Plastic bag ban has suprisingly lots of opponents. (Seattle, Spokane: house, organic)

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by eskercurve

The moment someone publishes data from NOAA or the EPA, or a scholarly publication like Nature, with hard science in it, then I'll consider it.

Why don't you go see it with your own eyes? Like I said earlier, stop by a local wildlife rehab center. They're almost always looking for volunteers. When you see, WITH YOUR OWN EYES animals come in with all sorts of injuries 80% of which are man related, what agenda is being pushed then?

[eskercurve]

Originally Posted by Ancalagon

You mean like this:

Marine Debris Program - Marine Debris Info

Or this:

Micro-Plastic Pollution in San Juans’ Waters « Orcas Issues: News & Views

Very good! Thank you Ancalagon. Now is finally some science behind the rhetoric!

And to address Gentoo's position too ...

The byproducts of our modern world permeate everything, so I find it hard to believe that changing one product for another will have a tangible effect on the welfare of nature. Verily, human interdiction in the environment is reprehensible, but such is the byproduct of our own being. We strive for an easier life, one not bound by the rigors of self-preservation demanded by nature. It started with agriculture. Would you claim that the razing of grasses and native life in the Nile delta to make way for farmland of wheat and other crop was a bad thing?

Whether the technology be fossil fuels or nuclear, plastic or paper, digital or analog, our impact on the world is felt one way or another, and changing one effect for another has no meaning. Unless you could prove that there is a way to not "interfere" with nature whilst being a part of it, I'd say such efforts are meaningless. So long as humans exist, we will alter nature, one way or another, and have byproducts.

[Freebird2007]

And another thing that really annoys me about do gooder wannabe environmentalists, instead of actually being proactive like say pick up a piece of trash instead of walking by it, they call for stupid inconvenience bills like the plastic bag ban. If you think plastic bags are killing whales GO PICK ONE UP AND RECYCLE IT! Just because you don't use it don't mean someone else won't.

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by eskercurve

Very good! Thank you Ancalagon. Now is finally some science behind the rhetoric!

And to address Gentoo's position too ...

The byproducts of our modern world permeate everything, so I find it hard to believe that changing one product for another will have a tangible effect on the welfare of nature. Verily, human interdiction in the environment is reprehensible, but such is the byproduct of our own being. We strive for an easier life, one not bound by the rigors of self-preservation demanded by nature. It started with agriculture. Would you claim that the razing of grasses and native life in the Nile delta to make way for farmland of wheat and other crop was a bad thing?
.

With all due respect, this is not a very informed response. Most wildlife can be surprisingly resilient as long as they are not somehow physically impaired. Plastic physically impairs wildlife. I see no logical reason for being against the ban other than those who do oppose it simply son't want to be inconvenienced themselves. That IMO is an unacceptable reason.

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by Freebird2007

And another thing that really annoys me about do gooder wannabe environmentalists, instead of actually being proactive like say pick up a piece of trash instead of walking by it, they call for stupid inconvenience bills like the plastic bag ban. If you think plastic bags are killing whales GO PICK ONE UP AND RECYCLE IT! Just because you don't use it don't mean someone else won't.

How do you know we're not doing just that? How do you know the person you see walking by it is one of those "do gooders" you mentioned? There are beach cleanups and shoreline cleanups many "do gooders" participate in and many tons of trash, yes tons are picked up from these efforts every year. Then there are the wildlife rescue centers I keep mentioning. Most of the people who work there are volunteers. I volunteered for years in high school until I needed a paying job. You have no idea what you're talking about.

[Ancalagon]

Originally Posted by eskercurve

Very good! Thank you Ancalagon. Now is finally some science behind the rhetoric!

The science has been there for a while, you just had to have it shoved in your face to recognize as it doesn't jive with your ideology.

And yet I see that even when presented with facts you refuse to shift your position.

Originally Posted by eskercurve

Whether the technology be fossil fuels or nuclear, plastic or paper, digital or analog, our impact on the world is felt one way or another, and changing one effect for another has no meaning. Unless you could prove that there is a way to not "interfere" with nature whilst being a part of it, I'd say such efforts are meaningless. So long as humans exist, we will alter nature, one way or another, and have byproducts.

Wow! Talk about Rationalization! B/c both have effects, there is no difference between them?

Here, let me shoot you with a Airsoft gun and then with a .357 (I mean, both have an effect right, so there is no point to substituting one for the other) and then you try and sell us that line of BS again.

[Ultrarunner]

I have an aunt that always does her marketing with a wicker basket... a few times over the years she has been asked by store personnel to take a look inside...

One time, it was a camera store... way back when they had them... guess they were worried a 60 year old was going to steal cameras.

Another time she was making several stops and had to produce the receipt for items she had just bought at another store at the same center.

I guess the same could apply at shops posting signs saying no backpacks or duffel bags?

The basket works for her because she only buys a few items at a time and takes the bus to do her marketing.

I can easily see circumstances where the checkout line will come to a standstill.... A person might not have enough bags to carry everything in one trip... one market I use to go to had shopping cart brakes that prevented the carts from going beyond the front of the store... so taking the cart to your car would not be possible.

[eskercurve]

Originally Posted by Ancalagon

The science has been there for a while, you just had to have it shoved in your face to recognize as it doesn't jive with your ideology.

And yet I see that even when presented with facts you refuse to shift your position.

To the contrary. It made me think awhile ...

Wow! Talk about Rationalization! B/c both have effects, there is no difference between them?

Here, let me shoot you with a Airsoft gun and then with a .357 (I mean, both have an effect right, so there is no point to substituting one for the other) and then you try and sell us that line of BS again.

It isn't rationalization. One thing that a lot of people with knee-jerk reactions to issues with the environment is that they typically don't take the time to gather data.

While there's plenty of data, apparently, saying how bad plastic is, we don't have much data on how much worse or better, relativistically, other packaging is. That's all I'm saying. There should be a study. That's it.

Action without the data to back it up on what the best path forward is is meaningless. 10 years from now we'll be saying how terrible the manufacturing process is / how bad old, dirty "reusable" bags are for the environment and go on a crusade against them. Let's take the time to do it right instead of just banning something outright without regard to consequences.

Scientists can in simple systems deduce by induction and by contrarian posits. In highly complex, nonlinear systems like the environment, with multiple feedback paths, taking action by saying "something is bad" and stopping it doesn't always make sense. I think there's been so much inarticulate hot air blowing around that people have lost good sense.

Though that's the general direction of people in this country nowadays ... *sigh* ... whatever.

[Frankums]

Perhaps Seattle dislikes the ban since SF and Los Angeles have passed them?

As for THAT storm, the roads were sanded plenty and still everyone's livelihood suffered... even the evil corporations. I think a whole bunch of folks here loved it. Nickels actually had to look truly concerned, rather than overly so, over the process that looked into the ways to safely deliver salt if another 10-day shutdown event ever occured.

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by Ultrarunner

I have an aunt that always does her marketing with a wicker basket... a few times over the years she has been asked by store personnel to take a look inside...

One time, it was a camera store... way back when they had them... guess they were worried a 60 year old was going to steal cameras.

Another time she was making several stops and had to produce the receipt for items she had just bought at another store at the same center.

I guess the same could apply at shops posting signs saying no backpacks or duffel bags?

The basket works for her because she only buys a few items at a time and takes the bus to do her marketing.

I can easily see circumstances where the checkout line will come to a standstill.... A person might not have enough bags to carry everything in one trip... one market I use to go to had shopping cart brakes that prevented the carts from going beyond the front of the store... so taking the cart to your car would not be possible.

Those sound like store policy issues that should be taken up with the company.