The environmentalists want no roads, yet without roads how would food and other items be transported to the cities. They want no airports, yet without airports there would be no cheap international travel. They want no mines, yet without mines there would be no coal, no metal, that would mean no the end of modern civilisation. The environmentalists want us to use wind and wave power only, but that is simply inadequate in the modern world where our engery needs are tens of thousands of times higher than they were 400 years ago!

It's time the environmentalists had good think about what life would be like with no roads, no electricity, no metal, no oil, none of the modern items that we take for granted today!!!!

On what authority do you have this information?

Which environmentalists are you speaking for?

Is it not sensible to want more sustainable methods of energy production?
Is it not sensible to want clean air to breathe, if not for us, for the mewling cabbages we may one day spawn?

With the help of Einsteins lifes work we have mastered nuclear fission, would it not be a worthy idea to put money into research on hydrogen fusion instead, so that the smallest amount of matter could provide us with an exponential amount of energy?

No?

You moron.

On what authority do you have this information?

Which environmentalists are you speaking for?

Is it not sensible to want more sustainable methods of energy production?
Is it not sensible to want clean air to breathe, if not for us, for the mewling cabbages we may one day spawn?

With the help of Einsteins lifes work we have mastered nuclear fission, would it not be a worthy idea to put money into research on hydrogen fusion instead, so that the smallest amount of matter could provide us with an exponential amount of energy?

No?

You moron.

Harlequin is quite correct in pointing out that our lust for consumables fuels the increased use of road haulage vehicles, but this hasn't always been the case. Indeed, the shift in recent times from rail to road for major loads has been pronounced, and there's no reason this could not be reversed.

As for international travel by aeroplane, why is this so essential? Why do we have the right to buzz around the world on a massively subsidised air service?

The basics here are obvious. The more we're given, the more we take and assume to be our right. This has never been true for less prosperous countries, and when the oil runs out it will be even less true of us. Investment in sustainable energy isn't some kind of liberal feelgood conspiracy - it's an absolute essential, because one day all that oil is going to disappear, and we'll have to find new ways of powering our lives, whether Harlequin likes it or not. But we're also going to have to cut back on the energy we use.

As for road building - well, we all know this is a politically motivated policy, designed to make it look as if things are happening. The more road there is, the more people use it - FACT. We can't always get what we want, eh?

Folks - Harlequin basically slags off anything progressive. There must be a link from the Daily Mail, BNP or Oswald Mosley memorial sites. Ignore him - he'll get back to his weapons collection.

He is right about the consequences of the kind of primitivism he describes, however most people even the most committed environmentalists don't subscribe to it, quite the opposite in fact. i want to see massive growth in technology, ideas, innovations and knowledge, the interconnectedness of people accross the globe, but i want it to happen sustainably - people who wnat it all despite the costs are actually the ones who in the long rum will hold civilization back - because if it isn't global warming it'll be something else that wrecks all the good things human species have already and could potentially achieve.