The second (public) reply from Greenpeace to my email...
Dear Peter,
I would like to apologise unreservedly for the technical error which caused your email to take thirty years to be delivered. For my younger readers, I should explain that a 2CV was a primitive form of motorised transport popular in the middle of the last century. If any Greenpeace supporters still own one of them, they may be interested to know that Beaulieu Motor Museum is currently holding an exhibition of 2CVs, including the original 1939 prototype, and so it probably is a very good time to sell. Remember who tipped you off, eh?
Ok, so we can now say with certainty that Greenpeace activists have problems understanding irony
Regarding 'where the real problems are', whilst aviation is the fastest growing source of greenhouse gas emissions, road transport will continue to be a far larger source for a good few years yet.
A man who obviously takes time over his research... Energy Bulletin reckons that pollution caused by flying is, a its current level, causing twice the damage that cars and power stations on the ground do. I'm not even going to go in to how much more is being done already by car firms while aircraft operators still fly 30 year old planes!
Still, if it makes you feel any better, I was acquitted of charges arising from an aviation protest last week. Rather spookily, the exact same charges are currently being threatened by a certain ex-membership secretary...
Hmm, no it doesn't, because given the way Greenpeace usually make their point heard I'm pretty sure it would have been ill-conceived, excessively vicious and a right pain in the arse for passengers and the poor suckers that work for the people causing all the problems
Finally, your hurtful and wounding accusation that I write like a 'foot-stamping stroppy teen'.
Guilty as charged on that one, I suppose.
Something to be proud of?
I do try to sound mature, serious and sophisticated, Peter, honestly I do. Sometimes, when I'm writing about the biggest mass-extinction in history, the accidental genocide we're inflicting on Africa or the destruction of every coastal city and community in the world, I really feel that I'm getting there, but when I'm writing about the Mitsubishi Warrior ("It's Hard") or a Range Rover that can't go off-road, I just regress horribly. Sorry. In future I shall model myself more closely on the restrained, thoroughly adult work of professional motoring journalists.
Right, so it's ok to slag people off and not actually know what you're talking about so long as it can only have an impact on the method that most people use to get around, to work, get kids from school and so on.
I have no problem with people taking the piss, but only when it's done with wit and humour... not "he's a wanker... HAH fu*king HAH"
If you can send me a piece about the Warrior ("It's Hard") which doesn't sound just a bit juvenile, I shall gladly post it as a useful example for all the aspiring Motoring Journalists and Editors out there.
Best wishes,
Graham
Conclusion: Narrow-minded, mediocre journalist needs to get a clue and do some research.
I would have sent this to Greenpeace direct, but seen as they didn't have the common courtesy to let me know that they'd be lambasting my perfectly reasonably voiced concerns in such public fashion... I couldn't be arsed.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by MrKipling
