Jump to content

**official** Environmentalists Do The Dumbest Things Thread


Recommended Posts

We all know of the global warming meetings that were canceled because of the snow storms, or the Algore meetings on global warming issue around a large table made just for this meeting from rain forest trees. Or even the recent group of global warming idiots who went to the artic to prove global warming and were snowed in and starving because of the amount of snowfall and snow storms that hit them.Here's a story to warm the cockles:Seems a group of idiots decide to show the world how they can sail to the artic to prove the global warming myth, using a carbon free sailing vessel.Well they would have sunk, but lucky for them an oil container ship was near by and was able to save them.How much would you have paid to have been a fly on the wall of their sinking ship as they starting packing their belongings to transfer them onto the oil container ship to bail their stupid butts out?And note the name of the ship!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 291
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

well I mean what do you expect? they were made up entirely of fossil fuels!

You spelled Jesus wrong.   #shotsfired

ok, ok let me guess the name without looking.Exxon Valdez right ? What do I win.
A Poker VT hat and mouse pad
Link to post
Share on other sites

Next on the long long long list:Must stop this raping of the planet!

Proving once again that environmental hysteria knows no bounds, hundreds of morons sign a petition to ban dihydrogen monoxide. Oh yes, hundreds of hydrophilic humans signed a petition to ban the common chemical substance that is essential to all known forms of life and covers 71% of the Earth’s surface.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well next the environmentalist idiots are starting to realize that there is no zero sum game.For a long time there was pressure on grocery stores to stop using paper bags, killed too many trees.So the grocery stores invented plastic bags.GASPPlastic is bad for the environment also.So some eco-deep-thinker came up with the reusable cloth bagsOoops

Link to post
Share on other sites

Next we have the wonderful green technology again forgetting that the earth doesn't give you a pass just because you are trying to save it.Troy Michigan: A green community center was the shining example of green technology and solar power

Troy -- It was supposed to be a shining example of the green movement -- a completely independent solar-powered house with no gas or electrical hookups. Seven months ago, officials gathered for a ribbon-cutting ceremony to celebrate the $900,000 house owned by the city of Troy that was to be used as an educational tool and meeting spot. But it never opened to the public. And it remains closed. Frozen pipes during the winter caused $16,000 in damage to floors, and city officials aren't sure when the house at the Troy Community Center will open.
Oh and the reason the pipes burst?
Jeff Biegler, superintendent of parks for the city, said the flooding occurred from a glitch in the heater. "The system was designed to kick a heater on to keep water from freezing," Biegler said. "The heater drew all reserve power out of the battery causing the system to back down and the pipes froze
Of course the associate dean claims that people forgot to turn the power back on....when they turned it off for the winter.Of the building that hadn't opened yet, and needed power to keep the pipes from freezing in the winter.Heck it was only $900,000.00. relax
Link to post
Share on other sites

The global warmists have yet another embarrassment on their hands.

The Catlin Arctic Survey was the brainchild of British explorer Pen Hadow who organized an expedition to trek to the North Pole to highlight how global warming was melting the Arctic ice cap. But his quest was thwarted when Mother Nature responded with fierce winds, bitter cold temperatures, and just plain lousy weather which destroyed ice measuring equipment and hampered resupply efforts, which at one point, left the team close to starvation.While the Hadow team was struggling on the ground, a German expedition was measuring thicker than expected second year ice from the comfort of an aircraft with advanced monitoring equipment. They reported that this second year ice was up to four meters thick, rather than the two meters they expected.Meanwhile, a Russian expedition simply drove to the North Pole in trucks which might be described as Humvees on steroids, with none of the discomforts the Catlin team experienced. But the Russians were more interested in oil than ice thickness. The Russians want to stake a claim to the oil rights in the Arctic Ocean while the Catlin team wants to save us from oil.The team did not see any polar bears but did find bear tracks at one point. The team apparently brought a firearm along just in case, since their website refers to firearms training. Such a practice is common with Arctic explorations since polar bears are known to attack people. It was fortunate that the team did not have to shoot any polar bears they were presumably embarking on this expedition to save the bears.
Hit the link for all the details, but the bottom line is that the expedition to help the environment actually had a carbon footprint four times bigger than the Russian oil exploration team. Oh, and the Russians actually got something out of their trip, too.
Link to post
Share on other sites

everything posted here is right. environmentalism is irrational and evil.but if you want the best example of environmentalism getting what it preaches, look no further than the grizzly man. think civilization is evil? think technology is evil? think the natural world is the ideal? want to live with the damn bears? well, you get eaten by a damn bear.the movie 'into the wild' is another good example of the height of this irrationality. although we need to consider the basic health of the planet we live on, environmentalism has taken it way too far. the thing the other posters in this thread wont tell you is that it holds us back in the same way religion does, because environmentalism is the newest world religion. if only they could develop principles consistently through all aspects of their life, but contradiction is a way a life for 99% of people.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We can talk about polluting or not polluting all we want, the planet will have the last laugh, it'll be around for a long, long, long time after we are gone. And the only thing we'll leave behind is a little bit of plastic, maybe.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well next the environmentalist idiots are starting to realize that there is no zero sum game.For a long time there was pressure on grocery stores to stop using paper bags, killed too many trees.So the grocery stores invented plastic bags.GASPPlastic is bad for the environment also.So some eco-deep-thinker came up with the reusable cloth bagsOoops
that study was done by a plastic bag company. hmmm. next you will be linking to a study about the how oil cures cancer brought to you by Exxon.
Link to post
Share on other sites
everything posted here is right. environmentalism is irrational and evil.but if you want the best example of environmentalism getting what it preaches, look no further than the grizzly man. think civilization is evil? think technology is evil? think the natural world is the ideal? want to live with the damn bears? well, you get eaten by a damn bear.the movie 'into the wild' is another good example of the height of this irrationality.
neither of those men had anything to do with the environmentalism movement, regardless of how badly you'd like for that to be true.
Link to post
Share on other sites
neither of those men had anything to do with the environmentalism movement, regardless of how badly you'd like for that to be true.
I agree with you on Christopher McCandless... but Timothy Treadwell was. Unless you're saying that neither was in some sort of political group... which would be true.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree with you on Christopher McCandless... but Timothy Treadwell was. Unless you're saying that neither was in some sort of political group... which would be true.
I mean, I consider park rangers to be a pretty great example of rational environmentalism in action. park rangers HATED treadwell for misleading the public and habituating bears to humans. maybe I'm wrong.
Link to post
Share on other sites
that study was done by a plastic bag company. hmmm. next you will be linking to a study about the how oil cures cancer brought to you by Exxon.
I guess then you have an acceptable level of fecal matter for your bags that carry the food for your family.Me..I don't have an acceptable level.And for the record. I think we are all totally for protecting the environment, stopping pollution, being smart about usage, game wardens controlling hunting based on animal numbers etc.In fact, I would say you can figure that we are aligned with most hunters in regards to the wildernes and what's acceptable to do to it.And no one wants pollution in our streams oceans or parks.We just don't want to sit around crying about the trees that were cut down to make baseball bats, especially since we can grow new ones.
Link to post
Share on other sites
And for the record. I think we are all totally for protecting the environment, stopping pollution, being smart about usage, game wardens controlling hunting based on animal numbers etc.In fact, I would say you can figure that we are aligned with most hunters in regards to the wildernes and what's acceptable to do to it.And no one wants pollution in our streams oceans or parks.We just don't want to sit around crying about the trees that were cut down to make baseball bats, especially since we can grow new ones.
I do not consider myself an environmentalist, but the bolded is not necessarily true. At least, there are ways of cutting down trees that make it more or less likely that you can sustain a similar environment. Forested areas have a certain ratio of old to new trees that is pretty important to the ecosystem. If you just cut down all the old big trees, recreating the forest is not as simple as planting new trees. It's certainly possible to do irreparable damage.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I do not consider myself an environmentalist, but the bolded is not necessarily true. At least, there are ways of cutting down trees that make it more or less likely that you can sustain a similar environment. Forested areas have a certain ratio of old to new trees that is pretty important to the ecosystem. If you just cut down all the old big trees, recreating the forest is not as simple as planting new trees. It's certainly possible to do irreparable damage.
The biggest way to do irreparable damage to the environment is to give it to the government. Something like 90% of the superfund sites were government land; the biggest polluter in the country is the government; the number of trees on private land has increased in the last 100 years while the number of trees on government land has decreased.It seems like pure folly the way the enviro-wackos keep turning to the worst steward for answers.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I do not consider myself an environmentalist, but the bolded is not necessarily true. At least, there are ways of cutting down trees that make it more or less likely that you can sustain a similar environment. Forested areas have a certain ratio of old to new trees that is pretty important to the ecosystem. If you just cut down all the old big trees, recreating the forest is not as simple as planting new trees. It's certainly possible to do irreparable damage.
It's possible to blow up the world.Some study was done not too long ago that showed that there are more trees in our forests today than there were during the civil war.Because of replanting efforts, fire fighting skills and lumber industry realizing that if they clear cut and leave, they will have to haul their trees from farther and farther locations, which drives costs up.And like I said, I am along side the people like the game warden and park rangers who make decisions on things like what should be cut, what can be cut, and what can't be cut.Or else we can go into the question of how did the first forests survive with only 100% new trees?????
Link to post
Share on other sites

The environment is stupid and I hate it and anybody who likes it. Really though, it's all well and good (and hilarious) to make fun of idiot hippie environmentalists who don't know the first thing about the actual science of what they're blabbing about, but protecting the environment is also extraordinarily important.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Or else we can go into the question of how did the first forests survive with only 100% new trees?????
Certainly they didn't just pop up from a bulldozed plot of land... the environment increased in complexity for billions of years before there were forests.. the first forests grew about 4 billion years into the earth's history. (or however that squeezes into 6,000 years)
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...