MiukuMac, on 18 May 2012 - 12:45, said:
I personally don't hate Greenpeace but I feel that their activity is inefficient and ultimately pointless.
Other less vocal groups have done much more for the environment and eventually companies and governments are forced to invest and develop more efficient energy sources in face of the sheer reality that the resources are slowly dwindling and cannot be sustained as the population grows. Greenpeace tend to claim that due to their activity companies and individuals are taking steps to improve their environment but in reality we were doing it on our own long before they came around or did anything about it.
In short, they're making a lot of noise but have very little to show for it.
Them making a fuss is still better than nothing, in my opinion
It still drums up interest in the cause. Of course, if other organisations are doing more for the cause, it's up to the donator to decide who best to donate to, but everyone should be thankful that Greenpeace are at least campaigning and protesting, in my opinion.
FloatingFatMan, on 18 May 2012 - 12:49, said:
It's not their message, it's their messengers and the methods they use.
Which messengers and what methods do you disagree with? I feel that as long as no one is being harmed, everything is fine. But you might be able to provide examples of methods that aren't fine.