jan.vindheim@gmail.com (Jan  Bojer Vindheim) wrote:
>Floyd L. Davidson <floyd@barrow.com> wrote:
>> jan.vindheim@gmail.com (Jan  Bojer Vindheim) wrote:
>> >Floyd L. Davidson <floyd@barrow.com> wrote:
>> >> jan.vindheim@gmail.com (Jan  Bojer Vindheim) wrote:
>> >> >Floyd L. Davidson <floyd@barrow.com> wrote:
>> >> >> How was it off the mark?  What do Greenpeace and the SSCS do,
>> >> >> other than collect huge sums of money?
>> >> >Why dont you take a loo at the greenpeace websites for an answer to
>> >> >that one ?
>> >>
>> >> You think they are going to advertize it on their web page???
>> > Of course.  Their  webpages are full of information about their various
>> >projects around the world. Campaigning on sea mammals is just a fraction
>> >of their amazing  range of acitvity
>>
>> Your logic is astounding.  No wonder you can't get the rest
>> of this straight.
>
>You ask what greenpeace does, except collect money,
>I ask you to see their webpages for informationm on their various
>campaigns. What is illogical about that ?

Their web page is propaganda aimed at increasing contributions.

It doesn't show how much goes to "administrative" or "fund
raising" costs, compared to the programs they advertise.

Pointing to their propaganda as proof that they are not a money
collection agency is illogical.

>> >But it is *not* an objective *fact* that gathering money is their main
>> >purpose.  Moneymakimng does not take up most of their time, and
>> >certainly is not formeost in their minds.
>> >
>> >Youre statement on this point is bullshit
>>
>> Which you don't seem to be able too either understand or refute.
>
>I refute your claim by pointing to the number of projects Greenpeace is
>engaged in.

That doesn't refute anything.  It has *nothing* to do with whether
they spend more on collecting money that anything else.  All it does
is suggest that you, like many others, are suckered by a well
financed PR organization that is very effective at raising money.

The point was and *still* is, that the only thing they actually
*accomplish* with regularity is funding.

>Your namecalling  is certainly no proof of the validity of your
>arguments, such as they are.

I've pointed out that what you have *said* is illogical.  I
haven't called *you* any names other than Jan Bojer Vindheim,
which is what you call yourself.  If you think calling you by
your chosen name reduces the validity of my arguments, then once
again I'll point out that your logic is not valid.  But we could
already see that from the other arguments you've presented.

-- 
Floyd L. Davidson           <http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)                         floyd@barrow.com