On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 7:42 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > What if the sad choice is saving the environment or human beings? >
At least to some degree that is indeed the choice. There are over 7 billion people on the planet, never before in the history of the Earth has a large animal (over 50 pounds) of the same species been that numerous or even come close to it. To keep all of those people alive other animals are going to suffer, to keep them not only alive but happy and prosperous its inevitable that other species will suffer even more. Environmentalists seem to expect everybody to live as Thoreau did at Walden Pond, but the Earth is not big enough for 7 billion people to remain alive, much less be prosperous, that way. Those 7 billion people need energy to live and environmentalists want nearly all existing energy sources shut down yesterday and they can offer nothing to replace them. And even Thoreau, the poster boy for the back to nature crowd, only lived at Walden Pond for 2 years 2 months and 2 days, after that he had enough and went back to energy hungry civilization. I don't blame him. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
