I'm very glad to see the commitment of the North Americans in assume the =
guilt for them. Maybe I should alleviate my consciousness, but I'm not. =
Unlike most of them, I do not consider the CO2 emissions the only one or =
the major problem driven climate change.
I'm still concerned with habitat
omplexity,
>> third world poor are often displaced to marginal,
>> high risk areas by
>> government or by them as have the clout and means to
>> persuade
>> government to allow it (to put in a resort, replace
>> mangroves with
>> shrimp farm, etc, etc) so the
I just wondered what kind of people developed this ecological footprint
quiz, because for me its seen biased and flawed. Naïve, at best.
You said that first world kids will have larger footprints that third world
kids. Because poor third world kids don't travel by planes, they walk by
feet because
A third world view on childfree ideology.
Here in Brazil, anyone who decides to not have kids in an attempt to save
the world, will soon became frustrated in seeing uneducated and miserable
couples in slums having 6 or 7 or even 10 children. The decision is clearly
useless and is clear to me
onclusions than keep trying to find rigid theoretical definitions.
apologizes for the english
Osmar Luiz Jr.
Brazil
- Original Message -
From: "Warren W. Aney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Friday, November 23, 2007 4:18 PM
Subject: Re: "unoccupied" ni
Hello,
I've been out of this list for many years and signed it again two days ago.
I'm very glad to see that it shifted from mainly naive questions about
environmentalism to serious discussions about the science of ecology like
that exciting messages about the niche theory.
Back to the central