3 ms·

Sorry, but I don't buy that you care "a lot about nature and the environment" if you oppose environmentalism in general. We do a lot as human beings to harm the

Sorry, but I don't buy that you care "a lot about nature and the environment" if you oppose environmentalism in general. We do a lot as human beings to harm the environment, and climate scientists generally agree there is a point of no return that we're heading towards. I'd cite a source or two, but we all know there are plenty of sources and by now you're either going to believe the overwhelming evidence or you're going to live in denial. Even if that were not the case, pollution in general is and has been visibly harmful to a number of ecosystems - oil spills, smog, etc. have an obvious negative impact on humans and animals alike. If you cared about the environment as you claim you do you would not oppose efforts to lessen the damage we do to it.

Kenji 10y ago
If you cared about the environment as you claim you do you would not oppose efforts to lessen the damage we do to it. I don't oppose efforts to lessen the damage. I oppose efforts that do not change the damage in any way, shape or form, or efforts that impose large costs at little or no benefit at all.
- exodust 10y ago
  Single-use bags take up to 1,000 years to degrade in landfill. According to The Wall Street Journal, the U.S. goes through 100 billion plastic shopping bags annually. There's your "way, shape and form".
  - JoeAltmaier 10y ago
    Essentially nothing degrades in a landfill. Not even food waste. If we don't use plastic shopping bags, we'll use something else that costs more to manufacture. Has more manufacturing impact on the environment. Paper, fabric etc. They can be reused, but it would take thousands of reuses to total less environmental damage than the extremely efficient plastic bag. Its conceivable that plastic bags are the minimum impact to the environment, considering all the options.
douche 10y ago
I'm not sure that opposing green parties for their bizarre beliefs is necessarily opposing environmentalism. Green opposition to nuclear power has been a disaster for the environment, to take one example.

Kenji 10y ago

If you cared about the environment as you claim you do you would not oppose efforts to lessen the damage we do to it. I don't oppose efforts to lessen the damage. I oppose efforts that do not change the damage in any way, shape or form, or efforts that impose large costs at little or no benefit at all.

exodust 10y ago
Single-use bags take up to 1,000 years to degrade in landfill. According to The Wall Street Journal, the U.S. goes through 100 billion plastic shopping bags annually. There's your "way, shape and form".
- JoeAltmaier 10y ago
  Essentially nothing degrades in a landfill. Not even food waste. If we don't use plastic shopping bags, we'll use something else that costs more to manufacture. Has more manufacturing impact on the environment. Paper, fabric etc. They can be reused, but it would take thousands of reuses to total less environmental damage than the extremely efficient plastic bag. Its conceivable that plastic bags are the minimum impact to the environment, considering all the options.

douche 10y ago

I'm not sure that opposing green parties for their bizarre beliefs is necessarily opposing environmentalism. Green opposition to nuclear power has been a disaster for the environment, to take one example.