• All Purchases made this month instantly go into the draw to win a USD $ 200.00 credit to your HoP account.
 

Forums > Social Discussion > Vegetarianism for climate change?

Login/Join to Participate
Page: 123456
Mynci
Mynci

Macaque of all trades
Location: wombling free...
Member Since: 27th Apr 2005
Total posts: 8737
Posted:Lord Stern has been quoted as saying we all need to go vegetarian to save the planet
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6891362.ece
br>
some interesting points raised, as well as the fact that on the radio they were saying the average family dog produces the same carbon footprint as a small car - 0.8 metric tonnes per year due to the high meat and cereal diet dogs have.

Is this really a viable option? meat (essentially fish) is the main reason we have such highly developed brains, should we stop to save the planet or are there much better ways to go?


A couple of balls short of a full cascade... or maybe a few cards short of a deck... we'll see how this all fans out.

Delete Topic

Rouge Dragon
Rouge Dragon

Insert Champagne Here
Location: without class distinction
Member Since: 21st Jul 2003
Total posts: 13215
Posted:Just because someone has a different theory about how to help the environment doesn't mean that they're not concerned for the environment or an environmentalist. Especially with the varied countries that we live in, not all environments work in the same way and many people don't realise what is glaringly obvious for their own country/region/culture could actually be drastic for another and visa versa.

i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey

Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...

Delete

FireTom
Stargazer

Member Since: 20th Sep 2003
Total posts: 6650
Posted:Preventing this to again turning into a boring one-on-one debate between Stone and me, I divide this post into two parts: one addressing him and one addressing directly the topic:

first on topic

No rocksolid evidence whatsoever has been presented by any human being so far that this planet indeed is in trouble. Planet Earth is circumnavigating its sun as it has for billions of years.

Even since the first lifeforms have emerged on its surface the planet went through serious catastrophes, sometimes wiping out most existing lifeforms on its surface.

More than 90% of all species that ever existed have vanished and Earth's climate has significantly changed over the course of the ages of its existence. Right now we're living in a comparably warm period.

No rocksolid evidence whatsoever has been presented that global warming will actually lead to the extinction of all lifeforms on the planet (including mankind). Sea levels have been significantly changing over the past and right now it is comparatively low.

My line of argument is not that you should eat meat, or that vegetarianism is a bad thing altogether. Hence I'm not an "environmentalist"... All kind of "-isms" repulse me as they are dogmatic, based upon the smallest common denominator and usually establish clichs which lead to "us vs. them". It's (IMNSHO) rubbish.

I said: The planet is fine. Mother Earth is not in trouble. I stand to it.

If you base your actions of water conservation, choice of diet and environmental protection out of worries for the planet *alone* then I perceive your horizon as extremely limited.

When looking at deserts you will notice one thing: the absence of water. Still there is an amazingly high amount of life there, waiting for a chance to sprout. When looking at life on this planet (and life in general) it proves one thing: it's amazingly persistent and flourishes in the most extreme conditions you can possibly imagine. Take the extreme conditions on ocean bottoms, near underwater volcanoes, in the absence of light, oxygen and other ingredients we as humans perceive as "vital" ingredients for the existence of life.

It's a quite limited perception to claim that life can only exist under the given circumstances and that any change would destroy the entire thing. This limitation is (ab)used to stir up emotions and worries to pursue particular goals. To boil it down here: IMHO it's about control (only). The more I worry, the easier I am to be controlled, because I'm not centered. The war against communism is followed by the war on terrorism and ultimately we will return to fight for resources (like water) and ideologies.

There is nothing wrong with caring for the environment. But it's far better to do it, because you enjoy living in a human body and have a moderate attachment to trees and birds, rather than clinging on to the idea that this (world) is the ultimate expression of existence.

This world has a due date and it can come any given moment in form of a meteorite (or another completely unpredictable catastrophe) or it can linger on for a few billion years more until the capacity of our sun has surpassed its peak, triggering a chain of events that no global diet is able to change.

Whether or not we'll be able to spot another planet with earthlike conditions and "seed" another human race (Ark) on it, is matter of speculation. Though I dearly enjoy it, I obviously feel less attached to the/this human form than others.

I save electricity and water wherever possible (and reasonable), separate garbage and try to avoid it wherever possible. My organic waste goes to cows or compost. I burn paper and what comes out of the garden to recycle it into the garden as we do not have a recycling plant here (not to mention garbage trucks) so I am forced to transport my plastic to the garbage dump at the next city, 20k's away. I don't burn it or dump it in the vicinity, like most of my neighbors in hope that one day they will establish such plant.

I frequently plant trees (this season so far alone I planted an almond tree, three palm trees, a hibiscus, two roses, one banana and two papaya - I intend to plant more before years end)... I don't haggle at nurseries in order to support their business.

I am not a vegetarian, but my diet is mostly meat-free. This is due to reasons beyond physical, as I can see my body negatively adapt to it (not ready to discuss it into detail here and now). I refrain from eating meat not because of an environmental approach but because of an ethical one: I dislike the way animals are farmed industrially.

I am not for people living out their ego trip and trying to sell it to me as charity. Trips to space or (global) concerts are not doing the trick (IMO). There is "poverty" here in India. Of course. A lot of it is "relative poverty", measured against western wealth and most of it is intentionally created and perpetuated by a system based on corruption and greed. By falling for the "pity game" of some organizations you change nothing. You only change something by actively going out there and doing something about it. (btw It's quite interesting to note how many beggars turn around on my doorstep when I offer them work...)

weavesmiley


Stone: I really don't give a [censored] what you think I should be(come), say or do and whether or not you're meditating 99% of your life. You seem to have casted a judgment against me a long time ago and remain ignorant to reason. You seem to fall for any kind of government/ media propaganda and trust more in their pamphlets than independent sources, subordinating to mainstream propaganda. You indulge in personal attacks, vast assumptions and populism... Maybe you meditate but you're not getting anywhere with it because you remain stuck in your mind. I challenged you to present evidence or disprove my claims with facts - you refuse and continue the same old boring cursing... If you hold personal grudges and want to sort it out I (again) ask you to use PM's and not drag it across all threads in which I don't agree with you. You're quite smart to always keep it below the level under which a mod would slap your wrist... Buddhism (IMO) is not the cure of all evils... it's my opinion and I stand to it. Take it from me (or not): you could as well make a nice career working for the RTA... It's funny (strange) that recently I met so amazingly sweet people from Brisbane when I confronted with someone who appears to be an obnoxious babbitt from Melbourne... when I lived in Oz it always seemed the other way round ... but times might have changed wink tongue2 wink hug peace <- fill in any soothing graemlin necessary

and watch:


EDITED_BY: FireTom (1260119815)
EDIT_REASON: life after people


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink

Delete

Rouge Dragon
Rouge Dragon

Insert Champagne Here
Location: without class distinction
Member Since: 21st Jul 2003
Total posts: 13215
Posted:Originally Posted By: tom
There is nothing wrong with caring for the environment. But it's far better to do it, because you enjoy living in a human body and have a moderate attachment to trees and birds, rather than clinging on to the idea that this (world) is the ultimate expression of existence.


That reminds me of my philosophy when it comes to the environment and all the political/social/everything stuff that's flying around:

Do the right thing because you believe that it's the RIGHT thing to do. Not because social pressures are forcing you to subscribe to the latest environmental religion.


i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey

Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...

Delete

Stone
Stream Entrant
Location: Melbourne
Member Since: 13th Jun 2001
Total posts: 2830
Posted:Tom, the problem is about anthropogenic global warming or man-made global warming. Ok, thats different to what happens naturally. If people dont understand that then how are we going to stop that process. There are a vast amounts of scientific evidence to prove this, and they are freely available. But you have to take the time to read them. Anyhow, the debate has gone way past scientific papers. The poles and the glaciers are melting. Even the Chinese realise what going on, and are starting to tackle the issue. Many are hoping they will lead the way at Copenhagen this week.

China unveils plan to limit emissions.
Garnaut Climate Change Review
ABC Climate Change
Antarctic icesheet losing mass
Grizzlies, polar bears breeding because of climate
Tibetan glaciers rapidly melting.





If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh

Delete

hamamelis
hamamelis

nut.
Location: Bouncing off the walls.
Member Since: 5th Jan 2006
Total posts: 756
Posted:
Non-Https Image Link


Sorry....

Couldn't resist...


THE MEEK WILL INHERIT THE EARTH!


If that's okay with you?

Delete

Stout
Stout

Pooh-Bah
Location: Canada
Member Since: 12th May 2004
Total posts: 1872
Posted:Originally Posted By: FireTomNo rocksolid evidence whatsoever has been presented that global warming will actually lead to the extinction of all lifeforms on the planet (including mankind). Sea levels have been significantly changing over the past and right now it is comparatively low.

Nobody's making that argument.The one that is being made is that AGW is going to cause life to suck, and suck hard for a lot of people. It probably won't happen in our lifetimes, but id you come to know your grandchildren, they may have questions about why "your" generation did what they did, knowing what they know.

Of course it's possible the whole thing could blow over, but at this stage of the game it's not looking to likely. The whole planting trees thing has absolutely nothing to do with the threat posed by AGW. I know we've been down this road before, but planting trees only helps to offset the trees removed for "other" things, like clearing the rain forest to grow cows, for instance.

The AGW carbon is carbon that "we're" releasing into the environment that's bees sequestered for millions and millions of years and as such is 'new" carbon as far as the biosphere is concerned. During the last ice age, this carbon was happily sitting deep underground which does serve to show that climate change is a "natural" phenomena and is bound to happen again, but we appear to be accelerating that process and bringing on those changes faster that we'd like.

How's this for cynical? I proposed my own Internet law, Stout's Law. It stated..No matter what the forum, threads involving the participants disclosures of what lifestyle advantages they'd be willing to give up in order to reduce their carbon footprint will fall to the bottom of the page at freefall speed. I submitted this to Wikipedia only to be told that it's too obscure and "go market it someplace else, if you get a following, then maybe come back"

Those days of anyone writing anything they want on Wikipedia are long over.

Quote: IMHO it's about control (

Pretty much, yes. Around here, Hummers are no longer socially acceptable.

Quote:Trips to space or (global) concerts are not doing the trick (IMO).
No, they may serve to "raise awareness" but the do as I say, not as I do thing is so transparent as to be laughable and has probably created more climate change deniers than supporters. All Al Gore is doing is preaching to the converted.

Quote:and watch

Interesting series, I have a bunch of episodes recorded but it's a little shy on the disaster porn. I'm waiting for 2012, the movie, now there's some serious destruction.


Delete

Stout
Stout

Pooh-Bah
Location: Canada
Member Since: 12th May 2004
Total posts: 1872
Posted:Originally Posted By: Rouge DragonThat reminds me of my philosophy when it comes to the environment and all the political/social/everything stuff that's flying around:

Do the right thing because you believe that it's the RIGHT thing to do. Not because social pressures are forcing you to subscribe to the latest environmental religion.

Yes, but it all depends on what information you're basing those beliefs on and if you're willing to change those beliefs in view of new information. That the recent H1N1 freakshow, with the thimersol and squalene.

Many people were wiling to label the vaccine as a hazard due to the mercury content in it yet they were unwilling to give up eating fish to avoid getting a way higher dose of a more lethal form of mercury. ( methylmercury vs ethylmercury) Or get all worked up about "good" squalene" vs "bad" squalene all based on one article written by one quack whose trying to sell books and supplements ( Mercola ) oh yea, and then there's Blaylock.

So..what do you do ? Believe the vaccine is evil and advocate against people getting immunized in the face of what looked like it might have been a pandemic ? Sit on your hands and just keep quiet and avoid the vaccine yourself? Or..debunk and expose misinformation for what it is ?


Delete

Stone
Stream Entrant
Location: Melbourne
Member Since: 13th Jun 2001
Total posts: 2830
Posted:Originally Posted By: Rouge DragonJust because someone has a different theory about how to help the environment doesn't mean that they're not concerned for the environment or an environmentalist. Especially with the varied countries that we live in, not all environments work in the same way and many people don't realise what is glaringly obvious for their own country/region/culture could actually be drastic for another and visa versa.

Rouge, I think because its a global problem it has to be tackled as such, by both the governments and people of all countries together.

Originally Posted By: Rouge DragonDo the right thing because you believe that it's the RIGHT thing to do. Not because social pressures are forcing you to subscribe to the latest environmental religion.

So Rouge, is that how you see global warming, as the latest environmental religion?

Doesnt it concern you that among the other effects of global warming, that the Kashmir and the Tibetan glaciers are rapidly melting?


If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh

Delete

Rouge Dragon
Rouge Dragon

Insert Champagne Here
Location: without class distinction
Member Since: 21st Jul 2003
Total posts: 13215
Posted:The reason why I used the word "belief" is because of what I mentioned earlier about physical location, culture etc having an affect on what is actually "right." What is going to help or hinder the environment in one location may not help it in another. I say this because Australia's environment confused the hell out of the Europeans when they first arrive. Our trees and water catchments don't work the same as they'd assumed that they would.

In regards to the swine flu vaccine, because it's a personal decision to make then it's definitely up to your belief and your own gut as to whether you did enough research or not. If you feel strongly enough that it's bad, then I don't see what's wrong with trying to speak your opinion because you BELIEVE that you're doing the right thing.

In all honesty, I think that the Pope is a very bad influence on many things and he (well, the Vatican) should be silenced. But I know that people believe otherwise and they have a right to it.

Taking responsibility for your own actions includes ones that you made in accordance to your beliefs. I don't believe in the Catholic god but if I've botched it up and I arrive at the Pearly Gates then I only have myself to blame for buggering it up.


i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey

Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...

Delete

Stone
Stream Entrant
Location: Melbourne
Member Since: 13th Jun 2001
Total posts: 2830
Posted:I really dont understand why people do not get the impact of global warming or why they arent concerned about whats happening to poor old mother earth, or why people react in such "hostile" ways when they are challenged by climate change? So I looked it up, and found this Report of the American Psychological Association Task Force on Psychology and Global Climate Change. The following are extracts from the Executive Summary.

Section 1: How do people understand the risks imposed by climate change?

Long-term climate is a phenomenon not easily detected by personal experience, yet one that invites personal observation and evaluation. Concern about adverse consequences of climate change (e.g., extreme weather events like droughts or floods) is low on average in places such as the United States, in part because small probability events tend to be underestimated in decisions based on personal experience, unless they have recently occurred, in which case they are vastly overestimated.

Many think of climate change risks (and thus of the benefits of mitigating them) as both considerably uncertain and as being mostly in the future and geographically distant, all factors that lead people to discount them. The costs of mitigation, on the other hand, will be incurred with certainty in the present or near future. Emotional reactions to climate change are likely to influence perceptions of risk. Yet, emotional reactions to climate change risks are likely to be conflicted and muted because climate change can be seen as a natural process, and global environmental systems perceived as beyond the control of individuals, communities,and, quite possibly, science and technology. There is, however, significant variability in peoples reactions to climate risks, much of which is mediated by cultural values and beliefs.

Section 5: Which psychological barriers limit climate change action?

Many psychological and social structural barriers stand in the way of behavioral changes that would help limit climate change. Many people are taking action in response to the risks of climate change, but many others are unaware of the problem, unsure of the facts or what to do, do not trust experts or believe their conclusions, think the problem is elsewhere, are fixed in their ways, believe that others should act, or believe that their actions will make no difference or are unimportant compared to those of others. They may be engaged in token actions or actions they believe are helpful but objectively are not. They have other worthy goals and aspirations that draw their time, effort, and resources, or they believe that solutions outside of human control will address the problem. Some or all of the structural barriers must be removed but this is not likely to be sufficient. Psychologists and other social scientists need to work on psychological barriers.

I hope that helps people, who like me, just just cannot understand why climate change sceptics are so in denial. For more information I suggest reading the full report.




If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh

Delete

Stone
Stream Entrant
Location: Melbourne
Member Since: 13th Jun 2001
Total posts: 2830
Posted:Originally Posted By: Rouge Dragon Taking responsibility for your own actions includes ones that you made in accordance to your beliefs. I don't believe in the Catholic god but if I've botched it up and I arrive at the Pearly Gates then I only have myself to blame for buggering it up.

Good point, but what about externality?

A negative externality is an action of a product on consumers that imposes a negative side effect on a third party; (aka- Social Cost). Many negative externalities (also called "external costs" or "external diseconomies") are related to the environmental consequences of production and use.

Anthropogenic climate change is attributed to greenhouse gas emissions from burning oil, gas, and coal. Global warming has been ranked as the #1 externality of all economic activity, in the magnitude of potential harms and yet remains unmitigated.

When car owners use roads, they impose congestion costs on all other users.


If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh

Delete

Rouge Dragon
Rouge Dragon

Insert Champagne Here
Location: without class distinction
Member Since: 21st Jul 2003
Total posts: 13215
Posted:But you ultimately can't change what a third party does. Only what you do. You can only be responsible for what you have control over.

i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey

Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...

Delete

FireTom
Stargazer

Member Since: 20th Sep 2003
Total posts: 6650
Posted:Hamamelis: laugh3 now that's what I call "evidence" wink

Rouge: can't agree more hug

Stone and Stout: preachertell... spank inform us on YOUR current individual actions to tackle the problem of global warming or other environmental issues as such...

Stone: ever heard of the inkblot test? quite accepted for some time.

Stout: when you got vaccinated?


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink

Delete

Stout
Stout

Pooh-Bah
Location: Canada
Member Since: 12th May 2004
Total posts: 1872
Posted:Originally Posted By: Rouge DragonBut you ultimately can't change what a third party does. Only what you do. You can only be responsible for what you have control over.

Sure you can.

You could, for instance, advocate for the building of a commuter rail system in order to reduce the use of the private automobile. That would reduce congestion as well as reducing reliance on the personal automobile. When I lived in Vancouver i took transit rather than drive to work, it was faster, easier and cheaper than driving.

In the same vein, you could also support HOV (high occupancy vehicle) lanes to encourage carpooling.


Delete

Stout
Stout

Pooh-Bah
Location: Canada
Member Since: 12th May 2004
Total posts: 1872
Posted:Originally Posted By: FireTom
<snip> Stout: preachertell... spank inform us on YOUR current individual actions to tackle the problem of global warming or other environmental issues as such...


I did, a couple of years ago but the thread is buried on page 136 wink

Quote:Stout: when you got vaccinated?

I didn't but I had my kid shot up with the stuff. He's under 5 and therefore considered in a high risk category. It's not something I wanted to do just for the heck of it.


Delete

FireTom
Stargazer

Member Since: 20th Sep 2003
Total posts: 6650
Posted:shrug you ultimately can only forcibly change what a third party does... preaching (unfortunately) is not going to do the trick either...

If you wanna make the world a better place you gotta get up and BE that change... wink

Originally Posted By: StoutMany people were wiling to label the vaccine as a hazard due to the mercury content in it yet they were unwilling to give up eating fish to avoid getting a way higher dose of a more lethal form of mercury. ( methylmercury vs ethylmercury) Or get all worked up about "good" squalene" vs "bad" squalene all based on one article written by one quack whose trying to sell books and supplements ( Mercola ) oh yea, and then there's Blaylock.

So..what do you do ? Believe the vaccine is evil and advocate against people getting immunized in the face of what looked like it might have been a pandemic ? Sit on your hands and just keep quiet and avoid the vaccine yourself? Or..debunk and expose misinformation for what it is ?

Originally Posted By: Tomwhen you got vaccinated? Originally Posted By: StoutI didn't but I had my kid shot up with the stuff. He's under 5 and therefore considered in a high risk category. It's not something I wanted to do just for the heck of it.


nuff said, no?... wink


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink

Delete

Stout
Stout

Pooh-Bah
Location: Canada
Member Since: 12th May 2004
Total posts: 1872
Posted:Nope, the shot wasn't available for the likes of me and by the time it was, the word was out that this "pandemic" was rather overblown. I'm basically healthy and if I do come down with the flu, I have the time to ride it out and go all man flu wink

Delete

FireTom
Stargazer

Member Since: 20th Sep 2003
Total posts: 6650
Posted:listen to yourself, Stout... wink

btw that "generation debate" works the same way... by the time you're mature enough to figure out the questions and who to address, compassion and corruption already kicked in wink kind-a comes with the entire "grandparents give chocolate to grandchildren" package wink wink

and before you start, Stone: your vegetarianism (assuming that's your diet) I would rather base on your religious faith than on environmentalism, so better come up with something else wink


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink

Delete

Stone
Stream Entrant
Location: Melbourne
Member Since: 13th Jun 2001
Total posts: 2830
Posted:Originally Posted By: Rouge DragonBut you ultimately can't change what a third party does. Only what you do. You can only be responsible for what you have control over.

Rouge, that was not what I was getting at by externality. Externality happens when someone takes an action but someone else, without agreeing, pays some or all of the costs of that action. Like say industrial pollution.

But to answer your question, there are ways to change how people act. For example, by raising fuel prices, carbon tax, water restrictions etc. But you are right, those actions doesnt instigate change. Before you get change you need acceptance. The best example of this is found in the change cycle ie. Denial - Anger Bargaining Depression Acceptance Change. For a more stylized version, see the change cycle

Originally Posted By: Fire TomStone and Stout: preachertell... spank inform us on YOUR current individual actions to tackle the problem of global warming or other environmental issues as such

Tom, I think this discussion went off the rails where you personalised it by asking people to clear up misconceptions on whether you cared for the environment or not. It was a mistake to answer that question because you obvious didnt get the answer you expected. So, I think it is much better to keep the discussion open, and not come down to personal competitions. Nevertheless, Ive been involved in a number of projects including the Biolink project. Vegetarianism could be taken form a number of areas on the Noble Eightfold Path like right view, right action, right effort, right mindfulness", as well as the First Precept to abstain from taking life. But they are not rules as such, it's about living a skilled, rather than an un-skilled life.

Tom, now let me ask you a question. Have you ever considered the possibility, even once in your entire life, that you might be wrong?


If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh

Delete

Rouge Dragon
Rouge Dragon

Insert Champagne Here
Location: without class distinction
Member Since: 21st Jul 2003
Total posts: 13215
Posted:You can encourage people, you can support people but ultimately you cannot change them. Even increasing petrol prices to financially cripple people who want to use petrol still leaves the final decision with those people. Changing the law still gives people the option to follow the law or not.

I do quite a bit of advocacy for bike riding as an alternative to cars but I can't force people to ride bikes (as was shown on this very forum when I was trying to be pro-bikes!) and therefore I simply refuse to take responsibility for the people who don't use my offered alternative. Sure, I can be disappointed and even disgusted but I can't be responsible. Some even have very fair reasons as to why they don't ride and I respect them for their decision.

But it's ok, I got bad marks once on an assignment in English once for this very argument. My teacher also disagreed with me that it's ultimately about individual choice and not third party choice.

And as for the actions having an effect on a third party. It's still something that you and only you can wear on your conscience. Again, it is something that is regrettable, but if you were to shoulder the responsibility for other people's actions then you will live a very sad life indeed! And not be able to chance very much at all because you can't change the actions of other people. For example, living in Vanuatu and hearing all the stories about how a few generations ago my country stole Ni-Vans for slavery - I could have felt guilty for their actions as inherited guilt. But I didn't. And my black family didn't expect me to feel guilt for them either.

I choose to not feel someone else's guilt. Inherited guilt? How very Catholic wink


i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey

Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...

Delete

Stout
Stout

Pooh-Bah
Location: Canada
Member Since: 12th May 2004
Total posts: 1872
Posted:Originally Posted By: Rouge DragonYou can encourage people, you can support people but ultimately you cannot change them

Yes, this is true. You can get 'em to fake it though. Sez me, who just bought a ticket to Asia today...woot!! six weeks of burning fossil fuels on dive boats and harassing local wildlife. Mmmmmm manta rays and Whale Sharks, and my favorite little fish, those clown fish like Nemo.

I tried the advocacy for bike riding thing but found it damn near impossible to get anything going. One thing I did get though was a "clause" issued by the Minister of the Environment re dress codes that stated that anyone who took "alternative" transportation to work got to wear pretty much anything they liked in the office. At least I got to ditch the suit and tie. That was only limited to government employees though.

Interestingly, I used a program that paralleled the one the Gun Owners of America are complaining about that already existed in the corporate world where employees are awarded "points' based on healthy living. Things like proving a gym membership, taking alternative transport, volunteering, all earned points that were exchangeable for consumer goods.

Quote:I choose to not feel someone else's guilt. Inherited guilt? How very Catholic

And how very politically correct. laugh3
The sharing of guilt thing, I mean.


Delete

WoodlandApple
WoodlandApple

addict
Location: Australia
Member Since: 1st Dec 2009
Total posts: 474
Posted:Originally Posted By: Stout When I lived in Vancouver i took transit rather than drive to work, it was faster, easier and cheaper than driving.


When I was working full time, it turned out cheaper to drive than catch public transport; I rode my bike for a while but with a 3 hr ride each way, crossing over some decent hills it almost killed me, so I rode-train-rode to work. After a month I worked it out that I was spending twice as much on transport.

Im also a big hypocrite, I try to be very enviro conscious, but as an avid outdoor sportsman, I travel a great deal in a vehicles big enough to get to where I want to go and carry what I want to take. I drill bits of metal into rockwalls, as well as clean off moss and break off loose bits. I contribute to gully erosion. I ski alot and although most of it is back country I do occasionally take the chairlift and add my bit to alpine resort destruction of the enviro. Im a ski patroller so I hoon around on skidoos and do maintainance (ie. cutting down trees and creating paths)

When I whitewater I remove dangerous obstacles (which can also be called habitats) and contribute to bank erosion..... THe list goes on and on and in particular, as an instructor I teach others to do these things as well.

I also play guitar poorly; so I add to noise pollution as well.

SO at home, when ride to uni or to the shops, when I swith of lights, take 3 min showers, grow a vegi patch and all the other enviro conscious things I do I do it knowing that in all honestly Im not keeping up.


EDITED_BY: WoodlandApple (1260237520)


sticks and stones my break my bones, but ski patrol will save me.

Delete

WoodlandApple
WoodlandApple

addict
Location: Australia
Member Since: 1st Dec 2009
Total posts: 474
Posted:Originally Posted By: Stout
Yes, this is true. You can get 'em to fake it though. Sez me, who just bought a ticket to Asia today...woot!! six weeks of burning fossil fuels on dive boats and harassing local wildlife.

Now, dont get me wrong, I enjoy diving as much as the next bloke (my fav. are puffa fish, they're so slow and stupid and fun to play with) but why would you leave the snow? shocked I would give almost anything to be Skiing in Canada right now bounce2


sticks and stones my break my bones, but ski patrol will save me.

Delete

Stout
Stout

Pooh-Bah
Location: Canada
Member Since: 12th May 2004
Total posts: 1872
Posted:Unfortunately, there's no snow around here, I'm on the water, on the west coast, on an island where the nearest ski mountain is 4 hours away.

I got spoiled living in Vancouver, three ski mountains right behind the city so going night skiing for four hours after work was always an option. Whistler/Blackcomb two hours away

So I swapped my skis for a drysuit.

Diving here is really beautiful. After the red sea, this area's been described as some of the best diving in the world and I can actually walk to a world class divesite, if I were so inclined.

But the tropics, the Andaman sea...beckons. bounce2


Delete

FireTom
Stargazer

Member Since: 20th Sep 2003
Total posts: 6650
Posted:Originally Posted By: StoneTom, now let me ask you a question. Have you ever considered the possibility, even once in your entire life, that you might be wrong?

Yes and I happily apologized to people in public when I found out about it... even when I've been quite right and noticed that I hurt the other persons feelings only by the way I expressed it...

Have you ever?


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink

Delete

FireTom
Stargazer

Member Since: 20th Sep 2003
Total posts: 6650
Posted:IMO Rouge is quite right about the "religious" aspect when it comes to some aspects of environmentalism and about her statement that you can't change people's behaviors in the long run. It's quite obvious. Especially unless practicable alternatives are offered directly.

For example: if you're raising fuel prices by collecting higher taxes and use that overhead not directly to improve mass transportation systems but to fill other holes in your budget, people lose it and rather keep up with higher prices.

"Prices will rise, politicians will philander..." these are "certain inalienable truths".

It's not that I'm unhappy with the answers to my personal question, vice versa. It's that there is some hypocrisy - which is absolutely human. Stout has wonderfully revealed it - and earned even more of my respect towards him because he's ready to admit one thing: that he's human. Wonderful personality, thanks a lot - it brightened my morning. hug

You can force people to follow your ideology, as long as they are dependent... once they follow their own predicaments you ultimately can't - and some feel the urge to regain this level of control... so they invent "ghostly" enemies and threats...


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink

Delete

FireTom
Stargazer

Member Since: 20th Sep 2003
Total posts: 6650
Posted:Vegetarianism for many people in the West is completely "off"... they enjoy burgers and BBQs far too much... to them talking about being "veg" is like talking about a 1st class round the world ticket to a Rickshaw driver in Calcutta...

Apart from the ethical issues with farming meat (most carnivores would not be able to spot "sentinence" in even the brightest of cows) the environmental impact (planet earth still floating fine) is not coming to them, because they blur it out in favor of a T-bone steak.

Rising meat prices and directly investing the overhead into the construction of Methanol plants might be one way to diminish the problems of industrialized meat production...

Growing food crops and clearing forests to graze cattle will continue to be an issue. Especially in countries like the US, Australia and South America, where most industrial meat production is outdoors. In Europe, most production happens indoors. I observed the impact of cattle on the soil of Australia to be devastating... whereas European soil seems to be far less fragile.

If you seriously want to tackle the problem, (as with polluted and the scarcity of water) you need to address the industries at least as much as the consumers, because their capability to destroy nature is to a far greater degree and faster pace.


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink

Delete

WoodlandApple
WoodlandApple

addict
Location: Australia
Member Since: 1st Dec 2009
Total posts: 474
Posted:Originally Posted By: FireTom
If you seriously want to tackle the problem, (as with polluted and the scarcity of water) you need to address the industries at least as much as the consumers, because their capability to destroy nature is to a far greater degree and faster pace.

The issue with cattlegrazing and land clearing in Australia go far deeper than than just addressing the industry - its deeply ingrained in our culture and historical practices. THe man from snowy river, the akubra hat, swagman etc, are all directly related to cattle grazing and are also part of our culture.

Our land usage is a direct result of our practice of Terra nullius, the idea that this is an empty land that can be utalised and shaped to our needs. The River Murray (longest river in Australia) is now just a glorified irrigation channel and the Snowy river hydroelectric scheme diverts 90% of its flow. These happened not just because of industrial practices, but because of Culture and attitudes.

When people came back from the war they were given small blocks of land for free to work on, on the condition that they had to clear the land on it, whether they wanted to or not. A government practicve again piggybacking on the ideas of terra nullius that had nothing to do with industry practices.
Industry works of of consumer demand, which is related to how we relate to the land, which has to do with culture, IMO


sticks and stones my break my bones, but ski patrol will save me.

Delete

WoodlandApple
WoodlandApple

addict
Location: Australia
Member Since: 1st Dec 2009
Total posts: 474
Posted:Originally Posted By: FireTom I observed the impact of cattle on the soil of Australia to be devastating... whereas European soil seems to be far less fragile.


this doesnt give a complete picture, yes Cattle have a goodly impact, for example grazing in the high country was indeed devestating, as well as grazing along the murray, eg. Barmah state forest. But both these have been stopped. Now most soil erosion in these areas occur from wild Brumbies, deer and pigs.

Victorian soils are damaged by past mining practices and land clearing and water management far more than cattle.

Western Australia is facing most soil degradation from salinity issues again from water management, South Australia mostly from trying to grow crops in an area that doesnt get rain. The large stations in central Australia is where you find the most cattle impact on soils today. Its important to remember that Aussie soils are crap to begin with, particulalry when compared to Europe. The style of land usage cannot be compared becasue they are entirly different. COnservation land management practices also contribute to soil degradation as we now do not have the fires that are essential for a lot of plants to propegate.The loss of Box and Ironbark forests through Victoria (mainly due to mining and lack of decent fire regimes) have devestated the victorian soils more than food crops and cattle do.

EDITED_BY: WoodlandApple (1260253095)


sticks and stones my break my bones, but ski patrol will save me.

Delete

Stone
Stream Entrant
Location: Melbourne
Member Since: 13th Jun 2001
Total posts: 2830
Posted:Originally Posted By: Fire TomYes and I happily apologized to people in public when I found out about it... even when I've been quite right and noticed that I hurt the other persons feelings only by the way I expressed it..

Have you ever?

Tom that was not I meant. I was really referring to things like climate change. I should have written "Have you ever considered the possibility, even once in your entire life, that you might be wrong? Like as about climate change for example". Anyhow, the even when I've been quite right statement negates what your claim.

Originally Posted By: Fire TomIt's not that I'm unhappy with the answers to my personal question, vice versa. It's that there is some hypocrisy - which is absolutely human. Stout has wonderfully revealed it - and earned even more of my respect towards him because he's ready to admit one thing: that he's human. Wonderful personality, thanks a lot - it brightened my morning.

Tom, you talk about hypocrisy. So how hypocritical is it to say Be the Change, when you don't accept climate change? As to having to earn your respect, that type of attitude just comes across as arrogance, to me.

BTW, "climate change" is not some "ghostly enemy or threat", it's real and it's here. The poles and the glaciers are melting, pacific islands are flooding and you talk like you think its something that might happen in 50 years. Good grief!



PS: This upshot of all this is that it is time to stop bickering about which country has the worst animal husbandry practices for the environment, and move forward. That means developing sustainable agricultural systems to feed a growing population.




EDITED_BY: Stone (1260322756)
EDIT_REASON: Added a bit extra.


If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh

Delete

Page: 123456