Looks that way to me.

I have to say that I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone state so blatantly that they don’t care what sort of world they leave for their descendants.

Fortunately, I would say that your point of view is a minority one. Most folks would not want their children or grandchildren growing up in a world where there are no environmental concerns.
Most of us value the place we live in and try to do our best to not s**t it up too much for those that come after.

So which part of this,

I do not share in the belief that we have to preserve the planet for generations to come.

have I misinterpreted. Seems pretty clear to me?

You are always good at putting words in peoples’ mouths aren’t you.

I don’t need to.

You are doing fine on your own.

I do not share in the belief that we have to preserve the planet for generations to come.

In other words, as Andy said “‘I’m alright jack–everyone else can go f**k themselves’ “

So what you are saying charliehunt is exactly what Andy in Beds said. Because we are here for a short time then we can do what we like?
Is that what you’re saying?
If so it’s no wonder the planet is in the state it’s in. Despite what others might say, humans have a major impact on the environment and almost none of it in a good way. What you’re saying is that commercial considerations and progress should outweigh any environmental impact. Well, let’s see how that works when they want to build 1000 houses within 2 miles of your home.

Absolutely. We have shown that we can and do affect the environment from small scale up to continent wide. Anything that can be done to stop our impact should be done.

Re 67

Derekf

Your commenting on local environmental effect. I thought we were more concerned with global effect, perhaps similar to a natural event like Krakatoa in the late 19th century that for all its power and contamination had very minor global consequences.

The summary of this article would suggest the effects were indeed global and significant.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v439/n7077/full/439675a.html

Holes in ozone layer? Local?
I guess it depends on your definition of local – Chernobyl affected most of Northern Europe.

To dismiss such disasters just because they are “local” is to miss the point really.

My point, and Andy’s on an even more local level, is that humans are very capable of affecting large parts of their environment and causing long-term and possibly irreparable damage. Any environmental effect, whether local or global will have very definite local effects as we’ve seen already.

Derekf

When before “did we detrimentally affect our environment” ?

Off the top of my head:-

Acid rain
Deforestation causing flooding in Bangladesh
CFCs causing ozone layer holes
Chernobyl
The 1920s dustbowl in the USA
The Aral Sea
London smog

and many many more.

Humans have the ability to do a great deal of harm to any environment they find themselves in.