Environmentalism: A Blogger's Track Record
If you've followed my writing on the "New Rostra" blog, you've read about natural disasters, weather, and the dangers of this beautiful planet we inhabit. I love living here, but it is not safe. The environmentalist dilemma is front and center on this forum. My record has been set here, in many different contexts:Pardon me for quoting my previous posts on #BlogSpot via the New Rostra, but here they are...
I've detailed the incredibly dangerous lives of storm chasers: http://goo.gl/iKZCTM
There have been musings on running away from threatening storms: http://goo.gl/sAqjpV
Reflections on Hurricane Ike in the Houston area: http://goo.gl/8cTmaa
The disastrous earthquake in Nepal: http://goo.gl/3jyBjn
Thank you reader, and if you'd like to read these previous posts you'll see that I respect the earth and her power, but I don't pretend to understand that power or predict what will happen next. It's crazy to try to do that...
Many in the environmentalist movement seemingly make fear-mongering a religion, and their know-it-all scientists have twisted statistics and theories in order to scare the public into thinking that we're ruining the habitat, and in a few years with the ice caps melted, the population is doomed to drown or be crushed by famine. [They're not sure how the bad stuff is going to happen, but they're sure that it will happen; which I call, "it's too late" environmentalism]. As an example of vague warning, climate scientists emphasize that climate change didn't proximately cause hurricanes Harvey and Irma; still, they maintain with assurance that climate change exacerbates risks posed by the storms.
This hubris is addressed by the famous thinker Kurt Vonnegut, when he said,
I could be wrong, but I won't live to see it. After a few hundred more years when I am but dust in the wind, I think the earth will still be doing fine; although her weather patterns may have changed again after few more millennia, who knows?! My opinion won't be relevant, but that doesn't mean that as stewards of this great earth, we should not be careful about how we behave. (Balanced with human reality).“For me (Kurt Vonnegut), the most paralyzing news was that “Mother Nature” was no conservationist. She needed no help from us in taking the planet apart and putting it back together some different way, not necessarily improving it from the viewpoint of living things. She set fire to forests with lightning bolts. She paved vast tracts of arable land with lava, which could no more support life than big-city parking lots. “Mother Nature” had in the past sent glaciers down from the North Pole to grind up major portions of Asia, Europe, and North America. Nor was there any reason to think that she wouldn't do that again someday. At this very moment she is turning African farms to deserts, and can be expected to heave up tidal waves, hurricanes, or shower down white-hot boulders from outer space, at any time. She has not only exterminated exquisitely evolved species in a twinkling, but drained oceans and drowned cites or continents as well. If people think Nature is their friend, then they sure don't need an enemy.” (end quote)
As an historically violent and unpredictable planet, the earth's recurring environmental nightmares are more common than we know: for example, Japan had been hit by tsunamis before 2011: in 1585, 1611, 1677, 1687, 1689, 1700, 1716, 1793, 1868, and 1894. The most destructive tsunami before 2011 was the Meji Sanriku Tsunami of 1896, which killed 22,000 people. Many of Japan's older residents remember the 1933 tsunami, w/ waves as high as 100 feet, killing 3,000 people. These hardy folks are not inclined to complain about weather, even in its extremes; nevertheless, she throws at Japan walls of water, every century. My point is that man didn't visit this tragedy on Japan.
Kathryn Schulz wrote in the New Yorker, in 2015:
"The “ghost forest” is a grove of western red cedars on the banks of the Copalis River, near the Washington coast. The cedars are spread out across a low salt marsh on a wide northern bend in the river, long dead but still standing. Leafless, branchless, barkless, they are reduced to their trunks and worn to a smooth silver-gray, as if they had always carried their own tombstones inside them.
What killed the trees in the ghost forest was saltwater. It had long been assumed that they died slowly, as the sea level around them gradually rose and submerged their roots. But, by 1987, it was discovered through studying soil layers in the ghost forest, evidence of sudden land subsidence along the Washington coast. The death of the cedars was not due to long exposure to saltwater; instead, the trees died quickly, when the ground beneath them plummeted. Scientists followed this lead to discover circumstantially, and through Japanese history that a massive earthquake happened there, and spread a tsunami to Japan, across the ocean.
At approximately 9pm on January 26, 1700, a magnitude-9.0 earthquake struck the Pacific Northwest, causing sudden land subsidence, drowning coastal forests, and, out in the ocean, lifting up a wave half the length of a continent. It took roughly fifteen minutes for the Eastern half of that wave to strike the Northwest coast. It took ten hours for the other half to cross the ocean. It reached Japan on January 27, 1700: by the local calendar, the eighth day of the twelfth month of the twelfth year of Genroku. In Japan it was labeled in history, the “orphan” because no one in Japan felt the earth shake prior to its arrival." (emphasis, and paraphrasing are mine)
In a previous post about petroleum's impact on the world economy, if you weigh that impact against the environmentalist view, the decision is forced: to lean on the side of humanity flourishing, or to limit carbon-based fuels to developing countries when they need it most:
http://goo.gl/H2uWPQ
"The need for abundant fuel is just as acute in 2017 (e.g., more than one billion people lack access to electricity and modern cooking fuels, and 75 million new cars are sold each year, globally). There is an incredibly strong correlation between the use of fossil fuels and life expectancy, and between fossil fuel use and income; one can observe the recent history of China and India as examples. Human “flourishing” requires resources, and abundant energy (points made by Alex J. Epstein in his book “The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels,” 2014)."
https://books.google.com/books?id=_ld9AwAAQBAJ&lpg=PP1&dq=Alex%20Epstein&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q=Alex%20Epstein&f=false
If you would like to discuss the environment with me, please give me a Tweet @markpills
Disclaimer: views expressed in this blog or anywhere on social media sites are my own personal opinions and express my individual perceptions. They do not represent the policies, positions, or viewpoints of my employer.
(Fair use of copyrighted work shown herein is not an infringement of copyright law, see 17 U.S.C. §107)
©Mark H. Pillsbury
