Reading mode: Light Dark

Alaskan oil drilling interests sink photography exhibit

Go to last post
http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/articles/greenpeace.html

Read the whole article. But, the fourth paragraph is:

"Then, he and his colleagues decided to do something totally unorthodox. Inspired by articles in Executive Intelligence Review and 21st Century magazines, Camargo got in touch with the Icelandic journalist Magnus Gudmundsson, who had made two films documenting in graphic detail the lies of Greenpeace. He was stunned by what the films showed of the self-righteous Greenpeace group. Greenpeace had even staged the grisly killing of a baby seal just to make a fundraising film that purported to show how bad fishermen were killing baby seals."
Robert P Miller said:
Give me a link to THAT one. I know GreenPeace is weird, but that
slipped below my radar.
Click to expand...
--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise
 
Then again maybe the troll that started this thread and the troll that believes that George W. cares about photography exhibits (that really is bizarre) are just getting an answer to what THEY started.

I would be extremely happy to go back to the subject of cameras and photography. So let's drop it.
Stefan1967 said:
Maybe y'all might want to watch your stereotyping with words like
"tree huggers" etc. You could very well be alienating a large
portion of the DP review audience. Maybe you don't care....but I
feel a bit alienated, and I'm no tree hugger. However, I do feel
that we owe a huge debt of gratitude to the environmentalist
movement. Let's not paint all those that put nature before people
and profits as "tree huggers". Some of us are very rational people
that take things on an issue by issue basis. It would be nice if
others could try that approach as opposed to assuming the worst and
reflexively lashing out.

I do find it ironic that a forum of photographers seems to be full
of conservative, anti-regulatory types. Maybe none of you are
nature photographers or spend much time in National Parks and
wilderness regions.

Personally I don't have much tolerance for radicals be they from
the left or the right. But I do feel very strongly about nature and
am saddened by the callousness that some of you appear to be
showing for the environment and those that choose to protect it.

Anyway, as a side note, I might actually start an OT thread where
you could vote yea or nay for ANWR drilling. A minimum of debate,
just a tally of our forum community.
billtoo said:
Photographer Subhankar Banerjee spent four seasons in the Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge and his work was good enough to get him an
exhibit on the main floor of the Smithsonian - that is until his
photos were used on the senate floor to support the case against
drilling in Alaska. Subsequent to the senate "show" the exhibit
was moved from the main floor of the Smithsonian downstairs to a
room behind the cafeteria. Smithsonian officials say they decided
the photos would be displayed better downstairs.

From the L.A. Times 4/29
--
billtoo
camera - One-D, favorite lens 70-twohundred/2.8 IS
http://www.pbase.com/billtoo
Click to expand...
--
http://www.pbase.com/stefanm
Click to expand...
 
Wiley Denson said:
Before anyone gets on his high horse about how bad exploration
there would be it would be useful to actually have been there
during all of the seasons of the year. The place is just an arctic
desert, and 99% of the pictures shown depicting the place were
actually taken somewhere else.
Click to expand...
I have photographed in ANWR and know many other photographers who have too. I would say that most of the photos I see in reputable publications (i.e. National Geographic, National Wildlife, Smithsonian etc) claiming to be from ANWR are actually from ANWR.

I also know of at least one nature cinematographer that has made lots of money from the oil companies for filming all types wildlife of wildlife existing next to the Alaska pipeline and haul road.
 
I can't say whether drilling there is a good move or not, on the one hand drilling with todays technology and under U.S. regulation would be rather low impact, enviromentally speaking. On the other hand the amount of oil that is there is not all that great.

I do know that a lot of political activists hide behind enviromentalism and only complain about drilling in the U.S.

If there will be drilling somewhere, a given, then drilling under the regulations of the EPA and a watchdog press is better for the enviroment than letting the drilling be carried out by third world dictators who could care less for the planet and shoot reporters who try to uncover embarrasing activity! Not to mention putting money into the U.S. economy instead of the hands of people who often fund terrorist activity.

Unless of course the enviroment only counts if it's within the borders of the U.S.....I didn't think so....

I just had to jump in because the initial post was not informative but inflamatory. More like a democrat hack picking a topic that plays well, photography in a photography forum, hiding his agenda under the enviromental issue so he can take a shot at an administration he doesn't like.
It's not like this thread had a chance of being anything else.
 
But as amazing as it sounds, there are a lot of red neck photographers around here, and they tend to be more "vocal", so its better for your own sanity to stick with photography here...

Alfred
 
on this board, just look at all the cat pics. :o)
Stefan1967 said:
Maybe y'all might want to watch your stereotyping with words like
"tree huggers" etc. You could very well be alienating a large
portion of the DP review audience. Maybe you don't care....but I
feel a bit alienated, and I'm no tree hugger. However, I do feel
that we owe a huge debt of gratitude to the environmentalist
movement. Let's not paint all those that put nature before people
and profits as "tree huggers". Some of us are very rational people
that take things on an issue by issue basis. It would be nice if
others could try that approach as opposed to assuming the worst and
reflexively lashing out.

I do find it ironic that a forum of photographers seems to be full
of conservative, anti-regulatory types. Maybe none of you are
nature photographers or spend much time in National Parks and
wilderness regions.

Personally I don't have much tolerance for radicals be they from
the left or the right. But I do feel very strongly about nature and
am saddened by the callousness that some of you appear to be
showing for the environment and those that choose to protect it.

Anyway, as a side note, I might actually start an OT thread where
you could vote yea or nay for ANWR drilling. A minimum of debate,
just a tally of our forum community.
billtoo said:
Photographer Subhankar Banerjee spent four seasons in the Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge and his work was good enough to get him an
exhibit on the main floor of the Smithsonian - that is until his
photos were used on the senate floor to support the case against
drilling in Alaska. Subsequent to the senate "show" the exhibit
was moved from the main floor of the Smithsonian downstairs to a
room behind the cafeteria. Smithsonian officials say they decided
the photos would be displayed better downstairs.

From the L.A. Times 4/29
--
billtoo
camera - One-D, favorite lens 70-twohundred/2.8 IS
http://www.pbase.com/billtoo
Click to expand...
--
http://www.pbase.com/stefanm
Click to expand...
--
Tom
 
Actually there's a fairly sizeable amount of oil there. However, the rate at which it would actually produce (and the timing involved to get it online) wouldn't be a huge chunk of our daily oil usage in the US.

But, there is no one single play around that will make a huge dent in that. It takes a lot of smaller ones. Ones that many people just don't want to see developed.

They're lucky they don't put ME in charge of things. I wouldn's sell California, for example, any oil or gas or products derived from them. They could import all that they need (minus their own production) from the Middle East and refine it themselves, in state.
Will Robinson said:
On the other
hand the amount of oil that is there is not all that great.
Click to expand...
--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise
 
DavidP said:
Don't get me started on her. ;)

Most people don't realize just how few actually visit ANWR, anyway.
It's about 1000 - 1500 per year. That's it.

And of course, few ever bother to notice the BENEFITS of man
showing up. For example, lots of wildlife shows up around where
the pipeline has been laid. Which would actually enable MORE
people to see the wildlife, and photograph it.

Of course, that's not the real goal of the "tree huggers".
Click to expand...
Wow! You are right we are always a huge benefit to the environment!
 
DavidP said:
http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/articles/greenpeace.html

Read the whole article. But, the fourth paragraph is:

"Then, he and his colleagues decided to do something totally
unorthodox. Inspired by articles in Executive Intelligence Review
and 21st Century magazines, Camargo got in touch with the Icelandic
journalist Magnus Gudmundsson, who had made two films documenting
in graphic detail the lies of Greenpeace. He was stunned by what
the films showed of the self-righteous Greenpeace group. Greenpeace
had even staged the grisly killing of a baby seal just to make a
fundraising film that purported to show how bad fishermen were
killing baby seals."
Click to expand...
Had to read some other articles on that site to realize that they are also WHACKED!
Sun Myung Moon controls the world according to one article!

Sheesh!
 
http://www.furcommission.com/resource/Resources/Jan99.pdf

"Mid-1980s: Greenpeace Australia distributes film of two men mutilating live kangaroos as part of a campaign to ban 'roo products in Europe. Greenpeace only withdraws the film after a court convicts the men for breaking the law, and concludes that they were paid to do so by the film crew."

(just for starters)

--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise
 
Whatever happened to State rights and "by the people, for the people?" If most of the Alaskans supports the drilling, why are the Senators from South Dakota or from New England or from any other state besides Alaska putting their nose where it doesn't belong? This decision should be left to the Alaskans because it is their land and it will affect their lives and they know what is best for them. If they want the drilling, then so be it, if they don't want the drilling, I will support them 100% also. Let the people decide.
Stefan1967 said:
Maybe y'all might want to watch your stereotyping with words like
"tree huggers" etc. You could very well be alienating a large
portion of the DP review audience. Maybe you don't care....but I
feel a bit alienated, and I'm no tree hugger. However, I do feel
that we owe a huge debt of gratitude to the environmentalist
movement. Let's not paint all those that put nature before people
and profits as "tree huggers". Some of us are very rational people
that take things on an issue by issue basis. It would be nice if
others could try that approach as opposed to assuming the worst and
reflexively lashing out.

I do find it ironic that a forum of photographers seems to be full
of conservative, anti-regulatory types. Maybe none of you are
nature photographers or spend much time in National Parks and
wilderness regions.

Personally I don't have much tolerance for radicals be they from
the left or the right. But I do feel very strongly about nature and
am saddened by the callousness that some of you appear to be
showing for the environment and those that choose to protect it.

Anyway, as a side note, I might actually start an OT thread where
you could vote yea or nay for ANWR drilling. A minimum of debate,
just a tally of our forum community.
billtoo said:
Photographer Subhankar Banerjee spent four seasons in the Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge and his work was good enough to get him an
exhibit on the main floor of the Smithsonian - that is until his
photos were used on the senate floor to support the case against
drilling in Alaska. Subsequent to the senate "show" the exhibit
was moved from the main floor of the Smithsonian downstairs to a
room behind the cafeteria. Smithsonian officials say they decided
the photos would be displayed better downstairs.

From the L.A. Times 4/29
--
billtoo
camera - One-D, favorite lens 70-twohundred/2.8 IS
http://www.pbase.com/billtoo
Click to expand...
--
http://www.pbase.com/stefanm
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top