The Sierra Club that was founded by John Muir should have FIRST on their list Hetch Hetchy. The preservation of wilderness for generations to come was what the Club was started for dammit.
They are NOT pro-hunting, and hunters such as myself are not made welcome at meetings (though I am still a member). The premier pro-hunting environmental group is Ducks Unlimited, followed by the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation.
The massive solar plants in the desert have triggered a lot of fights (the desert tortoise issue), along with nuclear plants in general. The Sierra Club DOES work with the residential solar companies though - they are very supportive of them.
In my opinion, the Club has allowed itself to get into too many issues instead of focusing on what was once their core.
I suppose that just goes to show the confluence of the racist right and the eco-left, the difference is that the racist right are open in their contempt for certain groups of people while the eco-left don’t fully undertand the evil inherent in their world view. But the people who founded the modern environmentalist movement definatley do understand. Sure the eco-left leaders employ some left cover for their plans otherwise they would be rejected outright. It’s a sad state of affairs when people seem forced to choose between one or the other or risk being called a “bleeding heart liberal” or a “climate denier”. Personally my ideology is to support economic development worldwide in order to drag bilions of people out of grinding poverty, this clashes irreconcilably with the right wingers AND the modern left that has been hijacked by environmentalist dogma.
You’re supposedly writing a book on the issue and this is the best argument you can muster. Not surprising, really; it’s a lot easier to be ‘writing a book’ than to actually create a manuscript suitable for sending off to publishers.
Oh, you mean like the one that exist in right wing land where they are mass murderers? It is indeed the big lie.
Incidentally the point was missed when you continue to talk about “confluence”, there is no confluence as the sierra club told the racists to go away.
Sorry, but so far it is clear that you are just a concern troll with the twist that in this case you think your peculiar idea of putting a nazi hat to environmentalists will fly, in reality even conservative scientists know that the climate deniers (that are usually conservatives just because the current leadership they have thinks that it benefits them politically) are really dumb.
You realize this is the Pit, don’t you? That wasn’t an argument, best or otherwise. More pointing and laughing, but things may have cleared up.
Anyway, please don’t go. Tell me more about these mysterious “publishers” you speak of. Do you really think if I tried hard enough I might break into the field? Could I actually get paid to write? Is there any chance could end up doing it … full time?! My gosh, it sounds like one of those too-good-to-be-true stories. Heck, maybe I could even work from home, with a kid and a pretty wife to do the graphic design and layout! Think there’s any chance? What an idyllic life!
Thanks for telling me what I really believe, you cretinous oaf.
By the way, the phosphate rock runs out in ten years. When humanity is starving because its staple crops have failed, what will you be eating? Or rather whom?
Some of us have seen the future coming. You want to live in a fantasy world.
No!:eek: No being reasonable and even slightly in agreement!:eek: I will have to report you, this is clearly against the rules of not only the Pit but of the entire interweb!
Iran is developing nuclear power and either the US or Israel or both is going to declare war on them and blow the shit out them and leave the Iranian environment even more dangerously polluted than it already is.
How can any sane person agitate for more nukes for developing countries???
The United States has the authority and right to limit the technological advances (peaceful or otherwise) of other nations because?
I’m not sayin’, I’m just sayin’.
Iran is probably going to be bombed by Israel and/or the USA because it’s developing nuclear power, and its US/Zionist policy that* Iran can’t have nice things because reasons.*
That aside, in environmental health class we learned a little bit about nuclear power plants. They’re not, “clean and renewable,” so much as, “containable, until the structure physically deteriorates, so for about 25 years barring natural disaster.” Still better than coal, but much much more expensive.
And dams are their own brand of problem. Really, a mix of wind power, tidal power, and distributed solar power generation using new nanomaterials is probably the best thing we can do. But we’re going to have to cut consumption.
Of course, in about seven years the global genocides will begin in earnest, and that may do something about it.
Oh, I disagree; it is indeed the best argument I’ve heard from the anti-nuclear people in quite some time. At least it doesn’t presuppose that nuclear reactors can explode like bombs.
Anyway, yes, I am wasting my time dealing with someone who hasn’t even heard of James Lovelock.
You’ve just proved me right. You say that phosphate will run out in ten years, actually at current usage the known supplies alone will last 345 years, obviously a lot more will be found over this time then are used as is always the way. So why bring up this mistruth? It’s not like we can just be nicer to squirrels and phosphate use will decrease. The only way to use less would be to reduce farming and industrial production. Which branch of environmentalism do you subcribe to? Stopping the useless eaters from breeding, throwing billions of people into poverty or out and out genocide right now for the sake of the planet?
