ENVIRONMENTALISM
RETURN TO EDEN OR TICKET TO HELL ?
BY Dr. STEVE PARFITT
Ecology is a social principle, condemns cities, culture, industry, technology, the intellect........
Ecology advocates mans return to 'nature'.. to the state of a grunting subanimal digging in the soil for food with their bare hands.
Enviromentalism will return us to labour all our waking hours, with tools created in biblical times... Tell me that America is defiled by shopping centres, expressways and family cars.
THE RULES
Always obey them, even when they make no sense. Even when you do not know what they are. Never deviate, never wonder, never question, never try and never fail to try.
I deviate, I question, I wonder, I try and, I fail to try, but most importantly I deviate as much as possible. I like to do all the things the rules say I shouldn't do. I fall in love easily, I let my imagination run free, I say things I should keep to myself and I do things in public better left in private, I do not like the rules, I will not follow them, I will not be forced and I will not be told what to do.
Oh how wonderful it is to be a nonconformist, to have the freedom of expression of my personality and the liberation from the rest of the herd.take a perverse pleasure in ignoring the rules. The results, the feedback, are a drug, sweeter than any drug I could snort.
The ignorant herd
It's interesting to watch the herd go by, talking the same, acting the same and living their lives the same. It's interesting to watch as their mannerisms, views and habits are mimicked by each other. Constantly striving to match those around them, the house, the car, the children and the pathetic lives that they have become accustomed to.
The ignorant herd who claim to have all the answers to man and life but choose to ignore the facts. For the facts do not follow the rules. (see above)
The environmentalist, religious leader & the politician. How dare they tell me how to run my life when they no nothing about life itself.
I do my own thing and this my friends makes me a freak? I am sorry if my ideas don't fit into your view of the world, that my thoughts are too deep, I am sorry that I can see the herd that you cannot.
ENVIRONMENTALIST WACKOS
Everything the environmental movement has proclaimed since its coming of age in the 1960s &1970s has turned out to be wrong. The air and water are getting cleaner, not dirtier. Nature kills more species than mankind. A mere three volcanoes during the past 100 years have spewed more pollutants into the air than all of mankind throughout history. In contrast to all of the doomsday predictions asserted by environmentalists pollution levels continue to decrease while the health and life span of humans continues to increase.
Environmentalism is merely the latest manipulation tool of that age old mentality that attacks success and progress. In the 1980s as communism finally collapsed former socialists and communists flocked into the budding green movement. Environmentalism became the new vehicle to attack success and progress. Environmentalism is an anti-progress movement.
It is abundantly clear that the socialist environmental movement considers mankind a scar on nature, that man's success and achievements act as a cancer upon the environment. In other words, stop progress, stop success & subordinate humans to stupid owls, fish plants.
Man is the only animal born without any survival natural tools. To survive we must transform nature. Everything required for human survival must be acquired by using the mind to think and to devise tools for satisfying needs and wants. To survive and prosper, man must follow a philosophy that holds his life and his welfare as the supreme value and guiding star.
All species thrive at the expense of another. It is a fact that 90% of all species that have ever existed on this planet are extinct. All animals kill other animals to survive and the dominant species will ultimately win the day. Luckily for us we evolved and adapted well enough over the last 3 million years to have won the day over our predators. But how many other species have suffered as a consequence and do we care about animals we never saw or knew existed? By the same token the children of tomorrow do not give a rats ass about weather there are any stupid snow owls so if you want to protect do not breed for when you initialise that in built animalistic desire to reproduce, your children throughout their lives will for sure want at least 10 cars, 4 houses & 70 years worth of food. How much mining will be required for this, how much quarrying, how many trees cut down, how much natural habitat transformed into farmland? Over the last 100 years the world population has trebled from 2 billion to 6 billion people. What will the effect be over the next 100 years when it trebles to 18 billion then 54 billion then 162 billion?
The real problem is reproduction, for it is population explosion not deodorant spray that will ultimately change the face of the planet.
GLOBAL WARMING
THE FACTS
Is the planet getting warmer? Of course it is.
Is it our fault? NO.
The environmental movement gets much of its support by proclaiming how fragile and delicately balanced the environment is and mankind had better not upset natures balance. Yet nature herself provides the ultimate rebuttal to these wackos. a quick examination of the earth's history reveals that there is no such thing as the natural state of the planet. The natural environment is constantly changing and evolving.
Originally earth had an atmosphere full of hot, toxic gases and was uninhabitable by life forms. Since that time, dramatic changes in all parts of the environment have occurred. We've had thousands of ice ages and thousands of hot periods. Even as we speak we are moving away from the last ice age towards a warmer period, Another contributory factor when we look back at the 90% extinction rate. Extinction by natures own doing.
Infact if history tells us anything its that every species becomes extinct. At some point every animal simply becomes unable to cope with the changes in the environment--that species then becomes an unadaptable dinosaur.
The polar caps are the last reminisce of an ice age of about 10,000 years ago. Our direct ancestors lived through that, and as we move further away our polar caps will melt and the sea levels will rise.
Then in about another 10,000 years from now we will head back into another ice age. Talk about climatic catastrophe! countless species will become extinct and our future descendant certainly wont like the idea.
OZONE DEPLETION
Lets stick to the facts-- plant decay, volcanic seepage, and other natural processes release about 200 billion tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each year. Human activity, on the other hand, releases only an estimated 7 billion tons of carbon dioxide each year. Obviously, this is not a threat to the ecosystem. If it were we would see undeniable proof that temperatures were rising, not inconclusive contradictory data depending on where measurements were taken and by what method over the last 100 years.
The ultimate factor in exposing the irrationality behind global the warming doomsday scenario is the fact that the eruptions of a mere three volcanoes during the past 100 years (Krakatoa in Java, Katmai in Alaska, and Hekla in Iceland) emitted more gasses into the air than the entire history of mankind combined. That is not even including the more recent eruptions of Mount St. Helens in Washington and Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines.
So where is the catastrophic change????????
CFCs, the main cooling ingredient in refrigerators can mix with certain other gases in the atmosphere and produce chlorine gas, which does destroy ozone molecules. Theoretically chlorine gas may rise several miles into the atmosphere and destroy ozone high above the earth's surface. Yet no direct evidence has ever been produced that shows that the relatively minuscule amounts released by human activity has resulted in the ozone layer being destroyed. Cars the cause? Cars have never been more efficient or clean. Cars are an issue government use to extract huge tax revenue under this false assertion of pollution. Furthermore the environmentalist would rather have us in buses, which pollute the air we breath 30 times more effectively than any number of cars, with more noxious gases and diesel particulate.
Ask any environmentalist this question.
If man made CFCs are destroying the ozone layer, Why do not the ozone holes appear over populated areas, why do they appear over the poles where no humans live???
They wont give you a straight answer.
They will not give you a straight answer because there isn't one. Ask ten 'green' environmentalists this question, you will get ten different replies.
How do they get away with it ?
They deceive by asserting the arbitrary.
For example, the environmental movement makes statements such as continuing to emit gasses into the atmosphere could have drastic consequences 50 or 100 years from now Or, releasing CFCs into the atmosphere may have a drastic effect on the ozone layer in the next generation. Or allowing a plant or an owl to become extinct could drastically effect the ecosystem and even the food chain somewhere down the line. But all of this is merely asserting the arbitrary. Asserting the arbitrary cannot be accepted by any rational free thinking being. for then any fantasy goes. A person could just as legitimately assert that a hundred years from now that we should have stepped up the emission of gasses into the atmosphere several-fold because it would have prevented the next ice age or would have improved plant life by thickening the atmosphere. Likewise, one could assert that mankind should step up the extermination of a certain owl, or a certain plant because we may discover that an undetected enzyme emitted by that owl or plant into the food chain was responsible for triggering cancer in humans.
Judgement day.
The method of free lateral thinking I use to draw my conclusions can be applied to absolutely any facet of life, be it religion, politics or any other fanatical cult following. It is the ability to see things for what they are rather than somebody else telling you what you should be thinking. You may think me a good person or you may think me a bad person, this will depend upon your own level of higher thinking, i.e.. Are you a leader in control of your destiny or are you the led being told how to live your life.
At some point in our lives we all look back and tally up the events in our all-to-short existence. Have we led a good life, have we led a bad one, or have we just scraped by. We engage in a feeble attempt to calculate what effect we have had on this planet.
But that is impossible, the money you gave to the homeless could be used to buy some crack that could kill hundreds, the house you break into or the money you stole could have belonged to a would be dictator who because of your intrusion never will be.
We have no idea what the end result of any action we make will be so we say something is either good or evil based on the immediate reaction.
Terms such as good or evil begin to lose their distinctiveness and the grey area gets broader. For all we know Hitler may have killed a man that one day would have destroyed the world, or Princess Diana may have saved the life of that same man.
So what is good, What is evil? I do not know. All I know is that the ends do not justify the means and the means do not justify the ends.
So tell me, have you been a good witch or a bad witch?