HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska)
Subject: Re: A new outlook on activism.
Organization: VEXCEL Corporation, Boulder CO
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 16:50:29 GMT

In article <168CE12C5C.DRPORTER@SUVM.SYR.EDU> DRPORTER@SUVM.SYR.EDU (Brad Porter) writes:
> 
>In article <1hvcjmINNd6p@agate.berkeley.edu> sherw@ocf.berkeley.edu (Gregory Sherwin) writes:
>>I basically agree with all of this.  Extreme (media-oriented) activism
>>has value when the cause is unknown.  When it is well-established, then
>>such activism will not likely help.  While we may agree on some
>>extreme examples, there may still be a dividing line.  Would you
>>consider blockading a road to prevent an illegal timber cut to be
>>extremist?
>In most cases - yes.  If there has been enough time to rally a crew to
>blockade the road, then there has been enough time to make the proper
>authorities on the legalities(sp?) aware of the situation.  Even a "letter
>to the editor" would probably bring enough publicity that the loggers
>would be forced by public opinion to stop.  Here's how it works now:
>a) Someone writes a "letter to the editor" and the logging company looks bad
>in the eyes of the public, OR
>b) People block the illegal cut and it makes the paper.  However, in this
>situation, now-a-days, the activists look just as bad as the loggers.
> 
>Battle 1 - stop the timber cut
>Battle 2 - prevent negative publicity regarding environmental preservation
> 
>Option A is a win-win or lose-win scenario.
>Option B is a win-lose or lose-lose scenario.
> 
>Conclusion:  Option A will always gain a little, option B has the potential
>             for total failure, and can't be successful in both endeavors.
> 
>Untouchable logic, well maybe not, but logic.  (Something that many
>activists don't appear to have.)
>                                   -Brad Porter
>DRPORTER@SUVM
> 
It usually takes weeks to get a letter to the editor printed.  By then,
the trees are gone.  There was such a cut over a holiday weekened a
few weeks ago.  A judge stopped it one Monday, but some of the trees
were already down.  Also, in some lumber towns, it wouldn't hurt
the public attitude.  Many activists can get a small crew together
to blockade a road in a matter of hours.  It doesn't take a mob.

-- 
==============================================================================
A thought for the holidays:
   "Wine is living proof that God loves us and likes to see us happy"
	- Benjamin Franklin			dean@vexcel.com
From: DRPORTER@SUVM.SYR.EDU (Brad Porter)
Subject: Re: A new outlook on activism.
Organization: Syracuse University
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 93 17:09:46 EST

In article <1993Jan4.165029.5007@vexcel.com>
dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska) writes:
 
>
>In article <168CE12C5C.DRPORTER@SUVM.SYR.EDU> DRPORTER@SUVM.SYR.EDU (Brad Porter) writes:
>>
>>>extreme examples, there may still be a dividing line.  Would you
>>>consider blockading a road to prevent an illegal timber cut to be
>>>extremist?
>>In most cases - yes.  If there has been enough time to rally a crew to
>>blockade the road, then there has been enough time to make the proper
>>authorities on the legalities(sp?) aware of the situation.  Even a "letter
>>to the editor" would probably bring enough publicity that the loggers
>>would be forced by public opinion to stop.  Here's how it works now:
>>a) Someone writes a "letter to the editor" and the logging company looks bad
>>in the eyes of the public, OR
>>b) People block the illegal cut and it makes the paper.  However, in this
>>situation, now-a-days, the activists look just as bad as the loggers.
>>
>>Battle 1 - stop the timber cut
>>Battle 2 - prevent negative publicity regarding environmental preservation
>>
>>Option A is a win-win or lose-win scenario.
>>Option B is a win-lose or lose-lose scenario.
>>
>>Conclusion:  Option A will always gain a little, option B has the potential
>>             for total failure, and can't be successful in both endeavors.
>>
>>Untouchable logic, well maybe not, but logic.  (Something that many
>>activists don't appear to have.)
>>                                   -Brad Porter
>>DRPORTER@SUVM
>>
>It usually takes weeks to get a letter to the editor printed.  By then,
>the trees are gone.  There was such a cut over a holiday weekened a
>few weeks ago.  A judge stopped it one Monday, but some of the trees
>were already down.  Also, in some lumber towns, it wouldn't hurt
>the public attitude.  Many activists can get a small crew together
>to blockade a road in a matter of hours.  It doesn't take a mob.
 
If you were to call a large newspaper and say:  There's going to be an
illegal timer cut at this place at this time, what are the chances they
aren't going to respond.  The media loves this kind of stuff.  Physical
blockading won't be nearly as effective as reporters and maybe cameras
taping everything.  There are easier ways and more effective ways of
accomplishing the same goals.  It seems, however, that some people need
to get their own name in the paper though these actions.  It looks
bad in this rather environmentally aware society.  Which is more important -
stopping the timber cut, or proving how dedicated one is to the cause?
All to often the answer is the latter.
                                  -Brad Porter
From: bull@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au
Newsgroups: talk.environment
Subject: Lets pulp hemp for paper, not trees
Date: 8 Jan 93 18:02:44 +1100
Summary: why are we so stupid?
Organization: Computer Centre, Monash University, Australia


        I was listening to the radio the other day, and the hourly
news report mentioned how protesters were preparing themselves to
go to Tasmania (an island state of Australia) to prevent logging
(for woodchipping and ultimately paper making overseas) from taking place.
My first reaction was, this is stupid, why don't they make the paper out
of hemp? I haven't been living in a cave (and not heard about the needless
woodchipping), but this was the first time I conciously made the association
of replacing wood pulp with hemp fibre.

        To me this makes a lot of sense. The virgin forest trees being cut
down take centuries to grow, and non native forests such as pinus radiata
take 20 years before they are mature for logging (and poison the soil with
their acidity in the process). You can grow and harvest a new hemp crop
every year. To be honest, I don't know how much land you need to grow
enough hemp to equal the woodpulp produced from 1 acre of trees (either
virgin forest or commercial plantation), but hey, farmers all over the
world are being subsidised because of agricultural over-production. There's
a market for the fibre, we just seem to be harvesting the wrong type
of plant. Now if only there wasn't such a social hangup about hemp.


           Bull@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au  OR  bull@monu1.cc.monash.oz
                    DOD# 251  '84 VF 750   Closet Ducatisto
             Disclaimer. If you love your llama, let it lambada.
From: ACTIV-L via Jym Dyer <jym@mica.berkeley.edu>
Newsgroups: talk.environment
Subject: INFO & ACTIVISM: EPA Works to Weaken the Clean Air Act
Date: 9 Jan 1993 06:11:18 GMT
Organization: The Naughty Peahen Party Line
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Keywords: environment

[Also Posted to misc.activism.progressive (by Somebody Else)]

================================================================
=> From: jcm@plex-1.ann-arbor.mi.us (John Martin)
=> Subject: EPA works to weaken the Clean Air Act

EPA WORKS TO WEAKEN THE CLEAN AIR ACT

     The EPA is proposing to rescind the new 1990 Clean Air
Act air emission standards for all NRC licensed non-reactor
facilities on the grounds that the less stringent NRC
regulations may provide an "ample margin of safety."  These
facilities include uranium fuel cycle plants, uranium mills,
hospitals, medical research facilities, radiopharmaceutical
manufacturers, laboratories, universities, and industrial
facilities (over 6,000 facilities).  Many who live near such
non-reactor facilities are concerned that the NRC's traditional
coddling of the nuclear industry and its poor past regard for
public safety puts local communities at risk.

     Comments concerning the proposed rescinding of the rule
must be received by the EPA on or before January 14, 1993.
A public hearing concerning this proposal will be held in
Washington, DC at 10 am on January 14, 1993 if a request is
made.  Contact the EPA, Fran Jonesi at 202/233-9229.

     The NESHAP rule (40 CFR Part 6, Subpart I) would limit
radionuclide emissions to any member of the public in any
given year to 10 millirems and to no more than 3 mrems from
radioiodines.  The current NRC standard is 100 mrem for the
general public.  The proposed rule would force facilities
to use control systems, to maintain effluent monitoring data,
and to report monthly if out of compliance.  The new NESHAP
rule gives citizens the right to take legal action to compel
compliance.

     These NESHAP rules were originally written to include
both nuclear reactors and NRC-licensed non-reactor facilities,
but in 1991, the EPA suspended the NESHAP rules for reactors.
Recently, however, the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit
Court ruled the EPA's action to be illegal.  Temporarily, at
least, these reactor facilities must meet the stricter air
standards of the new Clean Air Act rather than the less
stringent NRC standards.  The January hearing will decide
if the EPA can do for local nonreactor facilities what they
did for reactor facilities in 1991.

     For more information regarding this hearing, contact
Dora St. Martin, Citizens for Safe Waste Disposal, Ann Arbor,
Michigan.  313/996-0649.

======
-- 
John Martin
jcm@plex-1.ann-arbor.mi.us
Newsgroups: talk.environment,alt.politics.greens
From: sartre@iastate.edu (Michael J. Wendling (515) 294-6186)
Subject: Re: save the earth - ridiculous!
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 22:10:08 GMT

Paul Barton-Davis writes:
>I say that the phrase "Save the Earth" is the worst thing to hit
>environmentalism and green politics since the Industrial Revolution.

I agree, a more appropriate phrase for the environmental movement
might be:

	"Save the green trees because I like to breath oxygen and stop
pollution because I don't like drinking acid water"


>Let me count the ways:
>
>1) its ridiculous
>
>	- nothing that humans are doing right now threatens the
>	  earth as a planetary body or a geological entity.

Again, you're right.  Environmentalists want to preserve the aspects
of the earths climate that make if habitable by humans(and all life).
And make it 'beautiful'.  I don't think this is such a rotten thing.

>2) its foolish
>
>	- few people seriously believe that anything humans are
>	  doing will eliminate life on earth either. 

Speak for yourself, please.

>
>3) its simplistic
>
>	- the effects of human activity are on the types and distributions
>	  of ecosystems on the planet, not the presence of life
>          here. The choice is not life on earth, but particular
>          kinds of life, particular kinds of landscapes.

Correct, so what.

>
>4) its a straw man
>
>	- all it takes is for someone to come up with an easily
>	  understood, 6 word phrase that refutes the simplistic
>          nonsense of "Save the Earth", and public opinion will
>          shift with the wind. "Wise Use" isn't it, but they're
>          working on it.

Why are you so angry?  Don't you ever enjoy a soothing walk through
damp, dark, green woods?

Most people do approach problems simplistically, and admittedly, the
environmental movement is one of popularity.  Nonetheless, this
doesn't make it a bad idea.

My rally cry:
	
	I like the earth as it was before the industrial revolution.


Mike
-- 
 Michael J. Wendling
 A410 Phys & Astronomy		     
 Iowa State University	  			Internet: sartre@iastate.edu
 (515)294-5440		 			Bitnet:   ISUMMA::WENDLING
Newsgroups: talk.environment
From: constant@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Tino)
Subject: Re: save the earth - ridiculous!
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 93 02:02:40 GMT

In article <7134@m1.cs.man.ac.uk> bane@vtx.ma.man.ac.uk writes:
>In article <1993Jan7.014843.1852@gn.ecn.purdue.edu>, constant@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Tino) writes:
>|> In article <C0GDKx.IDu@news.iastate.edu> sartre@iastate.edu (Michael J. Wendling (515) 294-6186) writes:
>|> >My rally cry:
>|> >	
>|> >	I like the earth as it was before the industrial revolution.
>|> 
>|> No, make it:
>|> I like the earth as it was before the industrial revolution, when people
>|> lived 20-30 years shorter and had a much lower standard of living.
>
>Tino - what is wrong with shorter lives? And what`s wrong with a lower standard
>of living? Will either of these, really, decrease your happiness or feelings as
>a human?
>
>Michael

This is possibly the stupidest reply I have ever seen on the net.

If we want shorter lives and decreased standards of living, why not just
rape the planet 'til she's dry?

If you don't mind having a shorter life, please off yourself so that I 
can have your resources.

Tino
-- 
     "Here are the young men, the weight on their shoulders..." - J.D.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Purdue University School of Nuclear Engineering
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: shall@obiwan.nosc.mil (Scott R. Hall)
Subject: Spotted owl
Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego, CA
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 19:06:36 GMT

I am concerned with the issue of Wa. State's forest lasnds, and the  
spotted owl. I would be interested in any information anyone has on this  
topic, including the logging of this land, legalities, and/or the welfare  
and well being of the spotted owl. Thanks in advance.

Scott
Newsgroups: talk.environment
From: constant@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Tino)
Subject: Re: INFO & ACTIVISM: EPA Works to Weaken the Clean Air Act
Keywords: environment
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 01:25:52 GMT

Why aren't the fossil-fueled plants targeted for radioactive releases? 
Sounds like more "activism-before-science" legislation.

Tino 
-- 
     "Here are the young men, the weight on their shoulders..." - J.D.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Purdue University School of Nuclear Engineering
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: talk.environment,alt.politics.greens
From: ladasky@netcom.com (John J. Ladasky II)
Subject: Re: save the earth - ridiculous!
Followup-To: talk.environment
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 16:09:37 GMT

In article <1993Jan7.062742.10440@gn.ecn.purdue.edu>,
constant@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Tino) writes:
>I like my standard of living. 

	I like mine, too.  I believe that there's an excellent chance that,
within my lifetime, my standard of living (and yours) will suffer a signi-
ficant decline - unless we all work on more efficient and environmentally-
sound implementations of that lifestyle.  Won't you join me in my endeavor?

	I have directed followups to talk.environment.  It strikes me as
inappropriate to continue a conversation of this nature in alt.politics.
greens.  Greens have already accepted the soundness of an environmental
stance.  I think that anyone who decides to read alt.politics.greens is 
already aware of the fact that we are environmentalists.  To continue this
debate within a forum whose purpose it is to inform people about Green
policies strikes me as uninformative.

-- 
== John J. Ladasky II ("ii") ========================= ladasky@netcom.COM ==
"Great composers do not borrow -	     "Talking about music is like
 they steal."  - John Ladasky	      ~ -     dancing about architecture."
(quote stolen from Stravinsky, who    o o     - Elvis Costello?  Laurie
 stole it from a statement made by     >        Anderson?  Frank Zappa?
 Pablo Picasso about painting, who    \_/    -------------------------------
 stole it from...)			     "Property is theft." - Groucho
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"A man w/o charity in his heart - what has he to do with music?" - Confucius
============================================================================
Newsgroups: talk.environment,alt.politics.greens
From: ladasky@netcom.com (John J. Ladasky II)
Subject: Re: save the earth - ridiculous!
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 03:29:13 GMT

In article <C0GDKx.IDu@news.iastate.edu>,
sartre@iastate.edu (Michael J. Wendling (515) 294-6186) writes:
[much deleted]
>
>My rally cry:
>	
>	I like the earth as it was before the industrial revolution.
>

	Maybe so, but I prefer the human condition in the modern,
industrialized First World to anything I've ever experienced.  I lived in
Algeria for a year, and believe me, you'd be a little more grateful for
modern comforts, like vaccinations and sanitation, if you had lived there.

	So, how do we resolve this difficulty?  Human ingenuity must lead
us to a solution which allows us to enjoy the best of both worlds - a 
natural evironment with large, unspoiled tracts of wilderness, AND the 
comforts of modern life.  As for myself, I advocate the development of
clean technologies, the restructuring of living patterns in order to take
advantage of clean technologies we already possess but do not utilize
sufficiently (e.g., restructuring cities to make biking to work a viable
option for the average commuter), and the reduction of human population.

	Since this is being posted to alt.politics.greens, I think it 
would be instructional to post information from Green Party platforms
concerning these matters.  My general impression of the California GP
platform is that it calls for clean technology, rather than the elimina-
tion of technology.  I'll post a follow-up with specifics in the next
day or so.

-- 
== John J. Ladasky II ("ii") ========================= ladasky@netcom.COM ==
"Great composers do not borrow -	     "Talking about music is like
 they steal."  - John Ladasky	      ~ -     dancing about architecture."
(quote stolen from Stravinsky, who    o o     - Elvis Costello?  Laurie
 stole it from a statement made by     >        Anderson?  Frank Zappa?
 Pablo Picasso about painting, who    \_/    -------------------------------
 stole it from...)			     "Property is theft." - Groucho
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"A man w/o charity in his heart - what has he to do with music?" - Confucius
============================================================================
Newsgroups: talk.environment
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: Three Gorges Dam Project
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
Distribution: talk
Date: 4 Jan 93 00:32:47

Talk about Americans bullying Third World Countries.
--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.

Newsgroups: talk.environment
From: Jym Dyer <jym@mica.berkeley.edu>
Newsgroups: talk.environment
Subject: Re: . . . Dr. John Gofman . . .
Date: 9 Jan 1993 06:32:13 GMT
Organization: The Naughty Peahen Party Line
	<JMC.92Dec23185253@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu

> Gofman has been an anti-nuke for a very long time.

=-= It should be noted that he wasn't always so.  Gofman has
both a doctorate in nuclear/physical chemistry as well as a
medical degree.  He had a long and distinguished career in
the industry.  His current anti-nuclear position derives itself
from his experiences in that industry.

=-= This is, I believe, a bit more significant than his having
"been an anti-nuke for a very long time."

> I believe his epidemiological studies are not accepted by
> the health physics community.

=-= "The health physics community" is no monolith.  His studies
are neither universally accepted nor rejected.  They were
certainly rejected by the AEC, though the AEC (an organization
devoted to promoting as well as regulating nuclear energy) has
hardly distinguished itself as a fair or honest appraiser of
such studies.

=-= Gofman's linear assessment models make sense to me, and
I've seen no evidence demonstrating that other models are more
appropriate.  Gofman's calculations of deaths from genetic
damage are something I'm not qualified to appraise, but I've
not seen the purveyors of the other models even acknowledging
such a thing.
    <_Jym_>
Newsgroups: talk.environment,alt.politics.greens
From: constant@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Tino)
Subject: Re: save the earth - ridiculous!
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 01:48:43 GMT

In article <C0GDKx.IDu@news.iastate.edu> sartre@iastate.edu (Michael J. Wendling (515) 294-6186) writes:
>
>My rally cry:
>	
>	I like the earth as it was before the industrial revolution.
>

No, make it:
I like the earth as it was before the industrial revolution, when people
lived 20-30 years shorter and had a much lower standard of living.

Tino
-- 
     "Here are the young men, the weight on their shoulders..." - J.D.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Purdue University School of Nuclear Engineering
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: dencisco@eos.arc.nasa.gov (David Paul Encisco)
Subject: Oil Spill history?
Organization: NASA Ames Research Center
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 16:48:10 GMT

Has anyone read or wrote a history of oil ship calamities for the past
30 years or so? I would find it interesting to see who (what company)
was involved, the cost of clean- ups, the approximate area affected,
and whether the incidences are increasing or decreasing.

Maybe someone could recommend a good book?

Thanks,
Dave
Newsgroups: talk.origins
From: adpeters@sunflower.bio.indiana.edu (Andy Peters)
Subject: Re: A funny from the U.K.
Organization: Biology, Indiana University - Bloomington
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 20:29:07 GMT

In article <1993Jan5.135421@IASTATE.EDU> danwell@IASTATE.EDU (Daniel A Ashlock) writes:
>In article <1993Jan4.224144.4713@nsisrv.gsfc.nasa.gov>,
>jgacker@news.gsfc.nasa.gov (James G. Acker) writes:
>> 
>> 	From the Feedback section of "New Scientist"
>> 
>> 	All editors know that when they receive a letter written in
>> green ink and capital letters, it's likely that the writer will turn out
>> to be persecuted by microwaves from the Russian Embassy.  The world of
>> electronic communications has its equivalent:  the message on your
>> screen literally sprinkled with capitals.
>> 	For some reason the physicist's area of the academic network
>> Internet attracts more than its share of this.  Prompted by an
>> especially striking outburst from a retired mathematician insisting that
>> TIME has INERTIA, users have developed a Crackpot Index.  Forewarned
>> is fore-trashed.
>
>   Just as a matter of personal curiousity it wasn't Alex Abian of 
>the Iowa State University math department was it?  He's six doors down
>the hall from me and has been babbling something about time having 
>inertia...

Yes, actually, it was.  His posts get crossposted to sci.bio and other
uninterested groups from time to time.

>Dan
>Danwell@IASTATE.EDU

-- 
--Andy
     "God is a real estate developer / with offices around the nation
          They say one day he'll liquidate / his holdings on High
             I say it's all speculation." -- Michelle Shocked
Newsgroups: talk.origins