Monday, March 19, 2007

Atheism, Skepticism, Environment, Decisions Decisions Decisions...

Ooooh, a lot of material there, so much more then can be tackled between Exhibition and Oakville, so I'm going to have to go with... The Environment.

So the theme here is tough topics, topics that are personally revealing, and possibly the ones I'm the most indecisive on which side of them I come down, but have been chewing on for a while.

So we can't help but hear in the news about the impending end of the world, visa vie global warming. Global Warming is actually a two part issue; the first in light of evidence indicating a temperature raise over the short and medium term of human--history,1400 AC until present, and 1950 until present-we must consider if this trend will continue, and what impact that will have on civilization from aspects political, and geographical, and what impact this will have the little e environment, like wildlife populations, species diversity, biodiversity, and a slew of other such factors.

The short and medium term time frames of reference are kind of loosely defined as they apply more to human life spans and memory, than in geographical terms. The evidence in these frames of reference is fairly consistent, there is in fact a short and medium term pattern, now between those two there was a time when there was a short term down trend, and this led people to fear a global cooling off, but with that grain of salt, we can safely assume that the evidence for the short and medium term warming is consistent. We can mathematically model this progression, and do studies, and make assumptions and probably reasonably predict how these temperatures will affect things. While imprecise, we can probably at least formulate a 'best guess' and in fact science has made that guess, and it's pretty grim. Now I believe that the little e environment will be better off the human civilization, but that is because nature is brutal and cruel, and flexible. Man--and that's the none gender specific who made great leaps, and the not singular who took small steps-will not be so lucky, are boundaries are political, and are cities are great obelisks that rise from salted fields that are not capable of swift egress from flood nor rampaging villagers in famine.

Now science has painted the worst case scenario for two reasons, the first is that they are realistic predications, and the second is that without a sensational worst case scenario, people might not take them serious, and they are serious.

Now I actually don't take umbrage with this issue, and if reality trends with these models, well one I'm glad I have a sump pump, and two Jenn has reserved a spot for me on her farming commune. Now there is an aspect of the second issue I haven't addressed, but lets posit temporarily that this scenario is inescapable, that seas will rise, storms will ravage coasts and the landscape will change. This is not insurmountable, but it requires serious consideration of how in this post-apocalyptic future, not with standing any complications that may arise from new social orders, how will we regain power, and technology, how will we rise from the ashes. Well the ashes will be made of squandered fuels, and wasted resources, so we must even now begin to develop alternative fuel sources, renewable power, and innovative materials from renewable sources so that we can rebuild. It wouldn't hurt if we also learned to get along, but I won't push it.

There are also other steps we can take to ensure that in the short term, and medium term (going forward) that we don't preemptively poison ourselves. That includes finding better ways to make electronics, not pumping toxic soup out of factories in effluent, and green gas stacks. Accepting imperfect materials, instead of those chemically processed beyond recognition. Recharging instead of replacing, reusing, and reducing, before your recycle. The list is endless, and not all things are equal, but if it's burning less fuel, or making your own power with solar, there are innumerable ways we can make a measurable difference on our surroundings, even if it is just make sure that each breath we take is a fresh breath.

All of these thing impact not just our own health but the health of the little e environment. That environment is at times fragile to our poisoning, and it is not apart of a natural cycle. With time many things will learn to survive what we do to them, but they will be terrible things, with evil intent, whose eyes glow, and many fanged maws will consume our children and rent our world asunder (I've seen too many scifi movies.)

It looks like my time has run short, and I will have to conclude in a second, and possibly tertiary post. I will end today cleanly having covered my thoughts on global warming as an effect, but (and here is a hint of what is to come) not as a cause. I hope you understand that I love nature, and that doesn't mean in a bell jar controlled and unchanging, but in its natural, visceral, carnal, evolving way. I believe we should protect nature from undo encroachment, perversion and waste. That's not to say we should try and prevent it from doing its own thing. Furthermore, I believe we should stop killing ourselves (literally with war) and no less tangibly with toxic poisons. We as individuals must take ownership of our consumerism, and our personal responsibility. I'm not a hypocrite here; I'm just growing into it. I honestly and freely admit that devices I own are not free of impact, but as a consumer I am attempting to make decisions which I perceive to be friendly are. I challenge each and everyone who reads this to pay more for an environmentally friendly product, tell companies you care the only way they understand, with money!

It comes down to this, we only have one world, and we can have a world of beauty, or one of death. I choose the former, and if turns out the world isn't warming, but we've made it a cleaner place, that is ok.

((More exciting material to come Soon(tm)))
Post a Comment