It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Why are so many ATS'ers "anti-Environmentalist?"

page: 2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 01:02 AM
Sadly the solution has to be a money maker. Just not a scam.

Recycled paper. If the average person is given a choice between two products, one is recycled the other is not. They are both good quality, both the same price well then we are going to pick the recycled. BUT if the recycled one is inferior and cost twice as much (like many of the items today) then most of us are going to buy the cheaper one. I for one am not going to pay $6 for a four pack of TP that feels like sandpaper I don't care how good for the environment it is.

All the education, news hype, and other various means of bulling people into being more environment conscience will come to naught in the end, for in the end it comes down to the cost. Ways to be greener that make economic sense, that is best area of research to focus on

posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 01:03 AM
reply to post by infolurker

Good ideas! WTG!
Of course common sense is in short supply nowdays!
Kind of like where I work, if it makes sense, heaven forbid we try that.
Lets keep the oil cartel going as long as possible!

posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 01:13 AM
There is no doubt there will be scams and wranglings along the way as we try to clean up the show. Country X will say country Y is unfair for reason Z, and so on. And there will be winners and losers, fairness and unfairness. Its a big task, and maybe in the end one we will fail.

But just because scheme ABC happens to be a scam doesn't mean the whole topic is hopeless or that "everything is really alright in the end."

posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 01:38 AM
Members will dispute the CAUSE of global warming/climate change untill the sun burns out.

But, not one will dispute that there is a significant change happening to our planet's climate and cycles.

edit for illiteracy!

[edit on 6/7/09 by logicalview]

posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 01:45 AM
reply to post by silent thunder

Problem - The SCAM will get in the way and prevent real solutions. Were talking Billions / Trillions of dollars here.

Imagine what could be done with a fraction of that money! We could build a self sustaining carbon neutral Algae oil facility in New Mexico and solve 100% of our energy needs within a few years!.... and get clean desalinated water to boot through solar distillation.

1000s of garbage plasma facilities to recycle landfills.

All of the real solutions that will never come to be all because people are supporting a known Scam in the hope that some little fraction of positive change will come of it. It is shameful.

posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 01:55 AM
Distructivists are predators who live to consume what others create, deviant, pathological with a sadistic attraction to necrophilia. Biologically nonadaptive and genetically programmed toward creating a planetary ecological disaster, the "environmentalists" it seems, are the greatest threat to their agenda.

[edit on 6-7-2009 by HulaAnglers]

posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 03:15 AM
I worked in the mining trade of and on for 35 years and yes i am anti-Environmentalist.

Why because i has seen for all those years the propaganda program the Environmentalist have pulled in this country.

Just about every Environmentalist scare has been 10% fact and 90% lies.

Things like the spotted owl trick.
the spotted owl is not endangered and never has been.

What the Environmentalist did was fake the numbers of spotted owls by breaking them into three sub species.
Northern Spotted Owl
California Spotted Owl
Mexican Spotted Owl

The problem is that all three sub species look almost identical and only a blood test will tell the difference.
Then a blood test will show less genetic difference then people from northern Europe and the mediterranean.

If you breed a northern spotted owl with a Mexican Spotted Owl all you get is more Spotted Owls and you do not get a hybrid.
With the Northern Spotted Owl and the California spotted owl. there is so little difference that many times the DNA can not tell the difference.
Are the numbers of northern spotted owls dropping or is there just misidentification of northern spotted owls and california spotted owls.

Without catching every spotted owl and giving it a blood test there is no way to tell if the numbers of northern spotted owls are decreasing.

We only have the Environmentalist word that they are.

There are some researchers that that believe that there is no sub-species of spotted owl just genetic drift due to habitat in the population of spotted owls.

Then you have Mohave ground squirrel (Spermophilus mohavensis)
the Environmentalist claim they are Endangered yet every public works project and private development in the eastern Mojave desert
has to have a trap and count for there Environmental Impact Report.
every EIR that has ever been done in there areas of the Mojave desert has found plenty of them. And required costly protection while the projects are ongoing. And the only people that can do the mitigating protection are all card carrying Environmentalist.
Talk about a make work for the Environmentalist program. and they get about $25+ dollars a hour.

There are 100 of other lies that the Environmentalist have used to get there way in Calif and its got to the point that all there laws, regulations and wilderness areas have stopped or displaced so many jobs outside of calif that its killing the state.

If the Environmentalist say anything to stop a project in your part of the US be very careful that what they say is not 90% lies just to get there way.

That is also my take on global warming about 90% lies and 10% facts and only the Environmentalist know what is what.

posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 03:34 AM

Originally posted by Hastobemoretolife
reply to post by infolurker

I am about all that too, but the AGW alarmist crowd has turned CO2 into this huge evil gas. It's been classified as a pollutant.

Until people back off of the "CO2 = bad" mentality we are never going to anywhere. One side is being logical about it all and the other side is being babies about it.

If we could all just agree that polluting the environment is bad and CO2 is necessary for us to exist then we can make some head way into this area. As long as people try to blame everything on CO2 then nothing is going to happen.

Sir, have you taken any basic science classes?
CO2 has a natural tendency to absorb radiation (like from the sun)absorbing specific portions of the photo energy which in turn transfers into heat.

Do you understand that various ocean and wind currents create
the weather in which we all depend?

If too much ice melts at the poles, vital ocean current will be destroyed and it WILL mess up the history of mankind.
This is not fiction, excess trapped solar energy will produce heat, this heat we induce the melting of polar ice and the cold water created will shut off an entire Earth process.
BURNING, BREATHING AND FARTING RELEASE CO2, we can not likely effect two but we can the third.

But what I don't get from you, especially politically is that you are championing a cause of the ENTITIES that have bought and sold OUR government. At the same time the same these entities dump and pump millions of tons of carcinogens into the world every year, Via land, sea and air,,, Cancer levels have been on a freightening rise consistent with mankinds output. So less the CO2, you still have things that DO effect the health of you species. Fiscally speaking, this rise in environmetal induced cancer is also a great strain on our society.

Why do you defend the very multinational interests that buy our politicians, manipulate our markets and undermined our democracy and republic? It sounds as if you are acting as an extenuation of big oils 55 PR firms.

Ultimately this is to not advocate any globalize schemes, but science itself, men have spent entire lifetimes in pursuit of this knowledge, the concept itself was first observed on another planet.

If you do not like the policies that is fine, but what you guys are doing to the way mankind has advanced thru knowledge is the real shame. I wonder why it is we still have people who use science as a way to negate truth by calling it into question. The same thing was done when the planets were first discovered, religion and BIG POWER
launched a campaign to quell to truth. Once again religion and BIG BUSINESS question entire scientific fields in order to protect religious proclamations and the uber wealthiest maintenance of power.

Why is it that you a constitution tapping patriot are on the side of the big power brokers of power itself. I mean this stance goes beyond a taxation problem as it takes a swipe at the entire scientific community. It is very similar to the way the religious
dispute radio carbon dating and many other scientific methods.

The religious protecting their edicts and some one like you protecting maximum profit margins. Both using science as an out house and both part of the same extreme of political culture. It is clear that if you dispute the science you can hide the true deep down motive that lines the entire issue.

posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 03:36 AM

Originally posted by silent thunder

why is death so bad?

posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 03:39 AM
Nature has to be treated with respect, if humans cause global warming or not is irrelevant.

posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 04:30 AM

Originally posted by Histopherness
Sadly the solution has to be a money maker. Just not a scam.

Recycled paper. If the average person is given a choice between two products, one is recycled the other is not. They are both good quality, both the same price well then we are going to pick the recycled. BUT if the recycled one is inferior and cost twice as much (like many of the items today) then most of us are going to buy the cheaper one. I for one am not going to pay $6 for a four pack of TP that feels like sandpaper I don't care how good for the environment it is.

All the education, news hype, and other various means of bulling people into being more environment conscience will come to naught in the end, for in the end it comes down to the cost. Ways to be greener that make economic sense, that is best area of research to focus on

I totally agree - the main problem with recycled versus new is the methods used by corporations to socialize the costs of new products.

They are able to pass on the real costs to third world people and governments - they destroy environments that they never clean up. There are huge unseen costs that are never paid by the consumer - this is the problem with recycling.

Until corporations are forced to produce new products and actually pay ALL of the costs associated with them, then recycling will never look feasible.

Have you ever bought some new trinket and thought about the work required to make it - the cost of marketing and logistics to get it into your hands - the costs of mining or procuring the raw materials, and managing the environment safely?

When you look at the new trinket and ask yourself if you could possibly make it for that price - then you will know that someone else is paying for most of it - and the environment is paying for it.

Laws need to change to ensure the sale price reflects the real price - and that corporations are not able to push all the costs onto someone else.

EDIT: I will add something else. I live in a third world country in SE Asia. Almost everything here is repaired and recycled. If your gadget breaks - then you get it repaired - you will always be offered second hand parts before you are offered new parts. I have had my laptop and mobile phone repaired several times at very cheap prices - in a western country I know they would have told me it would be cheap[er to buy a new one. Here I have them repaired with a labor cost of less than $10 - I had some components replaced on my motherboard - $10 labor, $15 for the second hand parts. When the alternator for my car stopped working, they didn't replace it - they rewound it with new copper wire - and deducted the cost of the copper they took. IF I had that done in a western country - they would have simply replaced the alternator - and probably thrown the old one on the junk pile.

[edit on 6-7-2009 by Amagnon]

posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 04:45 AM
The problem is, our leaders care more about money than the environment. They believe we have to have economic growth before we can sort this situation out. Growth only causes more environmental damage. If we were really serious about the issue, the world would have to tackle the environment with the same effort and resources that would go into a World War. The fact all Governments seem to be doing is taxing and piecemeal gestures, suggests we will not take the issue seriously and hence destroy the planet.

posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 05:06 AM
It's the whole "conspiratorial" nature of ATS-ers here.

I don't noe where they get their information from, but they think the world is getting colder, and that icebergs in Antarctica are getting BIGGER, and that there are no increasing natural disasters - quite ironic considering their rejecting the so-called "MSM" and "Al Gore" who "feed them bad info".

THEY are getting the bad info, IMO. Your information that the world is getting colder is NOT backed by major science, and really has no basis in the scientific/geographic community.

Come on, people. OPEN YOUR EYES.

[edit on 6-7-2009 by KarlG]

posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 05:13 AM

Originally posted by hautmess

Originally posted by silent thunder

why is death so bad?

Now, following that, the next logical question to ask is: "Why is hell so bad?"

posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 05:17 AM
reply to post by ANNED

Well, sir, I hope you live in California, so a nice little Californian wildfire, or two, or THREE, maybe even four, A YEAR, should show you exactly what you need to know. I wish you nothing bad, just, you know, a little chance for you to experience on your own what you need to learn.

Or are the increasing wildfires in the world propaganda too?

posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 05:20 AM
Im not anti-environmentalist,im anti-BS...and thats what most of these environmental extremists do all day,fear monger,cherry pick reports to fit their views,tell us we are all evil despicable people that are killing the planet(funny) and when asked what they think we should do? pay more taxes...taxes,taxes,recycle,taxes,taxes,recycle more,taxes.Somehow i don't think the Earth can distinguish between taxed pollution and non taxed.

posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 05:26 AM

Originally posted by grapesofraft
reply to post by silent thunder

Well I am anti-environmental Nazi. I am sick of those people that put some stupid bug or bird or plant above what is best for people.

So beauty, balance, respect and natural evolution must be compromised by your presence here on earth. You are the one out of place here. We can not accommodate you any longer. Just go

Materialists and their ugly primitive life sucking contraptions and idiotic narcissist supremacy over all lifeform are no longer credible to decide what is best for people because they are anti life!

posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 05:28 AM
reply to post by silent thunder

Its a very big disappointment isn't it?

I could never come to terms with this behaviour and it baffles me as much as you do...

Just look at my own example and you will have part of my picture...
Even the moderator created a lot of problems to me. I would expect some help but i had to go through that thread so far alone, apart from people like you and me that sympathise giving me some courage.

Concluding in one word: Disappointment


Thank you for making this thread. I was considering to author it my self... You have my S&Fs .

Take care!

[edit on 6/7/2009 by GEORGETHEGREEK]

posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 05:36 AM

Originally posted by newworld
maybe the problem comes to the claim that global warming is the fault of human beings.

Originally posted by grapesofraft
I am also sick of the idea of cap and trade and politicians using the environment as yet another reason to raise taxes on all of us.


To the OP ... the TRUTH is that there is no evidence supporting the notion that humans are responsible for global warming, but the radicals on the left want the world to beleive that in order to sell Al Gore's carbon credit scam. That's the truth.

Do not equate people who are able to see the truth of the situation with being anti-environment. That's just not correct.

[edit on 7/6/2009 by FlyersFan]

posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 06:02 AM
To the OP - I think there are a number of reasons:

1. Just as has happened in this thread "environmentalist" gets all tangled up in "theorist". Being an environmentalist or anti-environmentalist in your mindset has nothing to do with whether you accept or reject global warming. Global warming is a theory - yet proven or disproven - being environmentally conscientious is a mindset. Environmentalists are as much to blame for this confusion as those who won't listen to anything that has "environment" in it.

2. Re-read a number of the posts in this thread...they center on "scams", costs, cap and trade. You have three pivotal points in just about any economy - the rich who want more, the poor struggling to make it, and the middle who are carrying the tax burden. When it boils down to it if you don't have an economic incentive for ALL three of these groups that will push forward a change in behavior and mindset, you won't win. For those on here who want to call any environmentally-friendly change/concept a "scam" because it makes're appearing fairly moronic. That or you're living in the wrong country...and by the way, according to the tallies I'm keeping, the countries available to move to where some one isn't going to make money from new technologies are few and far between...and you'll need a gun.

3. Actually just a subset of 2 above, people don't like change and will listen for what helps them hang on to not changing. The big pockets with the most at risk of loss with major changes in technology, spending, consumption, etc. know this. They employ scare tactics and lies to make sure the majority not wanting to hear they need to change can stay phat, dumb and temporarily happy.

The short of it is that any change for the sake of the environment will need an economic carrot, and stick - a short stick - because we're all greedy in some way (either through getting more or struggling less) and EXTREMELY myopic and self-centered.

That's the way I see it at least.

[edit on 7-6-2009 by Valhall]

top topics

<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in