Thursday, February 22, 2007

When Environmentalists' agendas do more harm than good

The Washington Times' The Inconvenient Truth offers an interesting take on a number of issues within a theme that is partially humorous - imagine Al Gore as President of the Whole Earth, or at least the Whole Earth Catalog!

But read on and it turns out that environmentalists objected to having the steel framework of the Twin Towers coated in asbestos - an omission that may have been responsible for the rapid collapse of the towers. They also managed to defeat a plan to provide New Orleans with sea gates that would have probably prevented major loss of life during Hurricane Katrina - just so that fish could more easily mate.

Neither of these outcomes are amusing. In fact you have to wonder why it has taken so long for this information to get out into the mainstream.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

in referance to the bit about fish getting through the rivers mouth to mate- who says humans are more important than plants and animals? in the eyes of nature were all equal. Humans have a bad habit of thinkin they are above everything else on the planet, but really were on the same plane as them, humans are part of this earth n people like u wish to see the human kind become more and more seperate.

your freind, mother nature

12:56 PM  
Blogger Focalplane said...

A good point in favor of Mother Nature, a concept I actually believe in more than you may realize. Humans have evolved extremely rapidly to the point that as a species we do think we are separate from Nature. Religion has created this belief system, not science.

Now, the problem with the New Orleans situation is one of balance between human needs and the needs of Nature. In all honesty, New Orleans should never have been built, but it was. The Mississippi is a river waiting to change its course, probably down the Atchafalaya, in which case New Orleans will no longer have an identity - a port without access to the ocean.

But New Orleans is now the home to a large population and that population needs as much protection from natural disasters as can reasonably be provided. I would prefer to see a total ban on new development in areas that are flood prone but greedy land developers, not scientists, are the people you really need to accuse.

The problem is "what is reasonable"? The building of sea gates was a good idea that lost out because it was not debated rationally. Emotions ruled over common sense.

Surprising that you should sign off as "mother nature" because our dear friend Gaia is not an emotional goddess. Far from it.

8:04 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home