• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Thanks for voting!

Top of page

Comments

Comments

Recent comments

  • Maurice E. Adams
    April 15, 2011 - 12:53

    I would suggest that the term "the conquest of nature" has within it a certain self- contradictory element. It tends to see nature as something separate from ourselves --- when we are, in essence, all connected.

  • Margo Ric
    April 15, 2011 - 11:43

    "The conquest of nature is not inconsistent with maintaining respect for it.” The conquest of anything means its subjugation and control by an outside force. To "maintain respect" for something or someone you conquered would be contradictory. It would be like respecting your slaves... so long as they remain your slaves. Apart from that, the language in this article is hardly vivid. It's more of a muddled diatribe against anything hinting of environmentalism made only worse by his green-baiting by equating environmentalists with seal hunt opponents.

  • Anon
    April 15, 2011 - 10:24

    Sustainability has to come before profits or we need to rethink how we do business and move freight.

  • Politically Incorrect
    April 15, 2011 - 07:41

    ...so what's your point? Environmentalists, the UN, Disney, and the Earth are bad? What about David Suzuki? You forgot to bash David Suzuki.

    • Lin Jackson
      April 15, 2011 - 09:33

      Brian -- thanks for putting in such clear and vivid language EXACTLY the problem I have long had with what I call the Suzuki syndrome. It peaked in the '60, is still with us and misses the point.that the conquest of nature is not inconsistent with maintaining respect for it. Lin J