blarneystone
spending too much on rocks
Rocks in my head
Member since March 2010
Posts: 307
|
Post by blarneystone on Apr 23, 2013 13:25:24 GMT -5
Well... it's no more unethical than most commercials and TV shows targeting children. Have you seen what kids watch these days? It's not as unethical as selling poison disguised as breakfast cerial. What kills me though is that David Suzuki resigned from that foundation over threats that it would have it's charitable status revoked. Source news.nationalpost.com/2012/04/14/david-suzuki-resigns-to-save-foundation-from-bully-charitable-status-threats/So... Enbridge wants to build a pipeline and the DSF raised concerns. Now, our Federal Gov. has commited 8 million dollars to help the CANADIAN Gov. to target environmental agancies. :nono: If you want to talk about ethics, let's discuss that situation instead.
|
|
robsrockshop
has rocks in the head
Member since August 2012
Posts: 715
|
Post by robsrockshop on Apr 23, 2013 13:57:38 GMT -5
Here's a camp a couple miles down the road. I generally get a little uneasy when they break out the black robes and druid hoodies lol. Been there a couple times, overall nice people but very whacky weed friendly and wary of strangers. They used to send out mailings to the locals but for whatever reason aren't very welcome in a farming community lol imagine that. www.campgaea.org/forums/festivals.php?do=view&festival=14
|
|
robsrockshop
has rocks in the head
Member since August 2012
Posts: 715
|
Post by robsrockshop on Apr 23, 2013 14:03:28 GMT -5
Much of this environment talk sounds like UN agenda 21. It's hard telling what kind of crap these idiots in charge are planning. Everyone seems to think this is so much more a civilized placed and things in history would just know way ever happen again. Anyone taken a look at how many people got wiped out in Iraq lately?
|
|
bushmanbilly
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2008
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by bushmanbilly on Apr 23, 2013 14:54:58 GMT -5
Source news.nationalpost.com/2012/04/14/....tatus-threats /
So... Enbridge wants to build a pipeline and the DSF raised concerns. Now, our Federal Gov. has commited 8 million dollars to help the CANADIAN Gov. to target environmental agancies.
If you want to talk about ethics, let's discuss that situation instead.In Canada it is against the law for a charitable org. to play in politics. They can't endorse, donate or help in anyway. Thats what Saint David was doing. And he got his hands slapped and is being audited. And thats what alot of green and other so called charities are doing. They are helping to funnel millions of cash coming from outside our borders. Rockefellers, tides, Hewlett to name a few. Our Gov. is no different from yours. If there is cash involved, they want a piece of it.
|
|
Sabre52
Cave Dweller
Me and my gal, Rosie
Member since August 2005
Posts: 20,487
|
Post by Sabre52 on Apr 23, 2013 15:21:58 GMT -5
Blarney: On the contrary my view is very wide and much in line with yours. As a biologist, I consider the impact of man's activities on other organisms more important than the impact of man's activities on man. You see, man has a choice on whether to live in a risky area or whether to engage in risky activities that put his environment at risk. Therefore, if man winds up screwing himself, I don't really feel a lot of sympathy or guilt. However, other creatures or organisms we share the planet with do not have the choice and therefore are at the mercy of man's activities which are pretty much all destructive in some manner. For them I feel the same way you do. I feel guilt about and sympathy for because them I'm not of the belief that all living things exist to serve mans needs.
I don't agree that because you are poor you have to live in dangerous situations because I don't believe anyone has to stay poor if they do not want to. I do however believe if you are stupid, you can choose to live in a dangerous situation on purpose or by accident and I don't think, as you seem to that all risk associated with man's activities can be mitigated . I think rather the opposite. Man being very imperfect, often stupid as hell, and inherently greedy pretty much tends to make a SNAFU of everything he does and therefore it's impossible to mitigate all the associated risks.....Mel
|
|
blarneystone
spending too much on rocks
Rocks in my head
Member since March 2010
Posts: 307
|
Post by blarneystone on Apr 23, 2013 15:35:04 GMT -5
Funny how when I post in this particular forum most of what I say is misunderstood. At the very top of my response to you I said... "I understand that there are always risks and most can't be mitigated"
...and then you respond with: "as you seem to (think) that all risk associated with man's activities can be mitigated."
....I think I'll stick to the rock forums.
|
|
Sabre52
Cave Dweller
Me and my gal, Rosie
Member since August 2005
Posts: 20,487
|
Post by Sabre52 on Apr 23, 2013 16:48:42 GMT -5
Blarney, I think we are very much of the same mind on most things but you contradicted yourself and that's what confused me about your viewpoint. I got your first remark and your disclaimer and then below you stated " However man made risk "can" be mitigated and controlled." I simply contend it really cannot over time. Odds are eventually a SNAFU will occur because man's activities tend to be skewed towards man's benefits and profits with little real thought to negative environment effects. Most mitigation is on paper and is simply smokescreen and lip service. As you can see, I'm somewhat of a cynic *L*....Mel
|
|
|
Post by Rockoonz on Apr 23, 2013 20:15:37 GMT -5
|
|
blarneystone
spending too much on rocks
Rocks in my head
Member since March 2010
Posts: 307
|
Post by blarneystone on Apr 24, 2013 9:10:56 GMT -5
Blarney, I think we are very much of the same mind on most things but you contradicted yourself and that's what confused me about your viewpoint. I got your first remark and your disclaimer and then below you stated " However man made risk "can" be mitigated and controlled." I simply contend it really cannot over time. Odds are eventually a SNAFU will occur because man's activities tend to be skewed towards man's benefits and profits with little real thought to negative environment effects. Most mitigation is on paper and is simply smokescreen and lip service. As you can see, I'm somewhat of a cynic *L*....Mel Yeah... It's difficult to discuss complex topics on line. Man made risk can be somewhat mitigated but it takes diligence. Natural risk is another story. Of course, there will always be mistakes. With regards to the West, Tx fertilizer plant, I discovered that the plant was built after the surrounding buildings and homes. I totally get that the political environmentalist movement has some questionable objectives and tactics but I think it's a bad idea to discount the good that environmentalists have done. There are plenty of examples but I won't list them here. I don't know much about Canadian politics but I do find it ironic that big business can influence Fed. policy but charitable orgs can't. When it comes to protecting the environment though... I'll always err on the side of caution.... it's the only environment we have.
|
|
bushmanbilly
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2008
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by bushmanbilly on Apr 24, 2013 10:21:04 GMT -5
This should explain why we don't allow charities to play in politics. Watch the video. One Group’s Strategy to Derail Oil Pipelines, Raise Energy PricesDetails of a large non-profit’s plans to combat the Keystone XL pipeline have surfaced, and offer some insight into the strategies and tactics of groups looking to combat the use of fossil fuels. Canadian news channel Sun News uncovered of a PowerPoint presentation from the Rockefeller Brothers Fund detailing its work with other groups to derail the Keystone XL pipeline and other similar projects it deemed parts of “a globally significant threat.” The presentation, written in 2008, describes the allocation of $7 million to environmental non-profits for tactics that include the use of the legislative and legal systems to delay or derail energy production in the United States and Canada, and to “raise the costs” of energy in both nations. Video www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/fine-with-foreign-funds/1426148700001Rockefellers powerpoint propaganda. www.scribd.com/doc/82144578/Tar-Sands-Presentation-July-2008
|
|