Al Gore,DiCaprio & other celebrities discuss about Carbon Neutrality while philantropic Bill Gates helping the poorest to get better health and education.I wonder how these activities relate to each other!
2006-12-25 18:59:33 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Environment
Unfortunately they are at opposite ends of the human spectrum. The scare mongering by Gore et al is meant to shift the balance of resources towards nature rather than man. With other conservationists they plan to eliminate a large part of mankind by starvation. This is the ultimate of "the rich get richer and the poor get poorer" syndrome. Philanthropists value human life everywhere and particularly attempt to help the most disadvantaged. They realise that by utilising the most fertile land and managing the rest for nature we can maintain our biodiversity and our human population.
I know which group I admire!!
2006-12-25 19:11:28 · answer #1 · answered by Gary K 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Often you find that people who are interested in one tend to be interested in the other as well - it is basically about thinking about others rather than thinking purely about selfish greed.
Take the example of parts of the developing world where climate change is making it harder for people eg due to floods. Do you support people with housing, food, education etc or do you tackle the causes of global warming which is going to have such a devastating effect on people's lives
the answer is that you need both
2006-12-26 03:30:14 · answer #2 · answered by The Mad cyclist 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Difficult to see how in the short term carbon neutrality would be possible in philanthropic ventures.
My priority would be philanthropy first.
2006-12-26 03:04:16 · answer #3 · answered by lulu 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's philanthropy (from greek philos=friend + anthropos=human). And the person who is into it is a philanthropist.
2006-12-26 03:08:22 · answer #4 · answered by cpinatsi 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't know
2006-12-26 08:38:55 · answer #5 · answered by montathra 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋