The Science of a Vanishing Planet
- This topic has 11 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 8 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Dorothea Lange Gravestone St. George, Utah 1953 There are numerous ways to define the Precautionary Principle. It’s something we can all intuit
[See the full post at: The Science of a Vanishing Planet]Moths are attracted to lights.
The morning pile of dead moths are smaller.
Are there fewer moths?
OR
Are the moths getting smarter?City mosquitoes are a vanishing specy.
County mosquitoes are still attacking me.“The Precautionary Principle, if it is to be applied, must turn the burden of proof on its head. The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. ”
Ahhh, let’s throw Precaution to the wind.
“What will the kids say?”
Fuck the kids Mildred.
I don’t know where to look for a solution other than waiting for the whole mess to fall apart and, if I am “lucky” enough to survive start picking up the pieces with whatever bits and pieces of life that make it thru the storm. Out to prune the grapevines-the birds and raccoons loved them last year!
Wot I said:
UK Government Preparing To Confiscate Russian Capital “Of Dubious Origin”
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-26/uk-government-preparing-confiscate-russian-capital-dubious-originUK gets poor, looks around for who has the most assets for the least trouble. Politics aside, if your main (only?) line of work is to hold assets for other people, perhaps it is not the best long-term solution to be known for stealing the assets of other people. They get cranky that way.
On precaution, it’s not legally viable to prove a negative. It also can be tricky to “prove” things in science. However, the many tests that are done are paid for, politicized, and leave the profiteer in control of what is released and what is not. Surely that is not fair law either. That’s ’cause no one cares about the truth, the law, or life itself, clearly evidenced.
I can tell you anecdotally that bugs have been falling for some time here, (10-ish years?) and birds mostly only this year. While I might suspect the stronger sun and wild swings for the bugs, as far as I can tell, there has been no significant change to pesticides, or none admitted, at least. It’s a progression, not a collapse, yet we see a collapse, not a progression.
Don’t worry, no one will care about that either until they can’t eat, then suddenly wonder why. Why? Because you’ve been openly destroying all life on earth, whatever the kind, type, variety, or genus for over 100 years. Did you think you were going to stop eating, you know, food, drinking, you know, water, and using, you know, wood and moving to a Star Trek Replicator? Or did you just not care how your bread was buttered? What am I saying? Butter comes from a package in a store, children literally don’t know what a cow is and don’t know that milk makes whipped cream then butter…even back in the 90s. So If you don’t know how anything works — anything, even what the food that creates you is — how can you know when it’s broken?
“Brawndo: It’s What Plants Crave”
No one is going to stand between the stampeding herd and the cliff. Just going to have to let Natural Selection sort it all out.
Not to worry. They’re making tiny robot insects now to fill in for the missing pollinators. So don’t tell me birds won’t get enough to eat.
Many insect larvae start their lives in aqueous environments, so fish populations are no doubt suffering the same fate as birds. But hey, at least fish get their fill of plastic, so who’s complaining?
Rachel Carson, if you’re old enough to remember that name, did warn us.
It will be nice and quiet though won’t it. And if a globalised population falls and there’s no one to hear it then did it really fall? People are so myopic and we are all just a bit too clever to be particularly hopeful here aren’t we. If it’s any consolation a lot of my anecdotal observations have shown me that insect populations are very high in our forests in Australia because our fertility here is just so pathetic that large scale chemical farming is an option for only small parts of the island continent. We are clearing a shit load of trees here though so it’s still just a matter of time. Bummer. And we had a nice reef when the Beatles broke up but it’s pretty shit now. Jacques Cousteau wouldn’t bother with it.
A quote from Jacques
“What should we do to eliminate suffering and disease? It’s a wonderful idea but perhaps not altogether a beneficial one in the long run. If we try to implement it we may jeopardize the future of our species…It’s terrible to have to say this. World population must be stabilized and to do that we must eliminate 350,000 people per day. This is so horrible to contemplate that we shouldn’t even say it. But the general situation in which we are involved is lamentable”.[15]Only one solution that I’m aware of, sumac.carol: culture change by mass choice.
Science is irrelevant within this system/culture. Government is irrelevant. Individuals are irrelevant. Population numbers are irrelevant. The culture is a one-way, insidious, pervasive, ubiquitous consumption march driven by exchange belief. End the belief, end the march. It’s that simple. But do continue to hand-wring over the bugs and all as if that weren’t also irrelevant. (FYI, irrelevant=powerless)
The solution is simple really, its just not popular.
We need to pay people to not do the wrong things, and charge people dearly for doing the wrong things.
Right now we only propose the latter therefore there is no money for anyone to get behind and that will never fly. Stop making all these proposals that essentially takes money away from everyone from top down and start proposing direct money making options that make the world a better place.
P.S. I definitely don’t mean ramping up some BS “green economy”.
The Missing Link: EMFs
Careful not to omit the influence of anthropogenic non-ionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF) e.g. radiofrequency radiation (RFR) in particular. Relatively biologically confusing (pulsed) microwave transmissions have only become ubiquitous in certain environments in the last decade or two
Anthropogenic radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as an emerging threat to wildlife orientation
The singular impact alone is understood to be devastating in many species, including and especially winged animals that utilise relatively subtle natural EMFs for various functions including navigation
A 2018 Horizon Scan of Emerging Issues for Global Conservation and Biological Diversity
The additive, interacting, and synergistic effects of EMFs when combined with other environmental hazards (e.g. persistent particulate pollutants) is also understood to be highly problematic (yet to be elucidated)
The EU Commission: GERoNiMO Project – Work Package 4: Animal models
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.