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.
@Jemand – There’s no need to be rude, even if you don’t answer the point about the ice fairs. I won’t answer in kind, but will just observe that in your second sentence, your desire to be sarcastic seems to dominate at the expense of rationality.
Later on, you talk about ‘idiots’ who think global warming isn’t taking place. In most places, it certainly is. You haven’t been led to believe that being critical of the wall-to-wall propaganda, of ‘science’, and of the official story equals denying that global warming is happening (in most places, anyway), have you?
The reason I ask is that I was wondering whether you were trying to argue against the opponents of the idea that climate change is anthropogenic by implying that we all opponents of the idea that the climate is changing.
That equates (by contrapositive, if you want the logical term) to the argument that since the climate is changing, the change must be anthropogenic. Which, er, doesn’t stand up.
In the course of getting a science degree, did you gain any useful knowledge about how scientific research in academia is funded, and how research topics get chosen? Sadly, most graduates don’t.
@ John Goss – Agreed, Dan Brown is a master of readability. But throughout Digital Fortress I was hoping that the story goal of preventing a breakdown of NSA computer security wouldn’t be achieved 🙂 It was much easier to get behind the hero in Angels and Demons when the goal was to stop the bad guys from massacring a conclave of cardinals!
Inferno has the usual shape-shifting character, but it’s different from the first 5 in that it carries a (vile) social message.
Guess I see the point, that you can exempt animals from the categorical imperative if they fail to pass some intelligence test. It’s a corollary of the argument from compassion exemplified here,
http://charliedavis.blogspot.nl/2013/06/how-lhasa-apso-made-me-eat-my-vegetables.html
But in purely instrumental terms, all species have some option value because it’s hard to know which one might take over if homo sapiens cooks itself or nukes itself. Maybe you want to be remembered when you’re gone (why you’d want to be remembered is beyond me (you don’t exist, what do you care?) but I see all kinds of people taking up space with gravestones, so I guess that has some ineffable appeal.)
Maybe it will be cockroaches learning from your mistakes, maybe it will be polar bears, hell, maybe loa-loa worms would have stepped up to do it. There’s plenty of time for any of these to evolve. How hard can it be to advance beyond the level of a Bush or an Obama or a Blair? If every human stopped reproducing and turned the world over to the next species in line, I’d be fine with that. Give them a head start.
Ben, Sorry for the delay. Comet Siding Spring (very close brush with Mars next year) is also a newbie from the Oort cloud. It is odd how so many long period comets seem to be entering the inner solar system in such a short space of time. Has something disturbed them? Maybe Sedna, Nemesis or one of the small TNO planets might have done it. Who knows.
I do think that if solar cycle 25 is weaker even than this one it could point to another Dalton/Maunder period of harsh winters.
I remember when it all started and people were proud to achieve a 10% efficiency. Now look at what happening, better panels approaching the 50% efficiency mark.
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/09/26/2681701/super-efficient-solar-cells/
Concentrated solar power in the Magreb could produce all our needs in Europe and beyond, sadly the neocon war machine is waltzing its way through the Med, leaving not much hope and many armed jihadi’s in their wake.
Desertec and DII have split some month back but the idea is still financed and backed by some powerful backers.
http://www.dii-eumena.com/
‘The two-headed baby of Fallujah’
Your title is in very bad taste.
“MMR jab or else: Cruddas alarms Labour with benefit claimant policy threat”
http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2013/09/23/mmr-jab-or-else-cruddas-alarms-labour-with-benefit-claimant
Chris Jones, Thanks for your kind remarks in the other thread, I really appreciated your observations. Further I share you sadness, that amidst the “tribal” confusions, the more serious issues are remaining overlooked.
The simple fact that we are living on a dynamic planet that is constantly changing, yet to expect and seek constancy and conservation of the moment is a forlorn hope born out of the fucking reactionary mindsets bent on maintaining the status quo.
The patently obvious confusion on this thread is telling of the degrees of conflict of interest spilling into outright fights. Further, the wider issues of compassion for animals, as well as dietary preferences, added to the memes sewn by the corporate media at the behest of their plutocrat masters are confusing the issues, which is then given a “scientific” bent. The fucking comical notion of debating the “scientific methods” raging without the mundane notion; are the right questions being asked and the answers thereof being searched for?
“The fucking comical notion of debating the “scientific methods” raging without the mundane notion; are the right questions being asked and the answers thereof being searched for?”
Oooh, G’won, Fedup. You tell us. I know you’ll know the answers.
‘The two-headed baby of Fallujah’
“Your title is in very bad taste.”
It is. No doubt he/she thinks it’s funny.
[Probably still pulling wings off flies, and putting salt on snails. Some folk never grow up.]
The Killing of Tony Blair
“Dear friends, in just over 30 days we reached 110K and still have 1 week to go to raise more, making this already the highest crowd-funded documentary film ever in the UK. This is absolutely amazing and we cannot thank you, our backers, enough. We are truly touched by your contributions so far. With one more week to go, please continue to let all your friends and family know about it and ask your local newspapers and radio stations to run a story on this already record-breaking documentary. Let’s keep the momentum. You are making this happen, thank you!”
George Galloway
2,840
Backers
£111,129
pledged of £50,000 goal
Did someone mention “compassion for animals”?
CIA front organisations spread false rumours of cruelty to animals by innocent Muslims –
http://www.banliveexport.com/egypt
http://www.peta.org/features/further-abuses-of-australian-animals-exposed-in-gruesome-investigation.aspx
http://www.weeklytimesnow.com.au/article/2013/02/11/559591_latest-news.html
@Fedup “The patently obvious confusion on this thread is telling of the degrees of conflict of interest spilling into outright fights. Further, the wider issues of compassion for animals, as well as dietary preferences, added to the memes sewn by the corporate media at the behest of their plutocrat masters are confusing the issues, which is then given a “scientific” bent”
Very true – the meat industry, agriculture and nature itself is also under attack as directed under Agenda 21 and Sustainable development and its doctrine of re wilding and coroprate property and rural control. There are serious questions and accusations made against the validity of the Foot and mouth debacle as well and whether it could be a deliberate virus Released from Government labs as a further way of attacking the agricultural community and feeding the billion pound vaccination programme. It’s death or a vaccine to the animals,enforced MMR for us,the other useless eaters. And if you question MMR as more and more are thanfully doing, you’re obviously a right winger, a nutter or some other kind of denier/anti semite/homophobe etc etc.
http://rabbitholenews.blogspot.co.uk/2007/08/foot-and-mouth-virus-released-from.html
(A pleasure regarding comments on the other thread by the way-just saying it how I see it)
No saucer of milk today, I see your claws are out again!
Drive by snipping seems to be all that you do lately.
====
What was the “Classic” movie about the _ews and their Kosher slaughter. What was the name of that move again? Der ewige J……
Fuckwit hatemongers have really limited options don’t they? The same fucking historical narrative, puled out, dusted and represented with new victims, but who is counting?
Nothing on the BBC ‘News’ about the NHS protest in Manchester. They do have a report on the website.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-24286582#
They quote attendance of 50,000. It was probably many more. They always understate numbers at protests and on marches.
They made a big thing of two old boys from the Royal Fusiliers in their berets and hackles, heckling Hammond on army cuts.
At the start of the Con conference, they displayed the greatest hypocrisy by showing a filmed tribute to Thatcher introduced by Grant Shapps aka Michael Green in his other life!.
They knifed her in the back for goodness’ sake and got rid.
Her ashes were laid to rest yesterday at the Royal Hospital Chelsea, with family and Chelsea pensioners in attendance. Hope that it is the last we hear of her.
Re, the killing of Tony Blair film proposal. If George Galloway is in charge of the money, expect a low budget film with much evidence given by George, with some luck he might even dare to take some shots, oops, sorry, film footage, in Iraq, Fallujah to be specific.
Or no film at all.
Just feel as if I can’t trust him, don’t know what it is, maybe its to do with his past, hence no support here.
The WHO report on congenital anomolies in Iraq was not made publicly available (because it was a shit report) but has been now. It is receiving harsh criticism. The report is a “disgrace”.
“The truth can be established by science, but not if it is dishonest and political. And it seems that this report, and the events and decisions that preceded it, and particularly the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine peer review meeting, are a classical example of scientific dishonesty. The use of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine reminds me of the use of the Royal Society to produce a disgraceful report on depleted uranium in 2001. Since the outcome is intended to exonerate the US and UK military from what are effectively war crimes, and since the result will be employed to defend the continued use of uranium weapons, all concerned in this chicanery should be put before a criminal court and tried for what they have done.”
http://rt.com/op-edge/who-iraq-report-disgrace-461/
Viewpoints from public bodies etc on the IPCC report.
Viewpoints: Reactions to the UN climate report
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-24296204
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/looting-the-pension-funds-20130926
Ref the Manchester march and its non reporting by the BBC, it appears that the BBC take their orders from the Cons.
From Medialens
BBC Man: Tory Security told us not to film – so we didn’t!
Posted by Vegetable Man on September 29, 2013, 5:14 pm, in reply to “BBC sponsors begin conference today”
From Norman Smith’s Twitter feed:
norman smith â€@BBCNormanS
 Unfortunately security at #cpc13 won’t allow us to film #nhs299 demo outside conference centre #magnacarta #gloriousrevolution
norman smith â€@BBCNormanS For clarity. I was stopped from filming “Live” for @BBCNews Channel from conf centre overlooking #nhs299 demo #cpc13

norman smith â€@BBCNormanS
 Also to be clear. I was stopped by security staff who said they had been told by police not to allow access. No reason was given #cpc13
Now what is needed is an international report by independent qualified scientists not funded by public bodies, governments or private interests on the climate and how it could change for the better or worse. 5 non dependent scientists from each of the world’s countries should come up with a good range of balanced evidence and theories. Only then can a real objective consensus be reached and definate decisions be made
Science is a hypothesis or theory only assumed to be true true until proven otherwise
Chris Jones, you have hit the nail on the head. The current preoccupation of the corporates, is to further consolidate their concessions into monopolies regardless of the efficiency of their operations, or suitability of their products and services.
Further if you recollect the “Tamiflu” doses for every man, woman, and child as promised by bLiar, is in fact the continuation of the same scam you have outlined.
ROFL, thanks for the laugh.
“There used to be ice fairs on the Thames. They stopped, because of regional warming, shortly before industrialisation. That warming could’t possibly have been caused by industrialisation.”
I debunked that one last night.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age
At least the climate scientists talk sense not a load of anecdotal clap trap.
“Science is a hypothesis or theory only assumed to be true true until proven otherwise”
Yes Newton’s theory of gravitation is only a theory.
Best hold on to something.
@Fred “Yes Newton’s theory of gravitation is only a theory. Best hold on to something”
I think you’re deliberately misunderstand the premise. Newton’s theory of gravitation seems pretty sound to me. If no one proves him incorrect then his theory will stand
“Drive by snipping seems to be all that you do lately.”
I don’t snip, Jon snips. And you didn’t tell us all about
“are the right questions being asked and the answers thereof being searched for?”
Why am I not surprised?
Meanwhile, you’re daily telling us you’re ROFL and PMSL, all of which is 100% fake.
1. pmsl
possibly the worst and most unrealistic of internet jargon…
‘pissing myself laughing’ sure u are
arse: OMFG really pmsl
cool dude: please dont piss…
arse: wat?
cool dude: stfu n00b
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=pmsl
“I think you’re deliberately misunderstand the premise. Newton’s theory of gravitation seems pretty sound to me. If no one proves him incorrect then his theory will stand”
How about Darwin’s theory of evolution then?
46% of Americans believe Darwin wrong with about as good evidence as the climate sceptics have got.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/155003/hold-creationist-view-human-origins.aspx
Fred :
“I debunked that one last night.
The first River Thames frost fair was in 1607 and the last in 1814; changes to the bridges and the addition of an embankment affected the river flow and depth, hence diminishing the possibility of freezes.”
~~~~~~~~~~
According to Wikipedia, work on the London Embankment started in 1862.
Well after 1814, in other words.
@Fred I think there are many many questions not only regarding Darwin’s theory of evolution as he presented it but about he himself as a man.The original title of this book was ‘On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life’ . That tends to suggest that there were some darker motives to his work. He was an eugenicist into bloodline breeding and an Anglo supremacist. Although obviously a highly intelligent man I don’t think his theory of evolution can be taken as gospel anymore.
http://henrymakow.com/was_darwin_an_instrument_of_th.html
Lloyd Pye. Everything you know is wrong. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pe6DN1OoxjE
Craig, perhaps the fate of the splendid polar bear is Natures foreshadowing of the tragic fate that will overcome our (great?) grandchildren. Whether or not global warming is the result of anthropocentric effects due to too clever by half technologies or not is really by the by the point is that polluting and exploiting the environment that supplies our essential requirements is a totally unnecessary and dumbassthingtodo!
@Chris Jones
Yes lets throw away Darwin’s theory of evolution and replace it with some nonsense from an anti-semitic website which blames everything on the Rothchilds, Freemasonry and the forged protocols of ZIon – or we could look at the other link you provide which pumps aliens and the paranormal. Talk about destroying whatever credibility you had with a single post.
@Fred
While I totally agree that man made climate change should be taken very seriously – that doesn’t mean that most climate scientists do not accept that there are natural and largely unexplained cycles in temperatures on both a global and a localised level. That said since such cycles are still largley unexplained – and therefore unforcastable it would be idiotic to assume that they can be relied upon to counter the problems that are already arising from man made global warming. This Thames freezing over stuff really is pretty much an irrelevance raised in nearly all cases by those who wish to ignore the science that does exist.