Niel Jones' response to Ron Gatrelle
mikayak3 at home.net
Sat Jan 5 18:34:02 EST 2002
I have not followed this thread closely for many reasons. However, my two cents from far-far
out in right field is this: Extincion - whether we like it or not, is the natural order of
ALL living things. If I could stop that, the first thing I would do would be to stop my own
impending extinction!!! There are millions of more species that have gone extinct than there
are species living on the earth today....and that's just on one measly little planet in a
backwater solar system in the boondocks of one of the outer spiral arms of one of the smaller
galaxies in the universe. Had the dinosaurs not gone extinct, we would not be here now. So,
in that case, I would think maybe Neil would want to consider the value of extinction. For
instance, I believe that smallpox or polio or some other bacteria was "made extinct" and is
only now preserved in CDC labs and such. Is this a "bad" thing?? I think not.
Once again, I think many conservationists are blinded to thier own impotence. They think
humans have control over the planet. VERY egotistical. And, also, ludicrous. That said, I
consider myself a conservationist. I do everything I can in my little sphere to keep things
going. But, I am also a realist. Trying to maintain the diversity of our flora and fauna as
is is as impossible as trying to stop the earth's rotation. You can't do it. It's bigger
than you. And, once again, I have to point out that we are part of nature - not separate and
above it - or different from it - but merely a part of it. I've stated it before and it
bears repeating. We are not the driver of this car. We aren't even really passengers....we
are part of the car. And, even if we are the engine or the steering wheel....I still don't
think we are the ones deciding where the vehicle is going to go! And, thinking we ARE in
control is like the steering wheel thinking it's driving.
Oh, and the ad hominem attacks and linking people with listening to Rush Limbaugh "don't make
it". See, first of all, if everyone on this list actually listened to Rush for 3 weeks, then
listened to Neil for 3 weeks, I think they would think Rush makes ALOT more sense and is much
more "mainstream".. And, if the fascist name calling, Hitler references are ALL the tools
that one has resort to, then you have lost the rational argument - and are, in fact, wrong.
I only wish I had followed more closely to see where everyone stands....but the holidays
REALLY mess with my routine!!!
> Kondla, Norbert wrote:
> > Yeah, me too. I was "grossed out" by Neil's personal attack but this is not
> > the first time this has happened on this list.
> Neil has personally attacked me this week too in the same general manner
> as yourself, Ron Gatrelle, Mark Walker, etc:
> Subject: Mr Cherubini's affiliations
> Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 00:06:05 GMT
> From: Neil Jones <entstore at NWJONES.DEMON.CO.UK>
> Reply-To: Neil at nwjones.demon.co.uk
> To: ENTOMO-L at LISTSERV.UOGUELPH.CA
> We have been hearing a lot from Mr Paul Cherubini.
> I know that some people will know about his affiliations but others will not.
> It is of course important that ad-hominem attacks are not made. This is not
> my intention. However, it is important for people to know when some one is
> dissembling about their affiliations. It is also important for people to be
> aware of the eccentric world view of someone making these outrageous claims.
> My Cherubini's main role in life seems to be to act as a political activist
> for the "wise use" movement. This political movement is deliberately named to
> confuse and is actual aim is vehemently anti-conservation. It is perhaps best
> described in the words of one of its gurus Ron Arnold.
> "Our goal is to destroy, to eradicate the environmental movement. We want
> people to be able to exploit the environment for private gain, absolutely."
> Mr Cherubini seems to oppose _all_ conservation effort _on_principle_. He has
> become well known on other lists for spreading conspiracy theories which in
> the main seem to consist of attacks on "evil" Ph.D scientists.
> He has spread falsehoods and smears about people engaged in conservation. For
> example, when a keen conservationist appealed for people to help save the
> Palos Verdes Blue (which is arguably the world's rarest butterfly) from a
> construction development on its last remaining site, he immediately attacked
> her as doing it for money. (No money was asked for people were just asked to
> write letters and the person concerned is in fact a professional choreographer
> who couldn't benefit financially from it.)
> Similarly he has attacked efforts to conserve the endangered Quino Checkerspot
> with false information.
> He says that people don't like him because he kills insects. Well actually the
> truth is people don't like him because he tries to help make them _extinct_.!
> No one will be able to study them then.
> Many people will remember his attempt to misuse satellite photographs to claim
> there was no deforestation on the Mexican hibernation roosts of the monarch
> butterfly. Essentially his claim , if taken as honest, would boil down to the
> claim that low resolution photographs showed _more_ detail than high
> resolution ones.
> This distortion of data is a frequent feature of Mr Cherubini's postings.
> Time and time again you find that people have dicovered he is misquoting
> or selectively quoting to misrepresent.
> If people want to know more about this issue it would be interesting to read
> the new book "Four Wings and a Prayer" by Sue Halpern.
> The following extracts about Mr. Cherubini are interesting.
> Here Mr. Cherubini is talking about how he came to form his beliefs.
> "... I got depressed, seriously depressed. And my parents were having
> marital problems and the psychiatrist wanted to interview me to get a sense
> about what their problems were but then he realized I had problems too, and he
> said "You're depressed, why do you think you have no future?" and I said
> "because these scientists have Ph.Ds," and he said ,
> "That's not right, you're paranoid,"
> It goes on but experienced Cherubini watchers will recognise the theme.
> Another extract is this.
> "We went to Jack-in-the-Box for lunch. Paul explained how low-fat foods were
> unhealthy but no one could say that out loud in public because to do so would
> be to take on a huge part of the economy....... He looked normal but his
> ideas seemed a little off kilter, tending toward the second gunman/trilateral
> commission/ Vince Foster conspiracy side of things."
> Read the book to get the full story it is most interesting.
> Neil Jones- Neil at nwjones.demon.co.uk http://www.nwjones.demon.co.uk/
> "At some point I had to stand up and be counted. Who speaks for the
> butterflies?" Andrew Lees - The quotation on his memorial at Crymlyn Bog
> National Nature Reserve
> For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Leps-l