Changes

|}

|}

Most '''Environmentalists''' tend to be [[Leftists]] who insist on [[censorship|censoring]], blocking and sometimes destroying human use of the environment for productive purposes.  Going way beyond [[conservationism]], they seek legal limitations on human use of the Earth's natural environment and resources. Media reporting usually blurs the distinction between "no-use" environmentalism and "wise-use" conservation.

Most '''Environmentalists''' tend to be [[Leftists]] who insist on [[censorship|censoring]], blocking and sometimes destroying human use of the environment for productive purposes.  Going way beyond [[conservationism]], they seek legal limitations on human use of the Earth's natural environment and resources. Media reporting usually blurs the distinction between "no-use" environmentalism and "wise-use" conservation. Some liberals who promote left-wing policies claim to be "conservative" in order to [[Liberal deceit|deceive]] conservatives into adopting [[socialist]] policies.<ref>Mooney, Kevin (February 27, 2019). [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/beware-the-liberal-green-activists-masquerading-as-conservatives-at-cpac Beware the liberal green activists masquerading as conservatives at CPAC]. ''Washington Examiner''. Retrieved February 27, 2019.</ref>

[[David Gelernter]] wrote:

[[David Gelernter]] wrote:

*Passionate environmentalists reject the proposition that love of nature is ennobling because loving nature is good for human dignity and happiness. They flirt instead with a worldview in which human beings are a species on a par with every other, and nature is to be protected not because you damage other people’s happiness when you destroy it wantonly but because nature itself has rights to assert against man. The Smithsonian, for example, posted a label in its Museum of Natural History apologizing for a display in which “humans are treated as more important than other mammals.” [http://www.city-journal.org/html/6_4_the_immorality.html]

*Passionate environmentalists reject the proposition that love of nature is ennobling because loving nature is good for human dignity and happiness. They flirt instead with a worldview in which human beings are a species on a par with every other, and nature is to be protected not because you damage other people’s happiness when you destroy it wantonly but because nature itself has rights to assert against man. The Smithsonian, for example, posted a label in its Museum of Natural History apologizing for a display in which “humans are treated as more important than other mammals."<ref>http://www.city-journal.org/html/6_4_the_immorality.html</ref>

==Forest fires and "saving" trees==

==Forest fires and "saving" trees==