|
Guess it stems from Mr. Gore. Let's pollute away, while telling others to stop. "I can buy offsets from my own company to make me look better". Yeah...that really works.
Did this guy even know there were trees there before hand, or did he see a chance to try and get his name in the paper. Statements like "How much more are you planning to gobble up" don't lend much credence to his argument, unless, of course, the museum is gobbling up acre after acre every year? Sensationalism really irks me, and this whole article is nothing but.
Do I do my part towards conservation? You bet ya', probably more than some, since I don't own a car, and will walk, ride my bike or the bus to get where I need to go. I won't, however, be seen publicly bitching about environmental concerns after just flying hundreds, or thousands of miles on a private jet, instead of taking public transportation. As I have already stated, what's historical about the landscape. That is the language used by the article, and has little to do with Natural History, other than age...
Edit: To explain my thought on the language of the article, I'd find the language more appropriate if it said this: DC plans to tear down the Lincoln Memorial for a parking lot. That is a site with historical merit, and would call for such an alarmist response, as opposed to removing a few trees.
[ 05-24-2007, 08:20 PM: Message edited by: robertthebard ]
|