Robert wrote: ↑Fri Jun 16, 2023 6:47 pm
Ken wrote: ↑Fri Jun 16, 2023 1:37 pm
However the actions you take here on earth have an individual and collective effect on both the environment and society in which you live. We are not alone on this world. We share it with others. But I guess what responsibility you choose to take your own actions is for you to decide.
I really have no issue with this. I think it is a good perspective. I do not see co2 as an issue. From the science I have researched and learned from, it does not have as dramatic affect that some are claiming it does. I also do not think we affect the climate as much as some claim, but I agree we do affect it some especially on a local level.
I do not see either as a crisis, but I do see both local and global effects as something w should be good stewards in.
I do not see driving cars as a big issue, but I think we should work to reduce desertification and find ways to improve lifestyle of arid regions. This means more energy and food, which requires water, are key to help impoverished nations. Restricting energy is harmful, not helpful.
Ken, I actually think we agree on a lot of how we should work to improve out ecology and lesson our impact, I do think we disagree on how and what is the more important issues to do that.
I have spent most of my life working in and teaching science. And the more I learn the more I realize how inter-connected our natural world is.
My actual biggest concerns are about the protection and restoration of natural habitats. Because I have come to learn that wild spaces are hugely important as are connections between them. So, for example, in Texas I was dismayed by the endless uncontrolled sprawl that now reaches from the DFW metroplex all they way to the Oklahoma border. But I was also hugely interested in things like restoring prairie habitats by ripping out all the invasive mesquite and cedar trees that have turned much of the area around Waco from what were once rolling grasslands into impenetrable shrub lands that suck up all the groundwater and do not support much of the original wildlife of the area. That means getting people to do lots of burning and chopping and expensive land clearing which can be a hard sell in an area were most of the rural property is in private hands and people have learned to fear fire. It doesn't mean appropriating private property for parks and government-run nature reserves But getting people to recognize the value of managing their own lands in a more sustainable manner.
I frankly do not care in the slightest about lots of trendy lefty things like veganism and animal rights and whether chickens should be free range and all that nonsense. I find a lot of it annoying because none of it has anything at all to do with the environment. And frankly if we can keep our chicken farms more densely packed it means less wildlands need to be sacrificed.
The whole climate thing is just one piece of a larger puzzle. I like more walkable and bikeable cities and I like to shop locally. Not just because it is more carbon-efficient. But also because I prefer that sort of built environment over endless car-centric sprawl for other reasons entirely. It is all inter-connected. And the sort of built environment that is more carbon-neutral is also going to be more people oriented and superior for a whole lot of other reasons that have nothing to do with climate change. Just like the Amish who have a very small carbon footprint, not because they are deliberately trying to do so, but because they are living in simple tight-knit communities that are just more energy efficient and superior in a whole lot of ways.
I currently bike to work here in the Vancouver area. It is a 12.5 mile ride diagonally across suburban Vancouver so I use an e-bike so I can get there in a reasonable amount of time without arriving in a pool of sweat as would be the case if I rode my road bike. I completely enjoy it, I get 35 min of exercise twice a day and have lost weight. It also means we don't have to buy another car. But a similar commute would not have been possible in Waco or much of suburban Dallas because the built environment just doesn't support bike commuting. Vancouver is not some cutting edge city when it comes to biking, but I do have wide bike lanes for 11 out of the 12 miles of my commute so it safe and easy. That would be impossible in Dallas with its maze of freeways and arterial streets that lack even the most rudimentary bike infrastructures. State law in Washington requires new road construction to accommodate bikes and pedestrians. State law in Texas does not and the results are obvious. One of the reasons (among many) that we moved from Texas back to the Pacific Northwest. I got tired of depending on cars for everything. Even though paradoxically the recreational rural riding is far superior in Texas.
So while climate change is not really my #1 issue, I do get offended by some of the climate denialism that comes from certain political sectors that are largely beholden to the fossil fuel industry. Interestingly, in 10 years of teaching HS biology in the Baptist and evangelical heartland of Waco Texas I never once got any parental pushback on evolution which I taught every year to many hundreds of students over the years. But I did get furious pushback from some parents on the subject of climate change. Even though I was teaching EXACTLY to the Texas state curriculum standards for Aquatic Science and Environmental Science that covered climate change. Mostly because they are so old they were written BEFORE much of the current political fervor about global warming when it was uncontroversial. Which should tell you how old and established much of the science is if it was being written into the Texas curriculum standards back in the 1980s and 1990s. And now they are like a hot poker. The state can't really touch them without creating a big embarrassing political firestorm.
