Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Consumption of Resources Is Outstripping Planet's Ability to Cope, Says WWF
Associated Press ^ | October 22, 2004 | Jonathan Fowler

Posted on 10/22/2004 1:34:34 AM PDT by Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit

GENEVA — People are plundering the world's resources at a pace that outstrips the planet's capacity to sustain life, the environmental group WWF said Thursday.

In its regular "Living Planet Report," the World Wide Fund for Nature said humans currently consume 20 percent more natural resources than the Earth can produce.

Consumption of fossil fuels such as coal, gas, and oil increased by almost 700 percent between 1961 and 2001, it said. But the planet is unable to move as fast to absorb the resulting carbon-dioxide emissions that degrade the Earth's protective ozone layer.

"We are spending nature's capital faster than it can regenerate," said WWF chief Claude Martin, launching the conservation body's 40-page study. "We are running up an ecological debt which we won't be able to pay off unless governments restore the balance between our consumption of natural resources and the earth's ability to renew them."

Populations of terrestrial, freshwater, and marine species fell on average by 40 percent between 1970 and 2000, the study said. It cited destruction of natural habitats, pollution, overfishing, and the introduction by humans of nonnative animals, such as cats and rats, who often drive out indigenous species.

"The question is how the world's entire population live with the resources of one planet," said Jonathan Loh, one of the report's authors.

The study, WWF's fifth since 1998, examines the "ecological footprint" — or environmental impact — of the planet's 6.1 billion–strong population.

To calculate the average size of each person's footprint, it measures land use, pollution, energy consumption, and the level of carbon-dioxide emissions.

The impact of an average North American is double that of a European, but seven times that of the average Asian or African.

Overall, the biggest culprits are the residents of the United Arab Emirates, followed by the United States, Kuwait, Australia, and Sweden. The least damaging are residents of Afghanistan, Somalia, Haiti, Tajikistan, and Bangladesh.

Rich nations tread heavily on poorer countries, said Mathis Wacknagel, head of the Global Footprint Network, a grouping including WWF. For example, Western demand for of Asia's palm oil and soybeans from South America has fueled destruction of natural habitats in those regions.

The study also warned of increasing pressure on the planet's resources amid spiraling consumption in Asia, led by fast-growing China and India.

"We can consume energy in a way that's harmful or in a way that's sustainable," Loh told reporters. The technologies are available to enable the world's population to live within the capacity of one planet."

Governments, businesses, and consumers should switch to energy-efficient technology, such as solar power, Loh said, adding that high oil prices may help focus their minds.

"It's not a question of how much oil is left," he said. "The question we should be asking is how much fossil fuel consumption the Earth can sustain. The Earth has a limited capacity."


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: climatechange; consumption; environment; fud; globalwarminghoax; ozone; resources; scaretactics; trade
There is so much wrong with this article it is hard to know where to begin. Perhaps to feel sorry for Jonathan Fowler's family for having raised such a poor journalist. He should have kept himself anonymous behind the AP label.

But the planet is unable to move as fast to absorb the resulting carbon-dioxide emissions that degrade the Earth's protective ozone layer.

Wow, this is new! Sure glad Jonathan made it up. The WWF would not have said this.

Overall, the biggest culprits are the residents of the United Arab Emirates, followed by the United States, Kuwait, Australia, and Sweden. The least damaging are residents of Afghanistan, Somalia, Haiti, Tajikistan, and Bangladesh.

Those evil, industrious, well-off nations. Why can't they just live in a state of constant penury, anarchy and corruption . Then our planet would be safer.

For example, Western demand for of Asia's palm oil and soybeans from South America

I am certain the farmers from the countries who grow these products are quite unahppy to be making a decent living and would much rather follow the example of the Somalian counterparts.

Listen folks, we do live on a finite planet with finite resources. We may even now be using more of the sources and sinks than the earth can take. But this type of article is just plain stupid. The are reasonable, market-based mechanisms that can allow us to maintain and increase our wealth and still remain within the earth's limitations.

It is articles like these that blantantly expose the agenda of the left is not focused on preserving the planet, but rather controlling resources.

1 posted on 10/22/2004 1:34:35 AM PDT by Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: farmfriend

Ping


2 posted on 10/22/2004 1:35:29 AM PDT by Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit (Politically, Saudi Arabia is 18th century France with 16th Century Spain's flow of gold and no art)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit
Earth: Use it up and move on.

3 posted on 10/22/2004 1:36:14 AM PDT by Deb (A Democrat Stole My GREEN Sweater!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit

I don't know if the WWF will ever face the fact that it is all those Billions of Chinese and Indians breathing out CO2 that is causing global warming! Also the underground peat bog fires in Indonisia are not helping the situation.

But not to worry, the increase in volcanism will cool things down soon.


4 posted on 10/22/2004 1:38:57 AM PDT by SubMareener (Become a monthly donor! Free FreeRepublic.com from Quarterly FReepathons!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit

I wish the WWF would stay out of politics and stick to wrestling! Just kidding :) Seriously, thanks for the info.


5 posted on 10/22/2004 1:39:03 AM PDT by Fedora
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit
This article is absolute bull#$%* !

There is plenty of everything for everyone on the planet. The world is abundant. Truth and science continue to be manipulated by various groups.
6 posted on 10/22/2004 1:39:25 AM PDT by Bandaneira (The Third Temple/House for All Nations/World Peace Centre...Coming Soon...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit

What does the World Wrestling Federation know about Natural Resources?


7 posted on 10/22/2004 1:40:16 AM PDT by Anti-Bubba182
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit

Eventially we'll get off this rock and then what will they say??? Just this solar system alone has more resources than we could ever use in a few million years...


8 posted on 10/22/2004 1:40:30 AM PDT by DB (©)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fedora

I was thinking the EXACT same thing.


9 posted on 10/22/2004 1:41:01 AM PDT by tiamat ("Just a Bronze-Age Gal, Trapped in a Techno-World!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit

We have more Enviro-wackos than the Earth can sustain.


10 posted on 10/22/2004 1:42:04 AM PDT by clee1 (Islam is a deadly plague; liberalism is the AIDS virus that prevents us from defending ourselves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tiamat

ROFL! Are you contemplating the same thing I'm contemplating, Pinky? :)


11 posted on 10/22/2004 1:44:08 AM PDT by Fedora
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit

**But the planet is unable to move as fast to absorb the resulting carbon-dioxide emissions that degrade the Earth's protective ozone layer.**

This is such a stupid comment, and one I often hear from Lefty-enviro-facists. They confuse their own propaganda! It's CFCs that (supposedly) degrade the ozone layer. It's CO2 that (supposedly but not really) causes global warming.

WHAT UTTER MORONS!!

Everyone interested should read this:

http://www.forces.org/articles/files/crichton.htm


12 posted on 10/22/2004 1:45:02 AM PDT by LeftCoastNeoCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit

Much can be, and has been, made of the Left's willful ignorance of not just general history, but even the history of leftwing thought.

Have the learned men at the WWF, for example, never heard of Malthus, or more importantly the absolute failure of his, and their, model?


13 posted on 10/22/2004 1:45:56 AM PDT by swilhelm73 (Democrats and free speech are like oil and water)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit

Oh my, does this mean the world will end?


14 posted on 10/22/2004 1:50:50 AM PDT by thegreatbeast (Quid lucrum istic mihi est?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit

later


15 posted on 10/22/2004 1:51:06 AM PDT by thegreatbeast (Quid lucrum istic mihi est?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit
The impact of an average North American is double that of a European, but seven times that of the average Asian or African.

It's not my fault if they can't keep up.

16 posted on 10/22/2004 1:54:27 AM PDT by Dont Mention the War (How important a Senator can you be if Dick Cheney's never told you to "go [bleep] yourself"?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fedora

I think so Brain, but how are we going to find rubber pants in our size?

(What are you doing up at this hour? Do you EVER sleep? LOL! )


17 posted on 10/22/2004 1:57:36 AM PDT by tiamat ("Just a Bronze-Age Gal, Trapped in a Techno-World!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: tiamat

Well, I've been pulling all-nighters the last few nights trying to finish this article, and I told myself I'd finish today so I wouldn't have to do it again tonight, but as you see. . .

And what are *you* doing up, BTW, LOL!


18 posted on 10/22/2004 2:00:45 AM PDT by Fedora
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Fedora

Nerves. mostly.

Can't sleep much these days.

That house stuff.

Besides, Kid will be up in less than an hour, and my dial-up is (relatively) fast this time of day...

Poit!


19 posted on 10/22/2004 2:05:05 AM PDT by tiamat ("Just a Bronze-Age Gal, Trapped in a Techno-World!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: tiamat

I drink herbal tea for my nerves. Chamomile helps, LOL! Hope you get the house thing settled soon.

Your kid sure gets up early!


20 posted on 10/22/2004 2:07:00 AM PDT by Fedora
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Fedora

Kid gets up at 6 AM.

She 's VERY slow in the morning and hates being rushed.

Needs time to make her bed, get cleaned up and to vegitate in front of cartoons with her hot chocolate and cereal before she leaves.

( Bus comes at 7:15)

She's mildly autistic and it's just better to send her to bed early on a school noight and let her fiddle around the morning after.

MUCH less trauma.


21 posted on 10/22/2004 2:11:17 AM PDT by tiamat ("Just a Bronze-Age Gal, Trapped in a Techno-World!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: clee1

"We have more Enviro-wackos than the Earth can sustain."

LOL


22 posted on 10/22/2004 2:14:30 AM PDT by Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit (Politically, Saudi Arabia is 18th century France with 16th Century Spain's flow of gold and no art)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Bandaneira

"There is plenty of everything for everyone on the planet. The world is abundant"

Second part right, first part wrong. The Earth is abundant but not finite. There are limitations to the use of certain resources. Fish are the best example. BUt there is also a limited amount of land, and oil and everything else.

The point is that there is enough right now. But humans would probably like to continue to live quite well as a species in the future.

We need to invest some of our finite resources into finding alternatives. As I said, there are market-based mechanisms for doing this. Some are already in place, others are not. But unqualified statements like yours just make the right look as kooky as the left.


23 posted on 10/22/2004 2:19:42 AM PDT by Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit (Politically, Saudi Arabia is 18th century France with 16th Century Spain's flow of gold and no art)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit

I encourage everyone to go out and cut a tree down today. And maybe club a seal or two.


24 posted on 10/22/2004 2:22:57 AM PDT by JessieHelmsJr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit
Firstly, your homepage includes this quote..."It is preoccupation with possessions, more than anything, that prevents us from living freely and nobly."

Bertrand Russell was a crank. Do you know how traumatic his childhood was ?

Secondly :

Do you believe that 6 billion people, i.e the current population of the world, can have a decent standard of living based on the amount of resources we have ?

Thirdly :

Have you read "The Deep Hot Biosphere" by Thomas Gold

Fourthly :

Do you know who Malthus was ?
25 posted on 10/22/2004 2:27:10 AM PDT by Bandaneira (The Third Temple/House for All Nations/World Peace Centre...Coming Soon...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: JessieHelmsJr

Use the tree for a good reason. Same applies to the seals.


26 posted on 10/22/2004 2:27:55 AM PDT by Bandaneira (The Third Temple/House for All Nations/World Peace Centre...Coming Soon...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Bandaneira

"Do you know how traumatic his childhood was?"

I have heard lawyers use this excuse for murderes and child-molesters.

"Do you believe that 6 billion people, i.e the current population of the world, can have a decent standard of living based on the amount of resources we have"?

It depends on how you define "decent standard of living". But if you mean, enough to eat, wear and live in, combined with access to education and the opportunity to "be all that one can be" - yes it is possible, but mostly a matter of choice and governance on the part of those who don't have it. Can 6 billion people consume resources at the pace that Americans currently do - no.


"Have you read "The Deep Hot Biosphere" by Thomas Gold."

No, I will take a look and see if I can find it.

"Do you know who Malthus was ?"

I'll tell you what. You keep your money, you get the Mojo and I'll get your baby (sound of lips smacking).


27 posted on 10/22/2004 2:41:05 AM PDT by Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit (Politically, Saudi Arabia is 18th century France with 16th Century Spain's flow of gold and no art)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit
In its regular "We Hate Everyone That Works Harder Than Unemployed, 30 Year Old, Dope Smoking Virgins Living In Their Mom's Basement Like Us, Report" the World Wide Fund for Nature said humans currently consume 20 percent more natural resources than the Earth can produce.

Like I expected: "This here planet's gettin' a little uppity. Let's strip mine it until it cries uncle."

28 posted on 10/22/2004 2:53:08 AM PDT by avg_freeper (Gunga galunga. Gunga, gunga galunga)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit
I never thought of Vince McMahon as being interested in environmental issues.
29 posted on 10/22/2004 2:53:23 AM PDT by fso301
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit
"The Earth is abundant but not finite. There are limitations to the use of certain resources. Fish are the best example"

No, actually fish are NOT an example. Fish are a renewable resource. The problem with fish is the method by which they are taken is indiscriminate and wasteful.

The only "finite" resource that I know about is/are fossil fuels.

And the "problem" is already fixing itself, as incomes rise and education increases, birth rates fall.

30 posted on 10/22/2004 3:25:39 AM PDT by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Bandaneira; Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit
Do you know who Malthus was ?

This was the second person I was thinking of. Well, technically the first...as you know Henny penny was neither real nor a person.

Dr. Paul Ehrlich also came to mind.

31 posted on 10/22/2004 3:37:35 AM PDT by LowCountryJoe (It's too damned important, so hold your nose if you must!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit

Is Vince ready to unveil wrestlings newest start: "The Mean Green Machine"?


32 posted on 10/22/2004 3:38:19 AM PDT by Semper Paratus (Michael)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: avg_freeper
Like I expected: "This here planet's gettin' a little uppity. Let's strip mine it until it cries uncle."

Right. If you can stand to sustain a debate for very long with an enviro-whacko, you'll soon find out that they would very much like to see the human population curtailed radically. They won't usually come out and admit it (at least to an opponent) frankly.

Ayn Rand stated that the left hates all humanity because individual leftists hate themselves.

(steely)

33 posted on 10/22/2004 3:46:20 AM PDT by Steely Tom (Fortunately, fhe Bill of Rights doesn't include the word 'is'.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog

First, I I meant to write, "infinite".

Second, I think we agree but are talking past each other.

I did not mention the difference between renewable and non-renewable resources. Just limitations.

As you pointed out, there is a total absolute limit on the amount of oil avaiable for human use on the earth.

Fish, on the other hand reproduce and will continue to do so forever.

The limits on the amount of oil we use will be reached at some point, or another resource will replace it.

However, getting the oceans to produce the maximum number of fish requires responsible stewardship (a.k.a. privatization).

My point is that despite the abundancy of the planet there are abolute limits (within the current confines of technology)because the planet is finite. Many of those limits we can identify fairly well. If we go beyond those limits we will all be poorer as a result.


34 posted on 10/22/2004 4:01:03 AM PDT by Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit (Politically, Saudi Arabia is 18th century France with 16th Century Spain's flow of gold and no art)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit
"My point is that despite the abundancy of the planet there are abolute limits (within the current confines of technology)because the planet is finite. Many of those limits we can identify fairly well. If we go beyond those limits we will all be poorer as a result.

The problem with your argument is the "within the limits of current technology" phrase. We have NO IDEA what the limits of the planet are (and why should we be bound by the limits of the planet, anyway), as we have no idea what the limits of technology are. "Eco-fanatics" assume that there will BE no technological advances (and they are doing their damndest to see that there ARE none). Unfortunately, the historic record says they are completely wrong.

To take your "fish" example--to increase the supply of fish, FARM THE OCEANS. This "will" take an increase in technology (actually, not so much an increase in technology in the sense of "new science" as a re-allocation of economic resources).

Instead, the eco-nutcases want us to implement global socialism, kill off 90% of humanity, and go back to oxcarts and windmills (but, of course, only for the "peasants"---the "intelligentsia"/"nomenklatura" won't give up their private jets to ride in those oxcarts).

35 posted on 10/22/2004 4:39:08 AM PDT by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog

Once again, I think you should recognize that we agree with each other here.

In terms of fish farming however, it is really necessary to understand that currently the oceans produce food for humans without any effort other than to harvest it.

If it is necessary to allocate capital in order to "farm" the oceans i.e. create conditions by which fish are raised and fed, then the costs for the same amount of fish may well go up.

The oceans really do provide a service by farming themselves. If we don't harvest it sustainably, we lose out on this service.

In terms of technology, necessity is the mother of invention.

When we are talking about our planet, precaution is appropriate and prudent. But, not hysteria.

WE should see the agenda of the left for what it is though. It is not about the planet, it is about power.


36 posted on 10/22/2004 5:08:23 AM PDT by Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit (Politically, Saudi Arabia is 18th century France with 16th Century Spain's flow of gold and no art)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit
"If it is necessary to allocate capital in order to "farm" the oceans i.e. create conditions by which fish are raised and fed, then the costs for the same amount of fish may well go up."

HIGHLY unlikely. The more likely result is that productivity will go up so much that prices will go DOWN.

The equivalent situation today is the harvesting of "wild rice" vs. standard rice farming. Which has the highest cost?? Answer---wild rice harvesting.

37 posted on 10/22/2004 7:10:19 AM PDT by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog

I can't agree with you on that. Producivity will only increase if there is more food available to the fish. If more food is made available that means it comes from somewhere - perhaps agriculture. Then we are just transferring one food source to another and providing ourselves a service. Unlike the current situation in which mother nature does it for free.

Regardless, the only real solution is to privatise the fisheries.


38 posted on 10/22/2004 8:14:08 AM PDT by Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit (Politically, Saudi Arabia is 18th century France with 16th Century Spain's flow of gold and no art)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit; abbi_normal_2; Ace2U; adam_az; Alamo-Girl; Alas; alfons; alphadog; ...
Rights, farms, environment ping.
Let me know if you wish to be added or removed from this list.
I don't get offended if you want to be removed.
39 posted on 10/22/2004 11:11:19 AM PDT by farmfriend ( In Essentials, Unity...In Non-Essentials, Liberty...In All Things, Charity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JessieHelmsJr

You forgot to mention have a bowl of beans with the next meal.


40 posted on 10/22/2004 11:16:20 AM PDT by B4Ranch (´´Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; They are our teeth for Liberty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit
"I can't agree with you on that. Producivity will only increase if there is more food available to the fish. If more food is made available that means it comes from somewhere - perhaps agriculture. Then we are just transferring one food source to another and providing ourselves a service. Unlike the current situation in which mother nature does it for free.

OF COURSE the necessary food will come from highly efficient agricultural sources, upgrading inexpensive carbohydrates and proteins from corn and soybeans into high-quality fish products. And yes, this will cost a bit more than "free from Mother Nature". BUT, the overall lowering of costs, would, I would bet, STILL be great enough to end up significantly reducing the cost of the fish products over that "harvested from the wild" today. Remember--the cost of such wild harvesting is NOT zero----it takes a lot expensive fuel to prowl the oceans of the world.

41 posted on 10/22/2004 11:27:15 AM PDT by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: farmfriend

BTTT!!!!!!!


42 posted on 10/22/2004 11:30:26 AM PDT by E.G.C.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit; Deb; Fedora; Bandaneira; tiamat; Steely Tom; Wonder Warthog; E.G.C.; ...
Care for the Earth??? BS, it's all about power!!!

Environmental Lies

Hypocrisy, Greed, Power Mongering, Violence and Hate in Todays Environmental Movement

© OFF-ROAD.COM

"You can't read the Constitution like a rule book"
-Bruce Babbitt quoted by the Arizona Republic, July 8, 1987

"Isn't the only hope for the planet that the

industrialized civilizations collapse?

Isn't it our responsibility to bring that about?"

Maurice Strong, Head of the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro


Pretty scary statement, eh?

Consider, that President Clinton and Vice President AlGore
laud the accomplishments of the 1992 Earth Summit.

Consider, that ALL OF THE MAINSTREAM ENVIRONMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS
support the 1992 Earth Summit.

Of all the World Issues of today, the one that concerns me the most is the basis and aim of the present environmental movement. My concerns are twofold. One, that the leaders of the movement or, those behind the leaders are no longer geniune. In contrary, their goals are that of attaining power and domination over the world populace with the proclamation of impending environmental consequences and clamities as some dark future that only they and their values can save us from. Such arrogance!

Secondly, I am concerned that the radical and often violent environmental groups such as Earth First and Sea Shepherd are backed by the mainstream enviro organization without bounds, perhaps encouraged...

Please don't misunderstand me. I firmly believe the original vision of the environmental movement was very admirable. Basic, common sense rules for clean air, water, and toxic controls among others are all things that have enhanced our lives.

In my optimism, I firmly believe that public awareness, and honest corporate awareness are the most simple extensions of human nature and good business practices. Both, perpetuate and enhance the orginal tenets of the movement.

Without question, there is always the 1% that of any entity that abuses the privlidges of others. Unfortunately, the mainstream enviro movement to a degree, and their financed, radical arms explicitly claim this to be much more than 1%.

Don't ever believe without question that human beings are the scourge of the earth and all business' are greedy, evil and heartless. This just isn't true, no matter what the Deep Ecologists, radical members of Earth First and other similar ilk proclaim.

Through the following links and sub-titles I will present information that questions the radical and power oriented entities of the present enviromental movement. I will also, do my best to seek out information on good, common-sense enviromental issues, projects and topics.

If you would like to email me regarding any of what you have just read please, do so as I greately appreciate your interest. If you have nothing more to say than flaming accussations of anti-environmentalism, save it.. I have heard it all..

Patrick J. Chicas, CEO
Off-Road.com, Inc.

Computer Videos, detailing Environmental Lies!

The Mainstream -

The Radical and Violent Factions

Animal Rights Extremism

Enviro Leaders and The Left Wing, Hand in Hand

Opposing Views on Todays Environmental Dilemmas

The Green Media and our Children

Private Property Rights

Opposing Views of the Environmental Movement

Laughing at the Malthus Whackos

Common Sense Environmentalism

Protecting Your Rights The Official RS 2477 Rights-of-way Web Site

Technology for the Future

Extremists on Usenet

 


Search for:


Let's Get Real....

Let me sum this up with a fine explanation via correspondance between one of our ORC Editors and a devote enviro activist and closet terrorist.
......how about something that there is not a law for YET. How about the Wives and Children of those loggers put in mortal danger every time one of these idiots decides to get all weepy eyed about a tree. I guarantee you D. The tears of an Enviro Terrorist (Tree Spiker) over a fallen piece of future furniture PALES in compairison to the tears of a 5 year old child who wonders why "Daddy's never coming home".

'Net Travelers have stopped by to visit this WWW site since April 11th, 1996.

* To leave email for the Webmaster, just clickhere.
*Click Here to See What Other Have Said


Back to Off-Road.com

43 posted on 10/22/2004 2:09:07 PM PDT by Issaquahking (U.N., greenies, etc. battling against the U.S. and Constitution one freedom at a time. Fight Back !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Issaquahking

BTTT!!!!!!


44 posted on 10/22/2004 2:43:38 PM PDT by E.G.C.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit; All
If you like to read online books, check this one out.. The Ultimate Resourse II By Julian L. Simon.

He just might change your mindset on the "limited and finite resources" and "all technology is bad", luddite nonsense.

Enjoy.

45 posted on 10/22/2004 6:26:30 PM PDT by PeaceBeWithYou (De Oppresso Liber! (50 million and counting in Afganistan and Iraq))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Issaquahking

Wow! Great addition. Thanks.


46 posted on 10/23/2004 6:51:31 AM PDT by farmfriend ( In Essentials, Unity...In Non-Essentials, Liberty...In All Things, Charity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit
The least damaging are residents of Afghanistan, Somalia, Haiti, Tajikistan, and Bangladesh.

Zimbabwe is named as another country that is protecting resources for future generations.

47 posted on 10/23/2004 7:07:35 AM PDT by alrea (Help wanted: Director of Homeland Security, New Jersey. Must be willing performer and cute.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson