> Now they use
>specially made containers that are not recyclable at all due to their
>composite structure of paper, waxes, and plastic, but are using up many
>old growth trees in the process.
>
Just so you know, old growth trees are not used for making cheapy crap like
food wrappers/containers. They are used for furniture and decrative fences
etc. etc.
no bussiness man would want to use old growth for such easy throw away
items as food containers cause its much cheaper and easier to get the
farmed, fast growing pine and excess wood shavings produced from the wood
mills.
It ain't economical to do that guys.
and that's always the bottom line, ain't it?
>These are just a few, and, should people start shouting about ad
>homenim, blah blah blah, I could do more research and come up with more,
>as they do exist, of the completely insane things environmentalists do.
>
there are insane ones on both sides of the the fence, I'm sure one chould
pull up half a dozen wacky stunts pulled by people for what they believe
are good reasons,in the environmentalist camp.
but I don't think that should be the focus. media has a way of making any
group look like a bunch of idiots. case in point, the L.A. weekly
interviewed three cryonists, one of them being me. the interviewer was
great. I really thought were going to get a fair shake. but it turned out
not to be the case. thankfully, I was cut from the article. but the end
result was a horrible review that painted all cryonists as geeks that can't
get a date. it wasn't pretty. made the front page.
>I have found that many if not most environmentalist groups are in
>existence simply to raise funds by appearing to advocate rules and
>regulations that have an initial apparent purpose of making somebody
>else clean something up.
they actually try to give teeth to the existing laws on the books.
and have had success in doing so, to some extent.
as for making some one else clean it up. what do you mean by that?
you think they should go out and clean up other peoples messes for them,
when it should be the ones who did it, do it?
They also typically wind up causing even more
>environmental damage across the board than they prevented
this I don't think is so.
(just look at
>the anti-nuke movement, which was incidentally funded by fossil fuel
>companies).
>--
it maybe have been funded by them, but I think your calling something black
and white when there is a hell of a lot of grey area here.
there has to be a balance in these views. I don't think the
enviromentalists are all correct and I don't think radical viewpoints of
extropians are correct either.
one thing you have convinced me of is that I've gotta read that article in
wired.
by the way, for those of you who don't know me, I am a cryonist and an
extropian believe it or not..
Regina