dreamer’s Recent Comments

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Thank you, Billhook, for a very nice post in response to my slightly snarky one. Indeed, it's not easy for any of us (individually or at the highest levels like conferences etc) to grasp "just the facts," discern where science itself shows us uncertainities, margins of error etc .. nevermind dealing with the complexity of politics. You write: quote Billhook: "First, there is no African delegation. There are delegations of each of the many African nations that are signatories of the UN.FCCC." from the article: quote: "The African delegation insisted today in Barcelona that its decision to walk out on negotiations Tuesday was necessary .." I think you are correct, and the article uses "African" as a writing shortcut. But that's why I used "African" to cover a diverse delegation. You write: "They [ African nations] have taken a common position of registering their disgust with the US refusal to match the UK offer of >40% cut by 2020 (off 1990 baseline) by withdrawing from certain sessions in Barcelona. " It's a fact that under Bush, the US has refused to lead or cooperate on environmental matters. In my personal observations I see very little -- certainly not enough -- efforts to consider the environment in everyday decisions, or future decisions. I see excessive and gross overconsumption. It's difficult to see if or how Americans would be willing to make personal reductions, spend more on green tech, live more modestly -- and insist that our elected politicians make unpopular decision like raising taxes to support a more sustainable lifestyle all around. you write: "Thus it is patently untrue to claim that they will not sign up to limits on their emissions." Are you saying the article is wrong? quote" but ultimately confirming that the Europe Union—and the U.S.—have no intention of entering a legally binding agreement in Copenhagen unless rapidly developing nations like China, India, and Brazil are also required to cut emissions and contribute funding to help poor nations survive as the climate deteriorates." Are you saying that China, India and Brazil all are eager to sign and that US/Europe do not? What about that bit "funding to help poor nations" .. We in US do fund China. We PAYED for their newly found prosperity. We should have been more mindful of keeping the "Made in US" brand and live within our means .. but we didn't, we gave our money, jobs, and know-how away to China to buy unnecesary throw-away products. We already gave, and gave, and gave , all kinds of aid to Africa. We are actually partially responsible for the well-being that brought increased survival and exploding population growth (giving medical aid, food aid for decades.) Are we now expected to PAY for them taking responsibility to reduce their emmissions as well ?! quote article: "So only a legally binding agreement is acceptable in Copenhagen, or Africa and other vulnerable populations are doomed to death and destruction, Lumumba told me. " Excuse me?! Blaming everyone else .. so what are African nations doing to take responsibility? (Like, providing birth control, reining in corruption, promoting peace ?!) quote article: "The anger from Africa and the rest of the developing world will continue to grow" What ?! Anger at US? Where is "Thank you, US for all the billions in help you've given us over the years?!" Clean up your own houses / countries first, take responsibility for feeding, clothing, your populations, take responsibilty for preserving your own natural resources, take responsibilty for extinguishing stupid religious customs severely impeding human right. Of course, we still in the US need to clean up our own act as well. Still, the modern environmental movement has started in the US. I grew up in a 3rd world country, and I wish the world at large would be way more thankful and appreciative of all the contributions by USA and all Americans. Unfortunately, while humans blame each other and act like 3-year olds (I'm not cleaning my room 'till Johnny cleans his) and expect handouts from USA because we've helped before .. all animal species are disapearing in droves, the garbage patch in the ocean grows, clean water, air, space are rapidly poluted, used up, paved over. And all our environmental problems would be much easier to solve if the human population was stable and much smaller than it is now.On Why developing countries cannot afford failure in Copenhagen posted 2 days, 2 hours ago 9 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Does the African delegation commit to allowing and encouraging a fact-based approach to climate, the environment and poverty? If so, have they pledged to make birth control information, education, and products widely available and culturally accepted? They walk out of talks because the US has not committed -- to what exactly, spending yet another round of billions to help Africans? Have African nations pledged to do whatever it takes to bring peace to their continent? As to this, quote: Europe renewed its non-specific posturing today, at first suggesting that developed countries could still bring promises, if not numbers, to Copenhagen, but ultimately confirming that the Europe Union—and the U.S.—have no intention of entering a legally binding agreement in Copenhagen unless rapidly developing nations like China, India, and Brazil are also required to cut emissions and contribute funding to help poor nations survive as the climate deteriorates. /quote what's wrong with that?! -- It's ok for USA to ask others to contribute as well.On Why developing countries cannot afford failure in Copenhagen posted 3 days, 2 hours ago 9 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  on nr.2, identifying the enemy: don't forget religion and tradtion, both of which usually encourage growth, forbid family planning, and (with exceptions) do not care about the environment.On Does anyone still care about "the land"? posted 1 month ago 25 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Let's not forget the easiest and cheapest action all humans could do right now: encourage family planning worldwide. Taking action seems difficult inspite of us having the information we need -we know how to build efficient cars, but many drive behemoths. Not taking action is even more difficult for humans. If we love land, we could stop overbreeding; stop overconsuming; stop overbuilding; stop the perception that all growth is good.On Does anyone still care about "the land"? posted 1 month ago 25 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  The root problem: too many humans. If the US and world population had been stabilized at about the 1960s levels of 3.5 billion people, Puget Sound might still have a better chance.

   

  Yes, even if we had stabilized the population, we still needed sustainable practices and pollution controls, better technology, and most of all, add "self-restraint" to each American's personal dreams.

   

  Suppose each human in USA could vote for a future strategy:

  1) extreme self-restraint, live VERY modestly, no growth in personal consumption, smallest house possible, no wasting energy on hobbies, most efficient transportation only .. in order to allow for global and local population growth?

  2) a lifestyle with more personal freedoms like we have chosen, knowing that each of us has a footprint 4x larger than the planet can sustain. We chose to allow and spur growth of all kinds: exponential growth in the number of people and exponential growth in consumption. With a predictable abrupt and ugly and painful end. But hey, we can scoop dog poop to help the whales.

   

  I realize that the US Northwest is progressive on supporting birth control -- it's it's too little, too late ... unless we get rid of the religious ideologues in American leadership and promote voluntary family planning worldwide. While supporting those who want to raise a small family and ensuring a better world for the next generation.

  On Puget Sound saviors wage war on pet poop posted 1 month, 3 weeks ago 14 Responses