I’d give it a try. I’m not a vegan. But, if I can get decent meat without having to kill anyone (or have someone else kill someone on my behalf), I’d go for it. Anyone else?
Dodge trucks made what just might be the worst Stupor Bowl ad ever. If not, I don’t want to see what’s worse. But, Funny Or Die made a good parody of it. Unfortunately, to get the parody, you must first waste two minutes of your life watching the original ad. If you’ve already seen the Dodge Trucks Stupor Bowl ad, by all means, spare yourself. You do not need to watch that crap again.
I’m sure many who read my blog have been convinced for a while that I’m somewhat of a fear monger with respect to climate change and overpopulation. Perhaps. Before you make up your mind, read this:
The figures come as one of the world’s leading environmentalists issued a warning that the global food supply system could collapse at any point, leaving hundreds of millions more people hungry, sparking widespread riots and bringing down governments. In a shocking new assessment of the prospects of meeting food needs, Lester Brown, president of the Earth policy research centre in Washington, says that the climate is no longer reliable and the demands for food are growing so fast that a breakdown is inevitable, unless urgent action is taken.
Good thing climate change is just a hoax. Dig hole in sand. Insert head. Fill in hole. Ignorance is bliss.
“Armed aggression is no longer the principal threat to our future. The overriding threats to this century are climate change, population growth, spreading water shortages and rising food prices,” Brown says.
Here are some seriously classic fully electric cars from over 100 years ago.
- 1891 – 50 mile range, better than Chevy Volt’s pure electric range
- 1901 – 57 MPH
- 1902 – fully electric bus
- 1906 – regenerative braking, like my 2011 prius
- 1909 – 100 miles on a charge
Now, I must ask, what the hell happened?
The old elephant is still hanging around the room … has been getting bigger … and is getting seriously pissed off. But, can we mention the elephant yet? For most of us, the answer is no. As usual, Mother Jones created a great cover for this one.
As I write this, a huge catastrophe is unfolding in the Gulf of Mexico. 5,000 barrels (200,000 gallons) of oil per day are spilling into the gulf and wreaking tremendous environmental devastation.
Rather than detailing this particular catastrophe that is so forefront in the news these days, I would like to point out something even more important. This is a catastrophe. This was an accident. No one meant for it to happen.
However, oil spills are not only foreseeable, they are an inevitable consequence of our horrifyingly devastating substance abuse and addiction.
I don’t know that I agree with him on all points, especially about other civilizations. But then, he’s Stephen Hawking and I’m not even making mud pies yet.
This is the elephant in the room. This is the taboo subject that even most environmentalists won’t discuss. And yet, all of the other severe problems facing humanity stem from this one issue. We may discuss carbon footprint, but not the number of feet. We may discuss the risk of thermonuclear war but not the population pressure that increases both the size and severity of warfaring. We may discuss poverty and starvation but not the fact that reducing population automatically reduces poverty.
Please join in the Global Population Speak Out.
Why is it that we can discuss all of the symptoms of severe human overpopulation but not the root cause?
… otherwise, the few hundred peer reviewed articles summarized and referenced in this pre-Copenhagen summary showing, once again, that climate change is worse than the uber-conservative IPCC has been estimating might really scare me. I mean, what if it were really true that these few hundred recent peer-reviewed articles show that:
Read the rest of this entry »
Here’s an excellent write-up that describes the ways in which we are stealing from future generations to feed ourselves and the parallels between doing so and any other Ponzi scheme.
I’ve read Plan B 2.0, an excellent book, and notice that there is a link to a new version Plan B 4.0 by Lester Brown.
Don’t forget, the article doesn’t even mention the fact that not only is the oil at the pump a subsidized and limited resource, so is the oil we pour on our corn as fertilizer.
That’s right, industrial fertilizers are petroleum products. We’re eating oil!! That can’t be good for either our health or our long term prospects in terms of a very large population dependent on a fossil, non-renewable, resource.
This may appear to undermine a number of my earlier posts. However, in this case, I think the point is extremely important. We must begin to recognize and tell the truth of the true nature of our problems. That said, we must also use every weapon in our arsenal to fight for the preservation of the environment to the best of our ability. Most likely the only tool that will actually be worth a damn will be birth control. Yet, we must still do all we can to reduce our ecological (including carbon) footprints while at the same time taking action to reduce the number of feet. The regulars on this blog will remember that I have already argued that the planet cannot support even 300 million of us, let alone 6.7, 8, or 9 billion. So, in that sense, this article is still somewhat consistent with my prior posts. However, I cannot recall previously gotting to the point of wording the issue such that climate change is a mere symptom of a much larger problem, one that involves not only too many people, but people with a completely failed view of the finite planet on which we depend for our very lives every single day.
UPDATE: Kimberly Clark has now pledged to make their products only from paper that is either recycled or Forest Stewardship Council certified as sustainable. While this is not as good as the 100% recycled products from companies like Marcal and Green Forest, it is far better than they were. I will continue to purchase only paper from 100% recycled sources, and the more from post-consumer the better. However, Kimberly Clark products may now be purchased with a relatively clear conscience.
And, remember that cloth napkins and handkerchiefs are cheap, easy to wash, and far more environmentally conscious than any paper products. Please give them a try. Sponges, towels, and good old fashioned rags also work well for replacing paper towels.
Here is the new statement from Greenpeace.
Environmental considerations have the potential at this time to cause global civilizational collapse. There is even a real risk of human extinction caused by our lack of concern for the biosphere on which we depend. Despite this, it has not been a major topic in the debates of the presidential candidates thus far.
Instead, people are highly concerned with Iraq, health care, and education. While all of these are important, it seems obvious to me that they would pale in comparison to human extinction and even to global civilizational collapse. Our environmental problems can be solved or at least dramatically reduced if we take decisive action now.
The biosphere will not care about our excuses. The biosphere will not care about our economic issues. The biosphere will not care about our reasons for warfare. We must take action despite any other issues that may arise. None will seem even remotely important as we begin to feel the effects of having destroyed our resource base.
We are already past peak grain production. All three major world staple crops, rice, corn, and wheat, are being produced in lesser quantities year over year. We are already past peak ocean fisheries output despite continually improving fishing technology. We have been getting less fish from the ocean year over year since 1983. About a billion people depend on ocean fish for their primary source of protein.
Clearly this situation is not sustainable, especially in light of the fact that humanity has not yet reached peak human population. Remember, people are made of food. As our food production drops, so too will the human population. It may lag a bit. But, it will be reduced either by us relatively painlessly or for us by limited planetary resources. The latter will involve a great deal of human suffering and will probably, due to normal human behavior, be disastrous for many other species as well.
So, my question is, why is this issue taking a backseat when it should be the driver?