Despite environmentalists calling for people to Go Green, Reduce Your Carbon Footprint or Reduce, Recycle, Re-use, their carbon footprint is no different than anyone else. According to Russia Today, that is the results of a research study published in the journal Biological Conservation from scientists at the Cambridge University.
Scientists discovered that environmentalists scored about the same in terms of their overall environmental impact than non-activists and, despite recycling more and eating less meat, even education did not affect the overall behavior of the people tested either. The study was able to gather over 700 people and broke them down into three groups: conservationists, economists and doctors. Overall, the carbon footprint of conservationists was still lower than that of economists and medics.
Each of the four researchers who participated in the research for the manuscript are conservation scientists. Each of them admit to not only having seven children between them but also took over thirty flights and consumed a number of meals that contain meat a week before the study was submitted for publication. Though denying they were hypocrites two scientists admitted that environmentalists should lead by example.
However, it isn’t so much leading by example, recognizing hypocrisy or credibility that is the issue. Environmentalists are well aware of their ethical inconsistencies but, in their minds, they are not acting hypocritical at all. What the central issue is, is the case being made by greens to reduce people’s carbon footprint. The environmentalist movement has an apocalyptic vision based on the Catholic doctrine of original sin coupled with ideas on how to attain salvation based on the morality of self sacrifice (i.e. altruism).
Calls for halting or scaling back human activity is based on a religious-oriented view of original sin and sacrifice. In short, you cannot live without your carbon footprint. Attempts to erase it is symbolic of wanting to end life itself.