I was just pointing out that you’re punishing the environmental innocents while making some of the guilty ones slip away.

Leave the innocents out of it or at least exonerate them. Don’t let your bias show you to be passing over some of the guilty ones at the same time as you’re flogging the innocents. It’s bad for you and bad for the environmental movement at the same time.

It is merely a start at a more objective analysis of the global realities involved and the obscenity of massive, nationalist investment in irrelevant and flawed competition in a starving and dangerously polluted world.

It also shows up the dishonesty of lying, racist, holocaust-ignoring Mainstream media that report such flawed competitions with extraordinary precision (e.g. event times to the nearest 0.01 second) but ignore the horrendous concurrent realities e.g. the “annual death rate” is 6.2% for under-5 year old infants in US-, UK-, NATO- and Australian-occupied Afghanistan as compared to 10.2% for Australian prisoners of war of the Japanese in World War 2 (for which war crime Japanese generals were tried and hanged).

1st, India – winner of 0 gold medals, and China – winner of the most gold medals: Both are emerging as the worst possible environmental enemies but this fact is masked by the gold medals/capita which makes India seem overly concerned about humanity and the environment and China seem overly incompetent with respects to its ability to win gold medals. India did not send a capable Olympic team simply because it has neither the resources, interest, nor the cohesion to assemble an effective Olympic team. On the other hand China is simply too populous to rate high on any of the scores except for raw medal standings despite the huge amount of effort spent in producing Olympic athletes.

2nd, Jamaica – top gold medal per capita winner, and Indonesia near the bottom of the pile for the same.
These two countries have very little basis for comparison except that both are primarily recipients of exploitation by others mentioned in this posting. Jamaica’s high per capita gold medal rating is due not to resources spend on producing gold medalists but on the ability of the country’s natural environment to create good sprinters. A high per capita of naturally good sprinters should naturally produce a high per capita gold medal ranking. The countries CO2 excess is also a product of the exploitation by others and when combine with such a high per capita gold medal number makes it appear extraordinarily high on the profligacy list. On the other hand, the aforementioned exploitation so oppresses the Indonesian people that despite the countries abundance of natural wealth, very little of it ever trickles down to allow the population to seriously contend for Olympic Gold. So, Indonesia’s appearance at the bottom of the profligacy rating is hardly worth mentioning despite its poor environmental record (again most of its CO2 excess is incurred by countries that are currently subjecting it to crushing exploitation).
In summary its good to remember that 1 divide by any number greater than 1 is always less than 1, and any number divided by any other sufficiently larger number is always almost 0. The devil is in the details and when your making a detailed analysis, you must not forget the details.