Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Water

On Earth Day, Forget About the Planet -- We're the Ones Who Are Screwed

By Joseph Romm, Climate Progress. Posted April 22, 2009.


Affection for our planet is misdirected and unrequited. We need to focus on saving ourselves. It's time to dump Earth Day.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Dumping Earth Day has been on my mind for a year now -- and all the more so today because the NYT magazine just published an interview with our Nobel-prize winning Energy Secretary, Steven Chu, in which he says:

I would say that from here on in, every day has to be Earth Day.

Well, duh!  Heck, we have a whole day just for the trees -- and we haven’t finished them offyet.  So if every day is Earth Day, than April 22 definitely needs a new name. 

I don’t worry about the earth. I’m pretty certain the earth will survive the worst we can do to it. I’m very certain the earth doesn’t worry about us. I’m not alone. People got more riled up when scientists removed Pluto from the list of planets than they do when scientists warn that our greenhouse gas emissions are poised to turn the earth into a barely habitable planet.

Arguably, concern over the earth is elitist, something people can afford to spend their time on when every other need is met. But elitism is out these days. Only bitter environmentalists cling to Earth Day. We need a new way to make people care about the nasty things we’re doing with our cars and power plants. At the very least, we need a new name.

How about Nature Day or Environment Day? Personally, I am not an environmentalist. I don’t think I’m ever going to see the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. I wouldn’t drill for oil there. But that’s not out of concern for the caribou but for my daughter and the planet’s next several billion people, who will need to see oil use cut sharply to avoid the worst of climate change.

I used to worry about the polar bear. But then some naturalists told me that once human-caused global warming has completely eliminated their feeding habitat -- the polar ice, probably by 2020, possibly sooner -- polar bears will just go about the business of coming inland and attacking humans and eating our food and maybe even us. That seems only fair, no?

I am a cat lover, but you can’t really worry about them. Cats are survivors. Remember the movie “Alien”? For better or worse, cats have hitched their future to humans, and while we seem poised to wipe out half the species on the planet, cats will do just fine.

Apparently there are some plankton that thrive on an acidic environment, so it doesn’t look like we’re going to wipe out all life in the ocean, just most of it. Sure, losing Pacific salmon is going to be a bummer, but I eat Pacific salmon several times a week, so I don’t see how I’m in a position to march on the nation’s capital to protest their extinction. I won’t eat farm-raised salmon, though, since my doctor says I get enough antibiotics from the tap water.

If thousands of inedible species can’t adapt to our monomaniacal quest to return every last bit of fossil carbon back into the atmosphere, why should we care? Other species will do just fine, like kudzu, cactus, cockroaches, rats, scorpions, the bark beetle, Anopheles mosquitoes and the malaria parasites they harbor. Who are we to pick favorites?


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: global warming, climate change, earth day, clean water

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Water! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Cut our losses?
Posted by: bonapartist on Apr 22, 2009 1:26 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
After reading this article I couldn't help but think that the approach of "Now we need a World War II scale effort just to cut our losses and save what matters most." is just a godsend for anyone and everyone who wants to trash environmentalism. Lord knows that environmentalism has its holes but in general it is a move in the right direction.

Crude oil dependency? No matter, we have to cut our losses and save what matters most!

Destruction of environment? No matter, we have to cut our losses and save what matters most!

Cutting down of rainforests? No matter, we have to cut our losses and save what matters most!

And so on and so fort, of course what matters most is human survival. If we have to cannibalize everything and anything in the process, so be it! Our future is at the stake here! We have a survival emergency here and if we don't fight them over there we will have to fight them over here! I cannot help but being reminded of mentality behind "War on Terror" and related overreacting hysteria.

Just who is to decide and in what way what are the acceptable losses in the process? Providing we accept that the situation is as dire as the author will let us think.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Cut our losses? Posted by: Spiritgirl
» RE: Cut our losses? Posted by: neilemac
» RE: Cut our losses? Posted by: Katie Marie
» RE: Cut our losses? Posted by: Lara1967
I found this article quite off-base
Posted by: abstractedaway on Apr 22, 2009 2:05 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Can we say ecologically ignorant? It's not just the tone of "Why should I care unless it affects me right away", it's the ignorance of ecosystems and how important it is to maintain the web of relationships. Every species has co-evolved with others to some extent, no species is an island. You can't refuse to care about salmon if you understand they're one of many casualties of a practice that threatens our oceans. You can't tick off species that you do and don't care about and then say "Who are we to pick favorites?" as a reason to not fight their decimation.

Could you imagine this kind of thinking applied to the human body? "This is just an appendix! Why do I care? So, why do I care about this thyroid, or this spleen" - keep ticking away all the things you don't think are absolutely vital and your subject will be in miserable shape indeed.

I am starting to think that college level biology needs to be widely taught, and put on TV instead of the cheap adventure shows. It sounds like Nature Deficit Disorder Day from where this article's standing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Fat people are more detrimental to the environment.
Posted by: Honky The Antichrist on Apr 22, 2009 2:09 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]

Thinner is better to curb global warming, study says



Plus, they’re hideous.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's all population baby
Posted by: Libsrule on Apr 22, 2009 3:19 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Seriously, until we take the 8000 pound bull by the horns and start to tell people to stop screwing themselves out of a place at the table, we are indeed screwed.

Pollutants are on huge problem but the population that is consuming everything to the point of extinction is the biggest problem.

World leaders need to tell religions to STFU and get with the program. Tell people to restart the ZERO POPULATION GROWTH idea.

But as long as religion REFUSES to be a part of the solution, it will always be a part of the problem, ESPECIALLY the Catholic church.

Either that or WWIII

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It's all population baby Posted by: ProfBob
» hilarious! Posted by: veggiegrrrl
The Picture is Chicago
Posted by: SeattlePackedSnowandCollidedCars on Apr 22, 2009 3:27 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
and the Earth will be here long after we are extinguish. Someday a meteorite or some plague will whip out the human race or the rapture will happen (for us Jesus believers) however the Earth will be here.

All this fear mongering messes up the whole environmental swagger becuase I don't know what is fake and what is really real but i know this an't it up above.

Really I think I'm going to find a tree to cut down, eat a steak dinner, turn all the my lights on in the house and buy a case of bottle water just to enjoy today Earth Day activities...

... I'm going to be a human being before any of those three things I mentioned up above happen.

p.s. don't worry about the tree, I'll save it for firewood

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The Picture is Chicago Posted by: Cherenkovrad
» Planet Earth will be fine Posted by: SeattlePackedSnowandCollidedCars
» RE: Planet Earth will be fine Posted by: Lara1967
Every day does need to be Earth Day
Posted by: janten on Apr 22, 2009 3:31 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If this article was written as it was just to stir up some discussion, I don't feel it's a very helpful contribution to our greater efforts to get things right in the world and in our lives.

As a geologist and as one who actively participated in the first Earth Day celebration, I can assure you that Earth will indeed survive all we can possibly ever do to Her. The question is: Will we be able to survive what we are doing to Earth?

Unfortunately, it's seeming less and less likely that we will. And, if you truly believe what you wrote, you are doing more than your share of contributing to our demise.

Every day does indeed need to be Earth Day and we need to help save all the ground we've got, and water, and air, and trees, and animals (including our selves). Every day also needs to be Life Awareness Day as well as Enlightenment Day. Otherwise, Earth will do us in - by our own hands.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Erik
Posted by: ProfBob on Apr 22, 2009 3:49 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
AMEN! It's all about population. It must be reduced. But our individual self centeredness and the concern for 'repopulating the Earth' by a few reactionary religions is killing us.
The problems of ecological scarcities like oil, food and water--and ecological excesses like pollutions, global warming and waste--pave the way for more poverty, starvation and unemployment.
Check out the web site 'Overpopulation Awareness' or the comprehensive look at the problem told in a non-fictional but sci-fi series of free ebooks at http://andgulliverreturns.info

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Save us from Earth Day
Posted by: davemcarthur on Apr 22, 2009 4:01 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You are correct Joseph. The whole notion of Earth Day needs reviewing. I looked at the issue in some depth and the language of Earth Day proponents revealed a deep denial of our roles as stewards within change. We were exhorted to “save the planet”, “fight global warming”, “stop climate change” and “to turn the lights out to show we cared”.

Our problems were projected onto the planet, thermodynamics and climate processes rather than accepted as a product of our own imperfections. Much of the language was militaristic rather than evoking the value of enjoying harmony – in this case harmony with the global balances and flows that enable and sustain us.

The symbolic act of “turning out of lights to show we care" is plain hideous within the contemporary context in which our concept of “energy efficiency” have been distorted and demeaned by an oligarchy of bankers who have colonised the “energy” symbol in general to serve their miserable, short- term interests. You may be interested in my blog at

http://tinyurl.com/d6sobk

It begins:
”Saturday night Earth Hour 2009 and my home will be a blaze of light, a symbol of harmony with the universe, a beacon of hope amidst the darkness, despondency and despair around me in Wellington City New Zealand in this hour. Here's some light on Earth Hour...”

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Save us from Earth Day Posted by: Livingston3
I believe that the next stage of our social evolution will take place after a mega-pandemic.
Posted by: Honky The Antichrist on Apr 22, 2009 5:01 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We live on a finite planet with a growing population. As resources become more scarce, we will have more conflict.

The Spanish flu of 1918 killed about upward of 15 of the world’s population. With air travel and our more urban life styles, a similar virus could reach out and touch a much larger population. Naturally the poor, malnourished, over populated countries would be hit the hardest. If we could reduce the world’s population be 75-80%, people would have no choice but to work together and value other people. Like I said earlier, large portions of the ignorant, backward, theistic, non producing third world would be dead. This would greatly benefit everyone.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This writer...
Posted by: Cybershaman on Apr 22, 2009 5:06 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...needs a job on the Colbert Report.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A Lesson from Kant
Posted by: artie on Apr 22, 2009 5:23 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I can't "read" this article at all well. If it is satire, it's prose needs serious polishing. If it is not, the author needs serious reflecting on the human, better, the biospheric condition.
Kant once argued that a person cannot consistently envisage a world in which promises may be honored or broken according to whim. The point is transparent: in such a world, the very practice of promising would be "obsolete"; the very concept of 'promise' would be rendered empty. Similarly, it is arguable that a person cannot consistently argue for the view "human survival at whatever cost to the natural environment." The problem should now be transparent. As the past 2 thousand years have made apparent, and the past 100 years have made "desperate," a world which would accord with such a view would render human survival obsolete; the very concept of survival would be rendered empty - Earth would become twin to Venus (the view is as self-negating as deterrence, given the effects of nuclear winter).
The fever affecting Earth's habitability threatens not only human survival, but the survival itself of a biosphere.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Smaller minds
Posted by: laura265 on Apr 22, 2009 5:39 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What an unfortunate, unnecessarily small, cynical and bitter-sounding view. I'm really questioning Alternet's choice to publish this. A lot of this rant doesn't even make sense.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Smaller minds Posted by: artie
» RE: Smaller minds Posted by: Bonita
annoying trends...
Posted by: ellie on Apr 22, 2009 5:38 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
over the past few weeks especially, we have witnessed a ramping up of the corporate 'go green' advertising and product roll outs...

earth day has finally been commodified for profit... do you see one hazardous product being dumped from a product line to be replaced by a 'green' product??? no... just more shelf space in stores...

live within your means, take no more then you actually NEED (not want), replace back what you can... accept that earth will always return to some form of balance, even if it means human extinction... remember a Lakota phrase; "... nothing lasts forever but the earth and sky"...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Talk, talk, talk... Posted by: brer
» RE: annoying trends... Posted by: hagwind
Talk, talk, talk
Posted by: brer on Apr 22, 2009 6:14 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm wondering how many people who are reading this can take stock of themselves and know they aren't one of the earth abusers.

I mean, really....what's a little recycling here and there when you buy bottled water in the first place.

How many people reading this bought a new electronic gadget recently? How many of you have a large screen television? How many have a car that's less than three years old.

Consumers, consumers, consumers...talk, talk, talk.

We think we can buy and use and buy and use and throw away and then commiserate about the planet, sigh, woe is me, too bad for the earth, blah, blah...all the while we are buying more and throwing the packaging away.

STOP BUYING THINGS! Can you go for a month without entering a department store or mall? Can you stay out of fast foods places?

I once wore the same dress every Sunday for two years. Is that crazy? Or maybe, am I one of the really sane ones?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Talk, talk, talk Posted by: Squarehead
blatantly flawed dualism
Posted by: digger on Apr 22, 2009 6:28 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This article is a sad testament to what will prove to be a catastrophic misconception that we can separate out what we do to the planet from what we do to ourselves (in the collective sense). It represents a woefully flawed dualistic viewpoint that is part of the root causes of the environmental crisis. I’m used to seeing more insightful articles on the website – this one is a glaring exception.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: blatantly flawed dualism Posted by: abstractedaway
I can go with Triage Day... or We're All Frakked Day
Posted by: DaBear on Apr 22, 2009 6:57 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Either that or we just need a global holiday so we can all take a god damned nap.

The way the owning class keep shitting on us all and the Right Wingers are all frakked up and puking their filch everywhere, planning their fascist coup in 2012, everyone's just a bit over the top cranky.

Well, I am at least, and when that happens, I need a god damned nap. I think the Earth Mother could us the break too.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

As Long As There is Belief in Heaven
Posted by: edgar_michel on Apr 22, 2009 7:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As long as the majority of the people believe that we are just visitors here on this planet and that our true home lies in heaven, we will continue to spoil our home. Only when the pastors are sent packing and we re-focus around our love of our home will we be able to see real change that begins to restore the beauty of this planet. Until then we will continue to deceive ourselves into believing that God has made a more perfect home for us somewhere else in the Universe and that our suffering will be short lived. The real question is do we believe in God or in our planet and the 6.5 billion people that live here. Put more succinctly, where does our community lie?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» and until the last king Posted by: NYmediator
» RE: Not a Bad Reply Posted by: edgar_michel
» RE: I Totally Agree Posted by: edgar_michel
Tell Obama: support a revenue-neutral carbon tax
Posted by: greenferret on Apr 22, 2009 7:12 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Solving climate change is our generation's greatest challenge. A revenue-neutral carbon tax is the cheapest, simplest, most effective and most progressive way to do it.

Join GreenChange.org in calling on President Obama and our elected representatives to support a revenue-neutral carbon tax.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This comment has been removed from the site due to non-compliance with AlterNet's community policies.
"Global Warming" is Al Gore (the NWO/globalist whore) propaganda!
Posted by: JohnTruth2001 on Apr 22, 2009 7:39 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Of course the corporations & unregulated countries like China & India are polluting/poisoning us to death, but "Global Warming" is a scam to further tax & control us sheeple! Wake-up already!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

To all the NWO/glabalist Eugenicists Out There:
Posted by: JohnTruth2001 on Apr 22, 2009 7:46 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Severely corrupt governments + corporations are why so many people are suffering!!! There are abundant resources on this planet for EVERYONE to have clean water, food, shelter, decent jobs, medical care, etc.!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm ticked off as much as Mr. Romm
Posted by: PaulK on Apr 22, 2009 8:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The activists are talking. The politicians are usually kissing the problem off with cheap boiler-plate replies to letters and emails. Exxon/Mobil is fighting the movement with big bucks. The population as a whole is waiting first for their food supply to dry up before being moved to do anything.

There are little things that I wouldn't say. "Sounds to me more like paganism than monotheism." Paganism, literally translated, is "the religion of the country people or heath-dwellers (heathens)". A great deal of pagan philosophy got pulled into the churches after Jesus came along. Anyways, the montheists would say that God gave us "temporary" dominion over His earth, so we have to take good care of it.

"Unfortunately, Conservative Day would, I think, draw the wrong crowds." "Conservative" has become almost a swear word. It currently refers to free-spending, sexually wild thorough crooks who love to fight disposable income wars abroad, plus the businesspeople, mostly men, who buy or rent the crooks, and all of the ape-like savages who vote for these clowns. Of course, "Librul" has a similar meaning in some circles. I try not to be afraid of labels. I'm "liberal" in the sense that I consider all sides of an issue. I'm "conservative" too, in the sense that I want to conserve the environment and a government.,

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

George Carlin made this point a while back
Posted by: Defenestrator on Apr 22, 2009 8:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Planet Is Fine... it's the humans who are in trouble.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» A friend looked... Posted by: Bbear41
TO HELL WITH EARTH DAY ! TO HELL WITH BIG GOVERNMENT !
Posted by: WYGunston on Apr 22, 2009 8:46 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's time to BULLDOZE Washington and most governments all over the world ! They're the reason why Earth and every creature on it is FUCKED !

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

R-E-S-P-E-C-T
Posted by: adelaney on Apr 22, 2009 9:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
R-E-S-P-E-C-T that's what earth day means to me.

C-E-A-S-EEEE having more babies....

As that would be: a huge help Saving Other Species ...yes indeed!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It’s been a long time
Posted by: solrev on Apr 22, 2009 9:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
“A second Arbor Day took place in 1884 and the young state made it an annual legal holiday in 1885, using April 22nd to coincide with Morton's birthday.”
". . . on April 22, 1970, Earth Day was held, one of the most
remarkable happenings in the history of democracy. . . "

All the environmentalism will not save us from hearing the sound of the first trumpet. “One-third of the earth was burned up, one-third of the trees was burned up, and all the green grass was burned up.”
What will save us from hearing the sound of the first trumpet and the other three is the collapse of the global economy. It is an illusion that Obama can preserve the old order by printing money. It is also an illusion that a new currency will preserve the old order. However, that will save many lives because Obama will refuse to cast the first stone. When we are more concerned with our daily bread than the creation of wealth, that will be change you can believe in. Necessity is the mother of invention.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How about Keep-Humans-from-Going-Extinct Day
Posted by: HumanistRuth on Apr 22, 2009 10:00 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For those too ignorant to grasp that a sustainable planet is essential for Humanity's survival, how about "Keep Humans From Going Extinct Day"?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

BulldogRedemer
Posted by: BulldogRedeemer on Apr 22, 2009 12:19 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Oceans rising 80 feet? Since we already have April Fool's Day, how about Idiot's Day?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Earth Day 365
Posted by: vincetastic on Apr 22, 2009 1:49 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is a funny post, thanks. Earth Day should be everyday, it is good that there is at least one day to spread awareness. Here are some suggestions on what you can do to help the Earth: http://www.toptentopten.com/?sort=newest, you can add your own suggestions.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

6.5 billion people
Posted by: Todd on Apr 22, 2009 2:15 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That fact alone accounts for 99.9% of the problems with the planet. Romm and the rest of the friggin' heterosexuals need to stop breeding...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: 6.5 billion people Posted by: mr. joshua
This article was satire
Posted by: truthlover on Apr 22, 2009 2:50 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...wasn't it?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: This article was satire Posted by: tmwright
Who will monitor the temperature decline even as we mobilize for "global warming"?
Posted by: johnwinthrop on Apr 22, 2009 3:11 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If global temps don't go up as models predict, are we going to abandon the multibillion, or trillion, dollar efforts to "save the planet"?

Who will yell halt?

Probably no one with any power.

There's big bucks in "climate change". All those who trade in carbon credits. All those green jobs. All those windmills and solar panels.

It will be funny. A footnote on p.24 of the NY Times in 2025(online version, as paper version won't exist) will note the 'correction' in temperature after a quarter century of Times gloom and doom about heat.

Govt will make billions in carbon taxes. Think there will be a "middle class tax carbon cut" when the thermometer heads in the wrong(unpredicted by IPCC) direction? The UN will blame Zionists for the sheer embarassment that ought to drive its scientists underground. Being the UN, no one will admit error and the computer models will suddenly produce graphs with low temperatures.

There will be billions however, with a new climate paradigm, to be made in developing new cities for white people to live comfortably in tropical Africa as the glaciers cover North America.Somalia: the new Florida! Pirates become casino owners!

Well glacial growth also should solve the Mexican overpopulation problem and with it the immigration problem.

And the polar bears will be winners!. AWWWWWWWWWWW.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

zero calorie environmentalism
Posted by: troy on Apr 22, 2009 4:01 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Until the end I took this article as a humor piece. When the author made an effort to be serious at the end, it became hard to tell if he was still trying to be funny or whether it is just another sad example of popular culture shallow thinking.
He seems not to understand that love of nature has great value for humans. It guides not only our behavior toward our environment but enables us to see each other in as part of a marvelous matrix in which we have great affect - for better or worse (our choice).
"ultimately, humans are the ones who will experience the most prolonged suffering. And if enough people come to see it that way, we have a chance of avoiding the worst".
I'm not sure how he knows that humans are ones who will experieince the most prolonged suffering. I think it is the same thing that tells him that polar bears are only important as indicators of global health that will effect humans directly. Sad really. A world of increasingly "cut losses". No the mentality represented here will get us nowhere worth going. We need a paradigm shift - that is if we can pull away from the pointless pre-occupations so effectively advertised into us.

TRC109

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This article exhibits profoundly stupid reasoning
Posted by: marcuse1871 on Apr 22, 2009 6:39 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"I don’t worry about the earth. I’m pretty certain the earth will survive the worst we can do to it."

This is a depressingly common line of thought advanced by self-absorbed cretins like Romm. Sure, it might be that planet Earth will not be bereft of all forms of life due to humans' abuse of the biosphere--but it seems like a pretty f*cking sad commentary on contemporary thought that this is all that is seen as possible. It in fact is reminiscent of some forms of apologism for Israel's brutalization of the Palestinians: 'well, at least the Israelis haven't subjected them to Auschwitz.' Is that really the point?

Apparently Romm works at Climate Progress. He then should know that anthropogenic climate change, if left unchecked (and, let's be serious, capitalism and the international bourgeoisie will probably ensure that it will be so), threatens to eradicate upwards of 90% of all life on Earth, which of course includes the vast majority of those humans who currently live and are expected in the near future to be born. It's not just the 'superior' beings who will be (further) subjected to a seemingly endless nightmare in the future to come, then; the very possibility of the continuance of life itself might be threatened.

Though the Earth as a planet may physically still survive the worst of global warming, it might be said that this fact is rendered rather meaningless if life no longer does. Surely human life has (potential) value and meaning, but so does life generally--unfortunately not a point that I expect the 'liberal' salmon-eater Romm to particularly understand or appreciate.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Earth Day 2009
Posted by: zagrrrl on Apr 22, 2009 7:13 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What an odd article to appear in print.
The author of this article is clearly disturbed.

I am reminded of an Oscar Wilde statement
"America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: arth Day 2009 Posted by: Basenjis
Mocking other People's Priorities destracts from your own
Posted by: Friend Of Jonathan on Apr 22, 2009 7:17 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The condescension and mockery in the majority of this article really make it difficult to respect, much less seriously consider, the proposals in the middle.

Joseph should write for the Onion, or Rush.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We're screwed
Posted by: yesman on Apr 22, 2009 10:48 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is likely true that, as the author says, "we're screwed." It's true that saving "the Earth" is much too abstract for most people to care about. However, saving "us" (i.e., humanity) is also much too abstract for most people to care about. Even saving "the children" of the future won't do it. Most people have demonstrated a willingness to condemn even already-alive children to lives of unrelenting horror. No, the only thing which will inspire action is when the ocean starts to fill up "my" basement, or when the temperature reaches 120+ degrees for weeks at a time in "my" town, etc. People (at least in America) have amply demonstrated their callous disregard for the suffering of anyone and anything other than themselves. So, until the (figurative) wolves are at the door, little will change. (Of course, the wolves must be figurative, because the literal ones will soon be extinct.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Just a blip...
Posted by: hughesrg on Apr 22, 2009 11:07 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't know if I could be so audacious to assume that mankind is solely responsible for the climate shifts and trending we have seen since these types of things were recorded. Is it us (man)? is it simply cyclical climate change? Who really knows for sure? What I do know is that unless a "planet busting" meteor or an expanding, solar flaring sun physically destroys the earth she'll be just fine. Much like the dinosaur's, mankind's day will end and even if it is through our own stupidity and misdeeds the earth will simply adjust and erase all signs of the infestation once known as man and move on through time and space as though we never existed at all... Evolution baby!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ever hear of humor?
Posted by: smckinley on Apr 22, 2009 11:43 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sorry, I couldn't be bothered to read through all the posts, but a quick scan reminded me why I'm hesitant to be too identified as an environmentalist: too many lack any sense of humor. Granted, it's deadly serious business, but that's absolutely the best time for humor. If you can't participate, at least learn to recognize it. It's the spoon full of sugar that helps the medicine go down - it makes your point a whole lot more palatable.

Like any humor, the article contains a grain of very important, but maybe difficult, truth: the Earth really could give a rat's patoot what we do to it. If it's not us killing off some enormous percentage of species, it's a huge meteor some time in the next couple hundred million years. It's all the same to Gaia.

At worst, we're a nasty flu to Mother Earth. She'll make it, after some unpleasantness along the way. WE are the ones who will really feel this stuff.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Not sure what this was intended as
Posted by: greenknight on Apr 23, 2009 2:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Humor? If so, it failed. Lame attempt.

If there was a serious point, it failed to make it.

Earth Day is a catchy name; obviously the environment is the aspect of Earth we're concerned about, but "Environment Day" is a clunky name. So let it be Earth Day.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Romm bombs
Posted by: mwildfire on Apr 23, 2009 6:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm a fan of Joseph Romm, reading his posts often on Grist especially. I've thought he should be working somewhere in the Obama administration. This piece really gives me pause. It appears that parts of it, but not all of it, are tongue-in-cheek--thus thoroughly muddying the waters of discourse. It was a stupid, counterproductive move to print it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Most seem to be missing the point
Posted by: inanaturallight on Apr 23, 2009 2:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I consider this a serious article, perhaps a bit tongue-in-cheek, but very much worth considering. One environmental group wants me to save the polar bear... sorry, but the polar bear is screwed... there's no way its natural habitat is going to survive our callous misuse of our planet... it may "adapt" as discussed in the article, at which point the polar bears will begin to die in huge numbers due to instant lead poisoning. One environmental group saves unique little places like prairies... but much of the prairie will disappear once the drought sets in.
I think the best thing to take away from the article is "what the hell are we saving bits and pieces for when we're all gonna be dead if we don't start thinking big" because that's my picture of what's going on too. And like the article says, most of the environmentalists gave up on the rain forest despite the fact that it may be the one most important thing to preserve if we want to preserve the planet.
There isn't much point in preserving little 'this and that' if we aren't going to be around to need them to escape to.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Earth needs to shake loose humans
Posted by: osd on Apr 23, 2009 7:57 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The sooner this planet shakes loose of humans the better off every other living thing will be. Humans are known for there piggy,me, me, me attitude. Humans don't seem to realize that this is heaven and are only interested in turning the planet into a hell hole. Greed and the conquest of everything and practicing the art of the 7 deadly sins seems to be a priority to so many.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A Revenue-Neutral Carbon Tax and MORE
Posted by: waves16 on Apr 25, 2009 8:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As human beings, we take our meaning in how we treat others and the environment. Destroying the environment would make us parasites, along with fungi. It does not surprise me that some people seem to be happy with this.

I full agree with the idea of a revnue-neutral carbon tax. It “is the cheapest, simplest, most effective and most progressive way to do it.” The following website, (see Revenue-Neutral Strategies for Global Warming AND the Environment), gives an idea of a revenue-neutral system that could be applied to global warming as well other environmental issues, many of which are also in dire need of being addressed.

Revenue neutral essentially means free. What are we waiting for!

Tags: Cap-and-Trade Alternative Solutions

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement