I have been trying for the last few days to discover a coherent logic towards my feelings on man’s relationship with his environment. This is proving not to be simple.
The process started when I heard on World Service radio a gentleman from the International Panel on Climate Change discussing their latest report. As you know, I tend to accept the established opinion on climate change, and rather take the view that if all our industrial activity were not affecting the atmosphere, that would be strange.
But what struck me was that the gentleman said that a pause in warming for the last fifteen years was not significant, as fifteen years was a blip in processes that last over millennia.
Well, that would certainly be very true if you are considering natural climate change. But we are not – we are considering man-made climate change. In terms of the period in which the scale of man’s industrial activity has been having a significant impact on the environment, surely fifteen years is a pretty important percentage of that period? Especially as you might naturally imagine the process to be cumulative – fifteen years at the start when nothing much happened would be more explicable.
Having tucked away that doubt, I started to try to think deeper. Man is, of course, himself a part of nature. Anything man does on this planet is natural to this planet. I do not take the view man should not change his environment – otherwise I should not be sitting in a house. The question is rather, are we inadvertently making changes to the environment to our own long term detriment?
That rejection of what you might call the Gaia principle – that the environmental status quo is an end in itself – has ramifications. It is hard to conceptualise our relationship with gases or soil, but easier in terms of animals. I am not a vegetarian – I am quite happy that we farm and eat cattle, for example – and you might argue that the cattle are pretty successful themselves, symbiotic survivors of a kind. Do I think other species have a value in themselves? Is there any harm in killing off a species of insect, other than the fact that biodiversity may be reduced in ways that remove potential future advantages to man, or there may be knock on consequences we know not of that damage man somehow? I am not quite sure, but in general I seem in practice to take the view that exploitation of other species and substantial distortion of prior ecological balance to suit men’s needs is fine, so presumably the odd extinction is fine too, unless it damages man long term.
I strongly disapprove of hurting animals for sport, and want to see them have the best quality of life possible, preferably wild. But I like to eat and wear them. I am not quite sure why it is OK to wear animal skin on our feet or carry it as a bag, but not to wear “fur”. What is the difference, other than that leather has had the hair systematically rubbed off as part of the process of making it? A trivial issue, but one that obviously relates to the deeper questions.
Yes I draw a distinction between animals which are intelligent and those which are not. I would not eat whale or dolphin. But this does not seem entirely logical – animal intelligence and sensibility is evidently a continuum. Many animals mourn, for example. The BBC World Service radio (my main contact with the outside world at present – I have just today found my very, very weak internet connection just about works if I try it at 5am) informed me a couple of days ago that orang-utans have the ability to think forward and tell others where they will be the next day. Why cattle and fish are daft enough to eat is hard to justify.
I quite appreciate the disbenefits to man of radically changing his environment, even if it could be done without long term risk to his existence – the loss of beauty, of connection to seasons and forms of behaviour with which we evolved. But I regard those as important only as losses to man, not because nature is important intrinsically. In short, if I thought higher seas, no polar bears and no glaciers would not hurt man particularly, I don’t suppose I would have much to say against it. I fear the potential repercussions are too dangerous to man. At base, I don’t actually care about a polar bear.
Five years ago there’d have been a huge outcry about this. Today, it passes by barely noticed, just another step in a rolling programme of increasing surveillance.
What the article doesn’t point out is:
(1) All filling stations will have to fit CC cameras. My local garage will have to install them or stop selling fuel.
(2) The data from these cameras will no longer be temporarily stored locally for security purposes, but will be transmitted to a Government national database.
(3) The location of every vehicle in Britain will thus be regularly logged.
http://www.nacsonline.com/News/Daily/Pages/ND1002134.aspx#.Uk35NbM25eR
Pykrete @ 8;38pm
Thanks for info, i hadn’t really looked to deeply into all that Stuff,
i was however aghast at this paragraph ( wich i meant to post but fucked up )
“Obama arrived with a heart for peace and an openness of mind to other nations which was in itself a huge transformation. He may see no alternative to fighting the war against al-Qa’ida in Afghanistan but everywhere else he has reasserted the importance of the United Nations and of multilateral diplomacy. He replaced military threats with dialogue with Iran and North Korea. He has begun talks with Russia over nuclear disarmament”.
“He has prioritised peace in the Middle East. He has reached out a hand of friendship to the Muslim world. He has thrown Washington’s recalcitrant attitude to global warming into reverse. All change begins with a change of mind by one individual and Obama has been that person”.
“In his will, the founder Alfred Nobel said that the prize should go “to the person who shall have done the most, or the best, work for fraternity between the nations and the abolition or reduction of standing armies and the formation and spreading of peace congresses”. It is hard to think of anyone of whom that is truer last year than Barack Obama”.
You just Could not make it up, Although that’s exactly what it is – Total Bullshit the indy know no shame, just like the rest of them
Anyway Pykrete, here’s pretty much the whole story, makes for a lotta reading, including the Comments section, and much history, check it oot.
The Truth About Russia in Georgia
http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/2008/08/the-truth-about-1.php
Ha Ha. Sinead O’Connor still takes no prisoners. Respect to her.
Here’s three extracts from a long open letter to Miley Cyrus, written upon hearing that Miley Cyrus had cited her as an influence.
Full letter here:
http://www.ourstage.com/blog/2013/10/3/sinead-oconnors-remarkable-open-letter-to-miley-cyrus
“Five years ago there’d have been a huge outcry about this. Today, it passes by barely noticed, just another step in a rolling programme of increasing surveillance.”
The Guardian did try to warn us 10 years ago.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/jul/29/humanrights.markoliver
“All these stories are subdued by the Zionist press. When is there going to be a public inquiry into Lockerbie? Ask Kempe, and Fred, and Villager and all the other pro-Zionist activists on this blog.”
You nasty little libelling wanker.
Show one pro Zionist comment I have ever made on this blog.
Frightening thing is that lowlifes like you think you have a right to control the media.
A couple of spats on BBC 1 last night. Dimbleby bridled when described by Quentin Letts as a member of the establishment. The subject of the discussion was the Mail’s attack on Ralph Miliband, or Rafe as Dimbleby called him. That says it all. QT.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b03c6zxq/Question_Time_03_10_2013/ 19′.40″ in.
Shapps, Letts, Yvette Cooper, Kirsty Williams, a Welsh LD AM, and Mehdi Hasan.
Then on Newsnight, we had Dame Neville Jones and Glenn Greenwald. The loaded question asked was whether Snowden was a hero or a traitor. The Dame was asserting that all of Snowden’s data was by now in the hands of the Russians and the Chinese. Greenwald said that was a baseless and preposterous allegation as Snowden possessed extreme encryption. Stuff and nonsense persisted the harridan. Newsnight, including a ‘report’ from Correra and an interview with Glenn Greenwald under Ms Wark’s control.
33mins from the start
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b03c4h38/Newsnight_03_10_2013/
John Dross:
“All these stories are subdued by the Zionist press. When is there going to be a public inquiry into Lockerbie? Ask Kempe, and Fred, and Villager and all the other pro-Zionist activists on this blog.”
Ditto to what Fred says, you embittered oaf of a loser.
You inspire to be called an el-Murrayista. The el standing for embittered-loser where you lose any inherent logic that may have creeped in to your ‘education’ and any sense of proportion.
Oaf!
Yes the APNR system is already extensive. The cops can already track vehicles in near real time and recreate any journey.
Well that caused a bit of a reaction Fred. You might not think you are pro-Zionist but you are. Even the comment asking to show where you are pro-Zionist is pro-Zionist. Anybody who defends the Zionist-owned media is Zionist. The important point of my comment was the fact that the regime you have consistently defended can put a man away and hold him in solitary confinement for a crime they clearly knew he hadn’t done and then release him to die. You chose to take it personally which is not nearly as important as the story, which was what I hoped you would comment upon.
http://www.democracynow.org/2013/10/2/after_4_decades_in_solitary_dying
As to wanking that is a personal indulgence. I suggest if you want to know who the wankers are you should look inwardly.
Likewise for you Villager. It’s just one personal attack after another without ever addressing the issues. Should there be a public inquiry into Lockerbie? Should a man have been banged away for 40 years for a crime he did not do? These are the important issues but beyond your realm of intellect.
Jon I am not on Medialens. The poster in question replied to the BBC under the heading ‘BBC’s classification of chemical weapons’ on http://members5.boardhost.com/medialens/msg/1380800901.html
Most Medialens contributors and many others are well aware that the BBC persist in carrying Israel’s fabrications such as the one about white phosphorus being used in Gaza to provide cover. War criminals hide behind the excuse of the ability of Willie Peter, as it was called in WW1 and later in Vietnam, to create ‘smoke’.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_phosphorus
@John Goss
You misrepresent Fred mate. His views are consistently libertarian not establishment and I have seen nothing to suggest Zionist. I suspect he is naturally contrarian and grumpy. Which I like.
“Well that caused a bit of a reaction Fred. You might not think you are pro-Zionist but you are. ”
Get it into your head shit for brained retard that I am not a Zionist, never have been a Zionist, got hit with the your sort of nasty underhand lies and character assassinations for defending the Palestinian cause, been banned from forums for defending the Palestinian cause.
That’s why I don’t take any stick from nasty little shits like you who will slander those who oppose their opinions rather than admit they are wrong.
Now go fuck yourself slimy little turd.
Thu. October 3, 2013
Main gate of Nuclear Weapons Factory blockaded by Welsh Dragons!
From 7.00am 50 activists from Wales have been blockading the Main Gate of the Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE) Burghfield. Campaigners are calling for Trident to be scrapped and plans to replace it to be abandoned.
Activists – from across Wales including from Knighton, Cardiff, Builth, Llandeilo and Swansea are accompanied by 3 huge red dragons and are ‘locked on’ with chains and pipes across the main entrance.
http://www.cndcymru.org/main-gate-of-nuclear-weapons-factory-blockaded-by-welsh-dragons
‘The AWE is owned by the Ministry of Defence (MoD), but since the early 1990s, it has had a GOCO status – Government Owned-Contractor Operated. So, although the MoD owns the site, private companies (AWE Management Ltd) run the day to day operations. From April 2000, AWE was run by British Nuclear Fuels Limited (BNFL), a private company run by the UK government, Lockheed Martin (the US company that also develops and produces the Trident missiles) and Serco (a UK company). In 2009 however, the government sold its BNFL share to a US company, Jacobs Engineering, so now AWE is two thirds run by US corporations.’ http://cnduk.org/campaigns/no-to-trident/aldermaston
Off you go again Fred. Off on one. What about the issues you defend?
I wish i could say it as eloquently as Fred conveying simple logic succinctly at the same time.
But evidently, simple logic is not for simpletons like The Dross.
Dross, go and have a shower, its sticking on you.
Yes Phil, may be on some issues Fred’s opinions are, if contentious, laudable, but he does choose to attack people who do not share his praise for Mainstream Media rather than address issues. And you must admit he has really lost the plot today.
@John Goss
I suspect you got a mouthful because you unfairly called him a Zionist.
All this faux-indignation over the Mail’s article on Ralph Milliband from the same people who chanted “the Witch is dead” and “tramp the dirt down”..
They are not upset because they found the article insulting, but rather that it is correct.
“Likewise for you Villager. It’s just one personal attack after another without ever addressing the issues. Should there be a public inquiry into Lockerbie? Should a man have been banged away for 40 years for a crime he did not do? These are the important issues but beyond your realm of intellect.”
Oh, I said that. Then you went and proved it at comments at 8.17 and 8.19 am. Any more evidences to come?
The discussion on Medialens about the appalling Wark interview with Glenn Greenwald includes a link to this excellent piece by Jonathan Cook, obviously written overnight.
The most embarrassing news interview ever
4 October 2013
This must be the most cringe-inducing interview by a senior journalist I’ve ever seen. It’s conducted by Kirsty Wark, one of the BBC’s top presenters, and takes places on Newsnight, the BBC’s flagship nightly current affairs programme.
It truly makes me more ashamed of the “profession” of journalism than I already was – and I didn’t think that was possible.
Throughout the interview, Wark abandons even the pretence of doing what journalism is supposed to be about: interrogating the centres of power and holding them to account.
/..
http://www.jonathan-cook.net/blog/2013-10-04/the-most-embarrassing-news-interview-ever/
Phil, if Fred says he is not a Zionist I am happy to accept that. But the important thing is the issues and his recent criticism of alternative media and praise for the ‘unbiased’ mainstream media, which is Zionist, coloured my comment. Anyone here making a comment, if the comment is not just an insult, the important thing is the content of the comment. Don’t you agree?
Dross, read Phil and try to get your rectum-sized brain around it, if you can. You don’t set the ‘issues’ around here, get it.
John,
Clearly, for you, “praising the mainstream media” is anything short of condemning it for being “Rothschild-owned Zionist”. And if one does not subscribe to your extreme crackpot view, one is Zionist without even knowing it!
My favourite of the day: “Even the comment asking to show where you are pro-Zionist is pro-Zionist.”
Brilliant!
I think the Today Programme should hand over the editorial to John Goss for a day so we can get a taste of what his “control of the media” would sound like!
Ps, is “Rothschild-owned Zionist” a roundabout way of saying Jewish?
@Fred:
Journalism’s role is not objectivity, in the sense that they must be sterile brokers of ‘He said this, then she said that’. They must look at what both have said in the past as contextual to the truth of their statements in the here and now. They must exercise perspective and analysis, which does not meet the textbook definition of ‘objectivity’.
This is what’s been wrong with Media for decades. Either they are obviously partisan and sectored in their reportage, or they fail to provide anything other than neutered and naive, as well as under-informed opinions about things they have but shallow understanding of. To be fair, we expect them to be experts in every discipline, but that is impossible, so they pretend expertise.
The most dangerous knowledge in the Media, is their partial education.
Worth repeating. That was the sort of response I was looking for. I note the Daily Mail believers among us carefully dodge the issue.
Now, wouldn’t it be good if journalists, to be admitted to their craft, did not mostly have 3 years on an arts course immediately after leaving school, and years on a local rag by way of experience, but instead had done something completely unrelated to the fairly simple task of grabbing (what may erroneously appear to be)the main points of an issue and boiling them down to the two paragraphs the punter actually reads if he can be bothered?
That would presuppose educating the public to read beyond the second par, as well, I guess. Which, as the Daily Mail followers among us will tell me, is incredibly elitist of me. As well as perverting the real purpose of education, which is to provide compliant economic cannon fodder.
Goss- suggesting that a poster’s asking for instances of pro-Zionism in his posts is in fact pro-Zionist, is IMO incredibly silly of you. Whatever Fred is, and my mind boggles sometimes considering this, he is not a Zionist.
Sh*t. The previous post was addressed to Ben, not Fred. Apologies to the former.
@Ben, then.
Now they’re out in force I’ve changed my 11.22 pm (yesterday) comment to concur with current opinion.
”
The wonderful US of A. 4 decades in solitary for a crime he did not do. Now, like al Megrahi was, he is dying of cancer.
http://www.democracynow.org/2013/10/2/after_4_decades_in_solitary_dying
All these stories are subdued by the Zionist press. When is there going to be a public inquiry into Lockerbie? Ask Kempe, and Anon, and Villager and all the other pro-Zionist activists on this blog.”
“Phil, if Fred says he is not a Zionist I am happy to accept that.”
Good.
“But the important thing is the issues and his recent criticism of alternative media and praise for the ‘unbiased’ mainstream media, which is Zionist, coloured my comment. Anyone here making a comment, if the comment is not just an insult, the important thing is the content of the comment. Don’t you agree?”
Dissent will not be tolerated, everyone must live on the same fantasy island as John Goss or they are Zionists.
Apart form that I haven’t criticized alternative media and I haven’t said that the mainstream media was unbiased.
“All these stories are subdued by the Zionist press. ”
The Guardian covered t over a week ago.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/25/angola-three-herman-wallace-cancer-release