“You can argue the planes would be flying anyway but the amount of greenhouse gases pumped out depends on the weight of the cargo.”
Vicky Hird, of Friends of the Earth, said: “We don’t want to be killjoys because receiving flowers can be lovely but why not grow your own gift?” [ Telelgraph]
Well if you want an example of what this lifestyle would be like in reality see the past 10 million years of human existence up until about 100 years ago. Or go to the nearest third world country and see what life is like without modern technology.
It goes without saying that the ease of transportation (along with all the other advances brought by technology) leads to massive productivity increases which lead directly to real purchasing power and thus increased standards of living including life expectancy. We have reached a point where we have so much wealth that flowers can be shipped around the world and given as simple gifts for next to nothing. Shouldn’t we be rejoicing? Anyone truly concerned with human life would have almost spiritual level appreciation for modern technology and the quality of life it has brought about.
In fact, ironically, modern technology has resulted in appreciation of nature. It is only from the vantage point of someone who has a home and endless supply of food that you could actually even conceive of “enjoying” nature. If you were left alone in the wilderness to exist like an animal would you value a sunset or would you realize it is the last moment of light to gather food and find protection from the descending darkness of a merciless nature?
Does anyone think the environmentalists are really concerned that global warming will somehow impact our standard of living or life expectancy and that this is what concerns them? What other conveniences would they have us sacrifice? How would they have us live? Will bouquets be on the list of prohibited items under “environmental law”? In principle, wouldn’t everything we consume be on that list unless you “grow your own gifts”?
