you could find enough trees!) Inaction by others adds to our collective carbon footprints for the very reason that "we are all in this together". When it comes to carbon foot prints sadly we are all a part of the one big foot. Meanwhile This blog has been a waste of time though. Poynter failed dismally. No-one else refuted anything either. No one "had a red hot go". The IFA should learn how to cook (more than ecosystems and wildlife) given they appear as passive as the CWA (Apologies Ladies). Maybe you could exchange recipes? I know which book I would buy though. At this stage no-one in their right mind would swallow anything associated with the IFA. Ed : Zibethicus : 12 Dec 2008 11:07:03pm "I wonder at what sort of life allows them the time to devote such an effort to online discussions, particularly as I notice that they haven't restricted their efforts to just this one. Being equally as outspoken about other topics only further strengthens the impression that this is virtually a career for them." That's just silly and snide. I went out of my way to explain - after being challenged to do so - why I thought your case was riddled with logical flaws. I went to considerable time and trouble to defend my case, using precious time which I was loathe to part with, and /none/ of the 'pro-un-logging' posters have yet disproved a single point I made. Your argument here is ad