[gigi]

I agree with almost everything you say Colin.

The question is whether we need to hurry up and route the terrorists and then move onto environmental issues because they are so important.

Priorities. Terrorism does, and SHOULD play a more important role at this point in time. I agree whole heartedly.

I think, in general, that the world has been doing a great and balanced job as regards environmental issues - that is, one that balances human needs for economy and progression with that of conservation and environment.

This is where I differ in thought somewhat. I don't believe we are doing a 'great' job, however I think we are doing much BETTER than we were at one time. There is still so much room to grow on this front. Attempts at correcting past mistakes are sincere, and everyday new solutions are brought to the forefront, but at this point in time, I think we are still sliding down a steep cliff....albeit at a slower pace.

The World Bank has concluded that as the western world was better able to afford to pay for a cleaner enrivonment, it has.

Of course, and considering the western world is the part of the world that leads in industry, it is only proper that it is first in the race to attempt to prevent and/or correct possible effects the environment might suffer.

I find the modern environmentalists especially the organized groups such as Green Peace to be irresponsibly alarmist. Every statement from them is about disaster, doom, and gloom. They want to scare people and they have.

I agree. Current data is not enough to base a conclusion that the future will be filled with doom and gloom on the environmental front, however I can see the current effects right now. But I do think these groups play an important role in balancing out ideas on environmental issues. Groups at both ends of the issue help us define some middle ground.

As far as the bears, get a gun.

I've got one thanks.