Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Environmentalism was hijacked, defunded, and replaced by the Climate Change campaigns

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Environmentalism was hijacked, defunded, and replaced by the Climate Change campaigns

    My concerns as an environmentalist are:

    1) Managing, mitigating, and reducing man made chemical and radioactive exposures that cause cancer clusters, birth defect clusters, and other chronic health problems in wildlife and humans.

    and

    2) Managing, conserving, and stewarding wildlife areas and native wildlife species.

    and

    3) Managing the litter, thrash, and pollution that finds it way to our wildlife areas, oceans, and bodies of water.

    Man made carbon dioxide is largely not an environmental concern for me.

    Greenhouse gas campaigns, including oddly enough man made carbon dioxide as a central focus, have diverted the bulk of the discussion, funding, and attention regarding the environment away from the three priorities I list above, and this is at a great cost to those environmental concerns that I list above regarding the allocation of Federal environmental funds and focus over the past decade and a half.

    There are over 1,300 superfund sites in the United States, where cancer clusters, birth defect clusters, and chronic health problem clusters in humans and wildlife occur due to the dumping of toxic chemicals and/or overly radioactive materials into the local ecosystems, that are not attributable to greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

    And, the careful management and preservation of wildlife areas, and native wildlife populations is a never ending process in need of more attention and funds outside of any issue related to greenhouse gases.

    I find it ironic in the extreme that when I press for the areas above to get the lion's share of the budget, focus, and discussion, and for greenhouse gases, that I am told that those priorities are not and should not be the priority because they won't matter because the ending of the world as we know it is just around the corner due to greenhouse gases, a set of predictions that has been recurringly made and recurringly spectacularly wrong for the past several decades.

    Superfund site numbers, superfund site chemical toxicity levels, wildlife area erosion, and wildlife species data does not rely on simulated data nor simulation models, but can be measured in the current period, and the results of those measurements verifiably replicated.

    It is my observation and position that traditional environmentalism and environmental concerns are losing out because of the climate change campaigns, and as an environmentalist and a data scientist greatly concerned with the three priorities listed above, I find this very troubling.

    Greenhouse gas predictions have often failed to pan out in future periods, but the reliability of prediction regarding what happens when a wide variety of chemicals or radioactive materials are dumped into the local water, soil, and somewhat more rarely the air supply are almost perfectly reliable.

    In my view the focus of environmental discussion and funding should favor the two priorities I listed above by 95% and man made greenhouse gases should get 5% of the discussion and funding instead of the current reverse ratio.

    We need a return to scientifically reliable and verifiable environmentalism rather than an over exuberance on speculative and simulated data end of the world campaigns, even though the general public clearly is more easily riled and mobilized by the latter.

    Scientists have to have the integrity to accept that mobilizing the public is more difficult by being more scientific and less sensational.

    Within academic natural science circles, the greater ease of mobilizing the public with the more sensational campaign is quietly discussed in the vein of the end justifies the means, but this in my view is a mistake and means that the scientists are making the public more motivated, but more ignorant by well intentioned deception, and turns the general public and their politicians into motivated idiots as the fruit of the good intention.

    And the very real and pressing environmental concerns of right now that I list above lose out greatly thereby.
    Last edited by Dr. Gonzo; 8/29/2019 5:20am, .

    #2
    Originally posted by Dr. Gonzo View Post
    My concerns as an environmentalist are:

    1) Managing, mitigating, and reducing man made chemical and radioactive exposures that cause cancer clusters, birth defect clusters, and other chronic health problems in wildlife and humans.

    and

    2) Managing, conserving, and stewarding wildlife areas and native wildlife species.

    and

    3) Managing the litter, thrash, and pollution that finds it way to our wildlife areas, oceans, and bodies of water.

    Man made carbon dioxide is largely not an environmental concern for me.

    Greenhouse gas campaigns, including oddly enough man made carbon dioxide as a central focus, have diverted the bulk of the discussion, funding, and attention regarding the environment away from the three priorities I list above, and this is at a great cost to those environmental concerns that I list above regarding the allocation of Federal environmental funds and focus over the past decade and a half.

    There are over 1,300 superfund sites in the United States, where cancer clusters, birth defect clusters, and chronic health problem clusters in humans and wildlife occur due to the dumping of toxic chemicals and/or overly radioactive materials into the local ecosystems, that are not attributable to greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

    And, the careful management and preservation of wildlife areas, and native wildlife populations is a never ending process in need of more attention and funds outside of any issue related to greenhouse gases.

    I find it ironic in the extreme that when I press for the areas above to get the lion's share of the budget, focus, and discussion, and for greenhouse gases, that I am told that those priorities are not and should not be the priority because they won't matter because the ending of the world as we know it is just around the corner due to greenhouse gases, a set of predictions that has been recurringly made and recurringly spectacularly wrong for the past several decades.

    Superfund site numbers, superfund site chemical toxicity levels, wildlife area erosion, and wildlife species data does not rely on simulated data nor simulation models, but can be measured in the current period, and the results of those measurements verifiably replicated.

    It is my observation and position that traditional environmentalism and environmental concerns are losing out because of the climate change campaigns, and as an environmentalist and a data scientist greatly concerned with the three priorities listed above, I find this very troubling.

    Greenhouse gas predictions have often failed to pan out in future periods, but the reliability of prediction regarding what happens when a wide variety of chemicals or radioactive materials are dumped into the local water, soil, and somewhat more rarely the air supply are almost perfectly reliable.

    In my view the focus of environmental discussion and funding should favor the two priorities I listed above by 95% and man made greenhouse gases should get 5% of the discussion and funding instead of the current reverse ratio.

    We need a return to scientifically reliable and verifiable environmentalism rather than an over exuberance on speculative and simulated data end of the world campaigns, even though the general public clearly is more easily riled and mobilized by the latter.

    Scientists have to have the integrity to accept that mobilizing the public is more difficult by being more scientific and less sensational.

    Within academic natural science circles, the greater ease of mobilizing the public with the more sensational campaign is quietly discussed in the vein of the end justifies the means, but this in my view is a mistake and means that the scientists are making the public more motivated, but more ignorant by well intentioned deception, and turns the general public and their politicians into motivated idiots as the fruit of the good intention.

    And the very real and pressing environmental concerns of right now that I list above lose out greatly thereby.
    Before the Progressive / Democrat trolls or the Conservative / Republican Trolls or For / Against Trump Trolls come out, my statement above is not an universal endorsement nor universal condemnation of the current or any prior administration's environmental policies.

    Comment


      #3
      Is this the environmental version of conservatives calling themselves "classical liberals?" Anyways:

      Comment


        #4
        I would add that 50 million Americans live within 3 miles of a Superfund site.

        22 of the 1,300 Superfund sites were classified as remediated in 2018, the largest number since 2005.

        Greenhouse Gases, and not Superfund site prevention and remediation, was the "environmental" priority for the Obama Administration, and remains the "environmental" focus of the Democratic Party.

        The Trump administration is slashing environmental budget, much of which may be Greenhouse gas pork, but Superfund remediation funding is collateral damage of that across the board budget slashing.

        Superfund site prevention and mediation should be one of the top three priorities of any environmental platform.

        With the second priority being classical conservationism of wildlife areas and wildlife species, and the third priority being litter, trash, and pollution mitigation and management.

        These three areas of classic environmentalism are getting single digits of budget, discussion, and focus from either the Democratic Party or the Republican Party, and it should be the reverse.
        Last edited by Dr. Gonzo; 8/29/2019 5:52am, .

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by ghost55 View Post
          Is this the environmental version of conservatives calling themselves "classical liberals?" Anyways:

          Ghost, I take a very light hand with you due to your self-disclosed mental disabilities, self-disclosed lack of formal education, and self-disclosed lack of career prospects,

          but as an aside, I am a member of Generation X, the generation that came directly after the baby boomers.

          The generation that grew up saying peace and love, surrounded by civil rights protesters, and the working generation that gave your generation the Internet, cell phones, and the democratization of information and access to scientific literature.

          Your lower class and middle class generation is indeed better educated than mine was, has a higher standard of living than mine did, is better fed than mine was, has more access to credit than mine did, has more job opportunities and better employment numbers than mine did, and is healthier than mine was.

          Lucky you.

          Saying that, I had a grand ole time being a member of my generation, and my generation is in their peak productive career years as contributors to the economy.

          I trust your generation will surpass mine in innovation, contribution, and success, as it should be,

          But, y'all sure are a cocky bunch, are very sensitive, and y'all sure do whine a lot about what you don't have and how hard y'all have it.
          Last edited by Dr. Gonzo; 8/29/2019 5:47am, .

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by Dr. Gonzo View Post
            Ghost, I take a very light hand with you due to your self-disclosed mental disabilities, self-disclosed lack of formal education, and self-disclosed lack of career prospects,
            How very magnanimous of you.

            but as an aside, I am a member of Generation X, the generation that came directly after the baby boomers.
            You have the Boomer mentality.

            The generation that grew up saying peace and love, surrounded by social protesters, and the working generation that gave your generation the Internet, cell phones, and the democratization of information and access to scientific literature.
            Peace and love was the hippies that gave up on ideals and became corporate yuppies. Y'all became the very system you complained about to begin with and did nothing to fix it.

            Your lower class and middle class generation is indeed better educated than mine was, has a higher standard of living than mine did, is better fed than mine was, has more access to credit than mine did, has more job opportunities and better employment numbers than mine did, and is healthier than mine was.

            Lucky you.
            Then why are savings down, debt up, and home ownership way lower than previous generations?

            Saying that, I had a grand ole time being a member of my generation, and my generation is in their peak productive career years as contributors to the economy.
            Of course you did. You're getting to have your fun and enjoy the spoils while there is still something left. Fuck the future.

            I trust your generation will surpass mine in innovation, contribution, and success, as it should be,
            We got to inherit a legacy of ashes. We will work until we die and we will spend our last year's watching this shit collapse.

            But, y'all sure are a cocky bunch, are very sensitive, and y'all sure do whine a lot about what you don't have and how hard y'all have it.
            Fuck you.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by ghost55 View Post
              How very magnanimous of you.
              Thank you.
              Originally posted by ghost55 View Post
              You have the Boomer mentality.
              I'm a social liberal, but fiscally conservative, so perhaps in part.
              Originally posted by ghost55 View Post
              Peace and love was the hippies that gave up on ideals and became corporate yuppies. Y'all became the very system you complained about to begin with and did nothing to fix it.
              We have made tremendous strides in civil rights.
              But the endless warring continues.
              And we have become the surveillance state that we claimed to oppose throughout the '80s.
              So, partially right, more so than you may realize, but also very wrong.

              I was working with AIDs patients before it was widely called AIDs,
              either before you were born or when you were in diapers,
              back when they were burning down AIDs patients houses
              who got AIDs as hemophiliacs from blood transfusions.

              Things have changed for the better on a colossal scale regarding civil rights and tolerance,
              you may have a limited frame of reference because while you may have read about it,
              you did not live through it.
              Originally posted by ghost55 View Post
              Then why are savings down, debt up, and home ownership way lower than previous generations?
              Because each generation since the Great Depression has saved less,
              and chosen to live beyond their means more,
              often buying premium brands when lesser brands of consumable goods / cars / cell phones would do,
              and often choosing to borrow to buy things that they think they can't live without,
              but really buy for pleasure or status symbol.
              The expectations for possessions have risen with each generation.
              My generation until my mid twenties did not own a cell phone, unless one was rich or a doctor.
              Because consumer price point cell phones did not exist.
              Now "broke" people put a smart cell phone that costs several hundred dollars on a credit card and/or amortized lay away plan (the year or two contracted months).
              For that matter, when I was growing up, most households did not have a personal computer, had one T.V., and made their food in house from unfinished groceries rather than eating out to save money.
              Originally posted by ghost55 View Post
              Of course you did. You're getting to have your fun and enjoy the spoils while there is still something left. Fuck the future.
              No more or less than your generation,
              except that your generation being larger,
              and more prone to buy consumption goods that rely on fracking for their manufacture and transport,
              does so at a much larger scale than mine did, or was able to.
              Originally posted by ghost55 View Post
              We got to inherit a legacy of ashes. We will work until we die and we will spend our last year's watching this shit collapse.
              You have a legacy of greater opportunity than we did.
              You can go to kickstarter and raise funds for an idea, rather have to discover who to make appointments with and manage to get those appointments,
              You can telecommute to work or a much richer library than we ever had,
              You can take online classes for tuition and credit or for free.
              You can order a good for a fraction of the work we had to do to pay for it or order it due to the global economy, that is Internet empowered.
              Originally posted by ghost55 View Post
              Fuck you.
              No thank you.
              You'll have to go fuck yourself.
              I am quite sure that you fuck yourself on a regular basis,
              and don't need a partner or any help to fuck yourself out of all kinds of opportunities.
              Last edited by Dr. Gonzo; 8/29/2019 6:42am, .

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by Dr. Gonzo View Post
                Before the Progressive / Democrat trolls or the Conservative / Republican Trolls or For / Against Trump Trolls come out, my statement above is not an universal endorsement nor universal condemnation of the current or any prior administration's environmental policies.
                I forgot to include the "my generation is morally superior to your generation" trolls...

                Comment


                  #9
                  What I dont understand is why everything has to cost money to solve the problem.

                  Why are people not coming up with and pushing solutions that will reduce tax.

                  We had an electric car scheme over here for a while that was tax efficient and it lasted a couple of years before you got hammered on tax for owning one through your company.

                  The Green new deal is ludicrously expensive.

                  I would like us to return to glass bottle usage with deposits paid and returned.

                  Lose foods like nuts and fruit sold by weight in your own container.

                  Just like you have parking wardens id have litter wardens on beaches with Go pro cameras giving people on the spot fines and bans for dropping litter. (i know that isnt a money saver but fuck those people)

                  New Build property developers to be given incentive's to Offer off the grid options with new build properties.

                  Im just tired of people on all sides announcing "we have the solution everybody pay more money"
                  King without a crown

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by PDA View Post
                    What I dont understand is why everything has to cost money to solve the problem.

                    Why are people not coming up with and pushing solutions that will reduce tax.

                    We had an electric car scheme over here for a while that was tax efficient and it lasted a couple of years before you got hammered on tax for owning one through your company.

                    The Green new deal is ludicrously expensive.

                    I would like us to return to glass bottle usage with deposits paid and returned.

                    Lose foods like nuts and fruit sold by weight in your own container.

                    Just like you have parking wardens id have litter wardens on beaches with Go pro cameras giving people on the spot fines and bans for dropping litter. (i know that isnt a money saver but fuck those people)

                    New Build property developers to be given incentive's to Offer off the grid options with new build properties.

                    Im just tired of people on all sides announcing "we have the solution everybody pay more money"
                    Ironically, in the U.S. we often have problems with over regulation preventing individuals from taking green efforts.

                    We have many municipalities that have regulations that prohibit taking a house that is on the grid, off the grid, after installing solar, wind, water, or biodiesel solutions to provide for one's own electricity.

                    We have many municipalities with regulations that restrict the use of a front lawn to be used as a vegetable garden.

                    We have many municipalities that actually have the gall to have a regulation that prohibits collecting rain water in barrel.

                    Regulations may hurt the environment, and restrict efforts to make efforts to be a good environmentalist at the individual or private level, as easily as regulations may be used to protect the environment.

                    Environmentalism at its heart, is very much driven by an act locally/personally, think globally practice.

                    Certainly the effects of commercial activities on the environment should be regulated.

                    But issues such as over fishing, and replanting forestation are getting drowned out and crowded out inappropriately by the focus and myopia on green house gases.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Put another way, plant trees.

                      I am astounded that campaigns to plant trees do not get the discussion and funding,

                      while vast, speculative, and difficult to execute effectively campaigns about greenhouse gas climate change apocalypse do.

                      I am more astounded that I now see government and industry directing huge funds at sophisticated technology facilities to recapture carbon dioxide from the atmosphere,

                      when we have a very proven technology that not only does just that, but gives back breathable oxygen, and in the future may yield fruit and usable lumber.

                      The entire conversation is drifting away from the most practical, simple, and common sense approaches.

                      Replant trees, reforestation to accompany lumber operations, etc.

                      The vast majority of the land of the United States is NOT populated by humans.

                      Planting trees to replace trees that have been cut down in the last century,

                      a practice that is practiced and is required by lumber operations commonly,

                      should get more investment, more discussion, and much more focus.

                      Certainly before we dump a billion dollars of funding in the research and development of carbon dioxide reclamation facilities, which ironically enough are often called 'plants'.

                      We are already have plants that do that, they are actual plants, and if you plant them and leave them be for a couple decades, they do the job nicely, and even self-propagate...

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by PDA View Post
                        What I dont understand is why everything has to cost money to solve the problem.

                        Why are people not coming up with and pushing solutions that will reduce tax.

                        We had an electric car scheme over here for a while that was tax efficient and it lasted a couple of years before you got hammered on tax for owning one through your company.

                        The Green new deal is ludicrously expensive.

                        I would like us to return to glass bottle usage with deposits paid and returned.

                        Lose foods like nuts and fruit sold by weight in your own container.

                        Just like you have parking wardens id have litter wardens on beaches with Go pro cameras giving people on the spot fines and bans for dropping litter. (i know that isnt a money saver but fuck those people)

                        New Build property developers to be given incentive's to Offer off the grid options with new build properties.

                        Im just tired of people on all sides announcing "we have the solution everybody pay more money"
                        You can thank the plastics lobby for the death of the glass bottle. Personally I prefer the taste from glass over plastic.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by Dr. Gonzo View Post
                          Put another way, plant trees.

                          I am astounded that campaigns to plant trees do not get the discussion and funding,

                          while vast, speculative, and difficult to execute effectively campaigns about greenhouse gas climate change apocalypse do.

                          I am more astounded that I now see government and industry directing huge funds at sophisticated technology facilities to recapture carbon dioxide from the atmosphere,

                          when we have a very proven technology that not only does just that, but gives back breathable oxygen, and in the future may yield fruit and usable lumber.

                          The entire conversation is drifting away from the most practical, simple, and common sense approaches.

                          Replant trees, reforestation to accompany lumber operations, etc.

                          The vast majority of the land of the United States is NOT populated by humans.

                          Planting trees to replace trees that have been cut down in the last century,

                          a practice that is practiced and is required by lumber operations commonly,

                          should get more investment, more discussion, and much more focus.

                          Certainly before we dump a billion dollars of funding in the research and development of carbon dioxide reclamation facilities, which ironically enough are often called 'plants'.

                          We are already have plants that do that, they are actual plants, and if you plant them and leave them be for a couple decades, they do the job nicely, and even self-propagate...
                          I'm 100% for tree planting programs and I agree more needs to be done in that respect.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by Dr. Gonzo View Post
                            Put another way, plant trees.

                            I am astounded that campaigns to plant trees do not get the discussion and funding,

                            while vast, speculative, and difficult to execute effectively campaigns about greenhouse gas climate change apocalypse do.

                            I am more astounded that I now see government and industry directing huge funds at sophisticated technology facilities to recapture carbon dioxide from the atmosphere,

                            when we have a very proven technology that not only does just that, but gives back breathable oxygen, and in the future may yield fruit and usable lumber.

                            The entire conversation is drifting away from the most practical, simple, and common sense approaches.

                            Replant trees, reforestation to accompany lumber operations, etc.

                            The vast majority of the land of the United States is NOT populated by humans.

                            Planting trees to replace trees that have been cut down in the last century,

                            a practice that is practiced and is required by lumber operations commonly,

                            should get more investment, more discussion, and much more focus.

                            Certainly before we dump a billion dollars of funding in the research and development of carbon dioxide reclamation facilities, which ironically enough are often called 'plants'.

                            We are already have plants that do that, they are actual plants, and if you plant them and leave them be for a couple decades, they do the job nicely, and even self-propagate...
                            This thread brought to you, courtesy of the Lorax.

                            The reason Ghost's generation is in debt is because of their self-perceived thneeds.

                            The reason you fear the air in the breeze is because you don't focus on planting more trees.

                            Worrying about carbon is a waste of your time, compared to reforestation, it's not worth a dime.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by Dr. Gonzo View Post
                              This thread brought to you, courtesy of the Lorax.

                              The reason Ghost's generation is in debt is because of their self-perceived thneeds.

                              The reason you fear the air in the breeze is because you don't focus on planting more trees.

                              Worrying about carbon is a waste of your time, compared to reforestation, it's not worth a dime.
                              Ah yes. Our desire for breathable air and a planet that isn't cooking. How fucking entitled.

                              Comment

                              Collapse

                              Edit this module to specify a template to display.

                              Working...
                              X