Skip to main content
planet

Of Walls, Mars, Climate Change

 

Climate variability is widely demonstrated in the geological record. There’s no particular reason to suppose that variability won’t continue. There’s not much static in nature – even the rocks morph eventually. Science, at this time, is not capable of predicting with any certainty how the climate will shift around. Humans, as always, have to deal with unexpected change.

The question of whether pollution contributes to climatic change or not is a red herring. The climate change issue has been polarized into yet another you’re either for us or agin’ us feud. This completely misses the point – and most of the information that needs examining in between the two extremes. We need to understand what’s going on with our environment, and shutting out data just because it comes from the other side, is devoid of critical awareness. We all need every scrap of input and all the answers we can get!

 

Pollution is the Real Point

 

Pollution damages the planet – and we depend on the planet. Pollution also damages us directly. If you don’t want certain substances in your glass of water or bath, in the air in your living room, mixed into the food and pharmaceuticals you eat, rubbing all over you from the clothes you wear, and leaking from the structures you live and work in – then why on earth would you support industrial, agricultural, governmental, etc., practices that routinely make it possible for those substances to contaminate everyone’s air, water, food, and shelter?

It isn’t enough to stop using or buying stuff that contain these substances or use them in their manufacture. Those who fund and develop these substances and the products made from them need to start taking their responsibilities seriously. Design and use benign materials and processes only. Much of what wrecks us and the environment has been made possible by just-because-we-can and just-because-it’ll-make-us-money attitudes.

 

Just because doesn’t address the vital question – does it make any sense to do so given how it could affect the health of the planet and all that depend on it?

 

Ambition is found behind unsustainable outcomes. Ambition tends to narrow concentration to consider only the goal. The more ambitious the drive, the more often reasoning methods are ignored – so wrapped up in hitting the target that potential consequences are downplayed, attacked – or don’t even come to mind. Motivation is important, but there’s such a thing as too much.

Just because we can make stuff out of tar sand, oil, coal, uranium – does it makes sense to?

Just because we can modify life-forms genetically, should we?

Just because we can come up with all and sundry unnatural chemicals, is it reasonable?

We need safe, sustainable ways to survive and get around in our environment without impacting that environment. How best to move toward this reality? Look around – who’s making the most progress with alternatives? How are they doing it? How can we apply it to our own situations – or better yet – improve on it?

Just because we can go to Mars – does it make sense to? What would come of investing that money and expertise into learning more about, and developing, sustainable processes on Earth, first? Air, water, food and shelter matter just as much here as on Mars. When we can get all this straight at home, then maybe we’ll be ready to head to other planets.

Just because we can make cars – does it make sense to? What if the beginning technology of public transportation progressed without the competing development of cars? Where would we be at now? What’s envisioned today could have been done years ago! How can we transition to viable transportation?

We need to question those who persistently use narrow scope – thirty billion dollars for a Mexican – American wall, plus uncounted millions in future maintenance and security costs?

What kinds of environmentally supportive industries, businesses, educational, research, and medical facilities could be created along that border – or any border – that would enhance human and environmental well being?

What about spending money on encouraging knowledge growth that generates environmental stability and employment focused on:

 

Natural source, renewable energy

Atmospheric and alternative water collection development

Dry/cold/hot climate natural soil/food production advancement

Bio-based fuel/fertilizer production

Self-sustaining shelter and communities

 

This is a small start. When you think about how much is known compared to how much there is yet to learn here on Earth, its obvious the possibilities are barely tapped. We can’t afford the time and energy wasted on scrapping over whether climate change is real or not, nor the funds being poured into science that doesn’t deal with pollution elimination directly.

Let’s get caught up to those who are already cooking. Here’s a few links:

Earthships Green Heating and Cooling Atmospheric Water Harvesting

Leave a Reply

Show Buttons
pages
%d bloggers like this: