Didn't they already apologize for saying that Apple computers are toxic, saying that the results of the test did not match up with the sensationalist claims they made beforehand? And yet they still have that page up? Weird. Though I'm all for the environment, I don't believe in sensationalism ESPECIALLY when it deals with what's supposed to be science and scientific method.
Agreed, but by focusing on Apple they cause them a great deal of damage in the consumer marketplace.I'm not criticizing Greenpeace for their campaign, but it's unfair to focus on one company. If they just focused on HP, it would be just as unfair.
@ bitcloudMaybe Apple doesn't know how to make the same high quality computers in an environmentally friendly way. Maybe they are doing the best job they can do already. We already know that Apple computers aren't as bad an Greenpeace's initial knee-jerk accusation said they were.If Greenpeace is sincere in their pursuit of saving the environment instead of simply using it to gain money and power, why don't they use some of their vast resources to come up with a solution and then offer that solution to Apple in a friendly and helpful manner instead of just pissing and moaning all the time?
Apple use PVC as an aesthetic feature of their products. It is the reflective white plastic that is in question, which is why they are the target of the campaign over other computers which are often metal, and sometimes plastic (but not exclusively plastic, and not exclusively PVC)So there's no requirement for Apple to use PVC for them to continue to give us their great products.They have also got a large number of alternatives to PVC:PVC Alternatives:<a class="user" href="http://archive.greenpeace.org/toxics/pvcdatabase/">http://archive.greenpeace.org/toxics/pvcdatabase/</a>It might seem to be a mountain out of a molehill, but we can no longer claim ignorance in the damage we do to the environment by locking up these elements into solid states and volotile states. We need ZERO emmissions and ZERO pollutants... It's every company and every individuals responsibility to work toward this.
Greenpeace has an even darker side they convince countries with thousands if not millions of people dying everday because of hunger to not use Genetically Engineered crops, that are designed to be more bug resistant, less prone to diseases, and yield higher yields.They do this with bulls**t like:Genetically Engineered crops are a mix of plant and animal DNA, while scientists do somethings experiment with mixing plant and animal DNA its for education only, not for comerical output. The problem is they give misinformation to consumers and hungry nations telling them that organic is the only way to go, its not, without technology even more people would die of hunger every year.Bulls**t! Eat This: <a class="user" href="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7592468947754427068">http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7592468947754427068</a>
You know, if greenpeace took all the money wasted on these smear campaigns and instead used it to buy up land, say in the south american or african rain forests, or even here in the US, they'd be doing a lot more good then what they are.
I think it is a really(!) cheap trick to use a company's popularity to get traffic yourself! Why not concentrate your efforts on WORSE companies than a simple computer producing company like Apple, or Acer or ...? Is this payback because one of their computers in the office broke down? :-)For Greenpeace two words: get real!
Is it just me. But I dont really understand why the rest of you Apple fanboys doesn't want Apple to get better? It's not like greenpeace are talking s**t about Apple in every way on that site. They also love Apple and they want it to become better. Why is it so hard for you guys to understand that Apple is bad at this area and really needs improving here. Sure Apple may not be the worst company in the world, but come on, thats not what this is about. I love Apple and I support this move from Greenpeace.
greatblackowlSep 27, 2006
Didn't they already apologize for saying that Apple computers are toxic, saying that the results of the test did not match up with the sensationalist claims they made beforehand? And yet they still have that page up? Weird. Though I'm all for the environment, I don't believe in sensationalism ESPECIALLY when it deals with what's supposed to be science and scientific method.
bitcloudSep 27, 2006
Do you have any examples of people profiteering from Greenpeace? I'm not saying they don't.. maybe you know something I don't.
luckyjonnySep 27, 2006
Eeeeexcellent. Let the Apple backlash begin.
gagravaarSep 27, 2006
Agreed, but by focusing on Apple they cause them a great deal of damage in the consumer marketplace.I'm not criticizing Greenpeace for their campaign, but it's unfair to focus on one company. If they just focused on HP, it would be just as unfair.
herolintSep 27, 2006
@ bitcloudMaybe Apple doesn't know how to make the same high quality computers in an environmentally friendly way. Maybe they are doing the best job they can do already. We already know that Apple computers aren't as bad an Greenpeace's initial knee-jerk accusation said they were.If Greenpeace is sincere in their pursuit of saving the environment instead of simply using it to gain money and power, why don't they use some of their vast resources to come up with a solution and then offer that solution to Apple in a friendly and helpful manner instead of just pissing and moaning all the time?
bitcloudSep 27, 2006
Apple use PVC as an aesthetic feature of their products. It is the reflective white plastic that is in question, which is why they are the target of the campaign over other computers which are often metal, and sometimes plastic (but not exclusively plastic, and not exclusively PVC)So there's no requirement for Apple to use PVC for them to continue to give us their great products.They have also got a large number of alternatives to PVC:PVC Alternatives:<a class="user" href="http://archive.greenpeace.org/toxics/pvcdatabase/">http://archive.greenpeace.org/toxics/pvcdatabase/</a>It might seem to be a mountain out of a molehill, but we can no longer claim ignorance in the damage we do to the environment by locking up these elements into solid states and volotile states. We need ZERO emmissions and ZERO pollutants... It's every company and every individuals responsibility to work toward this.
neozeedSep 27, 2006
its all about the ipod. Not to mention dead apple keyboards stick out, where as all the others just blend in the beige. This thing is just silly.
blueboiksSep 27, 2006
Greenpeace has an even darker side they convince countries with thousands if not millions of people dying everday because of hunger to not use Genetically Engineered crops, that are designed to be more bug resistant, less prone to diseases, and yield higher yields.They do this with bulls**t like:Genetically Engineered crops are a mix of plant and animal DNA, while scientists do somethings experiment with mixing plant and animal DNA its for education only, not for comerical output. The problem is they give misinformation to consumers and hungry nations telling them that organic is the only way to go, its not, without technology even more people would die of hunger every year.Bulls**t! Eat This: <a class="user" href="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7592468947754427068">http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7592468947754427068</a>
richiestang78Sep 27, 2006
Im all for the enviroment but Greenpeace needs to realx alittle, they just are flat out silly at times
dissidentSep 28, 2006
You know, if greenpeace took all the money wasted on these smear campaigns and instead used it to buy up land, say in the south american or african rain forests, or even here in the US, they'd be doing a lot more good then what they are.
boogieSep 28, 2006
I think it is a really(!) cheap trick to use a company's popularity to get traffic yourself! Why not concentrate your efforts on WORSE companies than a simple computer producing company like Apple, or Acer or ...? Is this payback because one of their computers in the office broke down? :-)For Greenpeace two words: get real!
karlskronaJan 10, 2007
Is it just me. But I dont really understand why the rest of you Apple fanboys doesn't want Apple to get better? It's not like greenpeace are talking s**t about Apple in every way on that site. They also love Apple and they want it to become better. Why is it so hard for you guys to understand that Apple is bad at this area and really needs improving here. Sure Apple may not be the worst company in the world, but come on, thats not what this is about. I love Apple and I support this move from Greenpeace.