Re: Woodlands improve health

On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 21:33:30 +0100, Malcolm Kane
<malcolm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

In message <3ko2f2pmmaecqpb916qrukqe4j7d2hljmp@xxxxxxx>,
amacmil304@xxxxxxx writes
On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 09:17:49 +0100, Malcolm Kane
<malcolm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

In message <ksj1f2pldffbgj672eeqqs5rc73solt53t@xxxxxxx>,
amacmil304@xxxxxxx writes
On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 22:42:44 +0100, Malcolm Kane
<malcolm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

In message <0n81f2lldurj5dibqrul84jhklqsn5fui0@xxxxxxx>,
amacmil304@xxxxxxx writes

You really have a problem with this because you don't have an argument
against it.

The argument against it is so blindingly obvious that you don't seem to
be able to grasp it.

If they conserve ANYTHING (at all) they can justifiably be described as
conservationists.

For them to be fakes you need to prove that they do not conserve
anything.


Garbage. Not when they are contributing to what is "cooking our
planet will disrupt and devastate all life..." Their words - not
mine.


Sorry Angus but you don't seem to have a grasp of the English language.

Just because you interpret something differently to how it should be
does not make it wrong.

Anyone who conserves can justifiably (and correctly) be called a
conservationist.

Therefor they are not fakes.

Rubbish. Not if what they're doing contributes to the eventual
destruction of that they say they are conserving.


Oh Dear Angus. Unable to cope with the facts. How sad.

If you can't cope, that's your problem not mine.



Angus Macmillan
www.roots-of-blood.org.uk
www.killhunting.org
www.con-servation.org.uk

All truth passes through three stages:
First, it is ridiculed;
Second, it is violently opposed; and
Third, it is accepted as self-evident.
-- Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Threatened capercaillies
    ... >>>Angus again you show your lack of knowledge. ... >>I'm not saying birds will not flee fire. ... >So you are still trying to hint that the norm is for all wildlife to ... >To call an organisation a fake you must be able to show they conserve ...
    (uk.environment.conservation)
  • Re: Threatened capercaillies
    ... >Can I take it Angus that you deny the suggestion that to be a ... >conservationist one merely has to conserve something? ... Angus Macmillan ...
    (uk.environment.conservation)
  • Re: Woodlands improve health
    ... If they conserve ANYTHING they can justifiably be described as ... Sorry Angus but you don't seem to have a grasp of the English language. ... Just because you interpret something differently to how it should be ... Therefor they are not fakes. ...
    (uk.environment.conservation)
  • Re: Woodlands improve health
    ... be able to grasp it. ... If they conserve ANYTHING they can justifiably be described as ... Therefor they are not fakes. ... Malcolm Kane ...
    (uk.environment.conservation)
  • Re: Woodlands improve health
    ... be able to grasp it. ... If they conserve ANYTHING they can justifiably be described as ... Therefor they are not fakes. ... Malcolm Kane ...
    (uk.environment.conservation)