burntoshine

Members
  • Content count

    18
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. IPCC fourth document!!!!

    I am pretty sure that this is the case for all peoples of the world. The longer we wait and contemplate what we ought to do about global warming, the more inevitable chaos and suffering are. The IPCC is pretty much, I think, the largest gathering of scientist ever for one problem. Why does it not carry the weight of true authority, I am really anxious to see what will become of the meeting in Bali this month. I am really upset that America is not sending a competent official there. burntoshine
  2. IPCC fourth document!!!!

    You know, they fall harder the taller they are. Us lofty Americans can only hold onto theirs material ideals until what? The stocks are awfully sporadic right now. Insurance is scared with natural disasters and fires being more of a concern, because of droughts from global warming. Glad you liked the tool joke. But we are the tools creating global warming, my very hands with this computer. Damn! But am I not blogging? I am a tool. So are you! jk happy friday!!! {{___***burntoshine***___}}
  3. IPCC fourth document!!!!

    you say that the western world has not ben hit with it yet, but recent sudies done over a the climate trends of the colorado plateau over the last 100yrs predict that we might be heading for a multi decade drought. What insurance can our current economy provide to us in such dire reports. I wonder what tools our society will produce to help cope, and if one could buy such? ****__-burntoshine-__****
  4. IPCC fourth document!!!!

    This is meant to be about the recent release of the fourth and final document by the intergovernmental panel on climate change, but I draw upon more than that. Does anyone have nay ideas how publicy policy might react to the ipcc document?? So thanksgivning was great. Hope yalls was too, I am glad to be back home though, Iam sad I missed our first storm of the year, and even more sad that there is hardly anysnow left of it, damn global climate change. Now on topic with it, I was thinking we are just going to have to live with this stuff. The africans are living with global warming, hell, they are dying for it!!! The IPCC has stated in their recent document that up to %50 of the agriculturable lands could be lost, due to further desertification and other effects of global warming, if no climate policy is made. Literally thousands of tons of peoples will watch as their bones start to shwo through the skin more and more as they come closer to starvation, all while we sit here and contemplate what we ought to do. I do not know what to do, but I think it may invovle proactive cooperation. So why all this dying and suffering ,called global warming???So we can have that new lexus or mercedes benz, which are not even american products? I sure hope people are not actually trying to sustain the old dream, of our ecomonic world of material value. Cars and malls and computer can and whatever can be sustained if recycled and reused. Cradle to the cradle instead of cradle to grave. All things end up in the landfill, and if want some current form of life, some commodity we have grown a liking to, we will have to resourceful and genius in our design making sure that all other things must be considered before, such as the other members of the biotic community, before we can try and sustain it. Can we not see that a man is rich by what he can leave alone, that is simplicity is really healthy, physically and spiritually. I propose the __ECO ACT__ . The Environmental Cooperation Organization, has only one rule, the golden one, treat others as you would want them to treat you. The organizations truly wants to not have a job and actually hates itself, because the very reason it exists is becasue of the need of its neccessity. The oranization also knows that by doing such to others we will have the healthiest country in the world. In light of ECO's only rule, america does not want to see the people of africa suffer from its use of fossil fuels, so fossil fuels are banned, forever, only used by emergency vehicles. We do not want the brazillian rainforest to dissapear, so the organization makes sure america does not contribute to any of the foresting there, it may even go as far as to ask othe contries to do the same and maybe even import some of our fine woods, which japan loves.
  5. Oil in Alaska

    I just leanred that there is 30million barrels of oil under in the northern parts of Alaska. I wonder, how will global warming effect the arctic and further its resources? WIll they just melt?
  6. Data From Solar Panels

    Welcome to the forum. I am a student at NAU and am glad to see a professor in the forum. Anyways what are you trying to do with the soloar panels, save energy? I think it would be cool if your students did something with the economics of solar energy. You can actually sell power back to the grid I heard, I think that is amazing. Is this an undergrad class or some applied reasearch?
  7. Ecofeminism

    On Ecofeminism Ok you tree huggers and dirt lovers, THE EARTH IS NOT YOUR MOTHER., and this is why. The earth did not birth man, in the sense the this rock did not create man by itself. There was a large rock, Earth, and over time something strange happened that has not happened on any other rock, that we know of. Our rock could be seen as a mother to all life, in the sense that his is where the magic happen. But we have made a disturbing discovery about our mother, she can die. There are enough people with access to nuclear weapons, that enough of them got pissed off, a nuclear fallout would ensue. This would hypothetically wipe most all of the advanced organisms on earth. We have found out how put huge metal tool upon the surface of our mother to manipulate life. We have seen fit to putting mother into a nursing home, she is getting old and dying, just as the Nature Conservancy puts our beloved mother under its care. Well it all depends on what your definition of the earth is. The most basic description is that the earth is a rock that rotates the sun. A more specific definition could include talk about our atmosphere and water and what not. Life happened on our rock for what reasons. Our earth rock is where life first started, so far as we know, but did the earth will it done. Is she actually a deity, Gaia. All of the basic elements needed to start the life on our rock are found everywhere else in the universe. The Miller Uray experiment is so crude but yet is the best answer we have for how it started. They re-created the atmosphere and put electricity to it. Well once you create a sphere like cocoon and ad energy to it, it is to be expected that the energy would be captured in the sphere. You see the similarities of the atmosphere and electricity as being an egg and sperm, but what chance created our atmosphere, was it the earth goddess. I see the force behind creating life here on earth to be our actual mother. I see it as we are living here with our bothers and sister, all as one organism called life, and that this mother she actually not be perceived as male or female. It is to be noted that women are very beautiful, very sharp minded and strong enough to give birth to a new being. All of these female attributes are prevalent in Nature. The only difference I see is that on earth, something(life) was created from nothing, a huge phenomena. Women do have bellies that suddenly grow a lump inside and bam! there is another life. But is this really making something out of nothing, there was an egg and a sperm. What then, the earth is the egg, then what is the sperm, because both are needed to produce new life. As much as women want to think men are useless, now sex not even being need to reproduce, sperm is still needed. Maybe women will find some way of releasing both egg and sperm, oh god to think of the population then! There are many female attributes to our world and it does feel inherent to me that the earth is lovely like a woman, I suppose this is just the nature of life. It is all how you perceive it. An Indian see the world as a plentiful fruit bearing place that truly gives him life, the hunter gather see the world as a survival of the fittest, competing for his food and energy/life, the capitalist would see the world as a mean to making money/fame/life. The soul of life resides here on earth as a collective and when I look at you I see a piece of it. "Go confidentley into the direction of your dreams. Live the life you have dreamed." - Henery David Thoreau
  8. Too late to avoid global warming

    So what ought we to do about these seeminy enevitable rough times ahead??????????????????????????????
  9. Too late to avoid global warming

    Well more than half of the land mass in these countries is frozen. A couple feet of permafrost that we thought was always there is now melting and the land is becoming usable for humans. I wonder if we will screw it all up as we have done with our present land. I sure hope we will have learned something. Example: Ice melting north of canada has opened the Northwest Passage for the first time on record. Never in the records has there been a ice free route. This is the shortest route connecting the Altantic and Pacific oceans. (**--__--**) burntoshine
  10. Arent these blogs pointless?!?!?!

    oh, how do you get one of those cool pictures next to your name
  11. Arent these blogs pointless?!?!?!

    Yeah these blogs are pretty cool. But in no way is this the only way to voice an opinion. I am kinda of the view that if yo uhaving something to say, why not scream it. I figured it would be a fun blog to do. I actually turned this paper into one of my professors under the name ""arent these journals pointless, because he makes us keep a journal. I got a laugh from him. (**--- __ ---**) burntoshine
  12. Too late to avoid global warming

    I am moving to Canada or Russia in the next 20 years. The only places that will benifit from global warming.
  13. Number 1

    As current trends predict, humans are way to comfortable to evolve, or change their way of living. Our culture, is sucking the life out of the Earth and all for what, so we can have more material posessions that ultimatley mean nothing. Anyways I believe that the future collapse of our way of life is to be seen as good news. This is what we have been waiting for. The forces of evil will be crushed by mother earth, and her sons and daughters will inherit the earth again. We will have a second chance to mess it all up again. It will be interesting to see what alliances will be made to control what is left. Will there still be power hungery people after the collapse. Whatever happens, I hope that the lesson learned will be that we humans are not all powerful and we are just a part of the whole. This will hopefully encourage unity and peace forever and ever. "Nothing in the communitylives in isolation from the rest, not even the queens of social insects. Nothing lives only for itself, needing nothing from the community. Nothing lives for itself, owing nothing to the community. Nothing is untouchavle is untouched. Every life is on loan from the community from birth and will, without fail is paid back to the community in death. The community is a web of life, and every strand of the web leads to all the other strands. Nothing is exempt or excused . Nothing is special. Nothing lives on a strand by itslef, unconnected to the rest. As you saw yesterday, nothing is wasted, not a drop of water , or a molecule of protein- or the egg of a fly. This is the sweetness and mirical of it all(the law of life). Everything that lives is food for another. Everything that feeds is ultimately itself fed upon or in death returns its substance to the community." Pg 163 The Story of B
  14. Number 1

    Yes, the only way we will change is to become one country, and nation. Environmental unity is discussed as well as environmental justice. Our current democracy is great in many ways. One it was the cummulation of the brightest free minds around 275yrs ago. Daniel Quinn says in the Story of B that we need a new vision. The currnet vision is best personified in our current revealed religions. I believe he would agree that our current vision is personified even more in our vision of governments. We have in our democracy two branches and a president that all work together to represent the views of 400 million citizens.They try to do all of this in harmony with each other but we rarely see any resounance in ideas on capital hill. The flow of ideas would be a lot easier if the knot in the middle was untied. There was never meant to be only one man/woman to fills the needs of every citizen. Our current form of democracy must evolve. We have to evolve as everything else does. To stay concrete to anythign to to die. Our current government will have to adapt to everyones needs. Yes I am saying their is no need for a president or just on leader of anykind. Our economical sytem is flawed and soon something will replace it. I encourage any ideas. The roots of this system will lie in our values and beliefs as a race of humans. We can not see the world as made for man to conquer, thus the material world around us is where all economic activity starts. Economy as profit off the land. Money is not growing off trees but the way we vision the world it is true to some degree. Man can try and dominate Earth for a while but as we are seening now, this just leads to self deaft. The new vision is that the world is a sacred place and a sacrd process and we are part of it.We are no more important than a mouse, or the lice that live on its back. Everything is consumed by another thing and that thing is then consumed by another and so on. Not a single drop is wasted in the cirlce of life. Every molecule of water. Every last peice of skin decomposed and sent back into the river of life. "Marxism consists of thousands of truths, but they all boil down to one: It's right to rebel against reactionaries." (**-- __ --**) Burntoshine
  15. Number 1

    Check this out http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/em/fr/-/2/hi/scie...ure/4226917.stm What is the number 1 environmental proplem. Well its is humans, of coarse. Its how many of us there are. We lived for over a million years in a sustained harmony with the land. Only once we learned to have power over the land in the form of agriculture(10,000 years ago) did we start to tip the balance. I must make the point of relating some relavencies I have seen latley. In chapter 3 in our college Environmental Sciences(2006), I was introduced to the view of our population as a closed sytem. A dynamic system based upon input and output. We are experiencing positive feed back due to the nature of exponential growth, great. The U.N. has no problem making prediction that our world population will reach 12billion(twice what it is today) with in 30 years. And what are we doing about it??? Our book is still debating how to solve this problem, but offers some reactionary methods to slow it(condoms,the pill ect). It points out three reasons why this environmental problem is hard to solve. First, is the nature of exponential growth. This positive feedback loop is misleading humanity. Second is what they call Lag Time. In the graoh they show, which is the standard "J" curve that represents the force of exponectial growth, as well as the aftermath of such a large explosion. This after math is defined as the concept of overshoot. "This eventually results in the collapse of population to some level below the new carrying capacity, which has been reduced. The lag time is the time of exponential growth of population before it exceeds the carrying capacity". pg51 Environmental Science In the Teaching of B, the population problem is addressed in the same way. As a closed sytem operation on input and output. The input being food. He makes many arguments and even constructs a hypothetical test on mice and points out the another test you can run 10,000 times and still conclude that MORE FOOD = MORE PEOPLE. Since the agricultural revolution(10,00yrs ago) each year the food production has increased and conincidingly the population has incresed that same year. This can be repeated 10,000 times. B defeats all current debate on population control. He says that we dont need birth control we need food control. The philosophy behind this is good. He is cutting to the truth of the matter. Birth control is a totally reactionary method of tackling the problem, thus it will never make much a difference. By directly reducing the input(food) into the system(population), a a reduction will be observed in the output of the sytem. He says " dont control the effects, control the causes. Simple. So are we to just stop making food then. Who knows how this will be implemented, but i thought of an current analogy. We are getting an In and Out fast food restaurant supposedly here in Flagstaff. I am thrilled, I love their burgers. Yet are people starving here in flagstaff? Do we need a buger shack so badly? There has been during our entire lifetime, a constant state of increase that we have been blind to. How can we explain the never ending list of new items on the market. Always a newer hotter more thrilling object. Each year the car companies produce a new cars, which will ultimately end up in the dump one day(seriously). Were is all this coming from? How are we creating all these things, and getting away with it? This is a feeling all of us know we have and yet we are ignoring it. I felt it today as I was walking along the streets. I picked up a peice of trash as a way of doing my part to save the world, and as I was walking to the trash can I was thinking how reactionary trash cans are. When they saw trash on the streets they REACTED and put out more trashcans. But it is not our streets that we need to keep clean, its the most pristine places on earth that must be clean. We just assume that there is trash and that there has always been it and will always be it. We invented trash cans and other large trashcans, such as landfills and have even tried to turn our ocean into a trash can, but never have we thought of reducing trash before it is made. We think that by puting the empty soda cans and ciggarette butts into the trashcan will keep the rivers cleen and the grass green. How blind this is to the fact the the earth has to swallow EVERYTHING we produce. Everything taken is giving back in due time. As B has doe withn population we must do with trash, we must seek the truth of the matter and look for the cause of the problem. We are in the lag time, we are decades from collapse. Thus the carrying capacity will collapse. This is what scientist have said. Earth will not be able to support as many of us after the collapse. This implies that the earth will be damaged really badly, so badly that our food will be resricted. Thus our population will decrease, just as B said. The scientist and daniel quinn are both right. burntoshine ( **--__--**)