We're wiping them all out

[Great Pebble]

I appreciate the fact that you're making an effort and I think we all should. But "drop in the ocean" are the words that apply. Even on a personal level.

The world is changing, whether it's global warming, pollution, over population - whatever "problem" it is that we've caused and we're not going to reverse the process or even slow it down significantly.

Although it's probably not related I was talking to a guy the other day who is a relatively big noise in the tobacco worls (comparatively). I suggested that his industry must be "feeling the pinch" somewhat, with what I thought amounted to a global turn against the evil weed. On the contrary, says he, they're undergoing a boom as "Third World" economies develop to the point at which the average joe can afford to smoke 40 a day. The point of me saying that is that there are a tiny minority in first world economys who take environmental issues seriously enough to make an impact. And that the entireity of those first world economies are a minority of the actual global economy.

I've reached the conclusion that rather than trying to work out how we'll stop the icecaps melting we'd be better served by working out how we'll deal with it when it happens.

 

[arctic hobo]

Excellent discussion, this. Have a look here: http://www.bestfootforward.com/carbonlife.htm
And remember the biggest difference you can make is not flying anywhere.

 

[R-Bowskill]

How to deal with it...

Rising sea levels:
1) move to somewhere at least 300 foot above sea level.
2) get a boat.
3) Grow webs between your fingers and toes.

Decreasing food supply:
1) find alternatives (bushcrafters are at an advantage here
2) grow your own
3) reduce waste, clear your plate.

Changing weather patterns:
1) get suitable clothing
2) have stronger, more insulated homes with less windows.
3) move to somewhere which is likely to develop a climate you can cope with.

Just some suggestions.

 

[Great Pebble]

Another thing that's struck me recently, just to inject an air of "topicality":-

The G-8 summit. Consumerism is arguably the root cause of many of our ecological "problems"

Apparently people are going to travel from all over the world to protest about "globalism". You can bet that the majority will not be walking.
The security operation which will prevent the delegates from seeing or hearing them will cost in excess of £5 million and doubtless involve large numbers of cars, vans, helicopters and even fighter jets. Leaving aside the "they" shouldn't use that much security debate (because it's a fact of life). Wouldn't the best "protest" against global mega corporations be to stay at home and not increase their coffers by using vast amounts of their products in order to tell them you don't like them? They already know.

No comment on the politics involved.

 

[Fluxus]

As the dominant theme of this thread seems to be fatalistic about the state of our planetary ecosystem – and our part in it, why don’t we bring this back to our own relationships with the natural world. I am finding it hard to understand why people who enjoy being outside in the woods or wilds and presumably have a special relationship with the places they visit, do not feel the same relationship with the wider global system of which it is a part.
If I may put forward a hypothetical situation:
The 8 acre ancient semi natural woods near your home, where you walk, botanise, track deer and foxes, chill out, whatever are scheduled to be felled to put through a new road. How would you feel? What would you do?
If the answer is nothing because that’s life, or Its necessary, or the forces at work are too big for us to take on, then we get what we deserve.
To me the state of the planet is merely an extrapolation of the feeling about that small patch of woodland.
You can beat yourself up about it or not but all positive actions have an impact , even if only on our conscience and sense of self worth.

Flux

 

[george]

I appreciate the fact that you're making an effort and I think we all should. But "drop in the ocean" are the words that apply. Even on a personal level.

The world is changing, whether it's global warming, pollution, over population - whatever "problem" it is that we've caused and we're not going to reverse the process or even slow it down significantly.

...snip snip...​

I've reached the conclusion that rather than trying to work out how we'll stop the icecaps melting we'd be better served by working out how we'll deal with it when it happens.

Fair enough. The balance has probably tipped so far that there's no stopping it.

But you can say "I dont want to play" and try at least to make the biggest drop in the ocean that you can, then when the sea levels do rise and the weather gets worse and worse you can at least feel happy that at the very least you did what you could.

I'm afraid I don't subscribe to the "we're all doomed anyway so why bother?" philosophy, so I'll continue to try to cut down as much as I can and as you suggest, I'll try to work out how I'm going to deal with the changes we'll see in our lifetimes.

George

 

[Great Pebble]

No reason not to and I wouldn't attempt to tell anyone not to try.

But when folks chain themselves to "SUVs" because they're "destroying the planet" and then fly off to A.N. Other country for a conference on introducing a global SUV ban you need to wonder somewhat about the hypocracy of it all.

There are people who set their own standards as to what can or cannot be done without, what represents a "reasonable" level of commitment to environmental issues and will be vociferous, pro active and in some extreme cases, violent against those who they don't feel are meeting their "standard". Which is a nonsense.

If whatever you do makes you feel better then it's probably worth it for that alone.
Until you're living a completely "natural" existance though (and being able to post/read here is evidence that you're not) then you are by degrees as much of a part of the "influence of man" as an oil well owner.

("you" in the above post refers to any random human being and no particular individual)

 

[FeralSheryl]

As the dominant theme of this thread seems to be fatalistic about the state of our planetary ecosystem – and our part in it, why don’t we bring this back to our own relationships with the natural world. I am finding it hard to understand why people who enjoy being outside in the woods or wilds and presumably have a special relationship with the places they visit, do not feel the same relationship with the wider global system of which it is a part.
If I may put forward a hypothetical situation:
The 8 acre ancient semi natural woods near your home, where you walk, botanise, track deer and foxes, chill out, whatever are scheduled to be felled to put through a new road. How would you feel? What would you do?
If the answer is nothing because that’s life, or Its necessary, or the forces at work are too big for us to take on, then we get what we deserve.
To me the state of the planet is merely an extrapolation of the feeling about that small patch of woodland.
You can beat yourself up about it or not but all positive actions have an impact , even if only on our conscience and sense of self worth.

Flux

With you 100 per cent there Flux. Nicely put.

 

[bambodoggy]

No reason not to and I wouldn't attempt to tell anyone not to try.

But when folks chain themselves to "SUVs" because they're "destroying the planet" and then fly off to A.N. Other country for a conference on introducing a global SUV ban you need to wonder somewhat about the hypocracy of it all.

There are people who set their own standards as to what can or cannot be done without, what represents a "reasonable" level of commitment to environmental issues and will be vociferous, pro active and in some extreme cases, violent against those who they don't feel are meeting their "standard". Which is a nonsense.

If whatever you do makes you feel better then it's probably worth it for that alone.
Until you're living a completely "natural" existance though (and being able to post/read here is evidence that you're not) then you are by degrees as much of a part of the "influence of man" as an oil well owner.

("you" in the above post refers to any random human being and no particular individual)

Nick, think I've agreed with just about everything you've said throughout this thread matey

Flux, I also agree with your last post 100%.... but from my point of view I think its a little bit of an "ideal world" solution.... no matter how many times I run head first at a solid granite cliff I'm not going to even crack it let alone bring down a rock fall...so why run head first at it at all. Obviously it depends from issue to issue when you run at it and when you decide not too...or maybe you give it a little headbutt from time to time...just to remind it you're still there and knowing you can feel better because at least you trying...
I think the bottom line is that we all pick our own morals and we all pick our own fights to defend those morals... Happy days

Just got back from Ashdown btw....another fab weekend in the woods

 

[Not Bob]

For a very different point of view:

http://www.ourcivilisation.com/aginatur/prog1.htm

http://www.ourcivilisation.com/aginatur/prog2.htm

 

[JimH]

But when folks chain themselves to "SUVs" because they're "destroying the planet" and then fly off to A.N. Other country for a conference on introducing a global SUV ban you need to wonder somewhat about the hypocracy of it all.

Howzabout they drive their SUV to a conference planning a ban on air travel?

But seriously, all motorised/dead dinosaur powered transport could be said to do harm (or to have a larger environmental impact than other forms).

Empirically, people want more of it, not less. They are either unaware of the consequeces, don't believe the projections, or feel they have more important things to worry about.

This makes it difficult to predict the outcome. My best guess is that the consequences will become increasingly apparent and awful for a further couple of decades before anything genuinely serious gets done.

I'm doing my bit (or some of it) at present viz recycling etc., but the transport issue is one I feel particularly bad about, being a one bloke, two vehicle household (at least I can only ride/drive one at once) AND I still feel enough is not being done longer term/more widely. At least I don't fly much.

Not hard to see why people get fatalistic, though...

Jim.

 

[Great Pebble]

We've 2 vehicles as well I suppose and one of them is a 4x4, it's definitely not an SUV though

 

[FeralSheryl]

We have have a Smart Car. You may laugh but they're brilliant little things. Like a Tardis, much bigger and more comfortable on the inside than you'd ever expect them to be. A tough little cookie too. It does everything we need it to, manages to take us everywhere we need to go and carry everything we need as well. I would reccomend one to anyone, seriously.

 

[bambodoggy]

We have have a Smart Car. You may laugh but they're brilliant little things. Like a Tardis, much bigger and more comfortable on the inside than you'd ever expect them to be. A tough little cookie too. It does everything we need it to, manages to take us everywhere we need to go and carry everything we need as well. I would reccomend one to anyone, seriously.

Can't see it fitting me and the wife in along with our massive great hairy German Sheperd Dog.....let alone towing the 1.5T machine plus the 1T trailer I need for work behind it

But on the other hand, if you don't need the size and towing power that I do then why not have a smaller car.

I ride a motorbike too (which are far more enviromentally friendly than almost any car) and use that when I can...

 

[FeralSheryl]

... massive great hairy German Sheperd Dog...

...I ride a motorbike too (which are far more enviromentally friendly than almost any car) and use that when I can...

Ah we have five felines and - if absolutely neccessary - we can just fit all five pet carriers in there with us. Fortunately for all of us, they prefer to stay at home.

German Shepherds are beautiful beasts, I love em, but you're right I don't think you'd fit one in, not with two humans as well. Tell, you what though, you could definitely fit a smaller dog in the back quite comfortably. But then you'd have to leave yer kit behind

I really miss my biking days (especially at this time of year). But we're talking 20 years ago now. My boyfriend at the time had a Triumph Bonneville 650 - Very nice. But that's another storey

 

[bambodoggy]

Knowing my mutt if he was cramed in there he'd paw his way forward and want to drive...lol

Why don't you take your test and get a bike yourself? You've got some nice roads close to you to go for a ride on. I've got a Honda Fireblade and love taking it all over the place in the summer...helps blow the cobwebs out

 

[FeralSheryl]

It would be nice, but I'd want an old British Bike or a Harley! I'm frequently tempted especially when we're driving off down a country road and see three or four of them going by. My heart just follows after them for a bit. But then I remember what it was like in the winter!

 

[JimH]

It would be nice, but I'd want an old British Bike or a Harley!

Unmodded Harley not favourite for twisty country roads

There's a rather pretty, but wholly oiltight and reliable new Bonnie out for the last couple of years in the new (Hinkley) Triumph range:

http://www.triumph.co.uk/uk/760.aspx

Go on! You know you want to...

Jim. BMW R1150GS, pipe and slippers

 

[FeralSheryl]

There's a rather pretty, but wholly oiltight and reliable new Bonnie out for the last couple of years in the new (Hinkley) Triumph range:

http://www.triumph.co.uk/uk/760.aspx

Yeah, I could go for that. Very tasty
Maybe next year... who knows,

 

[bambodoggy]

Jim. BMW R1150GS, pipe and slippers

Jim.....we've met and I have to say if there's two words I wouldn't choose to discribe you it'd be Pipe and Slippers! lol

Actually my old boss has just sold his 2002 Fireblade and bought a touring BMW...think I'll stick to my blade though