What do you think about Greenpeace?

Answer 1

SCAM and shame of most actual ecologists

they are not sincere. they make use of the fact that nobody knows everything so the can tell people anything in a easy to-believe way. Like i studied genetics and ecology, so that is what i can judge - they talk nonsence, but in a way one can go for it easily - here they hire young students to spread it further, the phrases they were taught. When they are campaigning (like instead of actually doing something) they seem to have been through some training what they should parrot on and on, but never think about it. always trying to persuade how good and caring they are but whanever i ask for facts, they are lost or cone up with lies - i asked them why they published only fraction of their tests (they didnt like the majority of results, that is why) they replied that the presented figures were mean figures - they were not. they were the figures that they liked only.

i personally think that conservation and ecology should get more attention than it gets and i work in conservation and i am happy that i do that - so i am not biased against "greens". Right the oposit - i am ashamed that some people take Greenpeace as ecologists. When the newspaper or tv says "the ecologists in our country" i would like these to be the people who teach ecology at universities, not greenpeace.

after i graduated i was looking for a job in conservation and i was naive enough to think of them - i was horrified that i would make living of lying and backed off right away. Since that time i dont take them as truthful. Oh please, dont believe them, go for renowned source of information.
i wouldnt call them independent, no way

they did more for showing off than for real conservation and environment, oh compare them to wwf
they fiddle with statistics and data as they choose - like take their so called surveys - just invalid from scientific point of view - you prove what you want to prove, if you pick up the results that you like and if you dont do a blind test - that is what i was offered to participate in!!! Maybe if i didnt contact them i would have believed them to this day. they predecide on what issues are interesting for them and they are not those that are the most pressing but those that can win them attention. at least here.
Like last time they stopped me in the streat with something about protection of primeval forests, but they were hopeless - of course it would be shameful to exploit primeval forests, so i asked them what company does that and sells here - they said that they were told that paper mills, so i asked them to be specific, they didnt know, but they were told that paper mills... after a lengthy discussion it turned out that the guy was ignorant of true problems in paper recycling and sustainable sources of paper pulp here and actual troubles and environmental consequences of paper industry here - there are some and should have been made public, but they did not talk of it at their trainings, dont care, it is better for them if they say "we are campaigning for primeval forests" it just sounds much better.

I would love if there was organizaton just like greenpecae but sincere and truthful, i would love it beyond anything. the founders must toss in their graves.. (EDIT" THAT S WHAT CONSULTANT TOM WITTNESSED BUT I DIDNT - I AM 33)

btw - look at this and you will get a clue how you truth "mabe in greenpeace" is made : http://www.dhmo.org/
example:
Greenpeace: gmo foods are bad , because antibiotics were used in breeding. So we are supposed to say omg, now i know. but really - if they say "t-shirts are bad because very sharp scissors are used in their manufacture" - you wouldnt go for it, because you know that probably in the manufacture of trousers scissors are used too, but nobody has a clue about how the antibiotics are used in GE and in what quantities and what chemicals are used in agriculture breeding - so we can believe anything. So i ask the girl - when you get antibiotics by prescription, is your pee contained and disposed of in a safe way so that you go to normal toilet ? the answers should be yes if you understood and meant what you just said!!!!

Answer 2

As a lifelong environmentalist I am glad such organizations exist. However Greenpeace strikes me as an imbalanced organization. They do some good, but a lot of things seem kind of over the top. Also, regionally, they run little gift shops that have odd business practices. On a personal anecdotal level, I once tried to sell a self produced musical album through them. The community I lived in was very supportive of the project; it involved the protection of manatees. Unfortunately, part of the story I told in the presentation pointed to the captivity issue. The local Greenpeace store refused to sell the tape because it was controversial to them to criticize animal captivity. Odd coming from a group that usually advances freedom of speech in their creed.

I think the Sierra Club is a more balanced and rational organization.

Answer 3

I watched them when I began to wake up intellectually ..... I was fascinated by their courage and their idealistic approach .... meanwhile quite a lot of the problems, which they brought into public's consciousness, have been solved (we had the Green Party even in government in my country Germany) and others turned out not to be so important any more, since focus of our society has changed.

Also Greenpeace itself has changed: They administrate the environmental problems and cultivate them in archives ... for this they need money .... so every Christmas they send out begging letters .... they have become one among many other charity and welfare organizations.

In a way they grew old ..... like my Church .... and also like me (52). Will they die in the next 50 years like I will do?

Answer 4

I think Greenpeace and Sierra Club are too extreme. People need to look at the whole picture and act logically. Some people will cut their nose off just to spite their face.

Answer 5

They're an organziation that has long outlived their usefullness. They lack vision, and they barely are a blip on the radar screen. It would be nice to have an organization that takes action outside of just collecting money.

Answer 6

I think very poorly of them!