above? Other than, oh no we couldn’t possibly consider _that._ ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2011, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-a-bigger-fool-that-follows-other-fools/585909/244 "2011-06-26T22:26:25Z")
> [@Chen019](#): > > Any response to the above? Other than, oh no we couldn’t possibly consider _that._ You are so deluded that you continue to ignore on purpose that population control was already a given. What Brown and other environmentalists do not give you is that immigration should be the focus for that control. You continue to avoid on purpose that “the focus of environmentalists, then, should not be on closing borders and blaming others for a changing climate, but on curtailing a system that consumes freely with little regard to global impact.” And also you pretend that your efforts do not ultimately make your pet issue worse. It would be totally sad if it wasn’t for the fact that that shows what an hypocrite those fake environmental organizations really are. And it demonstrates to all how scared you are for not dealing with those items. Keep going “hero”. ---
**Author:** ![Chen019](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f19dbf/32.png) [@Chen019](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chen019)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2011, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-a-bigger-fool-that-follows-other-fools/585909/245 "2011-06-26T22:42:23Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > You are so deluded that you continue to ignore on purpose that population control was already a given. What Brown and other environmentalists do not give you is that immigration should be the focus for that control. > > You continue to avoid on purpose that “the focus of environmentalists, then, should not be on closing borders and blaming others for a changing climate, but on curtailing a system that consumes freely with little regard to global impact.” > > And also you pretend that your efforts do not ultimately make your pet issue worse. It would be totally sad if it wasn’t for the fact that that shows what an hypocrite those fake environmental organizations really are. > > And it demonstrates to all how scared you are for not dealing with those items. Keep going “hero”. Yes, and immigration reduction is one logical way of addressing population growth. What are you so afraid of? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2011, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-a-bigger-fool-that-follows-other-fools/585909/246 "2011-06-26T22:50:14Z")
> [@Chen019](#): > > Yes, and immigration reduction is one logical way of addressing population growth. What are you so afraid of? Why should I be afraid when even your favorite environmentalist does not see it that way, and that others see that your logic is rotten? [http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2010/09/24/stand-against-the-“greening-of-hate”-for-the-movement-we-believe-in/#more-20974](http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2010/09/24/stand-against-the-%E2%80%9Cgreening-of-hate%E2%80%9D-for-the-movement-we-believe-in/#more-20974) > [@](#): > > No one likes litter, especially those espousing to be environmentalists. The narrative of this film is easy to follow. Immigrants = trash = ruined wildlife = environmental disaster. > > It’s a simple argument to pull apart; consumption levels of people in America are astronomically higher than those of our southern neighbors and historically the U.S. accounts for a disproportionate amount of carbon emissions. Upon entering the U.S. one doesn’t immediately increase their consumption; factors of class and wealth are much better indicators of consumption. Since the Environmental Justice movement took off in the early 1980s, more and more immigrants and people of color have contributed their voices and values to the fight for the environment and climate. In short, immigrants aren’t the problem. What you are are afraid of is to face to the fact that you are being manipulated **or even willing to throw under the bus your so called beliefs that AGW should be a concern**. > **[Heritage Foundation Wastes No Time Spinning Court Ruling On Greenhouse Gas...](https://www.desmog.com/2011/06/21/heritage-foundation-wastes-no-time-spinning-court-ruling-greenhouse-gas-emissions/)** > > The U.S. Supreme Court ruled against plaintiffs yesterday in a lawsuit (American Electric Power Co. v. Connecticut) brought by six states against several utility companies and the government-owned Tennessee Valley Authority. The states (California,... > [@](#): > > It should come as no surprise that some of the biggest financiers of the Heritage Foundation include oil giants Exxon Mobil and Chevron Texaco. In addition, Greenpeace has pointed out that the organization received more than $2 million from Koch foundations from 1997 – 2009. **Greenpeace and DeSmogBlog have also noted that Heritage has been involved in a strategic cover up of climate science and that the group has been leading the misinformation campaign on climate change for years.** > > The Court’s ruling might seem like a setback, but there is clearly a silver lining. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, who wrote the opinion in the ruling, said that the plaintiffs were simply making their case in the wrong forum. > > Furthermore, this ruling reaffirms the Court’s previous ruling that EPA has the authority to regulate this air pollution under the Clean Air Act. While some politicians are working to repeal the EPA’s authority, the U.S. Supreme Court just gave the agency a much-needed boost. ---
**Author:** ![Chen019](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f19dbf/32.png) [@Chen019](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chen019)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2011, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-a-bigger-fool-that-follows-other-fools/585909/247 "2011-06-27T00:12:50Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Why should I be afraid when even your favorite environmentalist does not see it that way] I mean why do you think any immigration restriction is beyond the pale? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2011, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-a-bigger-fool-that-follows-other-fools/585909/248 "2011-06-27T00:20:07Z")
> [@Chen019](#): > > I mean why do you think any immigration restriction is beyond the pale? You are really dense X10 🙂 As mentioned before, other organizations have to deal with this issue, Environmentalists do not. As I already mentioned before that I agree with more secure borders and other restrictions, your question here is certifiably stupid. But then again, I’m glad to be able to point that once again. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Chen019](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f19dbf/32.png) [@Chen019](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chen019)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2011, 12:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-a-bigger-fool-that-follows-other-fools/585909/249 "2011-06-27T00:24:16Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > As I already mentioned before that I agree with more secure borders and other restrictions, your question here is certifiably stupid. That is not clear from your comments. As I’ve demonstrated above, it is quite logical to reduce immigration as a means of reducing population growth in the US. Therefore there must be strong emotional or political reasons for avoiding such an obvious policy option 🙂 As Gaylord Nelson put it: > [@](#): > > in this country, it’s phony to say, it’s phony to say “I’m for the environment but not for limiting immigration.” Some common sense observations: > [@](#): > > Jonathon Porritt, chairman of the Sustainable Development Commission, said it was entirely possible to be “very progressive” on immigration while still having a policy of “zero net immigration” and no further population growth. > > Mr Porritt told an audience at the Cheltenham Science Festival, he would like to see Britain’s population on a declining trend, instead of increasing to 65 million in ten years and to 70 million by 2031. > **[Environment](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/environment/)** > > Find all the latest news on the environment and climate change from the Telegraph. Including daily emissions and pollution data. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2011, 1:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-a-bigger-fool-that-follows-other-fools/585909/250 "2011-06-27T01:49:00Z")
> [@Chen019](#): > > That is not clear from your comments. As I’ve demonstrated above, it is quite logical to reduce immigration as a means of reducing population growth in the US. > > Therefore there must be strong emotional or political reasons for avoiding such an obvious policy option 🙂 As Gaylord Nelson put it: And he was wrong by being an absolutist on this. Absolute assertions demand more explanations and we already offered a lot on why he was not really that accurate on this point. > **[Negative Population Growth is Recruiting Environmentalists - IMAGINE 2050](https://newcomm.org/files/imagine2050-sub/2010/10/04/negative-population-growth-is-recruiting-environmentalists/)** > > The anti-immigrant movement is attempting inroads into the environmental movement yet again.  This time, Negative Population Growth (NPG) has taken up the torch.  NPG is campaigning for both a National Population Policy and a... > [@](#): > > This is not new for NPG. One of the advertisements that NPG claimed to run in The Washington Times Weekly this past July read, > > “THE CRISIS IN THE GULF OF MEXICO IS ONLY THE BEGINNING…Without a national population policy America will face future environmental disasters on a regular basis!” > > NPG is out for making yet another attempt to further the manipulative demand for U.S. Population Stabilization by white nationalists and anti-immigration groups. NPG may not have a truly environmental platform, but there should be no question that a goal of NPG is to build a base of environmentalists. The ad above is targeting those concerned with the Oil Spill. And again NPG declares that it will reach out, “to hundreds of environmental groups.” To top it off, NPG uses Gaylord Nelson to legitimize the need to attack immigrants and push anti-immigrant agendas and U.S. Population Stabilization, > > “ In extending our invitation to join in this project we reminded environmental leaders what former U.S. Senator Gaylord Nelson, who many consider the ‘Father of Earth Day,’ wrote a decade ago: > > ‘A sustainable society may be described in several ways: a society whose activities do not exceed the carrying capacity of its resource base; or a society that manages its environmental and resource systems so that their ability to support future generations is not diminished.’” > > NPG is using arguments about sustainability, quality of life, carrying capacity and even Earth Day to promote Greenwashing Nativism with messages of hate, bigotry and racism. The environmental community is responding to this type of bigotry; some are even taking a pledge to reject it as well. While Negative Population Growth is trying to recruit and speak on behalf of environmentalists; many are taking a stand to promote inclusive ways to address pressing environmental problems. > [@Chen019](#): > > Some common sense observations: > > [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthcomment/charlesclover/3343704/Jonathon-Porritt-Britain-should-have-zero-net-immigration-policy.html](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthcomment/charlesclover/3343704/Jonathon-Porritt-Britain-should-have-zero-net-immigration-policy.html) Be as it may, it has to be commendable that he does not shy away from putting pressure on the ones that are in Britain now and advises all to have less children. Unfortunately I can see that he still uses the lie that environmentalists do not look at family planning. So for real common sense one will have to look elsewhere. > **[Population Bombs](https://www.monbiot.com/2008/01/29/population-bombs/)** > > It’s an important issue, but nowhere near the top of the list. > [@](#): > > None of this means that we should forget about it. Even if there were no environmental pressures caused by population growth, we should still support the measures required to tackle it: universal sex education, universal access to contraceptives, better schooling and opportunities for poor women. Stabilising or even reducing the human population would ameliorate almost all environmental impacts. But to suggest, as many of my correspondents do, that population growth is largely responsible for the ecological crisis is to blame the poor for the excesses of the rich. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2011, 1:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-a-bigger-fool-that-follows-other-fools/585909/251 "2011-06-27T01:55:14Z")
But speaking of logical, you can not avoid the fact that it is clear that you continue to avoid that organizations like The Heritage Foundation are funding anti-immigrant groups and and the same time continue to deny that there is any AGW. Not providing any cites to show that the “environmentalist” anti-immigrants are involved in any efforts to tell politicians to do something about carbon emissions demonstrate that your favorite organizations are just lying regarding their environmentalist goals. ---
**Author:** ![Chen019](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f19dbf/32.png) [@Chen019](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chen019)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2011, 2:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-a-bigger-fool-that-follows-other-fools/585909/252 "2011-06-27T02:06:46Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Be as it may, it has to be commendable that he does not shy away from putting pressure on the ones that are in Britain now and advises all to have less children. > > Unfortunately I can see that he still uses the lie that environmentalists do not look at family planning. I think his point is that not enough is done in relation to that. Also, he makes the obvious point about immigration and population growth in the UK. His position sounds similar to that of the Sierra Club until the mid 90’s: > [@](#): > > Jonathon Porritt, chairman of the Sustainable Development Commission, said it was entirely possible to be “very progressive” on immigration while still having a policy of “zero net immigration” and no further population growth. > **[Environment](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/environment/)** > > Find all the latest news on the environment and climate change from the Telegraph. Including daily emissions and pollution data. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2011, 2:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-a-bigger-fool-that-follows-other-fools/585909/253 "2011-06-27T02:36:02Z")
> [@Chen019](#): > > I think his point is that not enough is done in relation to that. Also, he makes the obvious point about immigration and population growth in the UK. His position sounds similar to that of the Sierra Club until the mid 90’s: > > [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthcomment/charlesclover/3343704/Jonathon-Porritt-Britain-should-have-zero-net-immigration-policy.html](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthcomment/charlesclover/3343704/Jonathon-Porritt-Britain-should-have-zero-net-immigration-policy.html) Again, many over there also disagree with that. But the most important thing to realize is that he is part of the government, not an environmentalist group. As I said before, immigration is more pertinent to public organizations than the sorry spectacle of nativist organizations attempting to hi-jack an environmentalist organization. Environmentalists reject that and also the idea that immigrants should be blamed for the problem when even in other developed countries they can see how shortsighted that “logic” is. [http://www.foe.org.au/population](http://www.foe.org.au/population) > [@](#): > > Some extremist population control groups have been wooing environmentalists to support anti-immigrant policies, at a time when environmentalists and immigrants need to be working together. They claim that immigration needs to be restricted because population growth is a major factor in US environmental degradation. > > We reject this argument and its results. > > Blaming population growth is a convenient way to ignore the varying environmental impacts of different groups of people and institutions. The impact of an immigrant family living in a one-bedroom apartment and using mass transit pales in comparison to that of a wealthy family living in a single-family home with a swimming pool and two cars. That the US, with only 5 per cent of the world’s population, consumes 32 per cent of the world’s petroleum and plastics and produces 22 per cent of the world’s carbon dioxide and chloroflourocarbon (CFC) emissions is not a reason to close our borders but to change our super-consuming economy. For example, reducing energy use will not be solved by curbing migration, but by adopting policies promoting energy efficiency, mass transit, and renewable energy technologies. > > Over-emphasising the role of population growth in environmental problems ignores who has control over production and consumption decisions. Many of the causes of environmental decline in this country have nothing to do with population growth or individual consumer choice. > The military, the nation’s largest single polluter, and corporations produce much more toxic waste than households. Corporate advertising drives over-consumption and creates demand for new products that are often more environmentally destructive than the old products. Sprawling suburbs, planned and built by developers, gobble up prime agricultural land and wildlife habitat. The public has little control over these decisions. Attempts to make companies clean up after themselves or make new development more compact and efficient are often undermined by industry lobbying against regulations. ---
**Author:** ![Chen019](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f19dbf/32.png) [@Chen019](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chen019)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2011, 2:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-a-bigger-fool-that-follows-other-fools/585909/254 "2011-06-27T02:39:43Z")
It’s not a case of blame, it’s simply a question of how to effectively stabilize the population. Porritt is to be commended for pointing out the obvious, that “zero net immigration” is a way to achieve this. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2011, 2:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-a-bigger-fool-that-follows-other-fools/585909/255 "2011-06-27T02:55:59Z")
> [@Chen019](#): > > It’s not a case of blame, it’s simply a question of how to effectively stabilize the population. Unfortunately you poisoned the well by referring to those nativist groups on your OP in GD. > [@Chen019](#): > > Porritt is to be commended for pointing out the obvious, that “zero net immigration” is a way to achieve this. Not so obvious as it is controversial and not all go for “zero” and: > **[70% of Britons want big cuts in the rate of immigration](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1184611/70-Britons-want-big-cuts-rate-immigration.html)** > > The YouGov survey found that just one person in 20 supports the current record levels, which have boosted Britain's population by 300,000 a year over the past five years. > [@](#): > > But critics say it will have little effect, **especially as Britain has no control over the numbers arriving from EU states, including eastern Europe.** ---
**Author:** ![Chen019](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f19dbf/32.png) [@Chen019](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chen019)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2011, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-a-bigger-fool-that-follows-other-fools/585909/256 "2011-06-27T03:00:53Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Unfortunately you poisoned the well by referring to those nativist groups on your OP in GD. > > Not so obvious as it is controversial and not all go for “zero” and: > > [70% of Britons want big cuts in the rate of immigration | Daily Mail Online](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1184611/70-Britons-want-big-cuts-rate-immigration.html) I think you’ll find you are the one poisoning the well by name calling opponents. In any case, I’m getting the impression you would never support zero net immigration even if every environmentalist on the planet supported it 😃 ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2011, 3:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-a-bigger-fool-that-follows-other-fools/585909/257 "2011-06-27T03:19:48Z")
> [@Chen019](#): > > I think you’ll find you are the one poisoning the well by name calling opponents. In any case, I’m getting the impression you would never support zero net immigration even if every environmentalist on the planet supported it 😃 You are only admitting that you virtually do not have any good respected environmentalist that supports your peculiar points as the one you quoted was not from an environmentalist group but from a government agency proposing policy. Speaking of name calling, it can not be helped if the shoe fits, now we have the case of you running from here to GD to do a jerk move: [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=13960116&postcount=526](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=13960116&postcount=526) We know already, you do not like the answers and you are pretending that no reply was made. But I’m glad that I can show all the jerk that you are. Still pending, any evidence whatsoever that shows that the nativist groups that pretend to be environmentalists in the USA are all what they pretend to be. They are missing in action on anything related to carbon emissions controls in government. ---
**Author:** ![Chen019](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f19dbf/32.png) [@Chen019](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chen019)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2011, 3:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-a-bigger-fool-that-follows-other-fools/585909/258 "2011-06-27T03:35:21Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > You are only admitting that you virtually do not . Missing the point again GIGO. I was saying that it would make no difference to your position if every environmentalist on the planet said immigration to the US should be reduced. You would still not accept that. > [@](#): > > Speaking of name calling, it can not be helped if the shoe fits, now we have the case of you running from here to GD to do a jerk move: I removed any name calling from the post, leaving just the parts that identify your ridiculous evasions and squid ink. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2011, 3:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-a-bigger-fool-that-follows-other-fools/585909/259 "2011-06-27T03:44:32Z")
> [@Chen019](#): > > Missing the point again GIGO. I was saying that it would make no difference to your position if every environmentalist on the planet said immigration to the US should be reduced. You would still not accept that. What anyone can see is that you cut the rest of the quote to make it so, I would have doubts if most environmentalists would focus on immigration, as they are not, you are only involved in wishful thinking. > [@Chen019](#): > > I removed any name calling from the post, leaving just the parts that identify your ridiculous evasions and squid ink. And everyone can see that I replied already to that here, the fact that you do not like the answers is no reason to be a jerk and demand different ones in GD. ---
**Author:** ![Chen019](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f19dbf/32.png) [@Chen019](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chen019)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2011, 3:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-a-bigger-fool-that-follows-other-fools/585909/260 "2011-06-27T03:46:09Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > And everyone can see that I replied already to that here, the fact that you do not like the answers is no reason to be a jerk and demand different ones in GD. You were repeating the same error in GD, so it was appropriate to provide the analysis correcting you. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-a-bigger-fool-that-follows-other-fools/585909.md?page=12) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-a-bigger-fool-that-follows-other-fools/585909.md?page=14)