On Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 12:55:01PM -0400, Isaiah Weiner wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2001 at 11:15:36PM -0400, Paul M Foster wrote:
> > But okay, let's just imagine that the environmental movement _doesn't_
> > have more than its share of nut jobs. So what precisely is the end result
> > of all this environmentalism? Precisely. Not some pie-in-the-sky nebulous
> > utopian statement. Something that precisely defines what is and what
> > isn't acceptable use of the environment, and an acceptable trade-off
> > between progress (as defined by the sadly misguided few of us who believe
> > that the environment is here to serve us) and environmental protection.
>
> No, the *reason* you're not going to find an end result is because
> we've not done it yet. You can't judge progress without having already
> been there, or without having something fairly accurate to relate it to.
>
So the environmental wackos are going in a certain direction and they
don't know where they're supposed to end up? And they don't know because
they haven't gotten there yet?
Yep, makes perfect sense. ;-}
Paul
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 20:24:43 EDT