Quote:
Originally Posted by Phanuthier
Interesting find, interesting topic, and interesting replies ... not because that dogs are bad for the environment or whatever, but I love to attitudes and replies here. Eddy and fotze said it best, people (especially Canadians and Americans) LOVE to tell other people what to do under the disguise of being "environmentally friendly" ... unless they have to change something about themselves. Typical.
For now, we'll just keep telling other people and other countries what to do. Now 'scuse me, I'm going to go drive to the mountains with my dog to do some outdoorsy stuff.
|
Painting with a wide brush, no?
A very disturbing trend I am finding is that those that ARE trying to do a little something for the environment are constantly being kicked in the groin.
- Unless I'm having friends over, I keep the thermostat at 17 throughout the winter. If I'm cold I put on a sweater.
- All the lights in my house are compact florescents
- I became a vegetarian 20 years ago for purely environmental reasons
- I gave up driving a car in turn for taking public transportation for environmental reasons
First, as many in this thread have pointed out, the math used in this study looks fishy at best. So until I see some corroboration I'm not about to buy this study right off. However, I think it a bigger issue. People want to slam on those who ARE trying to do something by pointing out any type of hypocrites they are.
The underlying theory is that Bob who recycles NOTHING can crap all over Sue who recycles everything except milk cartons. She throws her milk cartons in the garbage because even after cleaning them they smell. However, Bob can lord over her as a stupid evil hypocrite because she doesn't recycle her milk cartons!! Bob feels good about himself by tearing Sue down, Sue feels stupid about trying to do anything at all. Mission accomplished.