Yes. The Planet Does NOT Need Saving

The Human Race Does.

I know this is feeding into quibbling between proponents of the anthropogenic aspect of climate change and deniers.  Also, I am aware that  I am once again, preaching to the choir.  Those who believe that the whole plethora of potential and sometimes currently realized danger to the human race grouped under the umbrella of Global Warming will nod their heads in agreement, while Climate Change Deniers will sputter at this in mock.  Nobody's opinion will be changed.

What brings me here to post after a long hiatus from posting¹ (Tired of trying to teach pigs to sing) was several discussions in which I participated where people rather flippantly indicated that "the planet" has been taking care of itself for more than 4.5 billion years without needing saving by humans.  One person in such a discussion quoted comedian George Carlin² as a source, missing the double entendre of his joke.  If you have read any of my previous posts, you would realize that by this point in a post, I would have already quoted statistics like scripture, but have since learned that facts are ineffectual to  changing opinions.  I need to find a muscle-bound man and bikini clad woman in yoga poses to convey my message,  So, here's my rant³...er appeal to sensibilities:

Does this really need explaining?

Evidently, people don't get that "saving the planet" used in the vernacular is a colloquialism for keeping Earth habitable for humans; "saving the planet" means saving the human race.  Even when I titled my book "The Council to Save The Planet"  it had a bit of a tongue-in-cheek double meaning.  The tagline for the book read: "Take care of the Earth before the Earth takes care of you"

The Fatalistic Solipsism of Deniers.

The flippancy of the logic that Earth is on it's own agenda is the first indication of the solipsistic avoidance of personal inconvenience required to reduce carbon footprints, waste that won't decompose, conservational use of water and other resources, etc...  The harsh reality of selfishness of epidemic proportions practiced by climate change deniers come from the projections from the International Panel on Climate Control⁴ (IPCC) which show that real problems with the current carbon acceleration⁵ won't become cataclysmic until 2100.  It's not our problem, it won't happen until we are gone.

I don't know about you, I find this lack of compassion for future generations to be appalling selfish to the point of being pathological.  I would have used the term sociopathic, but I'm sure someone would argue that we can't be in society with future generations.  However, we can be compassionate and empathetical to those who will pay the price for our actions. Worse is the fact that those who will be the first to be harmed the most are poor from Third World countries. Now the term sociopath can be invoked to individuals who defer care about those less fortunate than privileged U.S. citizens⁶.

It's Not Someone Else's Problem

If you think about things blamed for green house emissions (cars, power plants, and manufacturing) there is no way to point the finger at someone else.  These are things that us ordinary individuals (AKA "consumers") leverage for our convenient lifestyles.    We are in control.  We can reduce our use of cars, reducing gas consumption. We can reduce our power consumption⁸.  We can reduce how much and what we purchase, reducing more power consumption and our output of non-degradable pollution,  We can conserve water⁹.  Sounds small scale, but multiply what you can do by 300 million and you have massive impact.  Most know how to do this, Global Warming ethicists and activists have pounded this at you for decades.  If not Google each, or look below where I have done it for you.

Rather than demanding that manufacturers give us more sustainable products and technology and that the government regulate those manufacturers to ensure sustainable products, we can change our habits to drive these changes. That is the one beautiful thing about Capitalism. It's really driven from the bottom up. It just means getting past The Cult of Convenience.

A New Zeitgeist

I have discovered that railing about specific practices needed to ensure a sustainable planet for our descendants is not productive.  We all know what we can do.  What's really required is a whole new way of thinking; one that is more mindful of others, alive or yet to be born.  This is tough for most U.S. citizens indoctrinated in the paradigm of rugged individualism (selfishness) .  The Cult of Convenience is rife with entitlement and status by gain, but lacking in empathy

Try this:  As often as you can, before you do something, buy something, throw something away, ask yourself how will this impact others, now or in the future?  A good time might be while you are in yoga class trying to ignore the pain of the Upside Down Flying Dog position.  Trust me, an overall new paradigm of concern for others will do a world of good


Footnotes
(Not only required to make this post look official, but informational also)

1. Actually I opted for action, by giving money to the strongest pro-ecology lobby in the US The Nature Conservancy
2. Carlin's opinion as a comedian of course outweighs the opinion of the 800 scientists of the International Panel on Climate Change and NASA
3. Rant's play better nowadays.
4. For those of you who are capable of reading more that short paragraphs Click here for the IPCC projections
5. "Carbon acceleration" refers to the fact that the rate of emissions gases released into the atmosphere is greater than the rate the Earth can turn it back into Oxygen and that rate is accelerating
6. The US has 3% of the planet's population, yet contributes to 25% of the green house emissions. Only China is higher, but that is only because they have so many more people.  On a person by person basis the Carbon Footprint⁷ of each Chinese person is 1/4th of each U.S. citizen contributes
7. Carbon footprint describes all green house emissions released by a particular entity (person, vehicle, factory, power plant) being assessed.  
8. Reducing your power / electric consumption <--Click
9. Conserving water <--- Click

You are responsible for the future.  

Maybe It's Too Late?

Or maybe that's just an excuse.

It's hard not to think that Mother Nature/Gaia/The Earth has had enough of us when one looks at the devastation that occured over the weekend in Joplin, MO (a tornado bifurcated the town in a half mile wide path of devastation) while considering the recent Earthquake in Japan. Add to this the over 1,100 tornados just this year attributing to over 420 deaths in April and May alone. The largest outbreak of violent tornados ever occurred in three days between April 25th and 28th; now labled the 2011 Super Outbreak. CNN reported that 2011 could shape up to be the deadiest tornado season ever, and include a graph of increased tornado activity since 1950 that exactly matches the "hockey stick" graph of global warming. Video of the Joplin, MO tornado can show just how deadly they can be

As for Earth quakes, records show that there has beeen a 30% increase of magnitude six earth quakes between 2000 and 2010. Already in 2011 (not even half over) the number earthquakes is almost 2/3rds the number of earthquakes in 2010. At that rate there will be 30% more earthquakes this year than next year. Maybe it's too late to stop what has been set in motion.

Maybe Lovelock is right?

...when he said, "climate change will reduce the human population to a few breeding pairs surviving near the Arctic." The Norwegian seem to think so with the Svarlbad Seed Vault project, collecting seeds and storing them in the arctic should natural disasters ( or war) destroy agricultural resources. Lovelock is the climatologist who put forthe The Gaia Hypothesis that we and the earth are a "single, self-regulating orgnamism." Perhaps, the planet is self-regulating itself.

So does that mitigate our sense of convenience?

Allowing us to continue with our current carbon footprint contributions to the accelorating carbon cycle by, driving everywhere, as often as we want, purchasing and disposing of disposable products rather than reusing, How many disposable cups did you you this week? Bags? Paper towels? I know that washing dishes and carrying your cups and canvas to the coffee shop and grocery store is inconvenient and washing rags is way inconvenient compared to buying disposable paper products. But they are require carbon emissions to manufacture, transport to the store and again to the land fill or recycle center and b e recycled.

Somebody should fix this.

But it should be somebody else? Right? Somebody ought to create cars with no carbon footprint, (not that we can buy enough to replace what is on the road) and disposable packages so that we don't have to be inconvenienced.