THE ENVIRONMENTALIST MOVEMENT: STOP AND SMELL THE ROSES (WHICH HAVE LESS CHANCE OF BEING POLLUTED IN THE USA THAN ALMOST ANYWHERE ELSE)

I am not sure I understand the raison d'etre of the Web Blog  Obsidian Wings, but on that Blog I came across a post on the environmentalist movement by one Charles Bird that makes for fascinating reading.

Mr. Bird is an environmentalist who, however, argues that much of the recent dogmatic tactics of the environmentalist movement have proven off-the-mark and, indeed counterproductive for the movement's own goals.  One of his key points is that the movement should expend more energy on pollution occurring overseas:

Our air and water and soils are cleaner than they were a generation ago. What the movement should concern itself with now is overstepping. How many more regulations do we need in the United States before eyes are cast on significantly more serious problems found in Russia, China, India and other hot spots.  How much more should we ding our own economy for reducing emissions that may have no discernible effect on the global climate.

Mr. Bird's post provokes a good deal of comment on the Blog, much of the comment precisely illustrating his point about the pitfalls of dogmatism. 

 

Comments

[parajumpers]

ENVIRONMENTAL LEGAL BLOGS: THE ENVIRONMENTALIST MOVEMENT: STOP AND SMELL THE ROSES (WHICH HAVE LESS CHANCE OF BEING POLLUTED IN THE USA THAN ALMOST ANYWHERE ELSE) bhjrcywbsgiuseppe zanotti shoes
parajumpers http://www.hoeker.dk/P/index.asp

[Dawid]

I do it every day, if you need support in your beelif that man's activities are causing some serious environmental problems that we can ameliorate (lessen the severity of), and yet at the same time you think the whole greenhouse warming thing is way out of line with reality.Don't you hate it when people say you are some sort of greedy oil-baron type because you are a global warming denier ? (I do not deny warming, I just think the evidence does not support the conclusion that man is primarily responsible for warming, and I do not see how climate change of any type is, a priori, a bad thing, mainly because I do not expect climate to stay unchanged no matter what man does). Was this answer helpful?