Greenpeace None Too Happy with Mighty O Sinking...

[lamont]

The original text by Greenpeace that kicked this one off was heavy with propaganda and light on facts, which is its basic problem. Its really amazing how light on facts most of the anti-Greenpeace posters are though. You're not really part of the solution to the discourse problem in this country.

 

[Kim]

The original text by Greenpeace that kicked this one off was heavy with propaganda and light on facts, which is its basic problem. Its really amazing how light on facts most of the anti-Greenpeace posters are though. You're not really part of the solution to the discourse problem in this country.

I'd have to agree with that. Of course, talking (or arguing) about it isn't going to change the actual reality of anything. The planet has a huge capacity to look after itself (much like humans can physically tolerate an incredible amount of self inflicted abuse) In the end though, if we are persistent enough it's possible to screw up anything!

 

[H2Andy]

You're not really part of the solution to the discourse problem in this country.

boy, ain't that the truth

it seems that the "powerful statement" (never mind if it's based on fact or not)
rules the day, and anyone can make any claim, and in the whirlwhind of
radio talk and internet chatter, he who shouts loudest is "right."

it's all about careers and egos, and nothing to do with the search for the truth

 

[Skull]

Again, you are extrapolating. Without knowing the direct, or primary funding streams of these organizations you make inferences to "supposed" connections to big business. I'm sure if you dig hard enough you can find a dirty connection. Money, back room deals are standard fare wherever there is an opportunity for personal gain, or profit.

If you see contradictions in life do something about it. You like DU. Support em'. Just don't blag on...

I will continue to do what I have done. Educate, support and try to put in a dollar where I think it'll be best used. If anything, I try to invest in the future - kids. Some of the banter on this thread indicates that some folks do not get it, but live for the moment while trivializing environmental factors of great importance. In the end it's about what you believe in.

Am I here to do some good, or am I here to get what I can? Done X

I was a member of both the Seirra Club and Greenpeace ...my ex-wife almost conned me into PETA ..but enough was enough. I've been to the fund raisers here in SoCal and I meet and know some of the big contruibutors....It's not dirty money Mr X , that isn't my point.

Example here is San Dieo a few yrs back the Seirra Club backed a proposition to restrict all real estate sales in the undeveloped county areas to 88 acre parcels. Sounds good right? Only those who could afford a 88 arce parcel could buy and sell the real estate. Theory was then there would be more open space and less developement. Problem is who can afford a 88 acre parcel in san diego county? We have some of the most expensive real estate in the ENTIRE WORLD. Ahhh here's the rub it would have excluded 95% of the population in California let alone San Diego from purchasing 1,2,5, 10 acre parcels even in planned developed area already on the books. So in the end who would own this land? Only those who could afford it and of course the land would have been domained by the BLM and/or California GSA/Parks and Recs. Sounds good right governement owning the land ...but the government would have paid a premium ---err excuse me the tax payers would have paid a premium for the land which the owners who occupy the land or would have snatched it up after the prop passed would recieve the windfall . Ahh but the ads from Seirra were so masterfully done with nobility and righteousness for the cause ...most folks in San Diego saw through the BS and defeated the plan... thankfully.

Just one example ...but hey like I posted earlier I don't want to state example after example of what I have been witness too ...it doesn't matter, you folks will believe what you want because frankly you WANT to believe these institutions are sincere, responsible and on your side. I'm never going to change your mind .. I just saw them for what they truly are and quit contributing. The greedy will always devise new ways and organizations of taking your right to land and opportunity ...its been that way for millinia.

Greenpeace doesn't care about the Mighty O ...they want to sue the tax payers of the USA to preserve there organization and to promote their fund raising . 700 lbs of PCB though bad as it sounds is managable ...over the next 200 yrs life for the Mighty O

 

[Agent 47]

Amen, Mr. Skull.

 

[DiverBuoy]

As to the "adverse effect" comment...
Personally, I think I have just as much right to live as the next animal. If I happen to eat that animal in the process, perhaps it should have evolved a faster way to get away, or a better way to kill me first. Sucks for them, but that's how it goes sometimes.

Yes but you also have "evolved/learned" to use your much higher intellect to create choices/tools which allow you to look at more than just the club over the head and drag it by its hair approach to every problem. A two year old throws a temper tantrum because after reaching a similiar level of frustration that any adult human might reach, it lacks the self control and self discipline to negotiate for an environmentally sound response to the external stimulus. When presented with several options, among which a 'best' option can be chosen it is intellect that allows you to select the one with longer term benefits, and human patience which lets you excersize self control to know this isn't your last meal, and envronmental responsibility to discipline yourself to conserve, preserve, plan, negotiate, deliberate, and choose most wisely. I'm personally not a believer in evolution for one reason above all others ... it is an excuse for the human family to be responsible to no one or no thing, especially not themselves and each other.

 

[H2Andy]

Example here is San Dieo a few yrs back the Seirra Club backed a proposition to restrict all real estate sales in the undeveloped county areas to 88 acre parcels.

i am pretty sure this means you can buy and sell parcels of any size up to
and including 88 acres.

limiting sales to 88 acre parcels (and only 88 acre parcels) is not only inane,
it's unworkable.

 

[Skull]

i am pretty sure this means you can buy and sell parcels of any size up to
and including 88 acres.

limiting sales to 88 acre parcels (and only 88 acre parcels) is not only inane,
it's unworkable.

No Andy the Prop was specific as to the MINIMUM parcel size.

Yes it was an inane and unworkable law, which was clearly a land grab by the extremely wealthy of California and backed/funded by the Seirra Club through the legal system of PROP. Voting in California.

 

[H2Andy]

holy cow.... even as a minimum size, what a bad idea

 

[Mr.X]

No Andy the Prop was specific as to the MINIMUM parcel size.

Yes it was an inane and unworkable law, which was clearly a land grab by the extremely wealthy of California and backed/funded by the Seirra Club through the legal system of PROP. Voting in California.

Was this previous 88 acre initiative called "Rural Lands Initiative"? I haven't kept up with the props. in California and needless to say some of them can be quite strange. I'd be curious to read the details limiting minimum parcel size to 88 acres. It seems there are similar props. on the venue. Prop A. Cheers. X