This is a valid, interesting and important topic, but I'd be interested to
see this discussion enter the realm of fact and historical context rather
than the micro-tempus context one usually encounters. Factor in the fact
that nature, without the help of mankind, has eliminated more species of
flora and fauna than humans could ever hope to. How does this fact impact
such a discussion? Further, how can such a discussion have any objective
meaning when it serves little reason beyond furthering the rhetoric of this
or that environmental philosophy?

Nature is capable of holding its own against any force; there is none
greater. Suggestions that "we're" destroying nature by this or that
activity can only be made by denying the context of nature and the history
of the world. Each such argument is merely a prescription and a
proscription for one or another facet of nature. Do you really believe
you're arguing an absolute? Why?

Kind regards,
Andy Rutledge
www.andyrutledge.com/
zone 8, Texas

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Lewis"
snip
...I do recall someone nattering loudly at me some time ago when I
noted that collectible trees were gone in Japan thanks to the
bonsai "industry." Prolly, some of the same folks over here who
collect and seem to even make a living out of it who are claiming
that it would/could never happen here.
But, enough. People who don't want to know won't listen . . .
Jim Lewis

************************************************** ******************************
++++Sponsored, in part, by Jarbas Godoy ++++
************************************************** ******************************
-- The IBC HOME PAGE & FAQ: http://www.internetbonsaiclub.org/ --
+++++ Questions? Help? e-mail +++++