Do activists do more harm than good to their own cause by exaggerating and lying?

Question

The green people - - - - a lot of them just jump over every urban legend and run with it to scare people - whether there's any evidence or not. And if it turns out that it's total BS many of them still repeat the lie. Example: monsanto butterflies. Another example: teflon birds (if you have a small kitchen and you heat ANY pan to 600 degrees it gives off fumes that could kill an animal with tiny lungs). Another example: second hand smoke - - - - this is an exaggeration, not a lie - - - - I'm NOT denying that second hand smoke causes lung cancer, of course it does - but that's a married couple sitting in an 8 by 10 room for 2-3 hours a night watching tv with the windows shut, and only one of them smokes - - - - it's not a kid tending bar 2 nights a week to pay the rent while he's in law school, never smokes, never again is in a smoke-filled room, and then 30 years later he has lung cancer.

Do you take what activists say with a grain of salt BECAUSE of things like this? I do.

"More faith in science and medicine" well nobody's saying anything differently - - the scientists are clear about Bt corn pollen - - - - yet Greenpeace repeats the urban myth. Do they realize that there's a boy who cried wolf phenomenon?

It's kind of like, Crystal Gail Mangum could actually be raped next month - but if she reported it, would anyone believe her?

http://www.organicconsumers.org/ge/monarch-butterfly.cfm
http://monsanto.unveiled.info/newsnviews/monarch2.htm
http://www.bio.org/foodag/background/monarchbutterfly.asp
http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/br/btcorn/

Answer 1

More damage because when they get outted for exaggerating and lying after a while it is like the boy who cried wolf 1 too many times.

Answer 2

I think vocal activists hurt any cause. Most people get angry when all they see is people protesting, or commercials saying such and such is bad. While behind the scenes activists are where things get done, not out on the streets. We had protests in the 60's to stop the Vietnam war, it lasted years after those protests started. We have seen pro-life and pro-choice activists all the time. And nothing either way has changes. I some cases such as civil rights, protesting and activists change things.

I consider myself anti-green. The green movement has gotten me angry, and I am intentionally rebelling against it. My AC runs all day, I leave my car running when waiting for someone ect. Why do they have to bring out these scare tactics? Why can't we clean up the environment to just clean it up? Why does it after to about these doomsday scenarios? I choose to be rebellous.

Another that makes me mad, are those Truth smoking ads, with the dirty looking guy. I hate the one where he compares low tar cigaretts to "light bullets" he asks whether they make light bullets, and is trying to show that smoking is deadly like guns. First off, they do make "light bullets" if you have shotgun, you can use birdshot which is safer than larger buckshot. Also rubber bullets are non lethal. If you are going to give us a commerical and make unreal comparisons, make them accurate.

Answer 3

I take everything every advocate for a cause says with a grain of salt. Lies, exaggerations and distortions are not the exclusive domain of the Activist.

Case in point, Mel Martinez (Florida Senator and RNC Chairman) wrote an op-ed piece opposing the SCHIP bill which pays for health insurance for indigent children. He mentioned 3 or 4 times that the proposed bill now covers fa miles making $80,000 and will lead to government taking insurance away from private business.

But the truth is that the $80,000 (3 times the poverty level for a family) is an upper limit to give the states (which determine eligibility) the latitude to cover the rare and special circumstances where families not in poverty can not get insurance for their children. One would not eligible for the program in any state simply because they make less than $80,000. On top of that, most states typically buy or subsidize private insurance to cover those in the program. Far from taking insurance dollars away from Private enterprise it does just the opposite, and the bill that Martinez opposes has the full endorsement of the Insurance industry.

Answer 4

Darn, where to start. Let's look at your argument about second hand smoke. You cite some evidence that you derive but it has no basis in science. All accepted science has determined second hand smoke to be carcinogenic. I consider myself green and have no idea about any Monsanto butterfly or Teflon birds. Where do you find this crap?

Answer 5

I do. These people are passionate and biased in their beliefs and are rarely rational. Still, I don't think it hurts their causes. Especially the 'green' people. They get entrenched in their beliefs and you can't budge them. Another group like this is the conspiracy theorists. They won't change their minds, and with such an opinion that differs from the mainstream, it confuses a lot of people as to what to believe.

Answer 6

There are some activists, just like there are some religious fanatics that take things too far. The key is finding the truth and practicing moderation.

Answer 7

I take what everybody says with a grain of salt, including your little rant. And I tend to put more faith in science and medicine when it comes to most of these matters. Thanks anyway though.

Answer 8

How do "pro-war" neocons, who by all means fall under your definition of "activists" fair under your model.

You had better zip up, your biases are showing....

Answer 9

You mean like this post?

Yes,of course I do.