Do not do that!

The modern environmental movement is one of the off-shoots of global warming that I always poke fun at indirectly, but one of the most important aspects of the movement is what it does.  At first, the movement was a collection of people who in their heart probably thought they were doing the right thing and at the beginning they indeed had causes such as cleaning up our respective nations and making our environment cleaner.  But over time there comes a point where technology can do no better and where the movement turns to stagnation.  This is where we are today with the environmental movement turning into stagnation and instead of using facts uses emotional tirades to prove its points.

You can list any of the respective environmental movements from the Sierra Club to the WWF and get the same answer.  These organizations became bloated over time and after gaining a part of the establishment turned their backs on what their original purposes were.  This is why people such as Greenpeace’s Dr. Patrick Moore and others have left the movement behind and actually talked about how they went from true causes to simple corruption.  The people in the movement are no longer in this movement to make the world better, but they are rather after making their respective organizations shine and after money.  They turned to greed and fear as their issues of choice and chose instead to use fear to make money.  These organizations today are nothing but parasites who try to fear and guilt common man into doing what they want them to no matter whether that goal is good for the environment at all.

The fear mongering that has plagued modern environmentalism is the scariest part of it all.  I talk about their stances on global warming and other issues as a point of mockery because instead of giving facts, they show pictures of seals and polar bears and tell the world that these “cute critters” will become extinct if we do not do what they tell us to do.  This appeal to emotions such as fear and guilt leaves people with this attitude that if they do not become green that they are somehow less of a person.  This is the core of the problem, but what are these organizations after in the long-term?

I think it is clear that they are after power and money.  After all, their campaigns are used to boycott non-green companies and to promote green companies who in the end become green at the expense of their customers who are forced to pay more for goods and services.  They do not care about man obviously because all of their policies hurt the poorest and the neediest the worst.  So what do they care about except for money and power?  I think we can all agree that they are after money and power, but perhaps they do want to make the world better for everything except man.

But therein lies the largest problem.  If they are after making the world better for say animals or plants, they are literally barking up the wrong tree.  (pun intended).  Mankind has for years lived in coexistence with the environment and simply not interacting with the environment will cause change by itself and this change is unpredictable since so many animals in the natural world are depended on man to exist in harmony.  If we stopped hunting the species that over-populate the various eco-systems (which has been a call of these organizations for years) then the environment is hurt through over-population which causes some of the animals to starve to death or worse go extinct in some cases.  If we stop caring for trees or plants, the bio-diversity will be hurt as certain species go extinct.  In the essence of that, perhaps the best way to describe environmentalists is as a group of people who just want to tell others “don’t do that” with no care of the consequences of said actions.

To take a look at how they function, greens have no problems causing visual pollution with wind turbines (Which cause various other problems as well) but when it comes to mountain-top coal mining, forget it.  One is bad, the other is good with the only argument against mountaintop mining being “it will spoil the view.”  Well what about those wind turbines they support?  Obviously even their causes lack a coherent goal and its more apparent they just want to tell people what they can and can not do that.

The largest emphasis is on stopping all mining and drilling in the end.  They stopped most logging in the US and they go from one industry to the next sucking the blood out of it as they bounce from paycheck to paycheck.  Eventually the US will just stop mining and drilling as the life-blood is sucked out of these industries and I would like to look at what that causes.  It only hurts the US or other countries where that happens at.  The mining and other processes will simply switch over to the lesser developed nations where they do not have our quality of environmental protection.  In this essence, not only is the first world hurt directly due to higher costs…but the world as a whole is hurt when these minerals and other substances are mined elsewhere where there are either less regulations or none.  That is what happens in reality…you can not stop industry completely otherwise you are left with a cave-man style life.  Perhaps that is what they want the rest of us to be subjected to?  I really do not understand the end result, as it hurts everyone in the process.  Instead of telling people what they can or can not do they should be promoting science to come up with even better ways to control pollution so that our various industries continue to thrive and we can still protect the environment.  So yes, we could stop burning coal and mining it.  But someone somewhere will still require it and they will find it probably more expensive somewhere else.  Free trade benefits all parties, but sheer banning never is the answer to just about every problem.  Regulation is good in certain quantities, but banning the burning of coal because of 0.7 Degrees of warming over 120 years is the most retarded idea ever.  We can all thank the US EPA for leading the world on that score while most other countries start to embrace coal due to necessity.

Those last thoughts are really lost in the context of things.  With the environmental movement stuck in fear-mongering mode with “climate change” blamed on humans with no proof, are we really expecting true environmentalism out of environmental organizations?  That would be a miracle today.  To expect an organization to actually want to accomplish the goals it says it wants to.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s