I am convinced the prophets of doom have to be taken seriously.
We may get to the point where the only way of saving the world will be for industrial civilization to collapse.
Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring about?
I do wish I could assist my many friends and colleagues in all the organizations I belong to, to remake the political and economic landscape.
Also, it is interesting that developing countries, with China and India perhaps in the lead, where the future of the global environment will be decided are now on board with the case for sustainable development.
A shift is necessary toward lifestyles less geared to environmental damaging consumption patterns.
After all, sustainability means running the global environment - Earth Inc. - like a corporation: with depreciation, amortization and maintenance accounts. In other words, keeping the asset whole, rather than undermining your natural capital.
Licences to have babies incidentally is something that I got in trouble for some years ago for suggesting even in Canada that this might be necessary at some point, at least some restriction on the right to have a child..
One of the things that I've always thought I would like to do is to develop an environmental index. Then people can measure their own environmental performance on an index as they do in other ways.
The Earth Charter is important as an expression of the commitment of people throughout the Earth to evoke their own deepest moral, spiritual and ethical principles in the task of ensuring a sustainable future for those who inhabit the Earth now and those who will follow us on the Earth.
What if a small group of these word leaders were to conclude that the principle risk to the earth comes from the actions of the rich countries? And if the world is to survive, those rich countries would have to sign an agreement reducing their impact on the environment. Will they do it?
I propose a new kind of commission be established -- a World Climate Commission. It would be permanent in nature, unlike previous commissions that addressed more limited issues and disbanded after making their reports.
Any guesses?
This clue might help INTERNATIONAL MAN OF MYSTERY:
Wednesday, March 07, 2007
Who Said?
Posted by Tim at 10:30 p.m.
Labels: church of climatology, kyoto protocol
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I got to about the third sentence, and recognized the socialist elitism of Strong. I've been following as many moves of that twit as I can. He is one dangerous dipstick that needs to be retired... Did you notice how all the eco freaks around the world want to shut down Alberta. The master of the propagation of fear has it out for us...... again. The NEP failure is still nipping at his butt.
I had no doubt that you would guess this one AB...lol
"Did you notice how all the eco freaks around the world want to shut down Alberta."
The part that makes me shake my head is that all the people in Canada that would like to shut down Alberta's oil industry and remove billions from the economy, and at the same time want to waste billions on cleaning up the CO2, and then have to send billions to other oil producing countries to buy the oil we need for Canada to continue to stay warm and move about. Yup makes perfect sense. NOT! The logic is enough to boggle anyones mind....
Post a Comment