where the government tries to make people aware of various psychological methods ... there 3 journalists / writers shoot at the actors or decisions to make a more sustainable world ...
That's good he will sell their books!
My comments insertion ...
And you, are not you fed up with ecology?
Anti-NGO pamphlet, satire against ecological religion or counter-investigation into organic "false promises" ... 3 recent books attack ecologically correct thinking. And you what do you think ?
"Who killed ecology ?" : war on green movements
Here is a book where the big names of the ecology - that they are called Hulot, Greenpeace, WWF or Arthus-Bertrand - take for their rank.
First observation of the author, Fabrice Nicolino, a convinced ecologist but not fooled: "forty years after the birth of these associations, the destruction of the planet has not receded on the contrary". According to him, the NGOs, which present themselves as the saviors of the planet are in reality accomplices, even responsible for this pitiful record. "Their spiel, because it is one, consists in whining in the morning on the destruction of the planet, before going to sit down for lunch with industry, whose deadly role is central, before going to converse with these powerless, perverse and manipulative political leaders ", castigates the journalist who condemns throughout the book the collusion between environmentalists and power. A collusion that does not date from yesterday. We learn in fact that WWF (world fund for nature) was created by British notables so that they can "continue to hunt big wild game in Africa". Or that Greenpeace is nothing more than a capitalist company boasting of having laid off half of its employees without ever having gone to industrial tribunal. Nicolas Hulot, whose foundation benefits from the largesse of large CAC companies, is portrayed as "a boy scout from whom nothing has emerged from his friendship with Chirac and that the Grenelle has rolled in the flour since Sarkozy ended up torpedoing the flagship measure he called for, the carbon tax ". Politicians are not spared either. Chantal Jouanno is described as an ignoramus. As for Jean-Louis Borloo and NKM, they appear to be real opportunists solely driven by their personal ambitions.
Houla go there Nicolino there! We can say things firmly without being so scornful if and the grenelle is not a failure at 100%, we talk about the ecological rigor of the RT2012?
Work probably inspired by: https://www.econologie.com/la-face-cache ... -2619.html
et https://www.econologie.com/l-imposture-v ... -2620.html
I think he "risks" selling a bunch of it ... it's going to exonerate his readers so much ...
Also, we remember the other book of Nicolino: https://www.econologie.com/forums/la-faim-la ... t4072.html
where he was not completely wrong, even if he was limited, O error, agrofuels of 1ere generation in competition with the food (which is no longer the case of the 2e generation for man and even less the 3ieme of which here is a functional practical example: https://www.econologie.com/forums/microalgue ... 10514.html )
"Ecology at the bottom of my house": the war on ecological religion. Grenelle, and the environmental disaster, Iegor Gran, the author of "Ecology at the bottom of my house", does not care.
What irritates him at the highest point is ecological morality. The one who wants that today we can no longer go out in society without praising "Home", the latest film by Yann Arthus Bertrand, a kind of cinematic prose on the destruction of the planet. "The terrorism of beautiful pictures" as it is called in the book. "Will they go so far as to count the number of televisions on the windows? Will they draw up lists? One column for those who watch Home, another for those who doze off," Iegor Gran exaggerates. It is now impossible to do without selective sorting without being brutalized by your own friends. "I feel annoyed, almost hurt ... We would like to think in my place," he worries in this story which has already sold more than 30.000 copies. With a deliberately provocative lightness and a bit of assumed bad faith, Iegor Gran, who received the Grand Prize for Black Humor in 2003, breaks his neck with eco-moralizing speeches, and their lack of self-mockery ... Iegor Gran also summarizes the debate between climate skeptics, such as Claude Allègre, and the supporters of the warming thesis. Without falling into negationism, he recalls in particular that in the 70s, it was the thesis of the cooling of the planet which made the front page of the television news!
Yes for cooling and 70 thesis, see this TV interview with Tazief and other personalities: https://www.econologie.com/forums/post188389.html#188389
The rest already seems to me more "acceptable" than the 1st: it is true that the moralizing ecological (especially for the others ...) is a little heavy, brittle ... and does not encourage concrete actions, well on the contrary !!
"Organic, false promises and real marketing": the war on organic marketing
It is the ultimate in agriculture. Organic today is a compendium of flavors, health benefits, and respect for the environment, conducive to the development of small-scale agriculture. What once again annoy the most critical minds. Among them, Gil Rivière-Wekstein publishes this Monday "Bio, false promises and true marketing", a counter-investigation on organic farming. He denounces organic propaganda, the proliferation of labels, AMAP (Association for the maintenance of peasant agriculture). But not only. Throughout his investigation - which lasted two years - the journalist managed to accumulate an incredible amount of information that could call into question the supposed benefits of organic. Pesticides are not already the preserve of conventional agriculture. "Yes, organic farming uses pesticides. Yes, it uses worrying molecules. Yes, certain organic practices can contribute to the death of soils," he says. Evidenced by a January 2009 study by the DGCCRF, which reported the presence of pesticide residues in 21% of samples of organic products of French origin. Copper and rotenone, natural pesticides widely used in organic farming, are also not without danger. According to Gil Rivière-Wekstein, the major problem would be that today nothing scientifically proves the benefits of organic. Even the promise of taste would not always be kept, testimonies from gastronomic experts in support. A very well educated book, but which sometimes leaves the feeling of being carried too much. All the more so when we know that the author was accused by Le Canard Enchaîné of being a fervent representative of the pro-pesticides lobby ...
Do we keep "the best" for last? We have a winner who is not afraid of defamation lawsuits I believe ...
What is said is so great that one wonders if the author is not simply a lobbyist of chemical pesticides ... ah yes the chained Duck claims ...
CQFD, Mass is said, Amen your pesticide!
And you, do you think these criticisms are justified?
Do you feel, like Iegor Gran, besieged by ecology?
Do you think, like Fabrice Nicolino, that we need to change our way of understanding ecology?
Do you like Gil Rivière-Wekstein that organic farming is overvalued?
What solutions do you propose?
You can react here on the express website: http://lexpansion.lexpress.fr/economie/ ... 51787.html
