Did Greenpeace's Controversial Stunt at Ancient Site Cross the Line?

  • Thread starter Thread starter nsaspook
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Thinking
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
Sign up Log in
11 replies · 2K views
Physics news on Phys.org

Discussion

Humanity is littered with lost souls like these - people who believe they're on truth's side. Such certitude nearly always results in clusters like this one.
 
B4a2ed3IAAA6j1i.png

Footprints?
http://elcomercio.pe/peru/pais/line...s-greenpeace-son-irreparables-noticia-1777541
 
Last edited:
Who gave Greenpeace the right to defile this pristine archeological treasure?
 
Lol. I watched the video and thought, what's so bad about this, looks kinda cool. And then I saw the link to the NYT article. That kinda changed the equation. Obviously some bone-head maneuver unless they knew what they were doing. I sure hope they didn't.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Silicon Waffle
It's not stupid. It's evil. There's a difference.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: mheslep
No, stupid is all it takes. Evil actually implies intelligence.
 
Aaronvan said:
Could have achieved the same thing with Photoshop.

Some say that any publicity is good publicity. They did get their name in the papers after all. (If they thought this that far through then they are evil after all.)
 
Vanadium 50 said:
It's not stupid. It's evil. There's a difference.
Robert J. Hanlon said:
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
Hanlon's[/PLAIN] razor.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Algr said:
Some say that any publicity is good publicity. They did get their name in the papers after all. (If they thought this that far through then they are evil after all.)

Well, when you're Greenpeace and your brand ostensibly stands for "conservation," then there is something called bad publicity, and I think this qualifies.