Yet Another Eco-Bandwagon

Within a week of the climategate scandal and the failure of the Copenhagen Climate Summit, the Eco-loon plan-B was brought into play: "Bio-Diversity".

"Man-Made Global Warming", that had been proven to be a fallacy, had become "Climate Change" and when that had convincingly been shot to pieces as a theory, the eco-nutters jumped on the bio-diversity bandwagon and steered it down the same rocky road as all the other bandwagons.

So we see in Japan the UN bio-diversity conference spouting out the same old shit about man being responsible for the extinction of thousands of species, despite billions and trillions of species having lived and died out long before man progressed to the industrial revolution.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Man Is Not God; we can't preserve the world in aspic: whether its keeping gasses in the air constant, or keeping all the current species alive. The planet contains trillions of living, breathing life-forms. Some are successful, some are not. Some survive on the planet for billions of years, others die out in a geological nanosecond.

It is beyond our power as humans to even attempt to do any of the things the U.N, the climatologists, bio-diversity nutters and assorted eco-loons would like to have us do. Its cloud cuckoo land, a fantasy world. In reality its a mechanism to scare us into thinking we're killing cute things in order to create legislation to control ever-more aspects of our lives, for no end whatsoever. I've yet to see mention of one single study that has shown the direct benefits to the Amazonian rainforest of the E.U.'s directives on how much of a new car has to be recyclable.

Of course the fact is that it'd be better in every single way if that car hadn't consumed vast amounts of energy and raw materials in its production and its owner had simply carried on using their old car. But we live in a consumerist society, run by huge corporations who cause vast amounts of damage to the environment. However, we must continue to consume in order for them to make a profit and for their huge corporate financial shareholders to keep getting paid a dividend. They need us to foot the bill in higher taxes and more punative levies , demonising us the consumer rather than the corporation, for if they were to pay the price and profits were reduced, their corporate shareholders would squeak most loudly to our governments that this was most unfair and that they may not be able to find the funds to support election campaigns. Mock charities are set up and funded both by corporations and governments in order to reinforce so-called "independant" views that we the consumer are evil and should mend our wicked ways. New forms of profit making are created, making trillions of dollars literally our of thin air in the form of carbon trading: making firms pay compensation for producing goods, with the costs passed onto us, the consumer. Carbon trading or "offsetting" is supposed to offset the production of CO2, but in reality only offsets the loss of profits the huge corporations suffer as we consume less of their trinkets.

And so us, the little guy at the bottom of the pile, gets punished for the sins of the rich elite. We endure higher taxes, higher energy costs, all because we are told it will save some fluffy thing (it always has to be a fluffy thing as no-one would mourn the extinction of killer bees, for example) in a forest so far away we are unable to verify the fact ourselves. Instead we gullibly rely on the fake charities set up by the elite to tell us how endangered the fluffy things are and preach to us how we should mend our ways.

Let the poor benighted fluffy thing pass on with dignity, let something else in the local ecology take up its niche instead. Thats how evolution works and will continue to work long after humanity, the not-quite-so-fluffy animal has also encountered its extinction.