"I have travelled much in Concord" are words that are very significant. Concord was just about all the world for Thoreau, although he did travel to Maine, Cape Cod, and as far as the midwest. Still, he valued most what he had close at hand, which should be the very definition of environmentalism. He thought that each town should set aside a large area of forest where nothing--not even woodcutting--would occur. If we had listened to him, we'd be better off, but the automobile and rampant suburbanization killed any chance that truly livable communities could be the norm. We have ecotourism in place of the type of caring ecology (from the Greek for "home") that Thoreau practiced.

Further, I think that we have no chance of turning away the tide of environmental destruction unless we adopt an attitude of humility similar to Thoreau's. Our human project consumes us and with it the world. We delude ourselves into believing we can have our continually expanding economies and populations along with clean air and water and healthy animal populations. We tell ourselves that we can have all the clean energy we want someday and not have to worry about any environmental effects: pure delusion. Obviously mine is a very pessimistic outlook. But what species has ever curbed its own success? There is no reason to believe that we will, just because we are such good thinkers. That in fact might work against us. We use our thinking prowess only to extract more from the earth and to exact more damage.
DWill

"Talk of heaven! ye disgrace earth."

Certainly, we could do with cleaner air, unpolluted by so much gas and oil and put less plastic and styrofoam into the soil, but I think that even if we weren't here, the earth would still be going through a big change.

I do not know the actual specs on this, nor do I have a link, but I heard someone say on one of the many 'talks' online that in the middle ages, the glaciers were melting and there were a lot of hurricanes, tornados, etc.

So what caused all that, the speaker asked . . . friction from handcarts? In other words, this speaker is saying, it's not anything we're doing! Global warming would have happened anyway.

I don't know what the truth is, so I'm not forming any opinion, just watching as the century moves into itself.

It will be interesting to see if the 'comet' or 'asteroid' comes . . . the one that's supposed to wipe us out in 2015.

The Mayan writings have it that we're outta' here in 2012, but last night I watched a video that claims the Mayan writings were 'fabricated' by the Catholic monks that burned them all.

They just re-wrote the Mayan history and their prophecies, so we don't know if that means anything at all.

Hi,
I'm not happy that environmentalism has become almost identical to the global warming issue. The Chesapeake Bay, the largest estuary in the country and the watershed I live in, is in ruins, and the cause has nothing directly to do with global warming. Putting global warming at the top of the list enables doubters to score points, because in fact climate science is very inexact and can be attacked. Then you have Al Gore, who uses over 20 times the amount of energy in his own home than does the average American (http://newsbusters.org/blogs/warner-tod ... -climbs-10). But by purchasing "carbon offsets" he says he brings his carbon footprint down to zero. What a bunch of bullcrap. Making global warming the king of the hill allows this kind of skulduggery to go on. We all need to be concerned about our total ecological footprints, and not have available the ridiculous carbon offset escape hatch. Sorry to rant a bit.
DWill

That's ok, Will . . . a little ranting is in order, methinks, with all this yadda' yadda' we have to listen to on the topic of the environment/global warming.

What are we seeing now - towns and cities in an uproar with these storms and they're worse than ever.

Toronto's getting the benefit of IKE right now - it's just heavy rain, but the weather forecasters are saying it's just a precursor to what we're getting tomorrow . . . 100 mm of rain in Windsor, Ontario . . . and they said, it's not impossible for some places to get up to 200 mm!

Geesh! I remember storms at the end of the summer - most people remember Hazel - we got the tail end of that and it was stormy.

But the one I remember was the storm in August - a few months before Hazel.

We were in a cottage rental for the month and my cousin and I (ages 11 and rain around getting all the storms onto the porches. My mother, who never encouraged herself to learn to do what she called 'men's jobs', was so impressed that we knew how to do that and we were so proud of ourselves.

That's what I remember about that storm - big and scary too.

But getting this kind of rainfall they're predicting for tomorrow - that is not normal, I'm sure!

And I've been looking at David Icke's video's, so I myself am ranting about things too, Will.

(I made a right spectacle of myself at a library meeting the other night - I went on about how political leaders don't really have any power - it's the rich influential families that have always been there. It doesn't matter who you vote for . . . well! Everybody looked at me like I was some kinda' nut! But these are mostly schoolteachers or retired schoolteachers . . . ha ha! They are fed a lotta' hogwash, and are instructed to teach the children a lotta' hogwash)

Hope I didn't offend anybody, but you can't poke me in the nose through the computer screen, eh?

WildCityWoman wrote:
And I've been looking at David Icke's video's, so I myself am ranting about things too, . . ..

Carly, please go light on David Icke until you've looked into his ideas thoroughly and understand the whole system:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Icke

Why say anything you would regret later? I agree that our leaders are typically coldblooded, insensitive, manipulative, and inhumane -- that is, are reptilian -- but I do not agree that it is genetic or spirit possession. Wealth and politics naturally corrupt.

Tom

I would like to give a pat on the back and my backing to Carley here.

Our Governments may be self-serving and a bit pathetic...but at least we can vote them out........

The super-rich and influencial are always there....and we can't vote them out.

Thomas Hood wrote:

WildCityWoman wrote:
And I've been looking at David Icke's video's, so I myself am ranting about things too, . . ..

Carly, please go light on David Icke until you've looked into his ideas thoroughly and understand the whole system:

Tom

Thanks, Tom for the tip. I don't always trust Wiki, but it is a good place to start.

I don't recall ever hearing of David Icke. Judging from the Wiki article,
I don't want to waste my time.
--DWill

Thomas Hood wrote:

WildCityWoman wrote:
And I've been looking at David Icke's video's, so I myself am ranting about things too, . . ..

Carly, please go light on David Icke until you've looked into his ideas thoroughly and understand the whole system:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Icke

Why say anything you would regret later? I agree that our leaders are typically coldblooded, insensitive, manipulative, and inhumane -- that is, are reptilian -- but I do not agree that it is genetic or spirit possession. Wealth and politics naturally corrupt.

Tom

OMG! Tom! I haven't come to anything like that in his videos . . . I do know he referred to some people as being reptilian, but I didn't know he seriously thought it had anything to do with 'spirit possession'.

Like I said, although I am enjoying the videos, find them kinda' interesting and have had a few laughs from them, I don't 'believe' everything he says.

In my opinion, there are two sides to every coin - and in this particular 'two cents worth', I am sure there's a lot of exaggeration on his part.

But, Tom, I have always believed that those we put in power are not really in charge. I once took a political geography course and the teacher worked on that very theme - they are not in charge - they are told what to do by people who are very rich and influential.

If they don't do what they're told, they are 'removed'.

I brought this up on the favourite 'U Tube' videos threads . . . maybe I'll get some feedback there.

I just went to the Wikipedia link you provided - yes, I do remember something about Babylon - I don't remember the 'reptilian' thing being talked about in 'connection' with Babylon, though.

I'll listen a little more closely when I get into it again.

Maybe I won't be getting into it again though - I find this kind of thing gets me too excited. When I get too excited about something I tend to pay less attention to other things.

When I listened to one of the videos yesterday, I seem to remember thinking 'oh, I think he's being a bit too much'.

I like to keep an open mind, but like you say, I don't think it's a good idea to get too 'into' something. I think I will take your advice and 'go light' on it.

It's not good to get all 'wound up' like that.