Stupid Environmentalists

[freedumb]

Much to Benjamin Franklin's dismay, the Bald eagle was adopted as the national emblem in 1782. He said that the Bald Eagle was a bird of bad moral character (stealing food) and recommended the turkey instead. None the less, the bird serves as a symbol of wilderness and freedom.

Stupid environmentalists saved this bird of bad moral character from becoming extinct. Hunters shot the birds for feathers and fun, claiming, and maybe even believing the birds threatened the all mighty pursuit of profit.

Land and water pollution from industry and the effects of DDT managed to, inadvertently, reduce the numbers of this so called menace to about 800 breeding pairs in 1972.

In steps the environmentalist extremists. With tireless work, the Endangered Species Act of 1972, conservation efforts, and various programs, the numbers have been raised closer to 3000 breeding pairs. Not near the estimated 50,000 birds which used to live across the states.

When will these stupid environmental extremists learn that constant industrial expansion, chemicals, and profit are more important than clean water, un-polluted land, and a bunch of small brained birds. Survival of the fittest.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

freedumb,

As I am sure you are aware, it is not an "all-or-nothing" proposition. Are there some legitimate, genuine environmental concerns, programs, and groups that truly promote, protect, and preserve in a manner that is both eco- and human-friendly ... yes. Are there some illegitimate, dangerous, environmental whackos who wish to promote an environment-over-human agenda ... yes.

People make mistakes -- always have, always will. Bad actions -- by EITHER side -- should not be supported, justified, or glorified. As humans it is our responsibility to learn from and correct our mistakes, not over-react to them and make MORE mistakes.

There is a middle ground between environmental conservation/protection and development/progress. Again, it is NOT an either or proposition -- we are mutually dependent, and neither piece is greater than the whole.

[freedumb]

Are there some legitimate, genuine environmental concerns, programs, and groups that truly promote, protect, and preserve in a manner that is both eco- and human-friendly ... yes

So what's up with the Kyoto Protocol? World wide, this is the warmest winter ever.

[PaulRevere]

Whatever
:rolleyes:
Please don't feed the troll
:trollhook:

[Keith J]

So what's up with the Kyoto Protocol? World wide, this is the warmest winter ever.You tell me, Einstein. Tell me how unregulated emissions from China, india and the rest of the third world as permitted under the current Kyoto Protocol is going to do anything beneficial. Tell me how cutting the developed world emissions will do anything but stifle technology, the same technology that will save us.

Now tell me how much you know (more precisely, how much you DON'T KNOW) about the global carbon cycle.

I have a thread here with the specifics. I'll post a link or at least bring it up a level or two for your benefit. There are several discoveries of recent that blow gaping holes in the greenhouse gas hypothesis of global warming.


Here is the link:
http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/showthread.php?t=13830

[THEBIRD]

Warmest Winter where?

It's been around 20 here in Orlando for the last week. 5 in St. Louis.

[Faithful_Servant]

Whatever
:rolleyes:
Please don't feed the troll
:trollhook:
What this troll doesn't understand is that he's fishing from a float tube using 6 lb. test in waters infested with Great White Sharks.

C'mon little troll, just a little closer, papa wants a snack.

[Faithful_Servant]

Stupid environmentalists saved this bird of bad moral character from becoming extinct. Hunters shot the birds for feathers and fun, claiming, and maybe even believing the birds threatened the all mighty pursuit of profit.
It was made illegal to kill the Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) in 1940. The Bald Eagle was one of the early successes of the ESA. Since then, the ESA has been bastardized into a tool for the eco-leftists to use to grab power.
At least quote your sources, fd&d. The "bird of bad moral character" line is from Ben Franklin. He was wrong.


Land and water pollution from industry and the effects of DDT managed to, inadvertently, reduce the numbers of this so called menace to about 800 breeding pairs in 1972.

In steps the environmentalist extremists. With tireless work, the Endangered Species Act of 1972, conservation efforts, and various programs, the numbers have been raised closer to 3000 breeding pairs. Not near the estimated 50,000 birds which used to live across the states.
The ESA was enacted in 1973.
The current estimates are 6,000 breeding pairs and a total population of 50,000 if you only count the lower 48 states. If you include B.C. and Alaska the number balloons to an estimated 50,000 eagles (probably 15,000 nested pairs by my estimation)
source (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/06/0620_020620_baldeagle.html)


When will these stupid environmental extremists learn that constant industrial expansion, chemicals, and profit are more important than clean water, un-polluted land, and a bunch of small brained birds. Survival of the fittest.
Here's a little fact for you fd&d, DDT was blamed for the reduced reproductivity of the eagles so it was banned. Since the ban was put in place and enforced almost world-wide, malaria and yellow fever deaths have sky rocketed. We allowed people to die in order to save some birds. There's no doubt that DDT contributed to the problems of the Bald Eagle reproducing, but the solution of totally banning it was stupid. Controlling how and when DDT is applied would have solved the problem w/o sacrificing human lives. That's stupid environmentalism.

[freedumb]

"The ESA was enacted in 1973."
oops. You're right there. My bad.

For my own part I wish the Bald Eagle had not been chosen the Representative of our Country. He is a Bird of bad moral Character. He does not get his Living honestly. You may have seen him perched on some dead Tree near the River, where, too lazy to fish for himself, he watches the Labour of the Fishing Hawk; and when that diligent Bird has at length taken a Fish, and is bearing it to his Nest for the Support of his Mate and young Ones, the Bald Eagle pursues him and takes it from him.
Benjamin Franklin
[url]http://www.greatseal.com/symbols/turkey.html[url]


What this troll doesn't understand is that he's fishing from a float tube using 6 lb. test in waters infested with Great White Sharks.
Funny you should mention fishing. "Poisoning from lead fishing sinkers has also been implicated in eagle deaths."--that's from your source, fs.


Was DDT really banned because of the bald eagle? Or because it was saving too many lives in third world countries?

DDT is a cheap disease control solution for some 3rd world countries, but it will not take too long for bugs to develop resistance. Some good medicine might help.


Are objections to Kyoto just political? You're not the boss of me sort of thing? Or are they really based on some real science? Looks like some people are scrambling for some science to prop up their feelings about the issue.

I think that objections are most likely based on short term economic concerns. The costs of making big industry burn cleaner. They should pay it themselves, but they will fight tooth and nail to pass the bill over to the public.

[DoctorDoom]

Kyoto is a joke. However, if it is so wonderful, why don't the rest of the world's countries sign it and adhere to it WITHOUT the US? We are, after all, far less detrimental to the environment that a goodly number of other countries. No one is stopping every other country from ratifying it and living with it, regardless of what the US does.

As of 12/16/2004, there were 140 signatories (http://www.mct.gov.br/clima/ingles/quioto/signata.htm) to the Protocol. Of them, 69 had ratified it. Your country is listed as "accession". If this Protocol is really the world-saver that its fanatical champions claim, why are there not 139 ratifications and full compliance with it? That would certainly show Americans how unenlightened we are, n'est-ce pas?

Q: what percentage of the world's population are exempt from the Protocol?
A: about 80%. Among the exempted nations are China (1.285 billion), India (1.05 billion), Brazil (176 million), and Mexico (104 million). If you want to literally see the air, try Mexico City.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/images/mexico%20city%20pollution.jpg

Air pollution

The Mexican Health Secretariat says that more than a third of Mexico's disease burden is the result of environmental factors, the most serious of which is air pollution. A recent CEC study found that respiratory ailments related to air pollution were the cause of death for at least half of the more than 2,800 minors who died in the northern border city of Ciudad Juarez. Though especially pressing in the country's largest cities (e.g. Mexico City, Guadalajara, and Ciudad Juarez), air pollution also has intensified along the border with the United States because of the growing number of factories ("maquiladoras") located there, as well as the increased truck traffic with the United States. Air pollution in northern Mexico also impacts the United States border areas.

Mexico City has the worst air pollution in the country and ranks among the most polluted cities in the world. Its ozone levels exceed World Health Organization standards 300 days a year, and SEMARNAT has estimated that the air in Ciudad Juarez is 40% less contaminated than in the capital. Exhaust fumes from Mexico City's estimated 4 million motor vehicles, many of which are old and especially environmentally damaging, are the main source of air pollutants. The city's air problem is aggravated by its unique geography. Mexico City resides in a basin more than 7,400 feet above sea level and is surrounded on three sides by mountains. These isolate the city from regional weather disturbances and trap pollution.Mexico: Environmental Issues (http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/mexenv.html)

Mexico is exempt from Kyoto. Why?

Q: What is the left's passion for saddling America with the burden of their delusions?
A: They want the US to be forced to comply with it because they want to this country to suffer massive economic hardships for political reasons.

Q: Why?
A: Because America is kicking the sorry asses of pissant leftist countries. The US is the only superpower on the planet, economically, technologically and militarily. And, the US was the force that ultimately led to the collapse of the communist empire, an offense for which the lefties will loathe us until the sun dies.

Kyoto, the junk-science brainchild of the looney left, was intended to impose crushing restrictions on the US, for no other reason than hatred of America. Screw the bastards.

[Keith J]

So what's up with the Kyoto Protocol? World wide, this is the warmest winter ever.Victoria, Texas. Technically on the upper Texas Coast, a scant 80 miles Southwest of Houston. A FOOT of snow on Christmas Eve. The first white Christmas in 85 years for Victoria and most of South Texas.

Oh yes, it wasn't exactly warm for the rest of the United States either. Lake effect snows have been brutal.

[DoctorDoom]

World wide, this is the warmest winter ever.One warm winter does not global warming make. Summer 2004 was the coolest that I've seen in years. Ordinarily we get at least a couple of weeks of 90 or higher, with occasional 100s. This year we hit the low 90s maybe three times, and nothing in the 100+ range. If the ecowackos can cite one unusual winter as proof of warming, I can cite one unusual summer as a counterpoint.

IAC, I fail to see where warming is a BFD. It has been a lot warmer over the millenia, and I'm not fond of cold weather anyway. So what if the polar ice melts? All it will flood is the liberal coast cities. No loss. I'd like to visit NYC or San Fagcisco with a glass-bottom boat. :D

[Timberwolf]

IAC, I fail to see where warming is a BFD. It has been a lot warmer over the millenia, and I'm not fond of cold weather anyway. So what if the polar ice melts? All it will flood is the liberal coast cities. No loss. I'd like to visit NYC or San Fagcisco with a glass-bottom boat. :D<!-- / message -->I'll second that motion, Doc!! LOL

[sunsettommy]

One warm winter does not global warming make. Summer 2004 was the coolest that I've seen in years. Ordinarily we get at least a couple of weeks of 90 or higher, with occasional 100s. This year we hit the low 90s maybe three times, and nothing in the 100+ range. If the ecowackos can cite one unusual winter as proof of warming, I can cite one unusual summer as a counterpoint.

IAC, I fail to see where warming is a BFD. It has been a lot warmer over the millenia, and I'm not fond of cold weather anyway. So what if the polar ice melts? All it will flood is the liberal coast cities. No loss. I'd like to visit NYC or San Fagcisco with a glass-bottom boat. :D
Actually all the ARTIC Polar ice can melt and no rise in the sea level.That is because the Ice and snow was already in the water to start with,DISPLACING the ocean waters.

[sunsettommy]

Stupid environmentalists saved this bird of bad moral character from becoming extinct. Hunters shot the birds for feathers and fun, claiming, and maybe even believing the birds threatened the all mighty pursuit of profit.

Land and water pollution from industry and the effects of DDT managed to, inadvertently, reduce the numbers of this so called menace to about 800 breeding pairs in 1972.

In steps the environmentalist extremists. With tireless work, the Endangered Species Act of 1972, conservation efforts, and various programs, the numbers have been raised closer to 3000 breeding pairs. Not near the estimated 50,000 birds which used to live across the states.

When will these stupid environmental extremists learn that constant industrial expansion, chemicals, and profit are more important than clean water, un-polluted land, and a bunch of small brained birds. Survival of the fittest.
Proof please.

[sunsettommy]

So what's up with the Kyoto Protocol? World wide, this is the warmest winter ever.
Prove it!

[freedumb]

Proof please.

Look it up. Debunk as you see fit.
It might be instructive to read the whole thread. Follow the links.


As for the warm winter comment...
I can't prove that. Just said it to make conversation.



4th warmest?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6720088/

[sunsettommy]

Look it up. Debunk as you see fit.
It might be instructive to read the whole thread. Follow the links.


As for the warm winter comment...
I can't prove that. Just said it to make conversation.



4th warmest?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6720088/I looked up your link,it lacks actual data and also the statements made in it are deliberately misleading.I quote:

The year 2004, punctuated by four powerful hurricanes in the Caribbean and deadly typhoons lashing Asia, was the fourth-hottest on record, extending a trend since 1990 that has registered the 10 warmest years, a U.N. weather agency said Wednesday.

Typical cherrypicking being done here,the time in years is only 14.if you extended it back to 1940,you would have a drastically different story.

Here is another quote:

The World Meteorological Organization said it expects Earth’s average surface temperature to rise 0.8 degrees above the normal 57 degrees Fahrenheit in 2004, adding this year to a recent pattern that included the four warmest years on record, with the hottest being 1998.

No scailing mentioned here,the bolded statement is worthless due to lacking reference in time frame.Then too 1998 was the powerful El Ninyo year coupled with the increase in solar irradiance.A statistical anomoly.

One more quote from your link:

The Caribbean had four hurricanes that reached Category 4 or 5 status — those capable of causing extreme and catastrophic damage. It was only the fourth time in recent history that so many were recorded. The hurricanes of 2004 caused more than $43 billion in damage in the Caribbean and the United States.
The worst damage was on Haiti, where as many as 1,900 people died from flooding and mudslides caused by Tropical Storm Jeanne in September.

Japan and the Philippines also saw increased extreme tropical weather, with deadly typhoons lashing both islands. Japan registered a record number of typhoons making landfall this year with 10, while back-to-back storms in the Philippines killed at least 740 people in the wettest year for the globe since 2000, the U.N. agency said.

I see the dishonesty here because the waters in that part of the world is ALWAYS warm enough to form Hurricanes.It is the trade winds that was different,that steered the otherwise ocean only storms onto land.There is no significant overall increase in the number of such storms,just more of them making landfall than usual.


Try this link for better worldwide data that the well known biased MSNBC is unaware of:


http://www.junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/Warming_Glance.htm

This next link is about Hurricane numbers:

http://www.junkscience.com/Hurricanes/Hurricanes.htm

[freedumb]

MSNBC are indeed a bunch of RightWing biased fakers

[sunsettommy]

http://www.crosswalk.com/news/1301826.html

Excerpt


Greens Concede Kyoto Will Not Impact 'Global Warming'
Marc Morano
Senior Staff Writer

Buenos Aires, Argentina (CNSNews.com) - After a relentless attack on the United States for opposing the Kyoto Protocol, environmental groups concede the international treaty will have no impact on what they believe to be impending catastrophic global warming.

Despite the fact that green groups at the U.N. climate summit in Buenos Aires called President George Bush "immoral" and "illegitimate" for not supporting the Kyoto Protocol, the groups themselves concede the Protocol will only have "symbolic" effect on climate because they believe it is too weak. Kyoto is an international treaty that seeks to limit greenhouse gases of the developed countries by 2012.


More in the link.

[sunsettommy]

MSNBC are indeed a bunch of RightWing biased fakers
Is this your rebuttal?

:munch:

[freedumb]

I'm saying that the warmest winter comment was not completely baseless. That the idea was 'out there' so to speak.

[sunsettommy]

I'm saying that the warmest winter comment was not completely baseless. That the idea was 'out there' so to speak.

Look you need to elaborate your position better since I really do not know what your point is.

your last two quotes:

Originally Posted by freedumb
MSNBC are indeed a bunch of RightWing biased fakers

I'm saying that the warmest winter comment was not completely baseless. That the idea was 'out there' so to speak.


I am sorry but there is no links,or evidence for you to make a point with,in your last two postings.Meanwhile I gave you significant links to point out something to you,such as the Environmentalists themselves concede what skeptics have from the start showed how worthless the Kyoto Treaty was.I read your provided link and commented on it and gave you rebutting links to it,also that others gave you points about the problems the Kyoto treaty,you have not been much of a responder to us.

Too bad but it appears you have little to say of substance to us in the thread you started.

[DoctorDoom]

Too bad but it appears you have little to say of substance to us in the thread you started.The Eurotroll has had little of substance to say in his 188 (as of this moment) posts. He's here to show us how brilliant he is and how iggernit we right-wing yahoos are. He has been certified as a troll from the beginning of his brief stint here.

[sunsettommy]

The Eurotroll has had little of substance to say in his 188 (as of this moment) posts. He's here to show us how brilliant he is and how iggernit we right-wing yahoos are. He has been certified as a troll from the beginning of his brief stint here.
Since my previous post,he has vanished.I think because he knows he can not carry a reasonable debate on this topic.I have been on this subject since the late 1970's,so it is of interest of mine.

[Faithful_Servant]

Since my previous post,he has vanished.I think because he knows he can not carry a reasonable debate on this topic.I have been on this subject since the late 1970's,so it is of interest of mine.
Christmas break is over now, so a lot of the college/High School/Jr. High School/Grade School/Pre-school (I think this is where freestupid comes in) are back in class again. Some of them will pop in again from time to time, but most of them just fade into the darkness.

[freedumb]

I wanted to connect the bald eagle to Americanism and environmentalism.

And point out the irony of having an endangered species as a symbol of freedom.


As far as Kyoto protocols go,
I wanted to know what people's objections were based on. I'm not here to debate my position because I do not really have a position at this moment.

I think that I will not keep posting here though.

I'll probably just lurk periodically.
or not.

[sunsettommy]

I wanted to connect the bald eagle to Americanism and environmentalism.

And point out the irony of having an endangered species as a symbol of freedom.


As far as Kyoto protocols go,
I wanted to know what people's objections were based on. I'm not here to debate my position because I do not really have a position at this moment.

I think that I will not keep posting here though.

I'll probably just lurk periodically.
or not.
I have already pointed out to you what some very prominent Environmentalists said in admitting that the Kyoto Treaty is no good.Why you gloss over it?

Here is the link I have provided on page one of this thread:

http://www.crosswalk.com/news/1301826.html

Maybe you actually read it this time.:smirky:

I will soon provide more on the scientific objections itself.I will refer to Bjorn Lomborg,who in his book Skeptical Environmentalists discuss the worthlessness of the treaty.

[Faithful_Servant]

I think that I will not keep posting here though.

I'll probably just lurk periodically.
or not.
We've heard this one before...
They tell us their leaving, but instead they just keep annoying us with their presence.

[sunsettommy]

I do not mind being "annoyed" by them as long as they at least provide minimal debate.Too bad he is not really that fired up about the Kyoto treaty problems.I wonder if he even knows that the U.S. Senate voted 95-0 back in 1998,against then President Clinton intentions to put up the Treaty to a Vote.The Senate made it clear it was going to fail big time if it was put up to a real vote.

All the Democrats who traditionally support the Environmentalists,voted NO.That is saying something.

[DesertFox]

These dudes think they're going to, uh, "open our eyes" to some truth they can see that we in the darkness can't because we're so hard-headed. Then they despair of us *sob* and leave us to our own devices, unwept, unhonored and unsung.

*Sigh*

[Goku]

http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives/05.01.05.EnvironMental-X.gif

[sunsettommy]

These dudes think they're going to, uh, "open our eyes" to some truth they can see that we in the darkness can't because we're so hard-headed. Then they despair of us *sob* and leave us to our own devices, unwept, unhonored and unsung.

*Sigh*Well I do know that when I am discussing Global Warming with people,who believe in it quickly discover they know diddly squat about it,and vanish.I think Freedumb did that.Too bad I could have helped him see the light with factual evidence that even a layreader like him would understand.

I have asked this question(name the most abundant Greenhouse Gas) many times,to show that they do not know about this forgotten/overlooked Greenhouse Gas.They are almost always wrong.It is amazing that CO2 gets so much press when it as a Atmospheric GREENHOUSE Gas such a tiny percentage of the total,less than .05%!

The most abundant Greenhouse Gas makes up 98% of the TOTAL Greenhouse Gas by volume.I have yet to read about this Gas in an Environmentalist advocacy website.Then too many "scientific" websites fails to mention it as well.It is pathetic that when a discussion is on the Greenhouse Gases,the most common one is missing in the gushing over CO2.

Sad.

[freedumb]

"Good News!
There is no global warming."

"The oil industry has a job to do: tankers to schedule, refineries to build. So when 2,500 eminent scientists signed a declaration calling for a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions, there was no time to lose. The industry had to act, and act decisively.
They called in Burston-Marstellar.
We created the Global Climate Coalition to downplay concerns. We found scientists and conservative think tanks to debunk theories and reinterpret evidence. And we created numerous grassroots telephone and letter-writing campaigns.
Dealing with global warming is a big job. But we've made steady progress. We've killed a proposed tax on fossil fuel. And we've provided the oil and auto industries with a reliable means of fending off environmentalists.
Now these industries can go back to doing their job. And you can keep yours.
We think that's good news. Don't you?"

[sunsettommy]

"Good News!
There is no global warming."

"The oil industry has a job to do: tankers to schedule, refineries to build. So when 2,500 eminent scientists signed a declaration calling for a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions, there was no time to lose. The industry had to act, and act decisively.
They called in Burston-Marstellar.
We created the Global Climate Coalition to downplay concerns. We found scientists and conservative think tanks to debunk theories and reinterpret evidence. And we created numerous grassroots telephone and letter-writing campaigns.
Dealing with global warming is a big job. But we've made steady progress. We've killed a proposed tax on fossil fuel. And we've provided the oil and auto industries with a reliable means of fending off environmentalists.
Now these industries can go back to doing their job. And you can keep yours.
We think that's good news. Don't you?"

Why you even on this forum?,you are not interested in debating anything in particular.

It is revealing that you are a fan of consensus scientific ideology,I quote you:

"So when 2,500 eminent scientists signed a declaration calling for a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions, there was no time to lose."

I see that you are UNAWARE of a different list,over 15 THOUSAND scientists who says that Global Warming via CO2 increases,is not a proved postulate.

But I am not really hot on such listings anyway,because it does not reveal scientific understanding,just a position of belief.But since it is obvious that you are not interested in the truth about Global Warming,why you trying so hard to expose your idiotic ignorance here? Is it your pathological need to make a fool of yourself?

I noticed too that you have been ignoring points of discussion with me and also avoiding questions.I think you do not know the answer to the question:What is the most common GREENHOUSE gas?

I was hoping you could provide a true debate,but now I know you must have trouble remembering to turn on the Computer,so actually you are a waste of time.

[sunsettommy]

"Good News!
There is no global warming."

"The oil industry has a job to do: tankers to schedule, refineries to build. So when 2,500 eminent scientists signed a declaration calling for a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions, there was no time to lose. The industry had to act, and act decisively.
They called in Burston-Marstellar.
We created the Global Climate Coalition to downplay concerns. We found scientists and conservative think tanks to debunk theories and reinterpret evidence. And we created numerous grassroots telephone and letter-writing campaigns.
Dealing with global warming is a big job. But we've made steady progress. We've killed a proposed tax on fossil fuel. And we've provided the oil and auto industries with a reliable means of fending off environmentalists.
Now these industries can go back to doing their job. And you can keep yours.
We think that's good news. Don't you?"
I will however shock you by saying that there us indeed a Global Warming,But NOT driven by CO2 increase,but by the MOST ACTIVE SUN of the last 1000 years! This fact is only recently getting serious attention,by climatologists.

Now here is a link that will show you the Satellite record of Worldwide Global Temperature:Scroll to near the bottom and the heading The Satellite Record 1979-2004

http://www.john-daly.com/

Try it.It is safe fella to peruse genuine climatic data.

[freedumb]

What is the graph supposed to show?

Is it your pathological need to make a fool of yourself?



I'm not pretending to be a scientist or something.

What I do know is that corporations have their interests and I, as a little guy, have mine.

The way I see it,
Small group of people controlling all the world's resources = bad.

No accountability for environmental damage = bad.

[Faithful_Servant]

Small group of people controlling all the world's resources = bad.

No accountability for environmental damage = bad.
People who understand how our environment works and don't have a political motivation for lieing controlling the the world's resources = GOOD - regardless of whether they're a small group or a large one.

People who have a political interest in making sure that only their side of the discussion is ever looked at and who are uninformed on how our environment works controlling the world's resources = BAD

Allowing the world's resources to go unused when those resources could be contributing to the world economy and helping to lift people out of poverty = BAD

People who have a vested financial interest in a healthy environment being allowed to make decsions = GOOD

Posting tree-hugging liberal drivel on a conservative forum = freeSTUPID