2008 Woodie Awards
Conservation For Disaster
How the enviornmentalists are supporting the deterioration of mankind.
Heather Robertson
Posted in: Opinion on 4/1/08 at 1:50 PM PST
In my opinion, environmentalists are supporting the deterioration of mankind. Throughout history, there has been a war to stay alive: the survival of the fittest. Charles Darwin first theorized evolution and natural selection during the 1830's, speculating and later proving that superior species are able to change and adapt to their environment, and will live after the brawl of extinction is fought. Contrary to many beliefs, this extermination of substandard life should be relished; it is one of the many natural and unavoidable forces that make the world go 'round.
Let me ask you this: if Charles Manson and Stephen Colbert were at war for ultimate control of the universe, whose army would you join? A legion of hoodlums backed by a psychopathic, criminal mastermind behind the creation of a brain-washed, homicidal "family," or the defense force of a well-respected political pundit and Dartmouth grad who has bombarded corrupt American politics in the name of truthiness? The choice isn't that hard. Why? Because nature makes it for you. One may think that he or she is in control of making a decision, but subconsciously nature is in control. It is by the forces of natural law that species die out. The resourceful and sharp-witted organisms remain in the circle of life when the half-baked and arguably inbred tribes fade out.
This said, why would anyone fight for the inferior creature? In sports, does anyone covet the second or third string players? No, because winning entails the starters. Environmentalists favor soon to be extinct plants and animals, but why would that organism be facing extinction if it were a winner? Exactly, it wouldn't. If that plant or animal was supposed to remain in the circle of life, it would've created a defense mechanism to combat the dominant species. We would see dodo birds carrying machine guns and Siberian tigers holding machetes. Trees would have daggers not leaves, and flowers would be time bombs, activated when plucked. If humans weren't the prevailing species, forests, grasslands, marshes and deserts would have tighter security than the pentagon and torture methods that would make Stalin blush.
The next time you debate walking the 20 extra steps to reach the recycle bin instead of using the trash can right next to you, think about it first. What if recycling helps inferior species gain the momentum needed to enable them to create weapons of mass destruction? Don't cut the plastic soda can holders, and don't feel guilty for ignoring the environmental crisis we supposedly face. You never know when the baby ducks and seals will learn how to fashion shanks out of the toothbrushes and pens we dump in the ocean.
Let me ask you this: if Charles Manson and Stephen Colbert were at war for ultimate control of the universe, whose army would you join? A legion of hoodlums backed by a psychopathic, criminal mastermind behind the creation of a brain-washed, homicidal "family," or the defense force of a well-respected political pundit and Dartmouth grad who has bombarded corrupt American politics in the name of truthiness? The choice isn't that hard. Why? Because nature makes it for you. One may think that he or she is in control of making a decision, but subconsciously nature is in control. It is by the forces of natural law that species die out. The resourceful and sharp-witted organisms remain in the circle of life when the half-baked and arguably inbred tribes fade out.
This said, why would anyone fight for the inferior creature? In sports, does anyone covet the second or third string players? No, because winning entails the starters. Environmentalists favor soon to be extinct plants and animals, but why would that organism be facing extinction if it were a winner? Exactly, it wouldn't. If that plant or animal was supposed to remain in the circle of life, it would've created a defense mechanism to combat the dominant species. We would see dodo birds carrying machine guns and Siberian tigers holding machetes. Trees would have daggers not leaves, and flowers would be time bombs, activated when plucked. If humans weren't the prevailing species, forests, grasslands, marshes and deserts would have tighter security than the pentagon and torture methods that would make Stalin blush.
The next time you debate walking the 20 extra steps to reach the recycle bin instead of using the trash can right next to you, think about it first. What if recycling helps inferior species gain the momentum needed to enable them to create weapons of mass destruction? Don't cut the plastic soda can holders, and don't feel guilty for ignoring the environmental crisis we supposedly face. You never know when the baby ducks and seals will learn how to fashion shanks out of the toothbrushes and pens we dump in the ocean.
Viewing Comments 1 - 2 of 2
michael f mccarthy
posted 4/30/08 @ 6:42 PM PST
. Some people think that the ?mortgage crisis? could have been prevented if there had been more government regulation. But, the politicians who would provide this regulation are beholding to the very campaign donating mortgage lenders that they?re expected to regulate. (Continued…)
Steve Solomon
posted 6/25/08 @ 4:22 PM PST
Heather, Heather, Heather...
We need nature as much as nature needs us...after all we have hunter, gatherer instincts drilled into our psyche. A world that is void of nature or "unnatural" would seriously affect our well being. (Continued…)
Post a Comment