The world seems increasingly strange. The roles change, and those who were once persecuted, are now the persecutors ... and backward
Why this discussion? Well I'll be frank: I'm fed up of Eco-skepticism. The Eco-skepticism is a new position (which we have spoken several times about all the problems of climate change), perhaps fueled by the neo-con ("and the mega-super chupi free market") it is assumed that all are hoaxes, the Earth does not need protection ... For those who fervently defend it, I would remind you a little something: one of the biggest neo-con (and Eco-skeptic) is George W Bush, which among other things is a creationist and fundamentalist religious, and his position is based on God is good and no one can harm us. Leaving religious or political considerations aside (and the alleged idiocy of Bush) going to do a little analysis to Eco-Skepticism.
is difficult to know when environmentalism was born. Already in the romance began to idealize the natural places (apart from cemeteries and churches in ruins), at the height of nineteenth-century nationalism (not to be confused with today) began to study the natural heritage of each country for the greater glory from their homeland. As a result of these movements appeared the first consciousness "natural" green.
However, we need to move many years until the decade of the 60 or so, when pacifism comes from a stream of "love" to Mother Earth. This love will have essentially two children, the New Age by Side (lizard lizard!) and environmentalism (though of a more emotional than scientific).
If you give a date for the birth of environmentalism "scientific" rather difficult task because many studies were in progress at the time, is 1962, year of publication of Silent Spring, which warned of the risks of certain substances chemical.
with green ideals and a more or less scientific, environmentalism will be present in our society since more or less influence on daily life. And what happens? Well, as in any site that has some ideology involved, appears irrational why many environmental groups are characterized.
Along with evolution of environmental (I have in mind a post about changes in "the main environmental problem of our Mother Earth), Science (the real one) has been advancing in the field of knowledge of ecosystems to the point that today we have a fairly completita of ecosystems (although far from enough). Thus, we have an army of environmental scientists (and non-environmentalists) to decide on what can or can not do.
ecologists have been radicalized and deeply entrenched in many aspects and sectors, this has not always been taken very good reputation. But it seems that are having more success lately, among other things by the boom of Climate Change. I would like to recall that merit is not the ecologists, although they who put the medals, but environmental scientists. And here come the eco-skeptics.
Although eco-skepticism has been always made to give a date of birth, say it is 2004, with the publication of the novel " State of Fear" by Michael Crichton. The biggest mistake of this book is put in the same bag of environmentalists and scientists.
higher environmentalism has been, stronger and has been the radical eco-skepticism. And another phenomenon I find it quite interesting, moreover there are turncoats (changed sides.) One element that is always present in any position are fundamentalist conspiracy: when arguments are not standing, because you pull a conspiracy more far-fetched as possible better and ready to roll.
something 20 years ago, people were so convinced that the oil had a kind of brotherhood evil and satanic rituals celebrating the devouring kittens and burned alive at successive inventors of infinite energy engines. Today things have changed, but although the names are different, the plot remains the same (and identically stupid).
The poor now are nuclear, yes those that environmentalists have long banished, because they want to gain ground, and promoting the climate change get people to start to fear more oil than our friend the uranium. And for this evil operation, now go hand in hand with environmentalists. Let
Gentlemen head what it is that environmentalists can agree with nuclear?. Conspiracies do not exist and the Magi are the parents. If it has become fashionable now global warming is because it has become fashionable, not because no one is feeding so concerned (politicians aside, of course)
And it is, be a little generous and accept that there are conspiracies: it is equally likely that there exists another. But here, who may be more interested in discrediting the other, nuclear or oil? For me to me that the oil, as are those with most to lose. Still, I remind you that we should not think of conspiracies.
Anyway, I'll be glad to read your comments and further discussion on the matter. By the way, I am NOT an environmentalist, but an environmental scientist (specifically environmentalists), but the eco-skeptics seem so clowns like environmentalists.
0 comments:
Post a Comment