gregorygarver.com

mission_viejo_california · Joined: 20 Mar 2004 Posts: 5

Why do environmentalists cause more harm than good?

MrPeanut · Joined: 22 Mar 2004 Posts: 3

long one.I would add the elimination of nuclear power to the list.

tll · Joined: 23 Mar 2004 Posts: 4

to me its funny that he would attribute the fires to that seeing as how they found out it was done by an arsonist...plus if the believed in control burning not so much land would burn like it is.....

trovalta_stinks_2 · Joined: 25 Mar 2004 Posts: 5

I doubt anybody read all that.I disagree. Without people working for cleaner air and water, nothing would ever get done about it.

JimSock · Joined: 26 Mar 2004 Posts: 3

If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound?These fires have been burning for hundreds of years. California, the world capitol of consumption, was running out of real estate in posh locations so they expanded willy nilly into the fire zone.Now the fires that have always been burning, are relevant.

Youareallweirdos · Joined: 27 Mar 2004 Posts: 4

Exactly(I skimmed all of it)

Stunt_Gem · Joined: 29 Mar 2004 Posts: 3

It's all a perspective yours, mine, his, hers....Go ahead and waste your breath=)

Webfoot · Joined: 30 Mar 2004 Posts: 4

I aint gonna read past your question, the rest is soap boxingIt has been going on since they have been aroundRemember them spray painting baby sealsdriving spikes in treesdriving the most untuned vechicles known to man north of cubaleaving their trash every where they protestDont know

John · Joined: 01 Apr 2004 Posts: 5

Environmentalists don't cause more harm than good.How could they?The American fires are down to other issues

Danny-R · Joined: 02 Apr 2004 Posts: 3

Wow, long question... I don't think that environmentalists necessarily cause more harm than good. They are (for the most part) well intentioned people who feel that things need to be preserved. The fires in California were caused by policies enacted due to the pressure from environmentalists, true. However, the solution they came up with (i.e. suppressing all fires and allowing no logging) was flawed. So while the environmentalists were right in wanting to save the "woodland creatures" they were wrong about how to do it. We've learned, and hopefully things will change in the future, but it does take lots of money to get the forests to where they need to be.

RoyH · Joined: 03 Apr 2004 Posts: 7

You should be reported for abusing Yahoo!Answers community guidelines (..your non-question is really a "rant"...) But I'm sure not going to hit the ol'"Report Abuse" button because everything you've posted is absolutely true and lays bare the absurd agenda of tree huggers and their ilk.

GeneralMaximus · Joined: 05 Apr 2004 Posts: 5

Environmentalists are sociopaths. Plain and simple.There's no reasoning with whack jobs that would - because there are "too many humans" - rather throw their own child in front of a train to save a spotted owl.

golfer7 · Joined: 06 Apr 2004 Posts: 4

ARe you asking a question or writing a novel. In any case, you are on the wrong side of this debate; next time, don't waste so much effort trying to defend the indefensible.

rooney · Joined: 08 Apr 2004 Posts: 3

how were you able to write so much without adding details?

Erinyes · Joined: 09 Apr 2004 Posts: 3

Because they want to blame EVERYTHING on global warming and the real culprits may not get caught. Their agenda has become more important than the lies they have to tell to bolster it. So many reasons, choose one.Even funnier is it was reported that one of the arsonists was caught. But I guess global warming made him do it...it wasn't a natural disaster, it was inflicted by a criminal. Ca. environmental policies just made sure he was VERY successful with his arson.