The Story of Stuff with Annie Leonard
Rated • 436 reviews • activism, environment, consumerism, video • storyofstuff.com
Words of wisdom, even though some people say there's just people in corporation.. it's true, but those are some nasty money-grubbing people in there. Others are just heartless bastards. There's no hidden-agenda or others in this. Other means than consumerism DO exist. :P
While I know this video has it's flaws there's some truth (which you should see Without resorting to stupid nitpicking (is it 30% or 25% etc.) and while e.g. Jayky sure seems to make good counter-points his logic is also flawed.
Here: seoblackhat.com/2008/12/21/stuff [seoblackhat.com/2008/12/21/stuff]
I'm too tired to do any math, but some pointers from the site:
"80% of the world's original forests are gone."
Nearly 4 billion hectares of forest cover the earth's surface, roughly 30 percent of its total land area. So . . . if 80% is gone, that means that at one point 150% of the earth's land surface had forrest. I see.
------------
It's not the current forestation, but the original forests. I'd say 80% of the original forests are easily gone, replanted with trees to produce palm oil and other consumer directed woodstuff. The _original_ forests are at a fraction of what they used to be. That means, all of that wood has gone somewhere, if burnt, then they're in the air adding up to the global warming.
Next:
"According to these guys (referring to the rest of the supply chain), the people that live there don't own [the Amazon forests] even if they've been living there for generations"
Actually, the deforestation is being done precisely by the people that live there. That's the PROBLEM.
-------
Deforestation is done by the people who live there because they're paid well for cutting down the trees. By whom? You may ask. Maybe some big companies who'd like to have cheap stuff imported in some well paying countries might have their claws in there. Or maybe even some palm oil plants to fuel those "eco-friendly" cars.
More follows:
"There are over 100,000 synthetic Chemicals in use in commerce today"
Good! Just because something is synthetic, doesn't make it bad. In fact, those synthetic chemicals are a big reason why our standard of living is higher today than at any point in human history.
-----------------------
Do you know anything about chemistry? Synthetics are not necessarily "bad", but they're certainly not good. Synthetic materials take a long time to disintegrate into the nature and therefore products that contain these materials cannot return to the natural cycle because no organisms are able to break them down anymore. Seriously, you're trying to debunk this video with your witty remarks and not using simple logic at all?
More follows:
"Only a Hand full have even been tested for harmful effects"
A hand full . . . that would be what? 5? 10? Lies!
-----------
:) You *could* fit samples from quite a few of those chemicals in your hand.. ah.. you get it.
Next:
"If everyone Consumed at the US's rate, we would need 3-5 Planets"
No. We would just need to produce more.
--------------
This is the best one so far. Where do you think you can just "produce more", out of thin air? There's no sampo of any sort that grinds endless amounts of oil, coal, wood, uranium, gold, silica and such for our needs. Nor is energy "free" unless renewable resources are used. Most of the energy being used in the world are from non-renewable sources which means they _will_ end at some point in the future. Not so fun anymore then, huh? Unless, of course you're able to find some way to extract energy out of ground, sand and such.
Room for one more:
"We have 5% of the world's Population, but we're using 30% of the worlds Resources"
So we use 30% of the world's water? we use 30% of the world's Air? We use 30% of the world's Soil . . . and then eat 30% of the world's food?
No.
The US does consume 25% (not 30%) of the world's energy - but so what? 2 billion people in the world don't even have electricity!
-----
Back to basics. RTFWiki:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_resources [en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_resources]
You kids..
While I know this video has it's flaws there's some truth (which you should see Without resorting to stupid nitpicking (is it 30% or 25% etc.) and while e.g. Jayky sure seems to make good counter-points his logic is also flawed.
Here: seoblackhat.com/2008/12/21/stuff [seoblackhat.com/2008/12/21/stuff]
I'm too tired to do any math, but some pointers from the site:
"80% of the world's original forests are gone."
Nearly 4 billion hectares of forest cover the earth's surface, roughly 30 percent of its total land area. So . . . if 80% is gone, that means that at one point 150% of the earth's land surface had forrest. I see.
------------
It's not the current forestation, but the original forests. I'd say 80% of the original forests are easily gone, replanted with trees to produce palm oil and other consumer directed woodstuff. The _original_ forests are at a fraction of what they used to be. That means, all of that wood has gone somewhere, if burnt, then they're in the air adding up to the global warming.
Next:
"According to these guys (referring to the rest of the supply chain), the people that live there don't own [the Amazon forests] even if they've been living there for generations"
Actually, the deforestation is being done precisely by the people that live there. That's the PROBLEM.
-------
Deforestation is done by the people who live there because they're paid well for cutting down the trees. By whom? You may ask. Maybe some big companies who'd like to have cheap stuff imported in some well paying countries might have their claws in there. Or maybe even some palm oil plants to fuel those "eco-friendly" cars.
More follows:
"There are over 100,000 synthetic Chemicals in use in commerce today"
Good! Just because something is synthetic, doesn't make it bad. In fact, those synthetic chemicals are a big reason why our standard of living is higher today than at any point in human history.
-----------------------
Do you know anything about chemistry? Synthetics are not necessarily "bad", but they're certainly not good. Synthetic materials take a long time to disintegrate into the nature and therefore products that contain these materials cannot return to the natural cycle because no organisms are able to break them down anymore. Seriously, you're trying to debunk this video with your witty remarks and not using simple logic at all?
More follows:
"Only a Hand full have even been tested for harmful effects"
A hand full . . . that would be what? 5? 10? Lies!
-----------
:) You *could* fit samples from quite a few of those chemicals in your hand.. ah.. you get it.
Next:
"If everyone Consumed at the US's rate, we would need 3-5 Planets"
No. We would just need to produce more.
--------------
This is the best one so far. Where do you think you can just "produce more", out of thin air? There's no sampo of any sort that grinds endless amounts of oil, coal, wood, uranium, gold, silica and such for our needs. Nor is energy "free" unless renewable resources are used. Most of the energy being used in the world are from non-renewable sources which means they _will_ end at some point in the future. Not so fun anymore then, huh? Unless, of course you're able to find some way to extract energy out of ground, sand and such.
Room for one more:
"We have 5% of the world's Population, but we're using 30% of the worlds Resources"
So we use 30% of the world's water? we use 30% of the world's Air? We use 30% of the world's Soil . . . and then eat 30% of the world's food?
No.
The US does consume 25% (not 30%) of the world's energy - but so what? 2 billion people in the world don't even have electricity!
-----
Back to basics. RTFWiki:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_resources [en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_resources]
You kids..
