Comments briseboy has made

Greenhouse gas

One needs to merely look at stats of remaining old-growth forests (always under 5 %), and the percentages of deforestation having occurred in the last two centuries, to understand the ridiculousness of such commentary as above.

Here, in forestland, we hear the same rhetoric. "Cutting is good, prevents forest fires." This logic is good for those who wish to manage everything for maximally sustained consumption.

This is the unspoken meaning of the term, "sustainable."

Deforestation, the overgrazing of former grasslands in the US southwest by introduced cattle, and, of course, ALL modern human consumption of every kind, have created orders of mangnitude more atmospheric ghg concentrations than forest fires.

Cut the obfuscation.On Sierra Club leader discusses plans for his new role as chairman posted 10 months ago 7 Responses

The limits of intellect, illustrated

DO remember that deforestation and increased carbon added to the atmosphere are the two major causes of anthropogenic global warming.

You can, and clearly must, do intimate things yourself to decrease emissions.

The overbloom of humanity still clings to presumptions of growth and discounting the future in favor of present "gain." While economics appears to describe the mechanics of living species and systems, growth ends when available "resources" diminish for the species involved. (I put certain terms in quotes because I do not personally adhere to their validity or value)

The only thing which COULD make humans different from other species, is ceasing of mining resources before using and poisoning the entire environment available.

As you see from CO2 ocean acidification, increasing global average temps on a scale perhaps 100x the speed of past climate turns, and extinctions vaguely estimated at 1000x background rate, suggests we will not, nor cannot, act differently.

The wider separation of the intellect and imagination from the senses which occurs in our species is not a significant attribute on a global scale (other than being implicated in our overbloom), does not divide our activities nor their results, from those of bacteria or any other species of cellular life.

We couldna done any other way.

TO the anthropocentric: Take heart, it's statistically unlikely that any individual in a population experiences population decline as catastrophe. Like the overpopulating bunnies, you just get hungrier and your environment bleaker. The time scale is larger than you comprehend.

What to do? Plant trees, demand NO MORE GROWTH, stay colder in winter, hotter in summer, grow your own, eat (gasp!) less and cease to buy prepared or distantly produced foods, or any other thing , except at dire need.

  economies of scale have shown their spots. A whole new operational economic theory is due, one of purposely using less, purposely diminishing. Political activity is moot until this happens.
On NOAA: Global warming 'irreversible' for next 1,000 years posted 10 months ago 15 Responses

Pollination ecology - we forgot to care

Honeybees have been seriously dying off since 1947. Something like 5.6 million hives in the US has turned to 2.3 million or less.
Europe has had similar problems. Varroa and tracheal mites, various fungal and viral diseases, and the unprven factors scientists are energetically turning their scopes to these days are all implicated, and they even show some indication of depressed immune response.

However, I would like to mention some lesser-known facts.

1. Honeybees (apis mellifera) are an introduced generalized pollinator which in combination with severe habitat loss and fragmentation, have starved out many other pollinators, especially a number of specific ones with important mutualistic relationships to plants in North America.
   
2. The habitat fragmentation I speak of does not have to be on the scale of the massive development occurring with urban sprawl in the far west and south. It merely has to be of a few acres. You are also aware of the still-widespread use of pesticides (whether applied or essentially shot into the chromosomes) and clearing of non-crop plants by big agribiz, especially since the 70s.
   
3. While I am not one to dispute Al Einstein, the only reason he is near right (and it would remain to be seen, as the disappearance of honeybees might just allow the indigenous pollinators to recover, even at this late stage) is due to this worldwide proliferation of one species, and to the determination of Americans to act as if the outdoor world is to be cleansed and vacuumed of its chaotic-seeming natural life, as if it were a kitchen or operating room. This attitude has been the most unfortunate import all over the earth.