Oil’s okay if it helps the protest?

How did the people protesting against oil exploration by Petrobras off the East Cape get out to the survey ship?

Did they walk, cycle or ride horses to the beach then row, sail or swim from the shore?

Thought not.

That sends the somewhat confused message that using oil is okay if it helps the protest against finding more.

7 Responses to Oil’s okay if it helps the protest?

  1. david winter says:

    I think they’d say using a little oil is OK, when it saves the use of thousands of barrels of oil and the associated risk of environmental damage that comes with it.

    Moreover, environmental protesters want governments and society to change, it’s not hypocritical to use oil when it’s your only option and your aim is have governments take alternatives seriously.

    Like

  2. Andrei says:

    Moreover, environmental protesters want governments and society to change, it’s not hypocritical to use oil when it’s your only option and your aim is have governments take alternatives seriously.

    Well they are over privileged idiots too stupid to realize that they have the time, energy and financial resources to indulge in this posturing because their daddys and forefathers had the vision to develop resources.

    We should arrest them, try them for interfering with people going about their lawful business and sentence them to work on a subsistence farm in Burkina Faso for ten years with no time off for good behavior.

    And if they should happen to die during that time of malnutrition, bilharzia or even a broken leg(1) in that tome too damn bad.

    This was a tragedy I was personally witness to where a 22 year old women (who looked like she was 40) broke her leg and by the time medical attention was available it was too late and gangrene had set in.

    These are people worthy only of the greatest contempt in my book.

    Like

  3. david winter says:

    I don’t know Andrei.

    I’ve known plenty of environmental activists, some of them are full-on nutcases who really would rather live in pre-industrial times. But most of them are people that are thankful for the advances of the last several generations, but who also realise the lifestyle we lead now has come at an environmental cost, an if we don’t developed a greener way of living the costs are going to get much greater.

    If we want people in Burkina Faso to share access to health care and electricity and washing machines then we can’t use resources in the way we have been.

    Like

  4. murrayg1 says:

    David Winter – well said.

    Actually, you can argue that using finite resources in an exponentially-increasing way, while continuing to leave the resultant pollution unmitigated (and the moves so far do nothing physically valid) is fraud.

    It’s taking options from, and leaving liabilities to, folk who have no say in the matter – who haven’t signed up to the deal. Our kids, and theirs.

    Hp’s comment is just the same as Mora belittling Al Gore – and as disingenuous. Whether something is ‘lawful’ or not, is different from being ‘morally acceptable’ or ‘right’. The Springbok tour showed us that.

    We’re all guilty of that fraud – but some of us are trying to remedy the situation. Others might like to have a wee think about that.

    Like

  5. Andrei says:

    We’re all guilty of that fraud – but some of us are trying to remedy the situation. Others might like to have a wee think about that.

    The only fraud is the hypocritical haves distorting science in order to keep the have nots in their place and it is utterly disgraceful.

    There is plenty of oil, the minimal amount of additional carbon dioxide added to the atmosphere is just as likely to have a beneficial effect as a detrimental one – nobody can say its an unknown.

    The climate changes there is nothing we can do about it – nothing. If there were no humans at all it would still develop and change.

    There are things we can do something about however, we can use the bounties that nature has provided us to improve the quality of life of the wretched poor and lift them out of their hopeless lives of misery.

    Where did this navel gazing idiocy come from – is it a symptom of a civilization in decline too scared to move forward in case something bad happens?

    Like

  6. murrayg1 says:

    Sad to be so twisted.
    My kids got taught to be responsible for their actions, and ‘got it’ by the time they went to school.
    You obviously ain’t there yet.
    And if you make statements like ‘there is plenty of oil’, you have to be prepared to defend your argument. Please state your estimate of total URR, your estimate of(and reasoning for)usage rates. If you refute this graph, you’re out on your own:
    http://www.durangobill.com/Rollover.html
    Please explain why.
    You’re not religious, are you? Those folk often think (?) like that.

    Like

  7. murrayg1 says:

    Interesting lack of reply.

    No substance, then.

    Perhaps you could start with this:

    http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/ParlSupport/ResearchPapers/4/6/a/00PLEco10041-The-next-oil-shock.htm

    That’s what Bill English has on the table. Perhaps we should ask him whether he understands the difference between reality and ideology?

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: