Climate Change

dkchristi wrote:

It is possible to search the internet for. Articles funded by those who profit from unfettered destruction of the planet. It is interesting that while they label climate warming quackery they admit to its occurrence. They are confused by their own premise. Reality is that even the production of our food supply is potentially a threat to health and many countries won't import food from the U.S. industrial corporate methods.We may produce more food but at what long term cost? Once again short term profits ignore future ramifications.

We can't destroy the planet, DK. We are not that clever or important. The world will evolve with or without us. Only man has an ego big enough to think that it could "destroy the planet."

Shelagh wrote:

Betty Fasig wrote:

I think that people who have the focus on long term climate changes are working out what will happen "if".  I believe these people and their predictions.  It is not about who to blame, but about how can a person like me or you change the destruction of this planet.

What if the only solution was to leave oil in the ground and stop the production of all of its bi-products including motor gasoline? How would it affect your life if you had to use a horse and cart instead of a truck?

Shelagh, I've used both.  There is much positive to say about the horse and cart.  There are many old folk who would not mind going back to the horse and cart days.  To enjoy the conveniences we have today, the price we pay is not just in money, but in pollution.  The end result affects everyone.  Food safe to eat?  Water safe to drink?  When we prefer convenience over safety, we must accept the fact that illness will increase.  It is recognized that there was illness in the old days, however the strains of illness has increased.  Why?  We want a cure for everything and that's a normal desire.  The problem lies with wanting instant cures.  Our society has lost patience.  One can reference our eating habits.  Fast foods - no time to sit and relax enjoying a good meal.  We prefer flying over the train or car.  We're in a hurry to get where we think we want to go and that may include dying.
I'm starting a new threat that I will call.  Titles.

5/5/2014

                        Climate change ? I don't think we have one, just some
                        political scare tactic. Mother earth has been around for
                        millions of years, every year we get the Hurricanes, the
                        tornados, major blizzards, as far back as I can remember
                        we've always had these problems. Now if you want the
                        real answer it's man and his stupid ways, blasting off 
                        major bombs in the 1940's , from what I've heard lately
                        it still affects the desert ....

                                                        Cheers.. Joe

Statement from Oxfam:

"Right now hunger levels worldwide are going down, though not nearly fast enough. But the IPCC cites studies which project a reversal of this progress. By 2050 an extra 50 million people - that's the population of Spain - could be at risk of hunger because of climate change, and an extra 25 million under-fives malnourished - that's the same as all the under-fives in the US and Canada combined. Availability of calories per person is set to fall lower than the levels in 2000. If we are serious about getting to zero hunger by 2025 and staying there, we need a huge increase in climate action - both in adaptation and cutting emissions."

Could be? Where's the science in this? Science is based on certainties not what ifs. Hunger levels are going down, which suggests that they will continue to go down. The past tells us that once improvements begin, people build upon them. If the present system is reducing hunger levels then it isn't broken, so don't fix it!

I think that some of the references here and the comments are for the purpose of argument and make little sense. The fact is we are abusing our resources which should upset the religious. We have the gift of a beautiful world that we are yes destroying with our gluttony for profits for the few and vile poisons.

dkchristi wrote:

I think that some of the references here and the comments are for the purpose of argument and make little sense. The fact is we are abusing our resources which should upset the religious. We have the gift of a beautiful world that we are yes destroying with our gluttony for profits for the few and vile poisons.

You're right, DK, we should return to the good ol' days of city smog in the 1950s:

Shelagh started the whole smog thing-ah-ma-jig. She was seen burning old weeds, etc in her yearly garden work. Here are the facts of world SMOG that started in Shelagh's garden.

Overview of the Great Smog of 1952:
When a severe cold spell hit London in early December 1952, Londoners did what they usually did in such a situation; they burned more coal to heat up their homes. Then on December 5, 1952, a layer of dense fog engulfed the city and stayed for five days.
Since the smoke from the coal burning in homes, plus all of London's usual factory emissions, had been prevented from escaping into the atmosphere by an inversion, the fog and smoke combined into a rolling, thick layer of smog.
Londoners, used to living in a city known for its pea-soup fogs, were not shocked to find themselves surrounded by such thick smog. Yet, although the dense smog did not instill panic, it nearly shut down the city from December 5 to December 9, 1952.
Visibility across London became extremely poor. In some places, visibility had literally gone down to one foot, meaning that you couldn't see your own feet when looking down nor your own hands if held out in front of you. Transportation across the city came to a standstill and many people didn't venture outside for fear of getting lost in their own neighborhoods. At least one theater was closed down because the smog had seeped inside and the audience could no longer see the stage.
It wasn't until after the fog lifted on December 9 that the deadliness of the smog was discovered. In the five days the smog had covered London, over 4,000 more people had died than usual for that time of year. In the following weeks, approximately 8,000 more died from exposure to what has become known as the Great Smog of 1952. Most of those killed by the Great Smog were people who had pre-existing respiratory problems and the elderly.
The death toll of the Great Smog of 1952 was shocking. Pollution, which many had thought was just a part of city life, had killed 12,000 people. It was time for change.
It was the black smoke that had caused the most damage. Thus, in 1956 and 1968, Parliament passed two Clean Air Acts, which began the process of eliminating the burning of coal in both people's homes and in factories.

I rest my case.  Without intervention and correction, we are bent on destroying ourselves.  It may be bit by bit, but it is real.  Yesterday,the smog in London.  Today it's the farmworkers sprayed with pesticides.  It's the losses to the atmosphere due to the destruction of the rain forest and the Everglades and logging of giant trees that will not be replaced for hundreds of years.  It's the fracking and forcing poisons into the water table.  It's the burning of fossil fuels.  It's the increasing number of highways and automobiles worldwide. It's the unfettered industry in undeveloped countries where our standards are not applied and therefore our corporate giants can earn profits on the backs of the poor.  It's the pouring of industrial waste and poisons into our own lakes and rivers. It's the excuse of "jobs" that do not come but are instead sent to other countries at slave wages that were outlawed in developed countries. 

And we can put our head in the sand and call them "incidences," but they are not.  The polar bears are fighting for their existence. The bees are disappearing. The frogs are mutating.  Ice fishermen are finding different ice holes because the ice layers are thinner in familiar places.  The wine farmers are planting at different times.  The farmed earth is cracking from lack of water.  The rain causes flash floods and landslides because the trees have logged the hillsides bare and the rivers have been rerouted to meet human needs for power and recreation.  The elephants are diminishing in number in Southeast Asia because the population is exploding so fast there isn't habitat sufficient for the elephants anymore and they are literally fighting each other for the land.  Huge developments in southwest Florida denude the land, dig a hole and call it a lake and name the development, "Lake Estates" and then wonder as the sink hole sucks the houses, the street and the cars down below.  The seas are warming and the hurricanes no longer allow us in Florida to drive to the center of the state for protection - they hurricane covers the entire state.  There's no where to run.  Seasons are changing.  Those areas of the globe with four seasons are finding the spring and fall are shifting with harsher winters and hotter summers.  Allergies are on the increase since the introduction of GMO foods and the harvesting of raw crops that ripen in gasses.  Lost already are dozens of varieties of bananas, apples, tomatoes, and peppers - bred out of the food chain because they don't ship well or aren't the perfect size to sell well.

The Amish are doing quite well in Indiana in their own world based on lack of modern conveniences and distractions.  I lived quite well for three years on the sailboat in a very conservative mode of life.  It can be done and should be done, even on a small scale.  Gluttony is our middle name.  Profit at any price the mantra of the super rich.  It will be the ordinary person who suffers.

Dk,
The world has seen many changes, and I'm sure it will make many more. This earth will always be here, and so will man.

You are correct.  However, there are more of us than ever before causing more destruction in a wider area than ever before.  Even the earth has its limits.  I wish some of our science fiction people would weigh in - those who have contemplated a world past its limits. 

Don't we have some responsibility for the husbandry of the earth?  Do we have the moral right to just use it up with no consideration for what we are doing?  Aren't we given the ability to use our brain as a gift to help choose our path more wisely and care for our earth and fellow travelers?

DK.  I know it seems that I agree with many of your posts, and rightly so.  We are either of like minds or we are tuned into the same universal currents.  It is comforting to know that one is not alone with their thoughts.  We have never met, but yet I feel I got to know you well with your posts and your books.  I'm pleased to have met you.

It does seem we see the world both secularly and spiritually through similar glasses and paradigms.  I wonder if its our experiences abroad.  Many people travel the world for certain, but not all see the world or live their experiences in a soul felt way. 

A person does not need to travel to see.  Reading and experiencing other cultures in our own back yards can certainly accomplish the same.  My six years with migrant farm workers certainly opened my eyes and that was 40 miles from where I live.  Yet I know many do-gooders who haul out clothing for the children, work in clinics and teach English yet see no relevancy between their cheap produce and the heinous lives of those who pick it.  They will add their political voice to send "those people" back where they came from to keep them from stealing our jobs - the jobs that no one in this country will do - no one. And then they caravan back to the migrant camps to "do good."

My stepmother was born with a spirit of loving humanity and a mind wide open.  Her life experiences were very limited and often tragic and she had little formal education. Yet, she and I had great conversations about the world of ideas and the questions about eternal life.  She was wise.

Perhaps it's the ability to make connections between events that makes the difference, connections that are not tied to a political party or a piece of propaganda.  Perhaps it's asking questions that makes the difference and simply looking around for common sense answers.

Any "scientific" study that deems another juried scientific study "quackery" is not science but political name-calling and searching for answers to support a political point of view.

Ann and Shelagh do a wonderful job of seeking out relevant passages from the Internet to support their points of view.  However, the Internet sources must always be suspect since many are funded by particular points of view. 

I had a friend whose college class, "Statistics Lie" was a favorite of students.  He loved mind games where he could turn any data into a lie to support a specific piece of information.

The best approach is to study valid, objective data and discover a common trend rather than pick an idea that supports a belief and then pull in data, regardless of the tainted source, that only supports that point of view.

I apologized once already and repeat the apology.  I was wrong to blame the Republicans for stupidity, though I still believe they have some pretty stupid people running for office.  Their propaganda mill is genius.  They can make any good belief look false and any false belief look like truth.  Their ads are brilliant.  I was married to a man that friends said could get one to believe that a black shirt was truly white.  He had the charisma and persuasion to make it happen, a regular Tom Sawyer.  

Money talks.  The United States has no elections anymore.  They only have the competition of money spent on negative campaigning with no support for visionary and creative ideas because they are risky to elections.  No, our system is now one of damning the other guy for specious things unrelated to what we need for a forward thinking nation.

Thus, any issue such as climate change is subject to the control of money.  The global, corporate industrial complex controls the money and it is to their benefit to convince ordinary people that the climate change issue is a "hoax."  Apparently, they have succeeded in other countries too. 

There is no benefit to me that is derived from being concerned about the environment, only clean water in my ocean to swim, clean air to breathe, a variety of flora and fauna to share my earth, trees to shade me from the sun, water to drink and healthy food to eat.  I thought I had those things in common with all people. 

What we forget is that the servants to the wealthy shop at Whole Foods Market.  They travel to their pristine villas by air.  They never have to see the pitiful, impoverished people in the countries that they exploit.  It's the ordinary people who get the food from the local supermarket rolled out of the gassing warehouses.  It's the ordinary people who drink the water from their wells - or not.  It's the ordinary people that can't escape the filth of the rivers, the lakes or the cities.

It's the money that feeds ordinary people the propaganda to keep them satisfied with the status quo, convince them that the water isn't so bad, the greater supplies of GMO wheat have nothing to do with the increased allergies to wheat, etc. etc. When you don't have choices, might as well accept the inevitable and do nothing.

It is always important, when doing research, to know your sources, and in knowing them, to know their agendas. it is not that difficult to do with online sources. Check out the "About" sections, and take some extra time to reearch the sources themselves.

The only source referenced by Shelagh that i asked her about was the Breitbart source, and she pointed out that she had used it "tongue in cheek."

It's odd, I guess. As far as the general concept is concerned, my perspectives are closer to yours and Abe's. I still value Shelagh's perspective as valid, and believe that changing our current direction is possible if we are all willing to put our points of view together to find a common solution, rather than insisting that we are the only ones with valid answers.

Being right sometimes seems more important that solving the problems.

Just me.

dkchristi wrote:

The best approach is to study valid, objective data and discover a common trend rather than pick an idea that supports a belief and then pull in data, regardless of the tainted source, that only supports that point of view.

I'm all for objective data, DK, and I don't have a belief to support. Past mistakes made by hard-working people cost many their jobs and their homes. These were not money-grabbing profiteers; they were simply trying to make a living, without realising that they would eventually put their own livelihoods at risk. I'm talking about the dust bowl of the 1930s:

http://www.loc.gov/teachers/classroommaterials/presentationsandactivities/presentations/timeline/depwwii/dustbowl/

Your expectations of how people should behave is unrealistic. We can't all live on boats and swan around without a care in the world. Even you couldn't do it forever.

I really started the thread to seek solutions.  As I said earlier, this is one case where I prefer not to be right.  I just see climate change all around in data and in anecdotal experiences and the results are for the most part negative and even dire.  I see nothing but self-serving in its denial and cloaking.

Ann is always promoting paradigm shift as the savior.  It's just too broad for the diversity of the world.  However, we do need a paradigm shift from profit as God to a community conscience.  If anyone has any ideas on how to promote, realistically, such a shift, I'm open. 

Since money is neck and neck with profit as twin faces of the corporate industrial complex God, then it will take money to force a paradigm shift.  There needs to be incentives for responsible corporate citizens and negative results for stockholders and boards that promote excessive profit at any price to the citizens of communities.

Yes, Shelagh, there were moments when community counted.  There were a rare few corporations who treated their community and their employees well.  It is possible, but so rare.

Harvard and Yale and Oxford need to reward their students for theses that provide for a better world for all, not just the few.  They need to encourage their alumni to not only donate back to the schools but to be good corporate citizens.

I'm just trying a bit of brain storming here - help me.....

We have valid research in many areas that goes begging.  In many cases, profiteering corporations keep great ideas under wraps to not compete with their own profit endeavors.

Education is my favorite bandstand.  We know how people learn and how to teach.  Yet, we ignore all research for the repetitive waves of new core ideas, skill sets, and whatever the legislature cooks up.

I believe though we may not fix it all, we are learning more all the time so that we don't repeat the mistakes of the dustbowl and carry that knowledge to other countries.  We do that in fits and spurts with well-meaning charitable endeavors.  We just never put enough money behind the good ideas because so much is wasted on the subsidies and supports to those already swinging along.  So much is wasted on war and prisons.

You are right Shelagh.  There's so much knowledge as to how things should be yet so many vested interests that keep them as they are - to the detriment of so many.

Thus, back to my search for ideas that might really be implemented - that someone with money and power might be encouraged to support.

The paradigm shift begins with one person who sees a new possibility, and believes it could happen. That new solution is shared with a few other people who pick up on it and share it to a few others. The growth of the idea spreads exponentially. At some point, a critical mass is reached where more people are committted to the new idea than those clinging to the old, and the change simply comes about.

Working for a solution is a good thing. If you have a voice and an audience, push your solution, but push it with at least a degree of hope that the change is possible. When you state that there is no hope for change, how can you expect to encourage others to see your vision?

One more thing: some years ago, Alvin toffler wrote the book, Future Shock, and in that book he discussed the idea that there are three main sources for power: violence, wealth, and knowledge. He felt that, at the time of his writing, that wealth was the primary source, that we had moved beyond the tie where violence was thae primary resolution for problems. He predicted a time when knowledge would replace wealth. My premise is that the internet is leading us into that era, from the Industrial Age into the Information Age, and that the recent unrest around the world is due to just that.

It is similar to the Reformation, when the printing press made the bible available to all who could read, and the nmber of people able to read increased rapidly. The Church no longer controlled religious knowledge, and the world changed forever.

We are in another of those times. I'm saying that the critical mass has been reached and that it is just a matter of time. If you want to reduce that time, take as much advantage as you can of this means for spreading your ideas. they are good ideas, DK. You just need to focus on believing that you can make a difference, that your personal power, through yur writing and your audience, can overcome the old power paradigm of wealth.

Go for it. Believe in your ability to report that change.

That's all I'm sayin.'

It's not my vision, Ann.  It's a vision that can't seem to get going with powerful people already behind it.  The ripple effect is too slow.  It is too educated.  People are responding to emotional propaganda.  It takes an emotional propaganda to engage them in the direction of a community conscience which is what I see as the necessity.  It's a spiritual change.  It's like the Civil Rights movement.  It takes a powerful voice.  It's only a movement until it stirs enough emotion to get it legislated.

We have action on the Everglades - but it's too late.  Acres of U.S. Sugar land still stand between Lake Okeechobee and the River of Grass, choking off the natural flow.  That means they will dump Lake Okeechobee with its agriculture run off into our River to our Gulf again and destroy another summer's swim in the Gulf due to the damage done by the runoff.  They have already started in a small way.  Once the fish start dying and stinking up the beach then they let go full force because the damage is evident then.  The alternative is to flood the city of Clewiston that should not be below the dikes.  Of course, the real alternative is for U.S. sugar to sell the state their land at a reasonable cost so the Everglades may flow naturally again and filter the filth naturally, replenishing the water table and putting moisture back into the air above.

It has always been the people with no power who have changed the world. 
Love,
Betty

Betty Fasig wrote:

It has always been the people with no power who have changed the world. 
Love,
Betty

  

Betty Fasig wrote:

It has always been the people with no power who have changed the world. 
Love,
Betty

Abraham Lincoln - Abraham Lincoln overcame many setbacks to become the most influential American President. In his famous Gettysburg speech, he inspired the nation with his noble words and helped to bring about the abolishment of slavery.

Mikhail Gorbachev - Mikhail Gorbachev had the courage, tenacity and strength of character to give up the absolute power of Soviet Communism. Moved the Soviet Union to democracy and respect for human rights. Gorbachev enabled the Berlin Wall to come down giving freedom to Eastern Europe.

William Wilberforce - William Wilberforce fought tirelessly for ending the slave trade, at a time when many accepted it as an 'economic necessity'. He awakened the conscience of many of his fellow countryman and made slavery appear unacceptable.

Nelson Mandela - Nelson Mandela campaigned for justice and freedom in his South Africa. Spent 20 years in jail for his opposition to apartheid. On release he healed the wounds of apartheid by his magnanimous attitude to his former political enemies.

Thomas Jefferson - One of America's founding fathers, Jefferson helped draft the Declaration of Independence and foster a belief in human rights. Amongst other achievements, Jefferson passed one of the first bills on religious tolerance in his state of Virginia.

Mahatma Gandhi - Gandhi was the principle figurehead of the Indian independence movement. Taught a philosophy of non-violence and peaceful protest.

Winston Churchill - In the worst moments of 1940, the Nazi war machine looked invincible as it swept through Europe. Churchill inspired the free nations to keep alive the fight against the tyranny of Hitler's Germany.

5/5/2014

                   You forgot one !

                   Shelagh Watkins... One of the greatest authors and publishers
                                             of our times...

                                                Cheers..Joe .. 

dkchristi wrote:

I really started the thread to seek solutions.  As I said earlier, this is one case where I prefer not to be right.  I just see climate change all around in data and in anecdotal experiences and the results are for the most part negative and even dire.  I see nothing but self-serving in its denial and cloaking.

Ann is always promoting paradigm shift as the savior.  It's just too broad for the diversity of the world.  However, we do need a paradigm shift from profit as God to a community conscience.  If anyone has any ideas on how to promote, realistically, such a shift, I'm open. 

Since money is neck and neck with profit as twin faces of the corporate industrial complex God, then it will take money to force a paradigm shift.  There needs to be incentives for responsible corporate citizens and negative results for stockholders and boards that promote excessive profit at any price to the citizens of communities.

Yes, Shelagh, there were moments when community counted.  There were a rare few corporations who treated their community and their employees well.  It is possible, but so rare.

Harvard and Yale and Oxford need to reward their students for theses that provide for a better world for all, not just the few.  They need to encourage their alumni to not only donate back to the schools but to be good corporate citizens.

I'm just trying a bit of brain storming here - help me.....

Well the academics are on the same gravy train as the big corporations, DK. It's a standing joke among academics in the UK that the chances of obtaining funding for research are greatly improved if "global warming" is introduced into the proposal e.g.:

The influence of climate on 19th century literature.

The effect of climate on Impressionist landscape painting.

Global warming and the history of pop culture.

Academic researchers receive money to attend conferences around the world to present data that can be neither proved nor disproved. The butterfly effect is real and can be used to explain anything from average rainfall changes to fluctuations in the size of the ice caps, north and south. A never-ending source of funding is available for scientists who provide governments with data presented to suit the policies of the day. It's a joke.
Just my opinion, okay?

How do we, as people without power, bring about change for the greater good?

1. Don't buy cheap goods that are made in sweat shops? Okay in theory, but it denies the poorest countries the opportunity to earn money selling their cheap goods.

2. Old habits die hard, if you want others to change, you have to be prepared to make changes in your own life. This may sound easy at first, but instead of thinking about the changes you would be prepared to make, ask yourself if you would change the things you would least like to change. Be honest with yourself, no one else can listen in to your thoughts.

3. Ask the rich to share their wealth among those less well-off than themselves? Again, ask yourself how much of your wealth would you be prepared to share with those who are poorer than you.

4. Do voluntary work. Time is money. If you can't afford to share your wealth, share your time and help those in need.

5. Look after yourself. The healthier you are, the less strain you put on the health services. Health is wealth.

6. Keep your glass half-full and spread a little joy.