Greenpeace Says Nintendo is Still Toxic
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
What do Nintendo's release a cloud of poison gas into the atmoshpere and slow kill everyone around them? The only problem I could see is if people start chucking em everywhere.
As much as I _do_ care about the environment, the products I buy from these companies are not ones I just use once and throw away. They're products I use for years. Possibly even a decade or more, with any luck and an extended tech cycle.
I certainly agree that it should be easier than it often is to recycle dead or obsolete electronics, not just from a toxic standpoint but from a resource standpoint. But I would be lying if I said that environmental impact is usually my first priority when considering which brand to buy. Unless it's actually leaking significant amounts of carcinogens and/or mutagens into my body every moment I'm using the thing...
It would also be nice if the site made it easier to understand why a company was given a particular score over another. As it is, the chart offers hard numbers that don't seem to add up to much more than arbitrary choices on the part of the chart's makers.
I certainly agree that it should be easier than it often is to recycle dead or obsolete electronics, not just from a toxic standpoint but from a resource standpoint. But I would be lying if I said that environmental impact is usually my first priority when considering which brand to buy. Unless it's actually leaking significant amounts of carcinogens and/or mutagens into my body every moment I'm using the thing...
It would also be nice if the site made it easier to understand why a company was given a particular score over another. As it is, the chart offers hard numbers that don't seem to add up to much more than arbitrary choices on the part of the chart's makers.
What has two thumbs, a funny voice and still doesn't give a crap? Bob Kelso. Every human not in Greenpeace. I added the funny voice to keep it fresh.
They'll throw just about anything into they're little "Greenpeace" spew! Granted, some of it's reasonable... Next they'll start using a "School Lunch" green meter... And most of you know those are TRULY bad for the environment lol
Jesus Christ, this thread is like a collection of the numbskulls spawned in the last two decades. It's like I was looking for a deal on ignorance, and, boy, have I scored.
I mean, did I just see somebody ask if anybody cares about what Greenpeace says? Good God. No wonder voter turnout is so low. Does anybody care about anything aside from fucking the grade's hot chick/getting wasted for the fifth night in a row? These guys are talking about the future of our planet, something that you (hopefully) care about.
I'm hoping that, in a few years, when the earth has completely gone to shit and the bottomfeeders of the world (I'm looking at you) have finally started to listen to reason, somebody from Greenpeace visits your crumbling house and kicks you in the sack. Twice.
Rant over, feel free to complain.
EDIT:
I mean, did I just see somebody ask if anybody cares about what Greenpeace says? Good God. No wonder voter turnout is so low. Does anybody care about anything aside from fucking the grade's hot chick/getting wasted for the fifth night in a row? These guys are talking about the future of our planet, something that you (hopefully) care about.
I'm hoping that, in a few years, when the earth has completely gone to shit and the bottomfeeders of the world (I'm looking at you) have finally started to listen to reason, somebody from Greenpeace visits your crumbling house and kicks you in the sack. Twice.
Rant over, feel free to complain.
EDIT:
The concern isn't disposal. While chucking your 360 into the sea isn't very environmental, that's not what we're worried about; rather, you've got to look at the hazardous waste that comes out of producing a system. Think about it like hybrid car manufacturing; the environmental cost of making a Toyota Prius is actually worse than driving a diesel car for a year or two (I forget the exact specifics).shaboinkin said:
Yeah, I don't care about an organisation that gets a large amount of media attention and has a shitload of members!
Come on guys, I'm not a fan of Greenpeace either, but if the report came from some lesser known organisation, I'd bet you'd at least try to put up a counter argument instead of instantly dismissing it because the organisation is quite good at getting attention.
Come on guys, I'm not a fan of Greenpeace either, but if the report came from some lesser known organisation, I'd bet you'd at least try to put up a counter argument instead of instantly dismissing it because the organisation is quite good at getting attention.
This guy knows it.Callate said:
Erm, isn't that, more or less, the definition of "toxic"?Macksheath said:
Greenpeace : environment :: PETA : animals. Sure, the idea is good, but the organizations tend to the extreme, which ends up doing their reputation (and, by extension, their cause) more harm than good.swaki said: