| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/30/2005 08:50:01 PM · #51 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
I'm trying to find the political framework in the thread...the focus seems to be on us as individuals. This is a "General Discussion". |
Originally posted by Imagineer:
There are so many threads that talk this over, and even ridiculous, illogical arguments against the evidence. But really - what argument can there be for not being considerate with our actions with the overwhelming awareness we now all have about the ill effects of ignorance?
I'm no hippy (far from it) but personally, I love it too much to let it all disappear before the next generation gets to see it - and what would some of us have to photograph? Isn't it time we actually change our patterns of consumption? It's all so very, very tiresome to continually read these gloomy reports. |
The original post in this thread (above), and especially the bolded phrases, frame this thread in a political context.
-Terry
|
|
|
|
03/30/2005 08:52:03 PM · #52 |
Terry,
You mean, so that people can choose to have "rant" blocked and not have to see a "political" thread? Or, to go a bit further, to say that anything "topical" should be in rant so people can choose not to be exposed to anything other than photo-related threads? I'm not making a judgment here, just asking if that's in effect what you're saying?
Robt.
|
|
|
|
03/30/2005 08:53:12 PM · #53 |
Now that this great thread is in rant, I'm going to let loose, scream and yell, curse and spit...
I HAAAAAAAAAATE FRIGGIN POLLUTIOOOOOOOOOOOOON !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
YYYYYYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!! |
|
|
|
03/30/2005 09:02:53 PM · #54 |
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Now that this great thread is in rant, I'm going to let loose, scream and yell, curse and spit...
I HAAAAAAAAAATE FRIGGIN POLLUTIOOOOOOOOOOOOON !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
YYYYYYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!! |
Post of the day, for sure!
On second thought, I am going to move this back to general discussion, at least for now.
If the thread does begin to take a political turn it will be moved back to Rant though.
-Terry
|
|
|
|
03/30/2005 09:04:33 PM · #55 |
Thanks, Terry. I think that's where it belongs, really.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
03/30/2005 09:05:43 PM · #56 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Now that this great thread is in rant, I'm going to let loose, scream and yell, curse and spit...
I HAAAAAAAAAATE FRIGGIN POLLUTIOOOOOOOOOOOOON !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
YYYYYYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!! |
Post of the day, for sure!
On second thought, I am going to move this back to general discussion, at least for now.
If the thread does begin to take a political turn it will be moved back to Rant though.
-Terry |
Thank you, I agree. |
|
|
|
03/30/2005 09:08:05 PM · #57 |
| Good choice Terry, the family of Earth thanks you ;) |
|
|
|
03/30/2005 09:28:08 PM · #58 |
Terry, thank you. It's an important thread that deserves more than getting stuffed away with anger and angst ;)
I don't see it as politics, it's more an important statement that Jon brought up. Actually, it's a discussion around daily news, and a valuable one too. It should be able to open some eyes. Maybe not the last 10-15 posts or so, but still :) |
|
|
|
03/30/2005 09:38:40 PM · #59 |
For what I believe is the second time, I actually agree with MadMordegon, without qualification.
AND Olyuzi, too.
Not to mention the others.
I think that I'm going to go and take my termperature now. :)
And, for the most part, I agree with those who have intimated that the problem will NOT be solved at an organizational level - it must be a "grass-roots effort" ( interesting phrase that, especially in this context ). If all DPC members agree to each do "our" parts - that's 35,000+. I think that 35,000 is a good start for a grass-roots effort, don't you?
|
|
|
|
03/30/2005 09:55:34 PM · #60 |
Originally posted by Imagineer:
Isn't it time we actually change our patterns of consumption? It's all so very, very tiresome to continually read these gloomy reports. |
Great question, and key to this thread. For my part, I drive a hybrid car and average about 45mpg on a day-to-day basis. I try to buy locally as much as possible, as well, to support local businesses, as well as reduce freight transport costs. I'll be growing vegetables in my garden this summer. I don't eat meat because I don't believe in the factory farm industry that pollutes our water and consumes a disproportionate amount of grain.
There's lots more I should do. I should be more fastidious about recycling (especially paper products). I should walk to work more often, or take public transportation. I should do my part to make sure my residence is as energy-efficient as possible. (I rent.)
What do you do, and what would you like to do a better job of? |
|
|
|
03/30/2005 11:01:48 PM · #61 |
for me and my wife, it's a matter of being examples for our children, not just trying to tell them, but spending time showing them how they can make a difference and them helping them make a difference.
we live in a little house in the woods. the woods will soon be gone, turned into another development. in the mean time, though, i take the kids back there as much as possible so that they can see what it is really like, and so that when it's gone, they will remember what it once was.
i really believe if you want to change anything, you have to start with the example you want to set for your children.
these images are from my 'awaiting suburbia' project. they were all shot within a 10 minutes walk of my back door.
  
  
   |
|
|
|
03/30/2005 11:10:38 PM · #62 |
I'll be good, I promise.
I see RonB is good, so I can't be bad. :)
Originally posted by jmritz:
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Now that this great thread is in rant, I'm going to let loose, scream and yell, curse and spit...
I HAAAAAAAAAATE FRIGGIN POLLUTIOOOOOOOOOOOOON !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
YYYYYYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!! |
Post of the day, for sure!
On second thought, I am going to move this back to general discussion, at least for now.
If the thread does begin to take a political turn it will be moved back to Rant though.
-Terry |
Thank you, I agree. |
|
|
|
|
03/30/2005 11:30:05 PM · #63 |
|
|
|
03/31/2005 12:50:16 AM · #64 |
Thanks for putting this back into General Discussion. I have 'rants' blocked off and would have missed the continuation of this important discussion/debate on the saving of our planet.
We can document its beauty and its misuse thru images. It's what DPC is good at. Call it an "awareness campaign" perhaps. But no, it's not a rant. |
|
|
|
03/31/2005 01:00:21 AM · #65 |
| There is nothing wrong with our palnet and there is no such thing as global warming. Back in the 70's if you do your research, they were all worried about a coming ice age. They have no idea what is going on. Just what ever will get them money to do more research. |
|
|
|
03/31/2005 01:06:39 AM · #66 |
Originally posted by gwphoto:
There is nothing wrong with our palnet and there is no such thing as global warming. Back in the 70's if you do your research, they were all worried about a coming ice age. They have no idea what is going on. Just what ever will get them money to do more research. |
Let's do our best NOT to let this turn into an acrimonious debate on whose science is better, ok? That'll just get us tossed back into rant. What we have here is some people who passionately want to ocnserve energy and clean up the environment. These are laudable goals even IF the planet's in no immediate danger. I see no reason for a post like this one. Surely we ALL benefit from a more cautious stewardship of our planet and her resources?
Robt.
Message edited by author 2005-03-31 01:06:56.
|
|
|
|
03/31/2005 01:12:44 AM · #67 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
Originally posted by gwphoto:
There is nothing wrong with our palnet and there is no such thing as global warming. Back in the 70's if you do your research, they were all worried about a coming ice age. They have no idea what is going on. Just what ever will get them money to do more research. |
Let's do our best NOT to let this turn into an acrimonious debate on whose science is better, ok? That'll just get us tossed back into rant. What we have here is some people who passionately want to ocnserve energy and clean up the environment. These are laudable goals even IF the planet's in no immediate danger. I see no reason for a post like this one. Surely we ALL benefit from a more cautious stewardship of our planet and her resources?
Robt. |
Therein lies the key.. *WE* benefit. I think one of the main reasons the populace seems so lazy about the environment is that a lot of the people in charge of bringing environmental issues to the public are going about it the wrong way. They emphasize the danger to the planet and other animals, and the forests, and everything else.. but they forget about *us*. Human beings are the most inward thinking, egotistical, narcissistic species known.. and unless we change our tactics and start saying.. Look here people, it's not the planet we're trying to save.. it's *us*..
I just don't think people are ever going to take it seriously.
We, as a species, are the ones in danger here. Not the earth, per se. It'll survive. Changed, mayhaps, with an entirely different ecology.. but we'll be gone, and we'll have done it to ourselves.
We *do* need to start taking care of the evironment and the ecology, and the balance of things.. but not for the Earth's sake.
For ours.
Cause that's the only way the mob will ever understand the danger.
|
|
|
|
03/31/2005 01:12:58 AM · #68 |
If everyone is interested in their "little part" making a difference, newdream.org has a great guide. You can sign up and calculate your efforts and see how they play in with everyone else's, all adding up to a great total...
//newdream.org/tttoffline/index.php
Good stuff.
from the site:
Originally posted by newdream,org:
None of Turn the Tide̢۪s nine actions involve drastic changes in your life, yet each packs an environmental punch. In fact, every thousand participants prevent the emission of 4,000,000 pounds of climate-warming carbon dioxide every year. And that̢۪s just one benefit. Turn the Tide participants are also saving thousands of trees, millions of gallons of water, and protecting endangered species, and all through nine simple actions almost anyone can take. |
Message edited by author 2005-03-31 01:13:58. |
|
|
|
03/31/2005 01:13:50 AM · #69 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
Originally posted by gwphoto:
There is nothing wrong with our palnet and there is no such thing as global warming. Back in the 70's if you do your research, they were all worried about a coming ice age. They have no idea what is going on. Just what ever will get them money to do more research. |
Let's do our best NOT to let this turn into an acrimonious debate on whose science is better, ok? That'll just get us tossed back into rant. What we have here is some people who passionately want to ocnserve energy and clean up the environment. These are laudable goals even IF the planet's in no immediate danger. I see no reason for a post like this one. Surely we ALL benefit from a more cautious stewardship of our planet and her resources?
Robt. |
Well I am jsut sick and tired of uninformed people preaching. I just wish they would put their energy into the proper channels. Start preaching to Europe and China and South America and leave us out of it. Done....
Message edited by author 2005-03-31 01:19:44. |
|
|
|
03/31/2005 01:23:32 AM · #70 |
Originally posted by gwphoto:
Well I am jsut sick and tired of uninformed people preaching to the cuior. I jsut wish they would put their energy into the proper channels. Start preaching to Europe and China and South America and leave us out of it. Done.... |
Regardless of your take on the global warming issue, we - as Americans - are certainly a big part of the problem. These other communities certainly need to be informed and, as developing economies, they have the (unlikely) chance to have their explosive development guided in part by environmental cues.
There are ways to help make this happen, like True Cost Economics.
As an example of America's influence (and more widely, developed Western nations)
on the world as a whole, through over-consumption:
- We are part of the 20% of the people on the planet that own 80% of the total wealth.
- Through our ravenous commercial-driven consumption, we contribute 80% of the toxic waste.
- We consume:
â€Â¢ 5 times more than a person from Mexico
â€Â¢ 10 times more than a person from China
â€Â¢ 30 times more than the a person from India
Our consumption of products produced overseas drives production overseas, where pollution standards might be low or non-existant. Not in my backyard, though, eh?
An average piece of food on your plate has traveled some thousands of miles to get there - all kinds of production and waste for something that could have been produced locally.
And all this consumption doesn̢۪t lead us to true happiness. In fact, as
the American culture spreads to other countries, depression rates and
obesity in those countries rise. Americans are some of the most medicated,
most obese, most depressed and psychologically dysfunctional
people in the world. There has to be a better way.
There are plenty of ways us Americans can make a difference locally and improve life here at home. Those other places certainly need some serious guidance, but we shouldn't be left out of the equation.
Message edited by author 2005-03-31 01:30:43. |
|
|
|
03/31/2005 01:51:06 AM · #71 |
Originally posted by gwphoto:
Originally posted by bear_music:
Originally posted by gwphoto:
There is nothing wrong with our palnet and there is no such thing as global warming. Back in the 70's if you do your research, they were all worried about a coming ice age. They have no idea what is going on. Just what ever will get them money to do more research. |
Let's do our best NOT to let this turn into an acrimonious debate on whose science is better, ok? That'll just get us tossed back into rant. What we have here is some people who passionately want to ocnserve energy and clean up the environment. These are laudable goals even IF the planet's in no immediate danger. I see no reason for a post like this one. Surely we ALL benefit from a more cautious stewardship of our planet and her resources?
Robt. |
Well I am jsut sick and tired of uninformed people preaching. I just wish they would put their energy into the proper channels. Start preaching to Europe and China and South America and leave us out of it. Done.... |
Having worked with Biosafety and Biodiversity research, I can assure you that this kind of attitude and the assumptions that you have made are inappropriate and misfounded.
Please don't turn such an important subject into a rant. I'm sure that you are intelligent enough to realise that the comments that you are making are misguided.
|
|
|
|
03/31/2005 02:08:37 AM · #72 |
There is a respected publication that comes out of England called
Granta. It is widely available in the United States on newstands and by subscription. Issue #83 is called "This Overheating World". There is an article called "Worry? Us? that almost says it as well as pictures.
There is another article in that issue, (but a reprint is not available on line) that talks about our Oceans. For that one, you have to find the issue. It's 'goose bump' material. |
|
|
|
03/31/2005 04:33:10 AM · #73 |
As I mentioned earlier, there's an interesting new theory/explanation for the conflict between "predictions" of a coming ice age and "observations" of global warming. The former were based solely on data collected showing 11,000-year cycles of warming/cooling trends as the earth precesses and moves closer to/further from the sun in its orbit. Based on these data, an ice age is overdue.
A recent article in Scientific American makes some very interesting observations of the relationship between observed anomalies in the CO2 content in glacial ice cores (which can be very acccurately dated) and human agricultural activity which began on an extensive scale 8,000 years ago. The authors believe that were it not for this human activity, which began contributing to "global warming" phenomenon long before the industrial age, we would already be on the verge of a true ice age, as we are currently in a position in our orbit where there always has been one in the past.
These effects were not noticed earlier for the simple reason that the natural cooling derived from our orbital position has simply been offset by the slight warming that had resulted from changes in CO2 and methane gas production as human agricultural activity increased, and we did not know enough about past gaes and temperature cycles to see that anything was different than before.
So, basically, if it weren't for 8,000 years of human-induced "global warming" we'd be in a wholly different, beginning glacial age right now. A precis of the article:
" How Did Humans First Alter Global Climate?; March 2005; by William F. Ruddiman; 8 page(s)
The scientific consensus that human actions first began to have a warming effect on the earth's climate within the past century has become part of the public perception as well. With the advent of coal-burning factories and power plants, industrial societies began releasing carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases into the air. Later, motor vehicles added to such emissions. In this scenario, those of us who have lived during the industrial era are responsible not only for the gas buildup in the atmosphere but also for at least part of the accompanying global warming trend. Now, though, it seems our ancient agrarian ancestors may have begun adding these gases to the atmosphere many millennia ago, thereby altering the earth's climate long before anyone thought.
New evidence suggests that concentrations of CO2 started rising about 8,000 years ago, even though natural trends indicate they should have been dropping. Some 3,000 years later the same thing happened to methane, another heat-trapping gas. The consequences of these surprising rises have been profound. Without them, current temperatures in northern parts of North America and Europe would be cooler by three to four degrees Celsius--enough to make agriculture difficult. In addition, an incipient ice age--marked by the appearance of small ice caps--would probably have begun several thousand years ago in parts of northeastern Canada. Instead the earth's climate has remained relatively warm and stable in recent millennia."
I can't link to the actual article as it's by subscription only. If anyone here's a member of SA Online, he might be able to help us with that.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
03/31/2005 08:38:31 PM · #74 |
Originally posted by sfalice:
There is a respected publication that comes out of England called
Granta. It is widely available in the United States on newstands and by subscription. Issue #83 is called "This Overheating World". There is an article called "Worry? Us? that almost says it as well as pictures.
There is another article in that issue, (but a reprint is not available on line) that talks about our Oceans. For that one, you have to find the issue. It's 'goose bump' material. |
Thanks for the article. To follow that path, I recommend again this book:
|
|
|
|
03/31/2005 08:57:43 PM · #75 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
A recent article in Scientific American makes some very interesting observations of the relationship between observed anomalies in the CO2 content in glacial ice cores (which can be very acccurately dated) and human agricultural activity which began on an extensive scale 8,000 years ago. The authors believe that were it not for this human activity, which began contributing to "global warming" phenomenon long before the industrial age, we would already be on the verge of a true ice age, as we are currently in a position in our orbit where there always has been one in the past.
These effects were not noticed earlier for the simple reason that the natural cooling derived from our orbital position has simply been offset by the slight warming that had resulted from changes in CO2 and methane gas production as human agricultural activity increased, and we did not know enough about past gaes and temperature cycles to see that anything was different than before.
So, basically, if it weren't for 8,000 years of human-induced "global warming" we'd be in a wholly different, beginning glacial age right now. A precis of the article:
" How Did Humans First Alter Global Climate?; March 2005; by William F. Ruddiman; 8 page(s) |
Sounds very interesting. I'll have to take a trip to Borders.
Message edited by author 2005-03-31 20:59:50. |
|
