Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Conversations Forum' started by burton420, Jan 4, 2008.
way to make a GIGANTIC generalization.
I suppose you'd prefer the entire world to go nuclear? Wind generation, for example, has been proven both feasable and sustainable. As for GMO food, there's no long term study on either the nutritional or agricultural impact that could have on the planet. Highly untested technology is normally fine by me, but not in my food supply thank you very much.
And what's your beef with hemp? It's superior to cotton and requires little to no chemical prodding to grow or maintain it.
We all recognize the existence of global warming. Or pretty well, everyone, in any event.
We disagree about what is causing it. Everyone says that those whose views differ from their own are simply relying on information from groups that are ill-motivated and ignorant.
For various reasons, it is inconceivable that anyone on this site is going to be change their mind because of what they read on this issue here.
Now, I happen to think that this is the most important issue that has ever faced mankind. And I realize that questions of human extinction necessarily fit into the raison d'etre of this site. But then, they fit into the raison d'etre of every site that I visit. After all, it is tough to think of any subject that would be unaffected by the extinction of the human race.
So I do not think that this subject should continue much longer here.
1. The level of dialogue has fallen far below what we normally see here.
2. The posts have become speech-making rather than information-sharing.
3. The subject - the cause of global warming - is not in any way of special interest to plant growers. The effects of global warming might be of special interest to us here, but we are not discussing the effects. Nor of course are we discussing the existence of global warming to any extent, since its existence is so well-understood as not to warrant discussion. We are "discussing" - if that is the right word - the cause, which is of enormous interest but not of greater interest to plant growers than to anyone else. And this is not a general interest site, it is a plant-growers site. If "general interest" is sufficient for us to post here, should we start a thread about Guantanamo? Religion? Politics? I would love to contribute! But do y'all really want to read what I would write?
I must however say that I think the combination of youth and enthusiasm is the only hope for the world. I too cringe at what I did and said when I was young - but that just reflects the fact that, like everyone else, I am not as smart as I was then. Arteries harden with age, they don't get softer.
We were, for a while, having an interesting discussion on methods of environmental stewardship; this was relevant to gardeners.
However, you're right. This has degenerated.
Good letter in the National Post Tuesday expressing my points earlier in the thread better than I can do myself!
"While the global warming crowd sees the shadow of Exxon everywhere, it conveniently ignores the parallel force that is befuddling its cranium. They are mesmerized by the potential for redirecting vast rivers of wealth through the instruments of carbon taxes and carbon credits. All of the beneficiaries, from Al Gore down to our professors and scientists, are dependents of the shift of wealth from the taxpayer to whatever will arise as the official organ for the transfer of this wealth. The left never did meet a tax increase it did not like; now it can use the salvation of the world as a lever to boost the confiscation of money.
The true potential for increased temperatures will come from the burning of all this wealth.
Rick Fuschi, Windsor, Ont."
But surely no one believes anything they read in the National Post?
Wait, so it's all a big conspiracy for scientists to falsify findings so they can get $$ - a worldwide conspiracy? Yeeeah.....right.
There will be those on both sides (or more accurately all sides) of this issue who will see this as an opportunity for personal or corporate enrichment. Their presence proves nothing, however they will be powerful players in the "game" and like other bottom feeders they will fight to protect their territories. They will typically resist change of any sort until it has passed their narrow test of self interest.
This is the sludge which any social or environmental movement must rise above. Unfortunately itâ€™s not just the â€œUS military/industrial complexâ€ or â€œcorporate agricultureâ€. Often itâ€™s our neighbour who has to make the next payment on his house or his 4x4 so he goes out and cuts another old growth fir because â€œthatâ€™s his jobâ€ and if he doesnâ€™t, somebody else will.
Perhaps itâ€™s one of us, who canâ€™t wait to get the phyto certificate and brings back some â€œsuitcaseâ€ vines, never imagining that they could be carrying some blight that will decimate the local vineyards.
Itâ€™s not just carbon or global warming/cooling/climate change.
Stand in any community, any shopping plaza, any business or school property, look at the mowed grass and mulched gardens of mostly plants that are not native to the area. Now start looking for little critters: birds, bugs, and reptiles in a small area, say 10 paces of so. Then go to a nearby natural area and repeat your count. One yard at a time, one business at a time, we are exterminating life on our planet. We depend on that life for our own: bugs pollinate our food plants, plants and creatures provide our medicines and food...
Isn't it in our best interest to nudge society from the 'green grass lawn' toward a more natural and diverse landscape mindset? That is change that can take place one person at a time, and that's the most likely change to achieve.
yeah!!! ..you got it sosososleepy ...this is the tragedy we pass on to the next generation...farm wisely the ground we have. plant hardwood forests, so people in future don't have to turn their eyes on virgin forests..... lorax re: gm foods .....when they tried to test it. the hippies jumped up & down so they had to abandoned it over here ..(plus I'm sure your getting enough doggy chems in your vave fast food restaurant or TV dinners that you have.."come on be honest") ..re: nuclear ....from chernobyl every one knows now to treat the technology with great respect..bar a terrorist attack ..god forbid.
fernwood - re: dodgy chemicals: I don't eat out all that often, and I'm a good cook. Part of the reason I live in Ecuador is so that I can grow my own food, and because of the country's progressive organic farming policy so that the food I purchase doesn't have nasty chems in it. Why would I need TV dinners or fast food? (this latter fairly uncommon here, since Ecuadorans cherish a good, big, four-course sit-down meal, preferrably home-cooked, even in restaurants.)
I absolutely support reforesting with hardwoods and also with native trees; this is what we're doing down here (something I'm a part of - see signature line) in order to reclaim areas that have been logged.
I'm still not sold on nuclear though, since there's no sound plan for long-term disposal of the waste it generates. We're doing great things with non-invasive hydro, wind, and geothermal down here, which has far less environmental footprint.
Of course there are different views; this all goes back to what I and others have said - responsible environmental stewardship is the key, and obviously it's got to start somewhere. Why not with us gardeners?