Green activists, who cut more trees in the world ?

The simple question that you keep telling people not to cut down more trees. But on the other hands, you are one of the collaborators in destroying the environment.

Putting aside that you as an non governmental organisation which does not respect the UNESCO resolutions 1985 to use Esperanto, perhaps, your organisation does not deal with UNESCO. I doubt your organisation can be left out in the UNESCO activities.

It would be good that I copied the final part of the resolutions to remind you as well as to remind other NGOs in the world, your leadership did not respect the resolutions, how would you expect others to respect your calling?

4. Recommends that international non-governmental organizations join in celebrating the centenary of Esperanto and consider the possibility of the use of Esperanto as a means for the spreading of all kinds of information among their members, including information on the work of Unesco.

Full resolutions can be downloaded from MESG site http://mesg2012.blogspot.com

Now, take a look, who cuts down more tree than the original people.

I list United Nations to be the first one. Perhaps, other international non governmental organisations, which use more than one language should be listed in too. This include the sport organisation like Olympic Council.

There are six official languages in the United Nations. Each time, the same text, whether speech or circular, they have to be translated into other five languages. Let us do some simple mathematics.

If the document is two pages, 2x5=10. Yes, the same topic of document needs to have extra 10 pages of paper to be used. Do you think United Nations only deal with one or two topics a day ?

Down the road, how many trees have to be cut down to produce the paper?

This is not including your GREEN organisations in the world.

Why blame the common people when one of the culprits of the environment you can find is standing tall in front of you and perhaps you are in and out of the building very often to defend the climate change issues.

If all the related NGOs can respect the UNESCO resolutions 1985 to use Esperanto, eventually, other NGOs will be with you and less trees are to be cut down. What is more, the translation cost can be reduced. The translation cost can be used to improve the education and health sysetems in most parts of the world. You are killing two birds with one stone.

Learning Esperanto needs only less than 200 hours, this small fractions of learning time would also reduce the using of paper. Certainly, we don't deny the love of those language lovers, they still can go on to learn the languages they like. Would you do a survey to see how many people in your local areas like languages?

Now, look into your path of contending and head on the right direction.