Why on earth do they want water from the national forest when the massive Columbia River is right there!? Is it too expensive to treat the river water? /s
This accusation ignores the fact that the formal species description (Etnier, 1976) was thoroughly peer-reviewed before publication and has withstood decades of scrutiny—-even from biologists employed by TVA. Etnier himself acknowledged that genetic affinities between snail darters and stargazing darters would be instrumental in fully understanding their degree of relatedness and divergence (Etnier, 1976:487).
Regardless of whether snail darters are genetically distinct from stargazing darters based on current scientific data, the Little Tennessee River population in the 1970s would have nevertheless represented a population separated from the core population of stargazing darters by over 700 river miles of habitat highly modified by nearly 100 years of impoundment projects. As such, the Little Tennessee River population may still very well have qualified for protection under ESA as a sub-species or as a distinct population segment, as the ESA is applied today.
Yes, corporations are not saints and stories about nestle? contracts that allow to sell them bottled glacier water boil my blood equally.
At the same time I cannot not to notice that only environmentalists, activists and watchdogs are quoted in the article. One (bark) got even quotes from 2 different people.
Not a single scientific entity, like university etc was presented.
From a linguistics perspective "environmentalists worry" is a phrase designed to trigger a certain response. It sets up an us versus them scenario with "us" being anti environmentalists. "Concerns over" would include the reader. More interesting for the journalism for some.
At this moment I just assume by default that those “watchdogs”, “environmentalists”, “nonprofits” are mix of nimby-ists and/or thinly veiled attempts of extracting money
(it’s a nice things you got here. It would be a shame if some rare species of a frog would be found here. A small donation for the great cause/good, of course, would help us to work on ensuring that nobody gets in harms way).
At this point, Google could be a drop-in replacement for the corporate villain in any 1980s/1990s action movie.
Cue the White Knights defending the poor misunderstood megacorp from their keyboards.
80s and 90s films had better villains.
Has google even had a preserved fetal pig delivered to anyone?
Why on earth do they want water from the national forest when the massive Columbia River is right there!? Is it too expensive to treat the river water? /s
[flagged]
Who are "these guys"? Are they the same people mentioned in the article? Why would you assume that everyone caring about the environment is the same?
If you are referring to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snail_darter_controversy
It says:
This accusation ignores the fact that the formal species description (Etnier, 1976) was thoroughly peer-reviewed before publication and has withstood decades of scrutiny—-even from biologists employed by TVA. Etnier himself acknowledged that genetic affinities between snail darters and stargazing darters would be instrumental in fully understanding their degree of relatedness and divergence (Etnier, 1976:487).
Regardless of whether snail darters are genetically distinct from stargazing darters based on current scientific data, the Little Tennessee River population in the 1970s would have nevertheless represented a population separated from the core population of stargazing darters by over 700 river miles of habitat highly modified by nearly 100 years of impoundment projects. As such, the Little Tennessee River population may still very well have qualified for protection under ESA as a sub-species or as a distinct population segment, as the ESA is applied today.
I hope you also take a similar view of “corporate needs”. Because their abuses of people and the environment are many.
Yes, corporations are not saints and stories about nestle? contracts that allow to sell them bottled glacier water boil my blood equally.
At the same time I cannot not to notice that only environmentalists, activists and watchdogs are quoted in the article. One (bark) got even quotes from 2 different people.
Not a single scientific entity, like university etc was presented.
From a linguistics perspective "environmentalists worry" is a phrase designed to trigger a certain response. It sets up an us versus them scenario with "us" being anti environmentalists. "Concerns over" would include the reader. More interesting for the journalism for some.
At this moment I just assume by default that those “watchdogs”, “environmentalists”, “nonprofits” are mix of nimby-ists and/or thinly veiled attempts of extracting money
(it’s a nice things you got here. It would be a shame if some rare species of a frog would be found here. A small donation for the great cause/good, of course, would help us to work on ensuring that nobody gets in harms way).
>I just assume by default
Gitmo couldn't get me to admit to this degree of intellectual cowardice
Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.