Not that there is a problem with environmentally conscious thinking in itself, but it has to be applied sc ientifically and in context. This is the way which has been lost by the advocates of environemntal movements (who were against pollution of air and water (both issues that have been resolved)) and also has been confused by those celebrity no-brainers that advocate "stopglobalwarming.com".
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/theblog/archive/laurie-david/comfort-vs-conscience-_945.html
Just take this little example, which shows nothing drastic, but the stupidity of an environmentalist who poses the "rescue of nature" (whatever that is) above the well-being and comfort of her family.
The battle of comfort vs. conscience has begun. Stay tuned to see who wins!
I dearly hope that it is not the so-called "conscience" that wins, because this consciences is about some superstitious belief, rather than an actual fact or situation. If she followed her conscience, she'd be more concerned about the well-being of people close to her, as to some disputable fact of global warming, that may or not may occur with or without the help of humans.
But, heh, there have always been stupid people around, so why should it change now.
No comments:
Post a Comment