Eco-terrorism

[Greenday]

Murdering a person in an attempt to "save the whale" is still murder. I personally, and y'all are gonna hate me for this, don't feel a responsibility to save species. Millions of species have gone extinct without any human intervention.

I pretty much agree with you. I don't think we should go out of our way to make them extinct, but I don't think murdering is the way to go about preventing it. Human life is more important than any other kind of life.

[lordlundar]

What really irks me about these "eco-terrorists" is that they seem to think that nature needs human's help to survive. Umm, no. If the universe really wanted us gone, there is not a single damn thing we could do to stop it.

On the History Channel, there's a show called "Life without people" and it covers theories on how the earth would continue if there were no people left. One of the questions asked is "What would the earth do after all the humans left?" My response? It would say "I'm going to take back every piece of me that humanity took." and then proceed to do it.

[protege]

On the History Channel, there's a show called "Life without people" and it covers theories on how the earth would continue if there were no people left.

I've seen that show. But, has anyone seen the current pictures of the Chernobyl area in the Ukraine? (With the mention of nuclear power, I thought I'd throw that tidbit out there.) For those who don't remember, that area was the site of the worst nuclear accident ever. Lots of people had their lives turned upside down, or outright destroyed when that happened. Even now, the cities nearby the plant still survive. Many things are still intact, but are slowly returning to nature. There are apartments with trees growing up through the floors; new moss clinging to radioactive rocks, etc. In other words, the area has already started recovering from the accident. Still dangerous as hell though. In other words, nature will continue to do what it does best. It will continue to adapt to changing conditions.

But, I do agree that we need something other than wind and solar power. Both are simply too damn expensive and not nearly as powerful as a nuke plant. Yet, because of Chernobyl--which was a *human* caused accident--it'll never happen in the US. From what I understand, that plant blew up, because all of the safety mechanisms were disabled during a power test! It wasn't an equipment failure at all!

Then there's the Three Mile Island's accident. Total opposite of Chernobyl--the amount of radioactive material released was actually pretty small. You're exposed to more radiation during your lifetime than was actually released at TMI.

[Greenday]

Yet, because of Chernobyl--which was a *human* caused accident--it'll never happen in the US. From what I understand, that plant blew up, because all of the safety mechanisms were disabled during a power test! It wasn't an equipment failure at all!

The plant was being run by a guy who knew a guy so that's how he got his job, not because he earned it. The higher ups of the company were coming by to check how things were going so the moron wanted the efficiency ratings to by REALLY high so he had the plant push all the equipment farther than their safety ratings allowed.

[protege]

Actually, according to someone from the area, the test was being run to see how long the turbines would spin if the electrical power supply went off line. But, from what I've read though, many industries in the Soviet era were controlled by bureaucrats...many of whom were miles away, or had no idea what they were doing.

[AdminAssistant]

What really irks me about these "eco-terrorists" is that they seem to think that nature needs human's help to survive. Umm, no. If the universe really wanted us gone, there is not a single damn thing we could do to stop it.

"The planet is fine. The people are fucked." - George Carlin

[BlaqueKatt]

So, now you want to equate the 1 person who makes the decision that their dinner plate tastes is more important than them (and the profits that come with it); and the mass killing of 10,000 sentient life forms that have lived for 20,30, 40 or more years from a species that is heading towards extinction - with an individual who chooses to give people a choice of life-style that may in fact improve the basic quality of those people's lives, by terminating what is questionably a 'sentient life form' that has not yet lived, in a species that is slowly destroying the planet, and is on the increase with not much chance of extinction (except by its own stupidity).

ok the person that murders the CEO to "save the whales" believes their cause is noble-the whales can't speak for themselves-correct?(in your mind ok to do)

What is a pro-lifer thinking when they murder an abortionist to save the unborn that can't speak for themselves-they believe it's a noble cause.(not ok-but there is no difference in the mindset of the perpetrators of either act which is what I'm trying to make you see)

All terrorists believe their cause is the noblest out there that's why they're willing to do such extreme things-look at what the IRA and PLO have done in the name of their "noble causes"

Hmmm.... why not indeed? Perhaps it's because of the amount of money that's involved in bringing a law-suit against an organisation by either an organisation or individual, for an entity that has no legal rights..

Yes because lawsuits are the only way to do things-there are no such things as petitions, lobbying, letter writing campaigns.....

As for the 'crops being planted'... who for? The locals can, for the most part, live quite successfully with what they have.

sure
they can
Rains have failed, crops are sparse and animals are dying,
Agriculture has virtually collapsed, nearly 4 million Kenyans who cannot produce, or afford, daily food.

On the average, 1 person dies every second as a result of hunger - 4000 every hour - 100 000 each day - 36 million each year - 58 % of all deaths
On the average, 1 child dies every 5 seconds as a result of hunger - 700 every hour - 16 000 each day - 6 million each year - 60% of all child deaths

wow they're doing great by themselves-oh wait they've had 3 years of drought...

Humans are notoriously stupid! Some have taken up the stance of which you seek - it was decades ago that protests started about whale hunting by the Japanese merchants....

By Americans-of course-the arrogant ignorant americans that no one listens to...

it's the same stance I have with drugs and guns - when humans are responsible enough to use them intelligently, fine. Until then, tough!

all I can say to this without seeing red is-don't be condescending-and who gets to be our nanny and decide that we're old enough to get out of diapers....
again the attitude of we know better than you in our smug superiority.....wait that's the stance most eco-terrorists take. You don't know any better we must save you from yourself.......it's bullshit.....I'm 34 I don't need a nanny thank you...

Your wind and solar argument has some merit... but it should also be recognised that it's the lack of research funding that is giving the problems with efficiency.

oh then what exactly are they doing with the billions of dollars in subsidy money they're getting? And don't forget the 2.25 billion in grants strictly for R&D in wind/solar only.....

I also happen to think nuclear is a good alternative for the short term.. while research goes on in other fields at the same time. Coal is just silly!

and the ECO-terrorists protest, block, and cause horrendous property damage to any attempted nuclear plant in the US-so how's that gonna happen?

Do they? Why? Or, more to the point, why do they have a right to live while helping to destroy an environment? Yes, I'm going back to the 'humans are ego-centric' line... which no-one has yet even looked at arguing for... (for that matter, my whale example hasn't been answered either!)

amazing how the poeple that say others have no right to live never volunteer to remove themselves or their loved ones from the "overpopulation problem" only poor people in third world countries. When you get sick do you go to the doctor, or think well I don't have a right to live? Hypocrisy gotta love it.

And I did answer your whale question-you just don't want to see that every terrorist believes their cause is noble-from Eco-terrorists, to the PLO, to Right to lifers.....adding the ECO prefix does not justify anything.

[Nyoibo]

Rains have failed, crops are sparse and animals are dying,
Agriculture has virtually collapsed, nearly 4 million Kenyans who cannot produce, or afford, daily food.

On the average, 1 person dies every second as a result of hunger - 4000 every hour - 100 000 each day - 36 million each year - 58 % of all deaths
On the average, 1 child dies every 5 seconds as a result of hunger - 700 every hour - 16 000 each day - 6 million each year - 60% of all child deaths

wow they're doing great by themselves-oh wait they've had 3 years of drought...

And this is what happens when you overpopulate an area that cannot sustain that level of population, oh and drought for 3 years? Boohoo, from 2002-2008 most of Australia has had the lowest rainfall on record for 100 years, 65% of Australia's viable agricultural land is currently in drought, but we're not so overpopulated.

[Slytovhand]

ok the person that murders the CEO to "save the whales" believes their cause is noble-the whales can't speak for themselves-correct?(in your mind ok to do)

What is a pro-lifer thinking when they murder an abortionist to save the unborn that can't speak for themselves-they believe it's a noble cause.(not ok-but there is no difference in the mindset of the perpetrators of either act which is what I'm trying to make you see)

All terrorists believe their cause is the noblest out there that's why they're willing to do such extreme things-look at what the IRA and PLO have done in the name of their "noble causes"

True, I don't have an issue with what you are saying here... I do have an issue in how it's being portrayed as being exactly the same thing. BTW, as for the IRA and the PLO - firstly, those things are brought about due to human ignorance - humans think what's more important for them is the only thing that is important. Secondly, the IRA and the PLO actually seemed to have succeeded (in some measure) in their goals. (FTR, no, I don't approve of their actions, but I can at least understand them...).

Yes because lawsuits are the only way to do things-there are no such things as petitions, lobbying, letter writing campaigns.....

Oh, there are such things... they just have a tendency not to work - mostly because most people don't bother with such things. If you got 100million people doing such things, a petition or lobbying or letters will have an effect. When it's only a few hundred. Extreme measures occur when people don't do anything. Or, when that something that has irreversible consequences, change takes so long to come about to make it almost too late. If something needs to be fixed now, then getting in the petitions and the lobbying etc which might work 2 years from now isn't going to work effectively.

sure
they can
Rains have failed, crops are sparse and animals are dying,
Agriculture has virtually collapsed, nearly 4 million Kenyans who cannot produce, or afford, daily food.

On the average, 1 person dies every second as a result of hunger - 4000 every hour - 100 000 each day - 36 million each year - 58 % of all deaths
On the average, 1 child dies every 5 seconds as a result of hunger - 700 every hour - 16 000 each day - 6 million each year - 60% of all child deaths

wow they're doing great by themselves-oh wait they've had 3 years of drought...

??? Your links and information are rather irrelevant to this argument. You said that people were being stopped by the eco-terrorists from cutting down forests so they can plant crops to feed themselves... what you've said here has absolutely nothing to do with this... For that matter, the links (particularly the second) actually back up what I was referring to...

By Americans-of course-the arrogant ignorant americans that no one listens to...

Sure??? I thought it was Greenpeace. I remember Dr Suzuki (Canadian - Japanese) talking about this decades ago. And Sir David Attenborough (English). Both of these big name individuals have been campaigning for about 40 years on these subjects (environmentalism)... lots of lobbying, petitions, political letters... now, 4 decades later, we're just waking up to some of these issues....

all I can say to this without seeing red is-don't be condescending-and who gets to be our nanny and decide that we're old enough to get out of diapers....
again the attitude of we know better than you in our smug superiority.....wait that's the stance most eco-terrorists take. You don't know any better we must save you from yourself.......it's bullshit.....I'm 34 I don't need a nanny thank you...

Your aggravation with my arrogance is also irrelevant. The facts speak for themselves. (btw - you've expressed fairly similar ideas in other threads... so what's the difference here?)

oh then what exactly are they doing with the billions of dollars in subsidy money they're getting? And don't forget the 2.25 billion in grants strictly for R&D in wind/solar only.....

Sorry, let me clarify... R&D, and initiatives for actual production! And some extremely serious ways to get it happening on a mass level. There are technologies out there that are far more eco-friendly, but at the moment, they're 'too expensive' (read, we can still bleed out more profits the way things are going). (did you happen to check out the links I provided??)

and the ECO-terrorists protest, block, and cause horrendous property damage to any attempted nuclear plant in the US-so how's that gonna happen?

I'm arguing for understanding eco-terrorism - I'm not suggesting they're always right... but in some cases, I would think some things are obvious - or do you disagree?? Does nature have infinite patience, and thus it doesn't really matter what we do?

amazing how the poeple that say others have no right to live never volunteer to remove themselves or their loved ones from the "overpopulation problem" only poor people in third world countries. When you get sick do you go to the doctor, or think well I don't have a right to live? Hypocrisy gotta love it.

You now expect the 'serious' eco-friendly to commit mass suicide??? Hmmm - not a line I'd expect you to take.... Oh, trust me, I'm not one to think the 'overpopulation problem' needs to be dealt with only at the Third World level. I have only asked the question (yet to be answered) why human life is more important than any other sentient life form's... Rhetoric is not an answer. (I could also point out, as Nyoibo has - the over-populated areas coincide with the areas that are having the major problems. (Australia just happens to be extremely lucky - large land mass, plenty of arable land, very low population...)

Ideally, I'm more for a socialist world, not a capitalistic one.... a world where economy is more important than life.

And I did answer your whale question-you just don't want to see that every terrorist believes their cause is noble-from Eco-terrorists, to the PLO, to Right to lifers.....adding the ECO prefix does not justify anything.

I presume then (perhaps rather foolishly) that you think 10,000 whales are less important than 1 CEO - yes? If so, why?

(ok, I need to do that other thread now... although there are similar out there...)

Human life is more important than any other kind of life.

Ummm - that'll take a massive thread, and almost a de-rail, though it's directly linked, and will be very controversial... but why?

What really irks me about these "eco-terrorists" is that they seem to think that nature needs human's help to survive. Umm, no. If the universe really wanted us gone, there is not a single damn thing we could do to stop it.

I'm suggesting that it doesn't need human's help to survive - it does need humanity to wake up and stop being so destructive. Cos humans have forgotten (ignored) the fact that we're still a part of nature as well - and when the time comes, we'll get what we've been giving.

[Savannah]

Damnit. I somehow lost a whole long reply, complete with links and everything. Here goes (again):

I think that ELF/ALF/etc harm their cause more than they help. Slytovhand, do you believe that you can get the average person interested in supporting something that they associate with "crazy extremists"? You will need people's support if you want to change things permanently.

Is it okay for us to actively prevent a species from extinction? At this point the question is are we ready to take on the responsibility of evolution?

When extinctions are occurring at a rate similar to that of other mass extinction events and we are contributing to that rate? Yes. We already have taken on the responsibility of evolution with animal and plant domestication, not to mention medical procedures that keep humans alive who would normally have died.

So people should starve, and not plant crops on their own land because there's a possibility that we might find something that can be used to make a medicine-yup typical "it doesn't affect me" attitude. Sorry I'm more concerned with people not starving than a drug company making more money.

I'm more concerned about the loss of one of the biggest sources of oxygen on the planet. The amazon rainforest produces 20% of the world's oxygen and could be gone in 40 years (less considering the article was written in 2003). That's bad for pretty much every living thing on the planet. Drugs derived from plants help more than just me.

We have no idea how many species have been lost before we even discovered them and we don't know whether they were essential for the ecosystem's long-term survival. Furthermore, as the linked article pointed out, loss of rainforest = loss of indigenous tribes, including the people you are worried about.

amazing how the poeple that say others have no right to live never volunteer to remove themselves or their loved ones from the "overpopulation problem" only poor people in third world countries. When you get sick do you go to the doctor, or think well I don't have a right to live? Hypocrisy gotta love it.

I believe that overpopulation will kill us. Therefore, I will never have a biological child and if I conceive accidentally, I will abort. I support all forms of birth control and tentatively support any policies like China's one child per family rule. (Tentatively due to concern over how it would be enforced and what would happen to existing big families.) Just sayin'.

Also, I completely agree with your eco-terrorist/pro-life murderer analogy. So often it's easy to forget that just because other's views are contrary to ours doesn't mean that they hold them any less dearly (or blindly ).

Human life is more important than any other kind of life.

OK, I'm genuinely curious. Why? I don't see anything particularly special about us.

EDIT: And I see I've drifted even more off topic and missed answering the main point of the thread trying to recreate my earlier post. Eco-terrorism: cause sometimes good, method completely unacceptable. By the way, where are you getting the whales vs. CEO number, Slytovhand? I was under the impression that most eco-terrorism targeted the workers and their equipment, not so much the higher-ups who are harder to get at and less immediately connected to whatever the eco-terrorists are protesting.

[Greenday]

OK, I'm genuinely curious. Why? I don't see anything particularly special about us.

I'm a human, thus my species comes first to me.

[BlaqueKatt]

And this is what happens when you overpopulate an area that cannot sustain that level of population, oh and drought for 3 years? Boohoo, from 2002-2008 most of Australia has had the lowest rainfall on record for 100 years, 65% of Australia's viable agricultural land is currently in drought, but we're not so overpopulated.

hmmm considering it's the second largest continent-only larger is Asia....
africa-population 1,001,320,281 density 33.0 per sq Km
asia-population 4,162,966,086 density 89.07 per sq Km

so.....by your theory Asia should be worse off yet it isn't

You also have more money to pay for birth control, prenatal care, doctors for your children-immunizations-clean drinking water....

look at their infant mortality rates...This entry gives the number of deaths of infants under one year old in a given year per 1,000 live births in the same year; included is the total death rate, and deaths by sex, male and female. This rate is often used as an indicator of the level of health in a country.

average of Africa is 180 per 1000 die before age one-Austrailia it's 4 per 1000, and the horribly overpopulated japan 3 per 1000 china(more overpopulated than anywhere else) 20 per 1000-overpopulation causing it is BS.

Africa is the world's second-largest and second most-populous continent, after Asia. At about 30.2 million km² (11.7 million sq mi) including adjacent islands, it covers 6% of the Earth's total surface area and 20.4% of the total land area.[2] With a billion people (as of 2009, see table) in 61 territories, it accounts for about 14.8% of the World's human population.

Oh, there are such things... they just have a tendency not to work - mostly because most people don't bother with such things. If you got 100million people doing such things, a petition or lobbying or letters will have an effect. When it's only a few hundred. Extreme measures occur when people don't do anything. Or, when that something that has irreversible consequences, change takes so long to come about to make it almost too late. If something needs to be fixed now, then getting in the petitions and the lobbying etc which might work 2 years from now isn't going to work effectively.

Maybe the reason people Won't assist them is because of their previous bullying and terrorist acts? I see quite a few of them as zealots and whackjobs-so not so willing to assist them...pretty sure I'm not the only one....

Sure??? I thought it was Greenpeace.

yeah the group their own founder left because "after six years as one of five directors of Greenpeace International, I observed that none of my fellow directors had any formal science education. They were either political activists or environmental entrepreneurs. Ultimately, a trend toward abandoning scientific objectivity in favor of political agendas forced me to leave Greenpeace in 1986.

Hmmm environmental entrepreneurs---sounds like greed to me....

I'm arguing for understanding eco-terrorism - I'm not suggesting they're always right

I don't think any form of terrorism is right-EVER.

You now expect the 'serious' eco-friendly to commit mass suicide??? Hmmm - not a line I'd expect you to take.... Oh, trust me, I'm not one to think the 'overpopulation problem' needs to be dealt with only at the Third World level.

But everyone that says "look at the overpopulation," or takes the cavalier attitude toward the 20% infant mortality rate in Africa with "well their overpopulated" would never say the same thing about their own country or family.

I could also point out, as Nyoibo has - the over-populated areas coincide with the areas that are having the major problems.

Yup Asia the most heavily populated landmass on the planet is doing just terribly......

I presume then (perhaps rather foolishly) that you think 10,000 whales are less important than 1 CEO - yes? If so, why?

I don't put a value on human or animal life, or plant life for that matter-life is life. Heck I don't even kill mosquitoes, I rescue earthworms from sidewalks-life is life.


*example of what greenpeace is currently up to
Phthalates are the new bogeyman. These chemicals make easy targets since they are hard to understand and difficult to pronounce. Commonly used phthalates, such as diisononyl phthalate (DINP), have been used in everyday products for decades with no evidence of human harm. DINP is the primary plasticizer used in toys. It has been tested by multiple government and independent evaluators, and found to be safe.

Despite this, a political campaign that rejects science is pressuring companies and the public to reject the use of DINP. Retailers such as Wal-Mart and Toys "R" Us are switching to phthalate-free products to avoid public pressure.

It may be tempting to take this path of least resistance, but at what cost? None of the potential replacement chemicals have been tested and found safe to the degree that DINP has

Greenpeace decision to support a world-wide ban on chlorine. Science shows that adding chlorine to drinking water was the biggest advance in the history of public health, virtually eradicating water-borne diseases such as cholera. And the majority of our pharmaceuticals are based on chlorine chemistry. Simply put, chlorine is essential for our health.

My former colleagues ignored science and supported the ban, forcing my departure. Despite science concluding no known health risks – and ample benefits – from chlorine in drinking water,

[jackfaire]

When extinctions are occurring at a rate similar to that of other mass extinction events and we are contributing to that rate? Yes. We already have taken on the responsibility of evolution with animal and plant domestication, not to mention medical procedures that keep humans alive who would normally have died.
.

Ok. Because what that means is stopping evolution. We now wish to throw a monkey wrench. No longer will we accept survival of the fittest. Nothing is allowed to change because extinction is bad so all species must be saved. It is now our decision to balance the ecosystem instead of leting nature do it.

[Cat]

Why should letting nature take its course (ie, not aiding endangered species) not be extended to humans?

After all, the earth will take care of herself

[Nyoibo]

hmmm considering it's the second largest continent-only larger is Asia....
africa-population 1,001,320,281 density 33.0 per sq Km
asia-population 4,162,966,086 density 89.07 per sq Km

so.....by your theory Asia should be worse off yet it isn't

Um, no, you seem to be under the impression that the size of a country or continent is directly proportional to its ability to sustain a population, it's not, Australia is not much smaller than the U.S (excluding Alaska) however a lot of Australia is uninhabitable and cannot sustain a population the size of the US.