Discussion in 'Current Events' started by OCA, Mar 28, 2004.
Yesterday I went with the family to an Amish auction to buy some of their handmade furniture, anyway on the way back we pass up a paper mill with all the logs stacked up in the yard and my wife says to my 7 year old son "look at all the logs" and he says "yeah they are harming the environment". Well I turned around like "what! Where did you hear that?" He says his teacher taught him that logging is always harmful to the environment. When I asked if she talked about managed logging or tree replanting he says nope. Freakin liberals, the education system is infested and they are poisoning and brainwashing young minds.
BTW I set my son straight.
Well OCA, I don't want to piss you off, is that a picture of you?
You look like some Mafia hit man.
Anyways, logging is bad for the environment, I know it's necessary, but the teacher was right about what she said.
So now you hate minorities but love trees, wow there is no contradiction there! And no it is not harmful, we don't practice clear cutting any longer.
I can't believe humans consume oxygen, the gual of them. That consumption must be a drain on the envirionment.
Actually, logging when done right, is very GOOD for the environment. See, under federal regulations, logging companies have only so much land with which to work. Converse to that wacko teacher's misguided brainwashing lesson, it was the extreme logging restrictions, leaving old growth debris as fuel, which led to last year's California wild fires being FAR worse than they would have been with common sense logging guide lines. Actually, what with major advances in fire-fighting, the planting of new trees, & profit motive [home building], there are far more trees now than 100 years ago.
Side Note: Since both lightning & trees are part of nature, I wonder when lightning would set fires, with which one would the wackos side? Hey! Fire is part of nature, TOO. Man, what a conundrum.
I'm sure those trees-- since environmental wackos think trees have feelings-- and spotted owls were cursing those wackos as they both burned to a crisp.
Did you guys know that at night, Trees 'consume' oxygen?
"I'm not a vegitarian because I Love animals, but because I HATE plants."
Spike, you make a good point. Many enviro-wackos argue that forest fires are good for nature, because it naturally clears acreage for new forest ecosystems to begin the cycle of life, or some crap like that. Which is great... but let's have the cycle of life start in an isolated area, burning away from places where people live and work. Or cut firebreaks into the forest so that fires don't spread so quickly.
But Spike, you are right, there are more trees today in America than there were 100 years ago. Yet we still see morons driving around with bumper stickers that say "Daddy, what were forests like?"
there are more trees today in America than there were 100 years ago.
"It has become a principle of the environmental movement to insist that wood and paper products be certified as originating from sustained, managed forests. ... Lord help those who don't fall in line, as big-box retailers and builders discovered when Greenpeace and the Rainforest Action Network became their judge and jury - hanging corporate reputations from the rafters with the TV cameras rolling."
"The environmental movement's campaign to force industry into accepting it as the only judge of sustainable forestry is pushing consumers away from renewable forest products and toward nonrenewable, energy-intensive materials such as steel, concrete and plastic."
"Wood is the most renewable and sustainable of the major building materials. On all measures comparing the environmental effects of common building materials, wood has the least impact on total energy use, greenhouse gases, air and water pollution and solid waste. So why isn't the environmental movement demanding that the steel and concrete industries submit to an audit for "sustainability"? ... Because emotive images of forests sell memberships."
"The environmental movement has unfortunately led the public into believing that when people use wood, they cause the loss of forests. This widespread guilt is misplaced. North America's forests are not disappearing. In fact, there is about the same amount of forest cover today as there was 100 years ago, even though we consume more wood per capita than any other region in the world. Isn't this proof positive that forests are renewable and sustainable?"
"When we buy wood, we are sending a signal to plant more trees to satisfy demand. If there were no demand for wood, landowners would clear away the forest and grow something else instead."
Quotes from the Los Angeles Times, need to have a registered account to view articles and the may charge for archived articles.
I liked the one that said "daddy, what were bison like?"