The fact that there is already a roading network of sufficient standard for WRC in place makes me wonder really... Must be a shit course if the cars will travel at sustained speeds of 200kph, and drivers don't like dust either, I'm sure there will be a water cart on hand to keep things damp. Noise is an issue for sure, possibly more so for wannabe lifestylers on ten acre blocks though...
There are far more important things they could be worried about, especially in Australia, for fucks sake! Sounds to me like it's a bunch of dorks who don't want their countryside quiet spoilt.
Greenpeace can really go get fucked, they are the most useless, ill informed stains out there.
Sea shepherd do achieve some good outcomes for sure, they are probably one of the groups that I would consider to be more successful. Plenty of other people don't achieve anything other than alienating their cause.
croc wrote:Protests, submission writing, law suits, public meetings are all legal because most of the time they don't work. Governments serve industry first and foremost. Why do you think 20 years of global talk on climate change has achieved nothing? The same for deforestation. Fisheries depletion. Strip mining etc etc etc.
NZ has a pretty good record of protests, submission writing, legal challenges and public meetings working. Project Aqua? Hell, I was working in the RMA process over summer, and I saw more applications stumble through those means than actually get approval. There are certainly problems with the RMA, alot of which arise through the retardedness of planners, and their desire to put themselves above science, but we do what we can.
20 years of global talk on climate change hasn't acheived nothing. I think your average citizen has become hugely more environmentally aware over the last couple of years, most of it due to CC misinformation (cheers Keisha). The other factor there is that climate science is so ridiculously complex that it is pretty dam hard to get anything constructive out of the science itself. Yes the planet is generally warming, yes CO2 probably plays a significant role in that, but beyond that, it's still a lottery. The relationship between CO2 and temp (as best as we understand it) alone means that carbon taxes and emissions trading schemes are more or less doomed to fail in actually mitigating any effects. Not to mention the fact that modern climatology looks nothing like comparing plots of temperature with those of CO2 emissions. Or the fact that Jones et al have now "lost" the global climate data set on which the bulk of that science is based, and in the past have consistently refused to provide that data to anyone who wasn't going to directly credit them in publication - meaning that sceptics/critics/whatever you want to call them have effectively been unable to test the data, and the stats applied to it (so much for providing an international climate "Service"). All that is left is one hell of a manipulated beast. That's a whole other issue though...
The bulk of major environmental issues have their roots in economics, which is nice and ironic since it's the pseudo-ist pseudosciene around. Until there is a MAJOR economical paradigm shift, these issues will not disappear. It's not a terribly difficult concept - that raping the earth is not only unsustainable on an environmental level, but also an economic level.