Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, move, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, protect, rollback, Administrators, template
293,571
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 139:
Line 139: + + + +
→Definitions: comment
For example, is agitation to ban or restrict [[DDT]] based on genuine concern for ecological damage - or on fear that using DDT to reduce malaria deaths will lead to [[overpopulation]]? If it's the latter, then ''we'' should be up front about this, even if ''they'' are not. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 00:20, 6 July 2007 (EDT)
For example, is agitation to ban or restrict [[DDT]] based on genuine concern for ecological damage - or on fear that using DDT to reduce malaria deaths will lead to [[overpopulation]]? If it's the latter, then ''we'' should be up front about this, even if ''they'' are not. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 00:20, 6 July 2007 (EDT)
:A distinction needs to be made between "environmentalist" and "environmental groups," in other words, between singular and plural, or organized groups. It is among the organized groups were agenda's other than "environmentalism" occurs, and among the singular individuals were wackos who don't use toilet paper are evidentally becoming more common.
:Grant, there may be individuals and groups with a bona fide concern for the environment, but they have been overshadowed in the pasat by the individuals and groups described above. Nowhere can we make the whoklesale statement that all self- described "environmentalists" and groups share a concern for the environment, because it simply is not true. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 00:28, 6 July 2007 (EDT)