the earth laughs in flowers
An Earth Day editorial from Paul Watson
>It's not the number of automobiles but the number of people
>
>
>By Capt. Paul Watson, co-founder of The Greenpeace Foundation and is
>president and founder of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society.
>
>Earth Day is almost here. I don't believe in Earth Day myself. I think it's
>a little silly to devote one single day of the year to being concerned
>about the environment, but I suppose one day is better than no day at all.
>
>Having been an environmental activist since 1968, I have seen the movement
>go up and down like a roller coaster in popularity. It was big in 1972 with
>the Environmental Conference in Stockholm which I attended, and it became
>big again in 1992 with the U.N. Environmental Conference in Rio De Janeiro
>that I also attended. I remember that the priority issue in 1972 was the
>danger of escalating human populations, but by 1992, that concern was not
>even on the agenda.
>
>Well we are approaching the end of another 20-year period, and it looks
>like ecology is in vogue again thanks to global warming and a few other
>scary things. Green is once again popular.
>
>I can always tell when the environment is getting to be faddish again. My
>indicator is the number of lectures I am booked for around this time of
>year. It reached its peak in 1992, practically disappeared for awhile and
>now it's coming around again.
>
>What worries me is that the movement is constantly being sidetracked by the
>issue of the day.
>
>It's global warming now. When we were trying to warn people about global
>warming and climate change 20 years ago, no one was interested. Now it's
>become the "in" issue and the big organizations are tapping the public for
>donations to address the problem although no one has come up with anything
>that makes much sense. But global warming is good for business if you're
>one of the big bureaucratic organizations whose primary concern is really
>corporate self preservation.
>
>Greenpeace is even telling people that they can slow down global warming by
>(and I kid you not) "singing in the shower." Yep, you see all you have to
>do is run the water, then get wet, shut the water off, and sing in the
>shower as you lather up and then open up the faucet and rinse off. Ah, so
>simple to save the world.
>
>The problem is that these big organizations are too politically correct to
>address the ecologically correct solutions. Instead they are baffling
>everyone with abstract concepts like carbon trading and carbon storage or
>trying to sell us a new hydrid Japanese car.
>
>Even Al Gore with his "Inconvenient Truth " totally ignored the most
>inconvenient truth of all. I'll get to that in a moment.
>
>But let's look at the NO. 1 cause of global greenhouse gas emissions..
>
>First and foremost it is human over-population, the very same issue that
>was the priority concern at the 1972 United Nations Conference on the
>Environment in Stockholm.
>
>It's 6.5 billion people folks.
>
>Remember in 1950, the world population was 3 billion. It's now more than
>doubled. 6.5 billion people produce one hell of an annual output of waste
>and utilize an unbelievable amount of resources and energy. And this number
>is rising minute by minute, day, by day, year by year.
>
>And most of the people having children have no idea why they are even
>having children other than that's what you do. Most of them don't really
>love their children because if they did they would be very much involved in
>trying to ensure that their children have a world to survive in.
>
>Unless over-population is addressed, there is absolutely no way of slowing
>down global greenhouse gas emissions. But how do you do that within the
>context of economic systems that require larger and larger numbers to
>perform the essential task of consuming products?
>
>Corporations need workers and buyers. Governments need taxpayers,
>bureaucrats and soldiers. More people means more money.
>
>I've said for decades that the solution to all of our problems is simple.
>We just need to live in accordance with the three basic laws of ecology.
>
>First is the Law of Diversity. The strength of an eco-system lies in
>diversity of species within it. Weaken diversity and the entire system will
>be weakened and will ultimately collapse.
>
>Second is the Law of Interdependence. All of the species within an
>eco-system are interdependent. We need each other.
>
>And the third law of ecology is the Law of Finite Resources. There is a
>limit to growth because there is a limit to carrying capacity.
>
>Human populations are exceeding ecological carrying capacity. Exceeding
>ecological carrying capacity is diminishing both resources and diversity of
>species.
>
>The diminishment of diversity is causing serious problems with
>interdependence.
>
>Albert Einstein once wrote that "if the bee disappeared off the surface of
>the globe, then man would have only four years of life left. No more bees,
>no more pollination, no more plants, no more animals, no more man. "
>
>That is the Law of Interdependence.
>
>
>
>Forget global warming folks. The disappearance of the honeybee could end
>our existence as human beings on this planet far sooner than we think.
>
>And the honey bee is in fact now disappearing. Why? We don't know why. It
>could be genetically modified crops, I could be pesticides or it could be
>that our cell phones are interfering with their ability to navigate.
>
>Whatever the cause the fact is that they are disappearing. All around the
>world bees are disappearing in a crisis called Colony Collapse Disorder.
>And bees pollinate our plants. Everywhere on the planet, bees are hard at
>work making it possible for you to live and enjoy life.
>
>We hold on to our place on this planet by only a toehold. If anything
>happens to the grass family, we are screwed. If the earthworms disappear,
>we are in big trouble. If the bees disappear, well, according to Albert
>Einstein who was considered somewhat smarter than most of us, we will have
>only four years. Just enough time to get a college degree to discover that
>everything you learned is relatively useless when sitting on the doorstep
>of global ecological annihilation.
>
>We are cutting down the forest and plundering the oceans of life. We are
>polluting the soil, the air and the water and we are rapidly running out of
>fresh water to drink. Only corporations like Coke and Pepsi have figured
>out that water is more valuable than gold. That is why they are bottling it
>in plastic bottles and selling it. This week I saw a bottle of water in my
>hotel room that I could have drunk for only $4.
>
>Unbelievable. That means that water is now being sold for more than the
>equivalent amount of gasoline. I hope that I'm not the only one who thinks
>this is insanity.
>
>Now for Al Gore's really inconvenient truth. In his film he does not
>mention once that the meat and dairy industry that produces the bacon, the
>steaks, the chicken wings and the milk is a larger contributor to
>greenhouse gas emissions than the automobile industry. You see, Al may
>drive a Prius but he likes his burgers.
>
>This is why the big organizations like Greenpeace and the Sierra Club will
>not say a thing about the meat industry. Last year I saw Greenpeacers
>sitting down for a baked fish meal onboard the Greenpeace ship "Esperanza "
>while engaged in a campaign to oppose over-fishing.
>
>When we pointed out that our Sea Shepherd ships serve only vegan meals, the
>Greenpeace cook replied, "that's just silly." We see what we want to see
>and we rationalize everything else.
>
>The oceans have been plundered to the point that 90 percent of the fish
>have been removed from their eco-systems and at this very moment there is
>over 65,000 miles of long lines set in the Pacific Ocean alone and there
>are tens of thousands of fishing vessels scouring the seas in a rapacious
>quest to scoop up everything that swims or crawls.
>
>This is ecological insanity.
>
>The largest marine predator on the planet right now is the cow. More than
>half the fish taken from the sea is rendered into fish meal and fed to
>domestic livestock. Puffins are starving in the North sea to feed sand eels
>to chickens in Denmark. Sheep and pigs have replaced the shark and the sea
>lion as the dominant predators in the ocean, and domestic house cats are
>eating more fish than all the world's seals combined. We are extracting
>some 50 to 60 fish from the sea to raise one farm raised salmon.
>
>This is ecological insanity.
>
>Yet the demand for shark fin is rising in China. Ignorant people still want
>to wear fur coats. In America, we order fries, a cheeseburger and a "diet"
>Coke.
>
>Ecological insanity, folks.
>
>Last week a reporter called to ask me if I had really said that earthworms
>are more important than people. I answered that yes I had. He then asked
>how I could justify such a statement.
>
>"Simple," I answered. "Earthworms can live on the planet without people. We
>cannot live on the planet without earthworms, thus from an ecological point
>of view, earthworms are more important than people."
>
>He said that I was insane for suggesting such a ridiculous idea when people
>were made in the image of God, and earthworms were not.
>
>What we have here of course is a failure to communicate between two
>radically different world views. His which is anthropocentric and sees
>reality as human centred and mine which is biocentric and sees reality as
>including all species equally working in interdependence. He sees us as
>divine and better than all the other species, and I see us as a bunch of
>arrogant primates out of control.
>
>But that's my two cents worth for Earth Day 2007.
>
>Consider the humble honey bee and remember that the little black and yellow
>insect you see flitting busily from flower to flower is all that stands
>between us and our demise as a species on this planet.
>
>We better see to it that they don't disappear.
>It's not the number of automobiles but the number of people
>
>
>By Capt. Paul Watson, co-founder of The Greenpeace Foundation and is
>president and founder of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society.
>
>Earth Day is almost here. I don't believe in Earth Day myself. I think it's
>a little silly to devote one single day of the year to being concerned
>about the environment, but I suppose one day is better than no day at all.
>
>Having been an environmental activist since 1968, I have seen the movement
>go up and down like a roller coaster in popularity. It was big in 1972 with
>the Environmental Conference in Stockholm which I attended, and it became
>big again in 1992 with the U.N. Environmental Conference in Rio De Janeiro
>that I also attended. I remember that the priority issue in 1972 was the
>danger of escalating human populations, but by 1992, that concern was not
>even on the agenda.
>
>Well we are approaching the end of another 20-year period, and it looks
>like ecology is in vogue again thanks to global warming and a few other
>scary things. Green is once again popular.
>
>I can always tell when the environment is getting to be faddish again. My
>indicator is the number of lectures I am booked for around this time of
>year. It reached its peak in 1992, practically disappeared for awhile and
>now it's coming around again.
>
>What worries me is that the movement is constantly being sidetracked by the
>issue of the day.
>
>It's global warming now. When we were trying to warn people about global
>warming and climate change 20 years ago, no one was interested. Now it's
>become the "in" issue and the big organizations are tapping the public for
>donations to address the problem although no one has come up with anything
>that makes much sense. But global warming is good for business if you're
>one of the big bureaucratic organizations whose primary concern is really
>corporate self preservation.
>
>Greenpeace is even telling people that they can slow down global warming by
>(and I kid you not) "singing in the shower." Yep, you see all you have to
>do is run the water, then get wet, shut the water off, and sing in the
>shower as you lather up and then open up the faucet and rinse off. Ah, so
>simple to save the world.
>
>The problem is that these big organizations are too politically correct to
>address the ecologically correct solutions. Instead they are baffling
>everyone with abstract concepts like carbon trading and carbon storage or
>trying to sell us a new hydrid Japanese car.
>
>Even Al Gore with his "Inconvenient Truth " totally ignored the most
>inconvenient truth of all. I'll get to that in a moment.
>
>But let's look at the NO. 1 cause of global greenhouse gas emissions..
>
>First and foremost it is human over-population, the very same issue that
>was the priority concern at the 1972 United Nations Conference on the
>Environment in Stockholm.
>
>It's 6.5 billion people folks.
>
>Remember in 1950, the world population was 3 billion. It's now more than
>doubled. 6.5 billion people produce one hell of an annual output of waste
>and utilize an unbelievable amount of resources and energy. And this number
>is rising minute by minute, day, by day, year by year.
>
>And most of the people having children have no idea why they are even
>having children other than that's what you do. Most of them don't really
>love their children because if they did they would be very much involved in
>trying to ensure that their children have a world to survive in.
>
>Unless over-population is addressed, there is absolutely no way of slowing
>down global greenhouse gas emissions. But how do you do that within the
>context of economic systems that require larger and larger numbers to
>perform the essential task of consuming products?
>
>Corporations need workers and buyers. Governments need taxpayers,
>bureaucrats and soldiers. More people means more money.
>
>I've said for decades that the solution to all of our problems is simple.
>We just need to live in accordance with the three basic laws of ecology.
>
>First is the Law of Diversity. The strength of an eco-system lies in
>diversity of species within it. Weaken diversity and the entire system will
>be weakened and will ultimately collapse.
>
>Second is the Law of Interdependence. All of the species within an
>eco-system are interdependent. We need each other.
>
>And the third law of ecology is the Law of Finite Resources. There is a
>limit to growth because there is a limit to carrying capacity.
>
>Human populations are exceeding ecological carrying capacity. Exceeding
>ecological carrying capacity is diminishing both resources and diversity of
>species.
>
>The diminishment of diversity is causing serious problems with
>interdependence.
>
>Albert Einstein once wrote that "if the bee disappeared off the surface of
>the globe, then man would have only four years of life left. No more bees,
>no more pollination, no more plants, no more animals, no more man. "
>
>That is the Law of Interdependence.
>
>
>
>Forget global warming folks. The disappearance of the honeybee could end
>our existence as human beings on this planet far sooner than we think.
>
>And the honey bee is in fact now disappearing. Why? We don't know why. It
>could be genetically modified crops, I could be pesticides or it could be
>that our cell phones are interfering with their ability to navigate.
>
>Whatever the cause the fact is that they are disappearing. All around the
>world bees are disappearing in a crisis called Colony Collapse Disorder.
>And bees pollinate our plants. Everywhere on the planet, bees are hard at
>work making it possible for you to live and enjoy life.
>
>We hold on to our place on this planet by only a toehold. If anything
>happens to the grass family, we are screwed. If the earthworms disappear,
>we are in big trouble. If the bees disappear, well, according to Albert
>Einstein who was considered somewhat smarter than most of us, we will have
>only four years. Just enough time to get a college degree to discover that
>everything you learned is relatively useless when sitting on the doorstep
>of global ecological annihilation.
>
>We are cutting down the forest and plundering the oceans of life. We are
>polluting the soil, the air and the water and we are rapidly running out of
>fresh water to drink. Only corporations like Coke and Pepsi have figured
>out that water is more valuable than gold. That is why they are bottling it
>in plastic bottles and selling it. This week I saw a bottle of water in my
>hotel room that I could have drunk for only $4.
>
>Unbelievable. That means that water is now being sold for more than the
>equivalent amount of gasoline. I hope that I'm not the only one who thinks
>this is insanity.
>
>Now for Al Gore's really inconvenient truth. In his film he does not
>mention once that the meat and dairy industry that produces the bacon, the
>steaks, the chicken wings and the milk is a larger contributor to
>greenhouse gas emissions than the automobile industry. You see, Al may
>drive a Prius but he likes his burgers.
>
>This is why the big organizations like Greenpeace and the Sierra Club will
>not say a thing about the meat industry. Last year I saw Greenpeacers
>sitting down for a baked fish meal onboard the Greenpeace ship "Esperanza "
>while engaged in a campaign to oppose over-fishing.
>
>When we pointed out that our Sea Shepherd ships serve only vegan meals, the
>Greenpeace cook replied, "that's just silly." We see what we want to see
>and we rationalize everything else.
>
>The oceans have been plundered to the point that 90 percent of the fish
>have been removed from their eco-systems and at this very moment there is
>over 65,000 miles of long lines set in the Pacific Ocean alone and there
>are tens of thousands of fishing vessels scouring the seas in a rapacious
>quest to scoop up everything that swims or crawls.
>
>This is ecological insanity.
>
>The largest marine predator on the planet right now is the cow. More than
>half the fish taken from the sea is rendered into fish meal and fed to
>domestic livestock. Puffins are starving in the North sea to feed sand eels
>to chickens in Denmark. Sheep and pigs have replaced the shark and the sea
>lion as the dominant predators in the ocean, and domestic house cats are
>eating more fish than all the world's seals combined. We are extracting
>some 50 to 60 fish from the sea to raise one farm raised salmon.
>
>This is ecological insanity.
>
>Yet the demand for shark fin is rising in China. Ignorant people still want
>to wear fur coats. In America, we order fries, a cheeseburger and a "diet"
>Coke.
>
>Ecological insanity, folks.
>
>Last week a reporter called to ask me if I had really said that earthworms
>are more important than people. I answered that yes I had. He then asked
>how I could justify such a statement.
>
>"Simple," I answered. "Earthworms can live on the planet without people. We
>cannot live on the planet without earthworms, thus from an ecological point
>of view, earthworms are more important than people."
>
>He said that I was insane for suggesting such a ridiculous idea when people
>were made in the image of God, and earthworms were not.
>
>What we have here of course is a failure to communicate between two
>radically different world views. His which is anthropocentric and sees
>reality as human centred and mine which is biocentric and sees reality as
>including all species equally working in interdependence. He sees us as
>divine and better than all the other species, and I see us as a bunch of
>arrogant primates out of control.
>
>But that's my two cents worth for Earth Day 2007.
>
>Consider the humble honey bee and remember that the little black and yellow
>insect you see flitting busily from flower to flower is all that stands
>between us and our demise as a species on this planet.
>
>We better see to it that they don't disappear.