Last Wednesday, the environmental activist group Greenpeace unfurled a banner calling out President Obama to step-it-up in relation to fighting global warming. Since then, the controversy relating to the incident continues, with people weighting in on both sides of the issue. On one hand, some people believe that global warming is not a man-made occurrence, and the stunt in itself did more harm than good because it defaced an American icon and added to the countries carbon footprint. (Please.) On the other hand, those that support Greenpeace think that the only way to get the government’s (and the general population’s) attention is to perform acts like this that attract the attention of the national media.
Personally, I think demonstrations like this take guts and doing things like this at an American monument focuses on the fact that there won't be any change if the government doesn't step in and force people to stand up and make a difference. I studied environmental science in college and while I do think there is some relationship between natural climate patterns and global warming, I also believe that man has added to the speed and severity at which these cycles occur. I'm sure there are many different opinions relating to this sort of thing. What's yours?