elphaba - some posters on this site are of the opinion (which they are entitled to be) that some views are not backed by sufficient science and so don't add up and so they seem to think that people who advocate them are poor misguided souls or some such equivalent. The level of debate reminds me of university debating clubs, can't think why . . .
Examples of some of these general types of topics -
organic food
global warming
recycling
renewable energy sources
gm crops
The debates that go on here tend to highlight the cost and failings of 'green' alternatives, but quite often fail to acknowledge the hidden but real cost of not considering some of the green issues. For example people will say it costs money to recycle glass, so why not just stick it in a landfill since it is cheaper ? Then they will put on their debating club colours and point out that driving to the recycling bank will increase your carbon emissions . . . ho, ho, where did they think of that one ? It's a bit old at this stage. They will also point out that for all the <whatever> recycled by people in Ireland there are several huge countries in Asia dumping 1,000 times as much in their lakes, so why do the Irish even try ?
The answer (which is obvious to some of us) is that if people don't start pushing for some change, start initiating change (stop buying that stuff in Tesco, etc . . .) then the status quo will be maintained. If you start from the position that you are not happy with the status quo (but large comapnies and their shareholders are) then it is reasonably clear that you need to start making some changes.
z