Environmentalism

[Jobber of the Week 0]

No, Mike, I think he means to label things as products of the GM process. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

If, for some reason (and again let me remind you we don't need to for now) put these things on the shelves, inform the consumer with hard facts and information and let the free market decide. That is, after all, what capitalism is all about.

[Styles 0]

I got to say I don't see the problem with that. It's like organic foods are marked in stores, this would be the opposite.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

I can guarantee you for a fact that it works, because I have seen it happen myself. I live in a region known for it's wine, but in a section of that region that specializes in dairy and has been known to be rather hippie-fied (although that's starting to change, I see.) One of the biggest local businesses around here is the dairy that makes everything from milk and cheese to ice cream and more. Ever since I was a kid, the shit-eating-grin of the Clover dairy cow has been one of those icons of my life that I'm as well acquainted with as I am Mickey Mouse or Ronald McDonald.

 

In the mid 90s, enter BST growth hormone. The government assures people it's safe, the FDA says that milk created by that isn't going to hurt you or anything. The enviro-types here take a moment to stop worrying about global warming and complain about BST. Clover announces they won't use the drug and even today their jugs and boxes still say something to the effect of "This product from cows that have NOT been given rBST." You can read their rambling about the thing here, in the very remote possibility you care.

 

Clover has since price jumped by my count (I guess they have the anti-BST people in their pocket, they assume) and I don't drink it anymore. Since moving around last year, I get some generic milk at the store that has no such warning that I can see. I don't really care about the issue enough to pay the extra for Clover, and since I see other people buying the stuff, apparently I'm not alone.

 

So, in the end, even despite the hippie fears about BST, milk without it exists for those people who care and other brands exist for those who don't. Everyone is educated and continues buying shit, and a local dairy that may have had trouble competing before got themselves a new audience in the group that doesn't want the hormone. Everyone wins. Yay free market and personal choice.

[NoCalMike 0]

Yeah I was just talking about labeling the food being a result of the GM process, not saying "Oh and you might die from eating it"

[Guest MikeSC]

Yeah I was just talking about labeling the food being a result of the GM process, not saying "Oh and you might die from eating it"

Then that's fair enough. Just saying it's "GM" is perfectly fine.

-=Mike

[Special K 0]

I think environmentalists should SELL their findings or solutions a bit instead of just saying the sjy is falling, and the world's going to hell, and then offer no fixes besides never drilling oil or coal again.

Think of some feasible ways to help the environment, low-cost measures companies can take, etc. Environmentalists too often look at the problem, not the solution. There appears to be little to no interest in enviornmental engineering.

[CheesalaIsGood 0]

I think environmentalists should SELL their findings or solutions a bit instead of just saying the sjy is falling, and the world's going to hell, and then offer no fixes besides never drilling oil or coal again.

Think of some feasible ways to help the environment, low-cost measures companies can take, etc. Environmentalists too often look at the problem, not the solution. There appears to be little to no interest in enviornmental engineering.

Well obviously there isn't any money to be made in it. Switching your house to solar panels to power and heat your home is super-expensive in spite of the indenpence it affords you. If they can't paint you in like the electric company does they won't push for it cuz they won't make any money.

[Special K 0]

There's no money in saying 'The ozone hole's getting bigger! See... see...see... year after year but they still do it.' Research grants. They're what's for dinner.

[SuperJerk 0]

WWF: Asian dolphins under threat

 

Group: Pollution killing Asia's river dolphins

 

GENEVA, Switzerland (Reuters) -- Asia's dwindling populations of river dolphins are under increasing threat from pollution, dam construction and entanglement in fishermen's nets, global nature conservation body WWF said on Monday.

 

The warning, issued on the eve of U.N. World Water Day, said only 13 of the dolphins were known to be left in China's Yangtze River where they once proliferated.

 

In India's vast Ganges and Brahmaputra river systems there were only 2,000, and only 1,100 along the Indus River and its delta in southern Pakistan.

 

The fate of the dolphins was also a warning for people leaving near the rivers, Jamie Pittock, director of WWF's Global Freshwater Program, said on the Web site of the Swiss-based organization.

 

"River dolphins are the watchdogs of the water. The high levels of toxic pollutants accumulating in their bodies are a stark warning of poor water quality.

 

"Clean water is not only vital for the survival of the river dolphin but also for the quality of life for millions of the world's poor," said Pittock.

 

credit: http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/science/03/21...reut/index.html

 

 

I'll let y'all make the punchlines for this one.

[EricMM 0]

Actually, many if not all environmental engineering applications, from specific solar energy uses to proper water management in farming, etc. cost less in the long term than more immediate solutions.

 

For example, installing a solar heater for water in a sunny area costs more immediately, but over a few years you'll save hundreds of dollars.

 

Pollution is only cheap until you have to clean it up. Then it gets REAL expensive REAL quickly.

[Guest Brian]

Actually, many if not all environmental engineering applications, from specific solar energy uses to proper water management in farming, etc. cost less in the long term than more immediate solutions.

 

For example, installing a solar heater for water in a sunny area costs more immediately, but over a few years you'll save hundreds of dollars.

 

Pollution is only cheap until you have to clean it up. Then it gets REAL expensive REAL quickly.

That's why the people who pollute tend to pass the buck.

[Hogan Made Wrestling 0]

WWF: Asian dolphins under threat

 

Group: Pollution killing Asia's river dolphins

 

GENEVA, Switzerland (Reuters) -- Asia's dwindling populations of river dolphins are under increasing threat from pollution, dam construction and entanglement in fishermen's nets, global nature conservation body WWF said on Monday.

 

The warning, issued on the eve of U.N. World Water Day, said only 13 of the dolphins were known to be left in China's Yangtze River where they once proliferated.

 

In India's vast Ganges and Brahmaputra river systems there were only 2,000, and only 1,100 along the Indus River and its delta in southern Pakistan.

 

The fate of the dolphins was also a warning for people leaving near the rivers, Jamie Pittock, director of WWF's Global Freshwater Program, said on the Web site of the Swiss-based organization.

 

"River dolphins are the watchdogs of the water. The high levels of toxic pollutants accumulating in their bodies are a stark warning of poor water quality.

 

"Clean water is not only vital for the survival of the river dolphin but also for the quality of life for millions of the world's poor," said Pittock.

 

credit: http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/science/03/21...reut/index.html

 

 

I'll let y'all make the punchlines for this one.

I don't see what these "punchlines" are supposed to be. Frankly, China is such a huge fucking mess, and the government couldn't care less about it, that I'm inclined to fully believe the environmental groups when it comes to anything involving China.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

What he means is some "har har am i not the wittiest man alive" stupid comment like "Oh well, the Asian dolphins weren't big enough to main event anyway." If any country is a haven for despicable practices of animal treatment or capture, it's China. I mean, animal people complain about the baby seal clubbing in Canada, but in Canada at least there's people who care and want to see that stop. In China, there's nobody in any position of power who remotely will care.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

If any country is a haven for despicable practices of animal treatment or capture, it's China. I mean, animal people complain about the baby seal clubbing in Canada, but in Canada at least there's people who care and want to see that stop. In China, there's nobody in any position of power who remotely will care.

 

Absolutely. And yet evironmentalists turn the other cheek when it comes to China. They don't even have to abide by Kyoto, and there are the most wasteful country in the world.

 

Seal clubbing is a little different for two reasons. One, it is a tradition of the Inuit for thousands of years and would cause a huge mess in native relations if the government got involved. They depend upon the seals for food. Two, the harbour seal isn't even endangered. Evironmentalists target them because they are cute, not because they are at risk. Meanwhile they do nothing for the many shrew and bat species that are on the verge of being wiped out.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

I don't see what these "punchlines" are supposed to be...

My guess is it involves the "WWF" headline...

[SuperJerk 0]

What he means is some "har har am i not the wittiest man alive" stupid comment like "Oh well, the Asian dolphins weren't big enough to main event anyway."

Except I wanted you guys to make the stupid comments for me.

[NoCalMike 0]

Administration kept mum about unapproved modified corn sold

 

Tue Mar 22, 6:25 PM ET Top Stories - Knight Ridder Newspapers

By Seth Borenstein, Knight Ridder Newspapers

 

WASHINGTON - The federal government kept it secret for three months that genetically modified corn seed was sold accidentally to some U.S. farms for four years and may have gotten into the American food supply.

 

The accidental use of unapproved seed became public when the scientific journal Nature published a story about it Tuesday.

 

The corn seed was probably safe. America's food supply and plant and animal stocks weren't harmed and remain safe to eat, according to officials of the seed company and the federal government.

 

 

But the government's secrecy about the mistake - one affecting the public food supply - raises serious concerns, according to independent experts.

 

 

Spokesmen for the Department of Agriculture and the Environmental Protection Agency (news - web sites) said there was no need to notify the public because the government had determined that Bt 10 was safe. In addition, the USDA is investigating the whole incident involving the seed company, which faces up to $500,000 in fines, Agriculture Department spokesman Jim Rogers said.

 

 

"We're gathering evidence that we may need in front of a judge," Rogers said. "If there was a health risk, you would have heard about it and there would have been a recall."

 

 

Syngenta, a Swiss-based company, distributed the unapproved genetically altered corn seed, called

 

 

Bt 10. It mixed the Bt 10 with a near-identical and approved corn seed called Bt 11, company officials said Tuesday afternoon in a hastily called news conference. The Bt 10 was modified with a gene from the pesticide-like bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis.

 

 

"Most of the corn is used for industrial and animal use," Syngenta spokeswoman Sarah Hull said. "It may have gotten into the food supply, but regardless, the proteins are deemed safe and there's no food concern."

 

 

Remaining seeds have been destroyed or isolated, Hull said.

 

 

The unapproved seeds grew into 37,000 U.S. acres of corn over four years. That involves one-one-hundredth of 1 percent of the corn acreage in America, Hull said.

 

 

Sygenta's U.S. headquarters is in Greensboro, N.C. It runs its seed operation out of Golden Valley, Minn.

 

 

"I personally don't see it would be a major issue," said Kendall Lamkey, the head of Iowa State University's plant-breeding center.

 

 

But the way the federal government kept the mistake secret is alarming, Lamkey said, and may undermine public confidence in the growing field of genetically modified crops.

 

 

"The whole GMO (genetically modified organism) controversy surrounds a lack of transparency on both (the part of) the companies and regulatory agencies," said Lamkey, who served on a National Academy of Sciences (news - web sites) panel in 2002 on the environmental impact of genetically modified crops. "There's too much secrecy."

 

 

In mid-December, Syngenta told the EPA, the Agriculture Department and the Food and Drug Administration (news - web sites) about the mistake, Hull said.

 

 

EPA scientists reviewed seven packets of information from Syngenta from Jan. 7 to March 10, and "as more data came in, the confidence of our scientific determination (of no risk) increased," EPA spokeswoman Cynthia Bergman said in an e-mail. "Had there been a human health concern, we would have alerted the public immediately."

 

 

 

 

 

That's not acceptable, said Sheldon Krimsky, a Tufts University environmental-policy professor who's a longtime foe of genetically modified crops.

 

"They have both a moral and legal obligation to reveal violations," Krimsky said. "This is a government that's operating in a stealth manner that wants to keep bad news from the public."

[Guest Crazy Dan]

Well to keep on this environmentalist thread, I will give me two cents. I agree that a big hinderance in the "movement" is aiming too high, over exagerating doomsday scenarios, and the attitude of some of these environmentalists have of those who might not share their viewpoints. I consider myself environmentally conscious, I recycle to help us reuse our resources and create less waste in our landfills. I turn off lights I do not use, and I try to walk in town, so that I do not use as much gas (I live in small town, where the store is less than mile away. I feel that these little things all of us can do and that can make a big difference. I know when I get settled into my teaching career (liberal brain washing commence ) and make some coin, I plan on buying a hybrid, so that I use less gas. Also, when I finally do own a house, I plan on installing solor panels so that I my energy consumption is comming more from the sun and not a power plant. I like how in California, you get a tax break for installing panels.

 

As for our environment, I admit that there is no way to stop growth and use of natural resources, I just want those in charge of it to be smart about it. If a company is spewing a bunch of chemicals, knowingly, and people are made terminally ill, they should be fined and forced to clean up their mess. The auto industry over here should try to raise fuel economies and make hybrid technology more readily available, especially in SUV's. Not only does that cut our dependence on oil from our good friends in Saudia Arabia and the Middle "Down with the infidels" East, but it also makes our oil use more efficient. Also, I do believe that Mercury levels have risen over the last ten years, this is Government problem and both sides are responsible. I live by a peer which has fishing and there are warning signs explaining that the fish may have dangerous levels of mercury in them and to not eat more than 1-2 helpings a week. I don't remember fish being so dangerous, well except for Jaws and those Killer Spring Break Sharks. Sure there was Mercury, but not at the levels where eating too much can make you sick and kill you.

 

If our timber industry must cut down trees, make sure I am done hugging it, but please replace the tree with a new one, so that the cycle shall begin again. Also, trees in national parks, should be off limits. I love going hiking and think that there should be areas which technology is not evident. We should also be looking at new ways to create energy in more cleaner means, because I for one don't like being able to see my air. Also, childhood asthma cases have increased greatly over the years and I do think that smog is contributing factor. Gutting clear air regulations, under the guise of the Clear Air act, is only going to increase smog and pollution and increase health problems in people of all ages. Responsibility must never be compromised when it comes to people's health. Pollution will always be around, but there is no reason why companies should be allowed to pollute in the name of profit.

 

I also wanted to comment on how children might not outlive their parents. As it is known, people in the United States are getting fat, real fat. We have more and more obese people living in the United States. Obese people are prime candidates to have heart attacks, diabetes, high blood pressure, and many more diseases which are all preventable. I read that if this obesity trend continues, the life expectancy will go down by 4-5 years. Now common sense should dictate that you should not eat McDonalds every day. Everything in moderation and people should eat foods that are good for them. Yet, our eating habits are filled with foods high in sugar, fat, cholesterol, and low to none nutritional value. Exercise is also important, but suprise, people are not doing that either. There are some real lazy people who don't do jack and the sad thing is that they pick up these bad habits as children and are never able to stop the spiral towards a life of early death and ridicule. I did a report where obesity is on the fast track to replacing cigarettes as the leading cause of preventable death.

 

Of course, our diets have always not been the most healthy, but it used to be you had to walk everywhere, because there were no cars and other motorized vehicles and no devices that kept you indoors on your BUTT. Now, we drive everywhere, have TV and 5000 channels (I still can't find anything to watch), video games, and the Internet, which makes it possible never to leave your home. I am not sure about this, but normally Industrial nations don't regress in life expectancy, our country is on the path to bucking the trend.

 

In this case, people need to take more responsibility and make an effort to cut down on the junk food and find healthy foods that taste good. Even if you don't join a gym, go for a walk, use the stairs, park on the far end of you work lot. Don't just embed your ass into the couch. I also agree with school districts who are banning soda and candy on school grounds. Suing McDonalds for making you fat is laughable, eating that crap is on the person who pays their money for the food. Once again, people need to be responsible for their actions. But information should be provided so that for those who might be ignorant can look up the information. One last thing, people should find activities they enjoy for their exercise. Not everyone likes the treadmill (I do love the Eliptical machines), so instead of trying to force yourself to do something that will ensure you quit, explore your options. It is sad that too often it takes getting diabetes and having a triple bypass hear operation for people to have the light bulb turn on. The growing trend in obesity can be stopped, but without the effort on people's part, it will be the number one killer.

[LessonInMachismo 0]

This is a really good speech by author Michael Crichton about extreme environmentalism:

 

Crichton Speech

[EricMM 0]

This is not the first time that straw man has been posted on this forum.

[Jingus 0]

Crichton makes a really strong case for global warming being mostly hysteria in his newest book, State Of Fear. Some of the storytelling is shoddy, but the science wasn't, at least as far as I could tell.

[SuperJerk 0]

This is not the first time that straw man has been posted on this forum.

Of course. Straw men are bio-degradable!

[Guest MikeSC]

This is not the first time that straw man has been posted on this forum.

Yet you can't refute it.

-=Mike

[SuperJerk 0]

This is not the first time that straw man has been posted on this forum.

Yet you can't refute it.

-=Mike

Do you even know what a fucking straw man is, dickhead?

[NoCalMike 0]

Another enviornmental thread ressurected by a "global warming is fake" claim. Considering the debate and/or discussion about Global warming ended awhile ago, feel free to stop posting articles about it. Global Warming and it's existence, is only on fraction of enviornmental issues.

[The Czech Republic 0]

I clean up litter where I see it if it's nice outside, and I minimize driving so as to limit toxic emissions. Probably more than some people who wear their environmentalist badges do

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

This is not the first time that straw man has been posted on this forum.

 

But it will be the first for THIS straw man (sorry, that's all I got...)

 

[SuperJerk 0]

I clean up litter where I see it if it's nice outside, and I minimize driving so as to limit toxic emissions. Probably more than some people who wear their environmentalist badges do

My car gets 38 mpg.

[Guest MikeSC]

This is not the first time that straw man has been posted on this forum.

Yet you can't refute it.

-=Mike

Do you even know what a fucking straw man is, dickhead?

Just because you call it a straw man does not make it one, fucking moron.

-=Mike

[EricMM 0]

Yet you always argue against it in every-fucking-single environmentalism thread.

 

You don't even address ANYTHING else.

 

The SCIENCE of environmentalism encompasses far more than just global warming.