Beam me to Planet Gore !
Posted on 01/06/2012 9:40:13 AM PST by Signalman
Really?
While the EPA is causing perfectly good power plants to shut down and incandescent light bulbs have disappeared from store shelves.
Yeah, dead in the water. < /sarc >
That’s what they want you to think.
The market is telling us that the environmental laws we have in place are sufficient to protect the public to the extent they want to be protected and the cost of being protected. Enviro-whackos seek to use government to impose rules and regulations that are often impractical and the cost of which the public considers stupid or onerous, and they don’t like it. It’s like a religion to these people. They would like nothing better than to decimate the untermensch so they and their favored friends can enjoy a pristine environment that we haven’t seen since Adam & Eve. Not gonna happen.
If the ship is dead in the water, ins’t that a prime opportunity to sink it?
The Green movement will never die. In part, because good stewardship of the environment is a legitimate goal.
What has suffered a major setback is not the advance of legitimate environmental protections but the hijacking of the green movement through the use of dishonest and junk science to further political aims that really have nothing to do with the environment.
Blame the blamed Congress for the incandescent light bulbs. It's one of these blamed feel good acts.
Green is the new brown.
use of dishonest and junk science to further political aims that really have nothing to do with the environment.
Not to mention great green investment opportunities for those who hawk the stuff - Al Gore for instance.
On Earth Day in 1970, I was the only kid being driven to school on diesel-powered bus 69. I can report that Roy, the driver, carefully passed the throngs of walking students without comment.
If you really want to confuse an “environmentalist”, ask them “What is the optimum environment?”
Exactly. An unholy combination of communism (elitist attempts at world control) and greed have “hijacked” the green movement and totally destroyed any credibility it might ever have had.
I think that's a silly question. You might as well ask a doctor "What is optimum health?". The question is only confusing because nobody knows for sure the right answer and the right answer varies by person and by climate. But everyone knows and can distinguish between a poor state of health and a good one. Same with the environment.
Better to stick with logical arguments than trick questions.
I think the authors intentionally left out the actual science or arguments of the opposing ideologies.
Either intentionally or accidentally, the implication is that the movement could have succeeded (still might depending on 2012 elections) regardless of the substance or scientific truth had it been more moderately managed.
AND THAT IS SCARY.
What should the earth’s temperature be and where should it be measured?
The point of the question (and their confusion) is that they have no idea what they mean by “protecting the environment”.
It’s just a way for them to fool themselves into believing they care about “the planet”.
They don’t know why getting rid of wetlands might be a good or bad thing, they are just told what to think.
“Environmentalists” know less about the environment than many of the people they lecture on a regular basis.
I think the article intentionally avoids the substance of the debate and focuses on the failures of the message to influence and why. The author gives a lot of external excuses but does admit (in my words) they over played their hand and discredited themselves.
It was the author's choice. But here is one important thing that is overlooked. The reason they had to keep ratcheting up the doomsday scenarios. In true liberal fashion, when the logical/scientific arguments won't hold up under scrutiny, scream louder and create a crisis through fear.
The general populous is fooled far easier than is comfortable for me. But I do find a hint of comfort that the populous seems to have a tipping point (at least these days). Maybe the tipping point was brought on by the increased attention and scrutiny that has been brought on by this economic climate that we are in.
50 years from now, historians may be reporting that this self induced, government caused recession, coupled with a radical liberal elected president and 5 to 7 years of misery is what saved the nation. The sleeping giant awoke again?
Let's hope.
Central planning fails and fails and fails, but they keep trying.
Proverbs 27:22
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.