Re: Sustainability Scam

On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 11:26:16 +0100, Malcolm
<Malcolm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


In article <85im13pq665j6o4a13u0tqoi2pu2lfeese@xxxxxxx>,
amacmil304@xxxxxxx writes
On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 08:45:57 +0100, Malcolm
<Malcolm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


In article <cq8l135hv1f17o9vahquh19pdgp42ef5n9@xxxxxxx>,
amacmil304@xxxxxxx writes
Almost every day one reads about "sustainable development" and
"sustainability", especially in the construction of new buildings and
a host of so-called eco-activities, but is it all hot air contributing
to Global Warming? I fear the answer is yes!

A whole new industry of experts, consultants and educators has sprung
up on the back of these terms but when asked when sustainability can
be determined, they appear not to know. If they don't know
themselves, how can they convince others?

As a lay person, my view of sustainability is that it must show a
neutral or less than neutral impact on the natural environment in
terms of our human footprint and contribution to climate change, in a
world where we are already exceeding this impact. Any additional
impact whatsoever cannot be sustainable.

So when a new development or eco-activity is added to our
environmental impact it might possibly be less damaging than it could
have been, but it is certainly not sustainable unless at the same time
and in association, a greater impact is removed.

Indeed, in the present eco-crisis, the buzz-word "sustainability"
appears to be part of the "con" in conservation perpetrated against
the world's populations by fakes.


You forgot the PS

"PS. I drive a gas-guzzling Range Rover which is towards the top end of
the scale of CO2 emissions."


As I have said many times, I am not a conservationist.

I criticise those who say they are but are fakes.

You criticise from a fundamentally weak position. You refuse to practise
what you claim others should be doing.

No. I criticise them for being dishonest.

Everyone nowadays ought to be a conservationist, which doesn't have to
have anything to do with wildlife, but out of recognition that the
earth's resources are limited, that man is damaging the planet and that
everyone, including you, should consider what they can do to help.

So the so-called conservation organisations should stop encouraging
environmentally damaging activities and you should live in a place
where you don't need an air ambulance in an emergency.


You, it seems, are prepared to carry on with your damaging activities
and to hell with the planet :-(

That's what the conservationists are doing.


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: Sustainability Scam
    ... up on the back of these terms but when asked when sustainability can ... environmental impact it might possibly be less damaging than it could ... I criticise those who say they are but are fakes. ... So the so-called conservation organisations should stop encouraging ...
    (uk.environment.conservation)
  • Re: A letter I agree with.
    ... Not much support for the cons in conservation. ... Are you suggesting the 'sustainability' ethos is unsustainable? ... was set up to encourage high tech overseas companies set up ... manufacturing facilities in Scotland. ...
    (uk.environment.conservation)
  • Just what is "sustainable development"?
    ... Is it a myth? ... Is it another fake concept like so-called conservation? ... How does one know when sustainability is achieved? ...
    (uk.environment.conservation)
  • Re: Sustainability Scam
    ... up on the back of these terms but when asked when sustainability can ... I criticise those who say they are but are fakes. ... ridicule, fraud, theft and downright moral bankrupt in conservation, ... Pete has taken all reasonable care to ensure that pages published by him ...
    (uk.environment.conservation)