planetary scrutiny

June 29, 2005 10:02 AM

“Negative eco-tourism from orbit.”Sprol shows the visual macroscopic effects of the decisions and behavior of our society. Since previous generations have not had the advantage of this perspective, it is our obligation to use it wisely.
posted by crunchland (20 comments total)

The "slideshow" underneath seems to have been writen by a loony. Points of fact are wrong, and matters of opinion half crazed. I'm not sure what the point of a bunch of pictures of log barges proves.
posted by Keith Talent at 10:51 AM on June 29, 2005

It's an interesting idea with a lot of potential, but as Keith Talent pointed out there are some photos that don't really show much. I'm thinking in part of the fish farm pictures too that just zoom out from a fish farm without showing any visible damage to the environment. I'm sure there is some, but the photos (which seem to be the unique part of the site) don't make a convicing case.

One would think that showing copper mines or clear-cutting would be more effective.
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 10:54 AM on June 29, 2005

Still, a cool idea.
posted by stbalbach at 10:54 AM on June 29, 2005

Still a cool idea if it actually proved something, or the pictures were used to actually substantiate the point.
posted by Keith Talent at 10:59 AM on June 29, 2005

Thanks crunchland.
I loved the site.
Spent way too much time there!
posted by nofundy at 11:28 AM on June 29, 2005

Let's send more rockets into space!!!
posted by klangklangston at 12:10 PM on June 29, 2005

there are some photos that don't really show much.

No there aren't. There are some photos that don't show a bloody obvious hole in the ground, framed to look as bad as possible. That is a good thing. I find it very well done, a good way to illustrate the text. Whether he gets the facts right, I have no idea, but I really like the presentation and writing.

Points of fact are wrong

Uh... if you find it worth saying so, you might want to be a bit more specific. You're not going to convince anyone by just saying "It's all wrong". That has pretty much the opposite effect of what you intend.
posted by sfenders at 12:34 PM on June 29, 2005

Amateurishly written articles about the environment accompanied by satellite photos. What's the big deal? I feel like I'm missing something.
posted by tippiedog at 12:43 PM on June 29, 2005

Uh... if you find it worth saying so, you might want to be a bit more specific.

The felled trees are floated to the mill down the Fraser river.

Err, actually they go up river.

In Canada, the timber industry is subsidized by the government

Uhh, not according to anyone but a handful of protectionist southern senators

"Today, the province’s timber industry survives, but it is in a state of crisis.

Umm no. In fact work is ongoing building the largest sawmill in the world in the interior. Pulp and Paper is healthy. Employment is high.

Every paragraph has a statement that anyone even semi-familiar with BC logging could argue. But even worse are the thinnly veiled scare tactics. Giant piles of sawdust (well duh) and logs being hazards to navigation in the Fraser?
posted by Keith Talent at 12:50 PM on June 29, 2005

What does this have to do with the negative impacts of 'eco-tourism'? Or am I just seriously misreading the intent of the title?
posted by Kickstart70 at 1:01 PM on June 29, 2005

Hey Keith...where is that sawmill going?

FWIW, I'm in process of moving from Richmond to Quesnel, where my wife and I own 5 acres of beautiful land.
posted by Kickstart70 at 1:02 PM on June 29, 2005

Thanks, crunchland, for posting this.

Keith, sorry that you hate the site so much to post comment after comment about it.

I'd just like to point out that there is an area for comments under each article, where readers are free to refute the ideas presented in the commentary.

Contrary to Keith's opinion, most of the substantive facts on the site are correct and we go to a lot of trouble to ensure that they are, including citing references to credible sources for where the information comes from.

There are scores of other articles besides the one about the timber industry in British Columbia.

Again, thanks for reading Sprol!
posted by Automatt at 1:24 PM on June 29, 2005

Keith, sorry that you hate the site so much to post comment after comment about it.

If somebody disagrees with somebody else's opinion about the site they must "hate it"? Since when was three comments "comment after comment?"

If the accuracy of the reporting on sprol mirrors the slanted presentation of data in this thread then I'm going to have to agree more with Keith Talent.
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 1:46 PM on June 29, 2005

If somebody disagrees with somebody else's opinion about the site they must "hate it"?

When that opinion is mostly personal attacks, yes.
posted by Automatt at 2:22 PM on June 29, 2005

One of the great things about the internet in general, and Metafilter in particular, is occasionally, the sniping grousers end up being confronted by the very people they think they're attacking in anonymity. It's even more interesting when the critics are silenced.

But anyway, of course Sprol is biased. What isn't? If nothing else, it's an admirable and interesting use of the google satellite imagery, even if it's not completely polished and professional. I'm looking forward to future posts with even better research put into the posts.

Look through the archives, and try not to judge the blog solely on the one or two that are currently on the front page, at least before being quite so dismissive. On the other hand, if you're a big fan of strip mining, oil spills and natural disasters like wildfires, then maybe this site isn't going to change your mind very much.
posted by crunchland at 9:15 PM on June 29, 2005

the sniping grousers end up being confronted by the very people they think they're attacking in anonymity. It's even more interesting when the critics are silenced.

Not indulging in endless rounds of pointless arguing is being silenced? Whoo hoo, point goes to whoever got the last post in I guess. Fact remains that the facts are dubious, as pointed out. That doesn't make me a fan of oil slicks, that does make me a critic of suspect fear mongering for effect.
posted by Keith Talent at 9:44 PM on June 29, 2005

Thanks for reading at least one post on the site, Keith.
Good luck with your own writing in the future.
posted by Automatt at 2:08 AM on June 30, 2005

BTW, I just got the Google Map API / wordpress integration working, W00t!

Check out these dynamic maps:

North American Sprols

World Sprols
posted by Automatt at 2:16 AM on June 30, 2005

BTW, BTW devildancedlightly, the point of the pictures in the aquaculture piece was to show that the fish farms are huge, like islands. So you could see what they look like, from space, and better understand what having hundreds more of these things might be like. Without a fixed address they can be somewhat tough to spot. Were you expecting the water to be brown? These satellite images are all false-color anyway.

Again, thanks for reading Sprol.
posted by Automatt at 2:41 AM on June 30, 2005

Were you expecting the water to be brown? These satellite images are all false-color anyway.

If the point was to show scale then maybe it was effective. I just don't think that the medium of satellite images was adding anything compared to other ways of presenting the same information. For example, for fish farms, show a pic of some sea lice and that'll have far more impact than a little island. I mean, hell, the whole middle of the country is nothing but land farms and nobody thinks that's a problem.
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 11:41 AM on July 2, 2005