John F. Morse wrote:

> Subject material is always so out of date in books. The Internet
> is up-to-date.


Hardly. And even when it is, it's usually full of ****.

>
> Books kill trees. The Internet doesn't.


It takes a LOT more natural resources for you to look something up
on the Internet than it does to make a book.

>
> Libraries and bookstores are polluted with human sickness. The
> Internet is safe in your home.


Oddly enough your home is probably a far better petri dish than a
public library. And being exposed to various contaminants in low
doses isn't just a good thing, it's necessary for a healthy immune
system. Staying home is actually unhealthy for you. Both germ wise,
and by virtue of you getting fat and lazy.

>
> The trip to a library or bookstore burns fuel. The Internet
> doesn't.


So you believe the electricity to power all the equipment necessary
to make the Internet function comes from elves then? The raw
materials that are refined into things like plastic case covers and
IC housings are made from fairy dust?

The very LAST thing the Internet is, is environmentally friendly.

>
> Burning fuel creates pollution. The Internet doesn't.


It creates not only air pollution, but landfill and and other
chemical contaminants created by the manufacture and disposal of
"gear" is a bigger problem than automobiles and air pollution all
by itself.

>
> Old books are a fire hazard, so they require a landfill. The
> Internet is Green.


Books are notoriously hard to burn as a matter of fact. Electrical
fires resulting from old/defective computer equipment are certainly
not unheard of.

>
> I suppose there will be different "opinions," but aren't "facts"
> more relevant?


They are. Too bad you have none.

>