• Register
  • Help
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 29

Topic: Real Importance?

Share/Bookmark
  1. #1

    Real Importance?

    sponsored links


    ***Advertisments***
    Global Warming -- Facing Our Fears
    By Kelpie Wilson
    t r u t h o u t | Statement

    Thursday 06 May 2004

    Addressing a meeting of environment ministers last week, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan warned that the Iraq war and terrorism have overshadowed critical environmental problems. Global warming and dwindling natural resources are losing the world\'s attention as the focus shifts to war and terror.

    \"However understandable that focus might be, we cannot lose any more time or ground in the wider struggle for human well-being. Just as we need balanced development, so do we need a balanced international agenda,\" Annan said.

    In recent months, others have made similar statements.

    Canadian Environment Minister David Anderson said: \"Current preoccupation is with terrorism, but in the long term climate change will outweigh terrorism as an issue for the international community. . . climate change is going to make some very fundamental changes to human existence on the planet.\" Anderson said that if nothing is done to slow global warming, the wheat-growing prairies of Canada and the Great Plains of the United States would eventually no longer produce enough food to support the population. \"Terrorism is unlikely to give us the strong possibility of 500 million refugees. Climate change is likely to give us that if it goes unchecked from flooded areas ... in countries such as Bangladesh,\" he said.

    Sir David King, science advisor to UK prime minister Tony Blair, said climate change was the most severe problem faced by the world. He criticized the US for a failure of leadership: \"As the world\'s only remaining superpower, the United States is accustomed to leading internationally co-ordinated action. But at present the US Government is failing to take up the challenge of global warming.\"

    He was later told by the prime minister\'s office to hold his tongue.

    Support for Sir David\'s view came from Hans Blix, the former United Nations chief weapons inspector, who said the environmental crisis was at least as important a threat as global terrorism. Blix is in a unique position to be able to weigh these relative threats. Unlike the general public he has first hand knowledge of Iraq\'s WMD program and was not fooled by the Bush administration\'s lies and distortions about the Iraq threat.

    Meanwhile, it is still possible to find climate change skeptics in the American media. The product of a few industrial think tanks like the Competitive Enterprise Institute and the Pacific Research Institute, their broadsides uniformly accuse environmental advocates and scientists of \"fear mongering.\"

    The overwhelming majority of the world\'s climate scientists agree that human-caused climate change is real, but that is not enough evidence for media hit men like John Stossel of ABC\'s 2020. In a 2001 piece still posted on his website, Stossel says: \"Despite what we hear from the media, there is no consensus that global warming is harming the planet.\" Stossel asks, \"Are we scaring ourselves to death?\"

    Still, the flood of climate change debunking has definitely slowed. As people around the world begin to believe the evidence of their senses, it becomes harder to sell the happy talk about global warming. Our fears are becoming reality:

    Western forests are dying from drought and the fire season in the west has come earlier than ever with officials now reporting conditions in early May like those not formerly seen until July.

    Reservoir levels are dropping and we are told that Lake Powell may go dry and stop producing hydro-electricity in a few short years.

    Those in the middle of the country are preparing for another summer of severe storms and tornados.

    In Europe, people are bracing for more catastrophic floods and another summer of killing heat.

    In Alaska, the permafrost is melting and roads and foundations are buckling as the ground turns to mush.

    Some Pacific islands are becoming uninhabitable as rising seas sweep across them during storms.

    Around the world, declines of wildlife and the spread of invasive pests are linked to global warming.

    Since 9/11 we have seen the Bush administration use fear to motivate the public to support an unfounded war on Iraq. Bush told lies that convinced Americans that Saddam Hussein supported al-Qaeda terrorists and that he was capable of launching missiles loaded with nuclear and biological weapons against his neighbors. None of this has turned out to be true, but the fear was created.

    Fear is a powerful force in human affairs that, because of our psychological makeup, is easy to manipulate. We are taught to fear our fears, and to suppress them as we desperately seek ways to rid ourselves of them. When our leaders tell us we can act quickly to eliminate a fear, we usually jump on board without a lot of questions.

    George Lakoff calls this the \"Strict Father\" model of politics. Lakoff is a professor of linguistics at the University of California, Berkeley who has written widely on the topic of \"framing.\" In public debate, he says, the winning side is the side that creates the frame that defines the terms of the debate. Today the conservatives are winning because they have framed that debate according to a particular model of the family. The conservative family model is based on the \"Strict Father\" who supports and protects the family. \"He does it in only one way -- by strength and punishment. Only punishment works. Only shows of strength work,\" Lakoff said in a January 15 interview with BuzzFlash. \"When you have fear in the country, fear evokes a strict father model. It\'s to the conservatives\' advantage to keep people afraid, to keep having orange alerts, to keep having announcements that they have secret information that there might be a bombing somewhere in the country. As long as you keep people afraid, you reinforce the strict father model.\"

    Lakoff contrasts this model with the \"Nurturant Parent\" family model that liberals use as a frame. This type of family and politics focuses on bringing out the best in everyone. It is more about joy, love, community and progress, but it has not coped successfully with fear. Lakoff said we need \"to be positive, to break through the fear You have to project an image of love and warmth, and happiness and hope. That\'s the first thing. You don\'t feed the fear.\"

    But when it comes to environmental issues like global warming, our fears are real. And no one is providing us with easy answers like sending in the troops to oust a dictator. Instead, we are being told not to worry about climate change, pollution and energy shortages and to carry on with business as usual. So we suppress our fears and they add to the general state of fear that is then used to get us to agree to war and destruction.

    In the depths of the Great Depression, Franklin Delano Roosevelt said to America: \"Let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself -- nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.\" But FDR did not ask people to suppress their fears. He said, \"only a foolish optimist can deny the dark realities of the moment,\" and called for moral vision and a plan of action.

    Unaddressed fear leads to paralysis. We still have a chance to head off some of the worst climate change scenarios, but we must change our attitude toward fear and come to see it as our best ally. Where would we be today if our ancestors did not fear the predator, the storm, the poor harvest, and take steps to protect themselves? We must face our fears and act, in concert with others, in joy and love. When we can do that, we will be free.

    -------

  2. #2

  3. #3

    Re: Real Importance?

    USA: greatest polluter in the world. Be proud of it, Brady.

    There is no world police that can write out a ticket for that.

    And: do some reading on \"Cognitive Dissonance\".

  4. #4

    Re: Real Importance?

    Thanks for the rhetoric. Now how \'bout some science?

  5. #5

    Re: Real Importance?

    Brady,

    I wouldn\'t look to the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine for objective information. It\'s not an academic institution at all. It\'s a think tank with an agenda. Heck, look at the address: Cave Junction, Oregon. The population is 1,363. It\'s a 20 mile drive on a winding road just to get to Fruitdale, the closest city of any size: 3,780. Nice name for a think tank though.

    Here\'s an article about a report from the Department of Defense regarding climate change:

    http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0222-01.htm

    And now for some common sense. When you visit Los Angeles or Houston on a smoggy day, do any of us question that the effect is real, or man made? We\'re talking about fudging up something like 10,000 cubic miles of air above a single city in a single day. It takes talking thousands of tons of pollutants to do this. It\'s enough to harm our lungs, rot natural rubber and leave a grit on exposed surfaces. Acid rain due to burning coal is strong enough to be able to destroy forests. We are able to make whole rivers undrinkable. Even the ancients were able to salt fields and make them barren. Can man cause enough environmental destruction to change environments? You bet. Even the trails on which we walk turn to mud tracks while the adjacent ground sprouts plants and grass.

    The challenge is to find a situation in which man exists in which he doesn\'t alter his environment.

    I\'ve no doubt that climate change is real and that man plays a role. I can\'t predict the future though. I can only hope for the best and work to curb our worst excesses.

  6. #6

    Re: Real Importance?

    JonFairhurst:
    [ QUOTE ]
    When you visit Los Angeles or Houston on a smoggy day, do any of us question that the effect is real, or man made?

    [/ QUOTE ]

    No, but I thought we were talking about global climate change (aka Global Warming) - not smog.

    [ QUOTE ]
    Even the trails on which we walk turn to mud tracks while the adjacent ground sprouts plants and grass.


    [/ QUOTE ]

    This is an interesting point. If I didn\'t know better (and actually, I don\'t), I would glean from such an observation the sense that the underlying message is that Man is inherently evil and unnatural.

    Here\'s an important question that I think should be asked before any other:
    If we are to take environmental action, do we take the action for the sake of the environment, for the sake of nature, etc, or do we take the action for the sake of Man\'s happiness?

  7. #7

    Re: Real Importance?

    --------------------
    - Nick Phoenix (Stop Mad Cowboy Disease)


    HEHEHE -- Nick, are you the original author of that ?? I\'d LOVE to make bumper stickers with that slogan!!!!

    I still have a Bush in \'92 sticker on a guitar case that has a swatzika for the \'S\' and a clever picture of senior bush with a hitler mustache.

  8. #8

    Re: Real Importance?

    [ QUOTE ]
    Even the trails on which we walk turn to mud tracks while the adjacent ground sprouts plants and grass

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Even animals cause this, so that point is moot. There are far worse pollutants than CO2 we\'re pumping into the air i.e. carbon monoxide, ozone - which have an impact on our health as well as the environment. Tackle those first, and by then we may have some more conclusive evidence on the effects of CO2 and global warming.

    Rob

  9. #9

    Re: Real Importance?

    Okay, I just finished reading the article on the supposed Pentagon report:

    [ QUOTE ]
    A secret report, suppressed by US defense chiefs and obtained by The Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a \'Siberian\' climate by 2020. Nuclear conflict, mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will erupt across the world.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I simply do not believe that. That’s only about 15 years off. Even if it was going to happen, it’s very likely much too late to stop it now.

    [ QUOTE ]
    \'Disruption and conflict will be endemic features of life,\' concludes the Pentagon analysis. \'Once again, warfare would define human life.\'

    [/ QUOTE ]

    This just sounds like so much “spin” and hype. Talk about fear-mongering.

  10. #10

    Re: Real Importance?

    [ QUOTE ]
    JonFairhurst:
    [ QUOTE ]
    When you visit Los Angeles or Houston on a smoggy day, do any of us question that the effect is real, or man made?

    [/ QUOTE ]

    No, but I thought we were talking about global climate change (aka Global Warming) - not smog.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    The two topics are related, given that the assertion is that green house gas emmissions cause climate change. The difficulty is that we can\'t see CO2, so it\'s easy to pretend that it doesn\'t exist. We can see smog though, which illustrates the scale of the situation.

    [ QUOTE ]
    [ QUOTE ]
    Even the trails on which we walk turn to mud tracks while the adjacent ground sprouts plants and grass.


    [/ QUOTE ]

    This is an interesting point. If I didn\'t know better (and actually, I don\'t), I would glean from such an observation the sense that the underlying message is that Man is inherently evil and unnatural.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Animal paths affect the ground similarly. My only point was that we leave footprints wherever we tread. It\'s illogical to think that six billion humans and their activities would have leave no footprint on global systems.

    [ QUOTE ]
    Here\'s an important question that I think should be asked before any other:
    If we are to take environmental action, do we take the action for the sake of the environment, for the sake of nature, etc, or do we take the action for the sake of Man\'s happiness?

    [/ QUOTE ]

    My sister-in-law has lived in a mining town for a number of years. She lived in Clairmont, CA (smog city) for years before that. One week ago we learned that she has inoperable cancer in her lungs, liver and near her spine. The oncologist says that she may die in as few as two days. My sister-in-law is 39.

    Given that cancer rates have increased greatly in the past 50 years for all age groups, I am convinced that the cause is environmental. Our industrial wonders are not bringing so much happiness to our family these days.

    Extreme climate change could be much, much worse. Check out the scenarios in that DoD report. These are not scenarios of happiness.

    The real tradeoff is short-term vs. long-term. Are we so short-sighted and simple minded that we will trade our long-term happiness for short-term gluttony?

Go Back to forum
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •