FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums
The Environmental Revolution is like the Watermelon - Printable Version

+- FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Piazza (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Secular News, Politics, & Social Issues (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=19)
+--- Thread: The Environmental Revolution is like the Watermelon (/showthread.php?tid=85210)



The Environmental Revolution is like the Watermelon - andalusia - 09-12-2019

The environmental or “green” movement is defined and spurred by the issues of global warming, climate change, sustainable development, naturalism and other environmental concerns.

While a majority of Americans, influenced by the persistent leftist media, may accept that climate change is happening, the justifications for its predictions and theories have always been controversial and divisive. Amongst the different agendas behind the climate change issue, there is one that is most controversial and disturbing. It is the study that shows that 62% of Americans believe that climate change is largely caused by humans.

In spite of all the global push, the earth’s climate is remarkably stable by historical standards, and there is no real proof that man is causing the warming or cooling of the planet. Such claims are based on outright fraud, and the real agenda behind is clearly political.


https://tfpstudentaction.org/blog/socialism-and-climate-change


RE: The Environmental Revolution is like the Watermelon - whitewashed_tomb - 09-13-2019

I think it's quite orthodox and important to want to conserve forests, wilderness, and farmland from corporate exploitation and over-development. However, the problem with the environmental movement is that it takes these good initiatives and uses them to promote an anti-human ideology.

Instead of blaming these issues on certain flawed, greedy, and selfish humans behaviors, it blames humans themselves for these issues. The non-human natural world is viewed as vulnerable, perfect, and precious while humans are viewed as a rampant alien threat, a virus, to be contained and, preferably, eradicated. The ultimate goal is, of course, population control, both in terms of demography and in controlling what people are allowed to do, think, and believe.


RE: The Environmental Revolution is like the Watermelon - jovan66102 - 09-13-2019

Actually, the first 'environmental movement' was a conservative, largely Catholic movement. Fr Fahey and others, priests and laymen, were writing about conservation, sustainable farming, organic foods, etc. back in the '20s. Then, and very unfortunately, Hitler (who would have fit right in with the Greens. He was a teetotaler, a vegetarian, animal rights/anti-vivisectionist, just like many of the Greens) took up the cause.

Having been painted with the Nazi brush the whole subject was verboten for about 20 years. Then the commie left took it up and suddenly it was popular again. And here we are today.


RE: The Environmental Revolution is like the Watermelon - Paul - 09-13-2019

(09-13-2019, 12:01 AM)whitewashed_tomb Wrote: I think it's quite orthodox and important to want to conserve forests, wilderness, and farmland from corporate exploitation and over-development. However, the problem with the environmental movement is that it takes these good initiatives and uses them to promote an anti-human ideology.

Conservation's not a bad thing, but to an extent. I agree the environmental movement is mostly anti-human and sees humanity like you said, as a virus or something to be contained or eradicated.

But it's the exploitation of the environment that's allowed developed countries to have the standard of living they do, even for the poor. There's a reason the poor in places like the United States and Europe have not just food and shelter but cell phones and cars and cable TV. Very few people starve to death now, because their ancestors cut down all the trees and established farms. If feeding the people of Brazil requires cutting down or burning a portion of the Amazon forest, sorry, but then the trees need to go.


RE: The Environmental Revolution is like the Watermelon - Jeeter - 09-13-2019

(09-12-2019, 10:15 PM)andalusia Wrote: The environmental or “green” movement is defined and spurred by the issues of global warming, climate change, sustainable development, naturalism and other environmental concerns.

Sustainable development isn't a bad thing. Using less and replenishing what we use is not bad at all.

Quote: It is the study that shows that 62% of Americans believe that climate change is largely caused by humans.

Percentages mean squat. Supposedly a majority of Americans support SS"M", that don't mean they're right.

We know that the climate has changed, and will probably change in the future. With 7+ billion people on the planet currently, and that number expected to increase (we are pro life) I'd say we should be researching and analyzing potential impacts of a changing climate, whether it's man-made or natural. Let's be honest; if the average temperature and sea level are gonna rise, it'll have a bigger impact on a human population of 7 billion than on a population of 1 billion.

In spite of all the global push, the earth’s climate is remarkably stable by historical standards, and there is no real proof that man is causing the warming or cooling of the planet. Such claims are based on outright fraud, and the real agenda behind is clearly political.

https://tfpstudentaction.org/blog/socialism-and-climate-change
[/quote]

(09-13-2019, 01:08 AM)jovan66102 Wrote: Actually, the first 'environmental movement' was a conservative, largely Catholic movement. Fr Fahey and others, priests and laymen, were writing about conservation, sustainable farming, organic foods, etc. back in the '20s. Then, and very unfortunately, Hitler (who would have fit right in with the Greens. He was a teetotaler, a vegetarian, animal rights/anti-vivisectionist, just like many of the Greens) took up the cause.

Thank you. Stole the words outta my mouth.

[quote='Paul' pid='1404038' dateline='1568393910']
Conservation's not a bad thing, but to an extent. I agree the environmental movement is mostly anti-human and sees humanity like you said, as a virus or something to be contained or eradicated.

But it's the exploitation of the environment that's allowed developed countries to have the standard of living they do, even for the poor. There's a reason the poor in places like the United States and Europe have not just food and shelter but cell phones and cars and cable TV. Very few people starve to death now, because their ancestors cut down all the trees and established farms. If feeding the people of Brazil requires cutting down or burning a portion of the Amazon forest, sorry, but then the trees need to go.

I've gotta admit, I hate the word "exploitatioin." It sounds too much like abuse, use for ill purposes. That being said, yes, I agree with you that nature is God's gift to us, for our use. However, I also think we need to focus on the consequences of our use of God's natural gifts to us. Example: overuse of aquifers (without replenishment) has resulted in rapid land subsidence in coastal areas, in turn leading to an increased risk for flooding and hurricane damage. There are ways to counter this, but sadly, they somehow get wrapped up with extreme environmental movements, instead of pro life movements.


RE: The Environmental Revolution is like the Watermelon - Paul - 09-13-2019

(09-13-2019, 01:08 AM)Jeeter Wrote: That being said, yes, I agree with you that nature is God's gift to us, for our use.  However, I also think we need to focus on the consequences of our use of God's natural gifts to us.  Example: overuse of aquifers (without replenishment) has resulted in rapid land subsidence in coastal areas, in turn leading to an increased risk for flooding and hurricane damage.  There are ways to counter this, but sadly, they somehow get wrapped up with extreme environmental movements, instead of pro life movements.

And if the environmentalists had stuck to those sorts of things, more people would be environmentalists. People don't want rivers on fire or smog-filled cities, and environmental laws have been good at putting an end to pollution in many developed countries. But a farmer burns down a tree in the Amazon so his family can eat, and the environmentalists go nuts. And it's often not because of the flooding and hurricane damage, but because some animal's going to be harmed. Or because there's less nature. Farmers burn down a portion of the Amazon, or they want to drill for oil in Alaska, and people don't realise just how big those places are and how tiny of an affected area we're talking about.


RE: The Environmental Revolution is like the Watermelon - Augustinian - 09-13-2019

Maintaining the world for future generations is not an evil. It only becomes an evil when it is coupled with misanthropic, nihilistic ideals and a religious mentality that the modern "green" movement maintains. I get that its bad to smash bald eagle eggs, but I would say killing the unborn is far more evil. Unfortunately, many people have been brainwashed into the eco-cult mentality and value many of God's lesser creatures much more than a human life.

Adam was created to be lord and master of the earth, I think its great that people want to maintain a standard of sustainability. What I don't like is when people, like the Holy Father, place modern environmentalism as the main concern when there's graver evils, like abortion and the sex trafficking of minors, occurring all over the world.

Yea, the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Fear not therefore: you are of more value than many sparrows. - Luke 12:7.


RE: The Environmental Revolution is like the Watermelon - BobCatholic - 09-19-2019

The current environmental movement is made up of two parts.

* overpopulationists. So their ultimate goal is to reduce the population. These are genocidal maniacs.
* luddites - they hate technology and want to shut it all down. They want us to party like it is 1699.

You can guess which side is speaking depending on their policies.