|
|  |
|
|
|
| |
| Jan 20, 2010 11:41 am |
|
re: The Reality of Climate Change - Discipline in this network |
James Booth
| |
.
Had hoped to chime in here earlier, but due to time constraints, the “initial conclusion” had already been published ...
"Population - Feeding Ourselves - World Government"
Now the proposed new structure seems to have devolved somewhat.
Neither a scientist nor a politician, I simply love breathing the air and drinking the water in (on) the only home (Planet Earth) I know of in the Universe where I can, as a physical organism, survive and prosper.
Regarding *Climate Change* it seems clear to me the subject is one of several we need to know more about, and as quickly as possible, if we are to survive as a species on this planet - for that matter, whether some other forms of life presently occupying this planet survive may hinge upon what we learn, and how soon we acquire that knowledge and put it into effect.
We need to support science, and scientists, engaged in producing unadulterated results, without distraction and without diversion, and we need to subdue as much as possible any attempts to subvert or derail real scientific research which may provide answers we need to improve the quality of our own actions relative to maintaining an environment which will continue to sustain life, and / or to prepare ourselves to "weather" very different climactic conditions which may naturally occur with or without human input.
That scientific inquiry sometimes leads us down dead ends is all the more reason we need to clear the way as much as possible for scientists to conduct research and publish results untainted by political pressures designed to profit some few who pretend to rule us all.
_
Because of the turn this thread has taken ...
However much I love Ron for his apparent desire to be "involved," rarely have I directly responded to his posts because so many of them seem to be reactions to a “crisis du jour,” and over time I have come to question whether he may be a willing, or unwitting, agent of those who manufacture scarcity for the rest of us, not only for their profit, but to keep us in fear and arguing with and amongst each other so as to dilute effectiveness of our independent individual and collective energies, thus dependent on “them” for security against fears "they" invest billions of dollars to conjure up for us.
On the other hand, while I appreciate knowledge Thomas brings to discussions, I cannot ignore that so much of what he says is delivered under one word which, to me, says that he feels he, or his knowledge, is superior: "sayeth" seems to me to mock and so detracts from the capacity to teach others.
_
Present human population is easy to blame when thinking about Earth's sustainability, but blame only puts off real solutions to real problems.
With adequate planning, there are not too many people for this planet.
At the rate some of us are consuming raw materials, there are too many of us today, and because some of us are ignoring our responsibilities of "housekeeping" and overrunning Earth's ability to naturally recycle waste material, there are too many of us.
Adequate planning at least requires we produce materials and products which maximize existing resources; instead, we continue to manufacture "throwaway" products designed to be replaced in a short time in order to "sustain" an "economy" which is in no way economical, nor sustainable, but does serve to maintain a constant flow of profits required for our current cyclical financial system.
Efforts to reduce population increase need to be accompanied by resource distribution which minimizes poverty that in turn produces more children, and by real education which, again, requires that our efforts support science producing unadulterated results, without distraction and without diversion.
_
That among millions or hundreds of millions of people, or billions of people for that matter, each has a plan, does not make each and every one of those plans viable.
Anyone with a plan "for how everyone else should live their lives" for whatever reason must first have a plan that works for himself, then for his neighbour, his community, and so on.
That anyone has even a workable plan does not mean that person can *enforce* that plan, nor is there any requirement that any plan should be enforced.
Those who can enforce a plan on a national, or even global, scale, do not necessarily have a plan that is good for humanity, however likely it is a self-serving plan.
Unworkable plans fail; plans imposed on others can be, and are, resisted, if they are not good for the majority of people.
What is required is a society open to possibilities and actions built on knowledge arising out of the experience of previous generations, followed by a free and open distribution of the fruits of those actions - a society in which reasonable recompense is realized by those who contribute new and improved technologies while not hoarding technologies and their benefits for some select group.
_
We do not know, but need to know, and very soon, how much *change* one person, or one plant or corporation, makes to our air, to our water, to our soil, with all the variety of actions each individual or other entity creates, on a daily basis, cumulatively - just to know temperature.
A tremendous order to fulfill, yet results of those efforts must then be combined with data related to forces external to Earth itself, forces which affect all the planets - particle, plasma and magnetic radiation from the sun and beyond, just as one example.
No law, no tax, no political agenda or coercion is going to produce such results for us.
_
In an earlier thread I attempted to get members to focus on solutions, or at least ideas for solutions.
Unless I misread what followed, I could count only two people who contributed something toward progress.
Not surprising to me, but nonetheless appalling, it seemed most of those who had engaged in "discussion" did so for the "entertainment value" of a fight, an argument, a contest or emotional tangle, yet when called on to move forward, they could only stand still.
Yes, disciplined thinkers are required, and they need to exist and be allowed to function freely in an atmosphere free of fear, free from belligerence, among people determined to acquire what is necessary for our collective survival.
The way I see it all ...
JB
Private Reply to James Booth (new win) |
|
| |
|
