My heart bleeds. for the trees...

[Tuckahoe]

...well not really. Maybe I am in the minority here, but this is just so pittiful in so many way :eek:. Enjoy... http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=30d_1358649482

[jeffmeh]

Pitiful and misinformed. http://www.rationaloptimist.com/blog/the-greening-of-the-planet.aspx

[Rasty]

The best comment was "I wonder how many insects they killed walking up to the trees?"

[rocketsocks]

What the!!!!!!!

[Tuckahoe]

Its western North Carolina... how many old growth forrests are there?

[HikerMom58]

Oh BOY :eek: ...................

[Rasty]

Its western North Carolina... how many old growth forrests are there?

Joyce Kilmer and Linville gorge are two that I know of.

[Old Hiker]

I weep for the dead trees..................when the smoke from my fire gets into my eyes. Watched until "I want to mourn.........." and quit.

Sheesh. You feel that badly about humanity's impact on the Earth, take yourself off of it. Go compost somewhere.

[Papa D]

Its western North Carolina... how many old growth forrests are there?

There are pockets of old growth and virgin timber in Joyce Kilmer / Slickrock Creek Wilderness, and a few hiding spots in Eastern Ciitco Creek Wilderness on ridge shared with Joyce Kilmer. There are also small pockets in the Snowbird Mountains near the TN border and further east in the Nantahala and Pisgah National Forests near Brevard and Cashiers (as well as a bit in Linville Gorge (as noted) - - wish we had more.

[WingedMonkey]

It reminded me of a typical Southern tent revival.

[HikerMom58]

It reminded me of a typical Southern tent revival.

Ha Ha!! Yes indeed & one could argue that one group was "worshiping the created" while the other was "worshiping the Creator".

[hikerboy57]

treebeard would be pleased

[Capt Nat]

This is so stupid, I almost don't have words. Tens of thousands of people died today, how are they going to handle that when they find out?

[hikerboy57]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JaZmdZACMNo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JaZmdZACMNo

[Sarcasm the elf]

I had a chainsaw blade slip clear off of the bar while i was cutting firewood today. It shredded the chain and put a few nice gouges in the clutch plate, I'm lucky that it didn't kick up and hit me in the face.

I suppose of you ask the kids in the video they'd say I deserved it...

[Odd Man Out]

Pitiful and misinformed. http://www.rationaloptimist.com/blog/the-greening-of-the-planet.aspx

The reason is that the enzyme responsible for taking up CO2 in all photosynthetic organisms will also take up O2 , which has the effect of producing CO2 instead (photorespiration). So the net CO2 consumption is the difference between these two processes which is dictated by the relative concentrations of CO2 and O2. Thus, as CO2 concentrations increase, the plants do more photosynthesis and less photrespiration. A few plants (tropical grasses like corn and sugar cane) use a trick to concentrate CO2 inside their cells and take advantage of this phenomenon, which accounts for their relatively high efficiency at normal CO2 levels.

However, it would be a mistake to think that this will stop the increase of CO2 due to burning fossil fuels. Note that the citation said the CO2 increase on Mona Loa is coincidental with an increase in the magnitude of seasonal oscillation ("breathing"). So plants are taking in more CO2 in the summer, but they are then releasing more CO2 in the winter. The increased efficiency of photosynthesis will only have a net decrease of CO2 in the atmosphere if there is also a permanent net increase in biomass.

[JAK]

The reason is that the enzyme responsible for taking up CO2 in all photosynthetic organisms will also take up O2 , which has the effect of producing CO2 instead (photorespiration). So the net CO2 consumption is the difference between these two processes which is dictated by the relative concentrations of CO2 and O2. Thus, as CO2 concentrations increase, the plants do more photosynthesis and less photrespiration. A few plants (tropical grasses like corn and sugar cane) use a trick to concentrate CO2 inside their cells and take advantage of this phenomenon, which accounts for their relatively high efficiency at normal CO2 levels.

However, it would be a mistake to think that this will stop the increase of CO2 due to burning fossil fuels. Note that the citation said the CO2 increase on Mona Loa is coincidental with an increase in the magnitude of seasonal oscillation ("breathing"). So plants are taking in more CO2 in the summer, but they are then releasing more CO2 in the winter. The increased efficiency of photosynthesis will only have a net decrease of CO2 in the atmosphere if there is also a permanent net increase in biomass.Now don't you go complicating science with reason. The truthiness should speaks for itself. Our lifestyles can only be sustained with truthiness. Reason is not sustainable.

[JAK]

The truthiness is that these people are whacked, therefore we are right.

[Mountain Mike]

I have cried many times over dead trees. There was the time I was limbing one I cut down for firewood, rolled over & stuck a branch in my foot. Another time I used one as a seat over a cat hole. The Mexican food from night before was what brought tears to my eyes, but still crying over a dead tree. Many times smoke from a dead one has brought tears to my eyes.

After reading all the responses to this post it really opened my eyes. Makes me know who charges in blind & who reads that this is the humor section post.

[moytoy]

I've seen that clip before. I think it was posted on WB. While those people wail for the loss of the old growth trees maybe they can take some solace in the fact that someday we will be extinct and the old growth will return.

[rocketsocks]

I've seen that clip before. I think it was posted on WB. While those people wail for the loss of the old growth trees maybe they can take some solace in the fact that someday we will be extinct and the old growth will return.Good point, there crying over nothin....and yes it was on here last year. And I bet it will be here again....too funny.

[Pedaling Fool]

Send them to Cambodia to cry!

http://www.gpb.org/news/2013/01/29/as-china-builds-cambodias-forests-fall?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+GPBNewsFeed+%28GPB+News%29






As China Builds, Cambodia's Forests Fall
By Michael Sullivan

China's demand for natural resources is being felt in a big way in Cambodia.

Illegal logging and economic land concessions are threatening Cambodia's dwindling forests, which now echo the sound of chainsaws.

Prey Lang forest an eight-hour journey north and east of the capital, Phnom Penh is one of the forests where illegal loggers see money signs on the trees.

Supply And Demand

"It's just like in the United States in the 1960s, when every single redwood tree was a target for illegal logger[s]," says Suwanna Gauntlett, head of the Phnom Penh office of Wildlife Alliance. "It's the same thing in Cambodia. It's a natural resource worth a lot of money."

And many people with money particularly China's growing middle class are eager to spend it on luxury hardwood furniture, says Tracy Farrell of Conservation International.

"You also have the fact that other countries have been culling or reducing the extraction of their own luxury wood," Farrell says. "Thailand has been becoming much more strict about illegal wood leaking out of their country, so that puts the pressure on the countries that are less strict. ... Laos and Cambodia are really, really struggling."

Both Conservation International and Wildlife Alliance have been working with Cambodia's government to protect some forests. Those efforts have been hugely successful in slowing the rate of forest decline there, but without this protection, Gauntlett says, it would be a different case.

"Six months six to eight months," she says. "It'd all be gone. It would be wiped out, believe me."

But Prey Lang forest doesn't have the same kind of protection. And the forests are not just threatened by illegal loggers, but by so-called economic concessions large tracts of land awarded by the government to agribusinesses on the forests' borders. It has become land often used to launder wood taken out of the forest illegally.

'We All Depend On It To Live'

Eoun Sopapheap, a local activist in Sandan, says he's tired of watching the forest disappear. He and a few others journey into the forest to catch illegal loggers in the act.

"The forest is our rice bowl," he says with the help of a translator. "We all depend on it to live. We tap the resin trees there and sell the sap in the market, and we use the money to buy rice and to pay for our children's school fees. If we lose those trees, we lose everything so it's up to us."

He fires up his motorcycle and starts the trek into the forest. In less than an hour, the group spots the first of many newly fallen trees not far from the road. They hear a chainsaw humming in the distance.

It's a resin tree, one of the men explains its trunk still oozing sap. It's worth about $750 to a logger, he says. But for those who live here, a source of sustainable income has now been eliminated forever. The chainsaw draws the group deeper into the forest.

The Hunt For Illegal Loggers

The underbrush is thick and rips at the flesh. It takes about 30 minutes to go 100 yards, then a clearing and a glum-looking logger.

He says he's not from around here; his boss offered him $10 to cut this tree.

"I know it's illegal," he says, "but what can I do? I don't have any other work, and I have to support my family."

The activists let him go, but they keep his chainsaw. They're after bigger fish, and find one on the road a few miles farther in.

It's a tractor pulling a large stack of freshly cut timber. The man who owns it, the driver claims, is the district deputy police chief, who shows up not long after, looking annoyed.

The activists tell him they're burning the wood and reporting him to the Interior Ministry. The policeman protests, claiming the wood was legally cut and belongs not to him, but to the owner of a land concession in the district.

Chhim Savuth, with the Cambodian Center for Human Rights, doesn't believe any of it. First, he says, that land concession is some 30 miles from here, and the license expired a year ago.

Exasperated, the police chief whips out his phone and says he's calling his boss. But he's not talking about his police superior. He's talking about the owner of the company the man paying him to protect the illegal shipment. He walks away a bit, but is still within earshot.

The human rights activist listens in and says he overhears the boss telling the cop to offer the activists money to make the problem go away. But it doesn't come to that.

Just then, several hard-looking men on motorbikes pull up gun thugs serving as reinforcements. The activists are suddenly outnumbered in the middle of the forest, and it's getting dark. They decide to retreat.

Stopping The Practice

Back in the capital, Ou Virak, who heads the Cambodian Center for Human Rights, says that was a good call especially with the police involved.

"In any of these situations in the middle of nowhere, with so much money and so much interests at stake they're willing to do quite a lot," he says. "So it could turn ugly pretty quickly. If anything happened, they could just blame anybody."

Virak says the incident perfectly illustrates the extent of the collusion between local officials and the illegal logging trade in many parts of the country, and how difficult it will be to stop the practice.

[Train Wreck]

In all seriousness, think of the wasted potential for actually achieving something of value - if these nutjobs would only put a fraction of all their passion and energy into a cause where they could actually effect a positive change. Sad.

[Capt Nat]

I'm wondering if I can hire these people to attend my funeral. It shouldn't be a big deal but I just think I would be really embarrassed if only two show and neither cries. These folks would be great!

[Train Wreck]

I'm wondering if I can hire these people to attend my funeral. It shouldn't be a big deal but I just think I would be really embarrassed if only two show and neither cries. These folks would be great!

3 models currently available depending on your budget and preference from cheap to expensive :
A. Allergy mourner - red eyed & sniffly
B. Sulky Emo teen - pre-dressed in black, wishes he was dead along with you
C. Full on sqalling female - wanna-be opera diva

[moytoy]

I wish I had the wit that some of you do. That's funny:)

[Pedaling Fool]

Thank mother earth for the coal she provides, or else many others in Europe would be cutting down trees during these very cold winters over there. :) http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21569039-europes-energy-policy-delivers-worst-all-possible-worlds-unwelcome-renaissance





WHILE coal production and use plummet in America, in Europe “we have some kind of golden age of coal,” says Anne-Sophie Corbeau of the International Energy Agency. The amount of electricity generated from coal is rising at annualised rates of as much as 50% in some European countries. Since coal is by the far the most polluting source of electricity, with more greenhouse gas produced per kilowatt hour than any other fossil fuel, this is making a mockery of European environmental aspirations. How did it happen?

The story starts, again, with American shale gas. As American utilities shifted into gas, American coal miners had to look for new markets. They were doing so at a time when slowing Chinese demand was pushing down world coal prices, which fell by a third between August 2011 and August 2012 and is below $100 a tonne. These prices make European utilities willing buyers. European purchases of American coal rose by a third in the first six months of 2012.


Compared with the rock-bottom price of gas in America, coal is not all that cheap. But it is a bargain compared with the price of gas in Europe. Although gas can be carted around in liquid form, that is expensive and the infrastructure required is still patchy; for the most part, gas is shifted through pipelines, and tends to be used close to where it originates. So whereas coal has world-market prices, gas has regional prices, often linked in one way or another to the oil price. Many European gas contracts were negotiated years ago with the Russian gas giant, Gazprom, and despite a wave of renegotiations European gas prices have stayed high. In the summer of 2012 they were more than three times the American gas price and more expensive than coal. Gazprom has said it will cut prices—probably by around 10%—in 2013, but that may make little difference.

So coal is cheaper than gas in Europe and is likely to remain so, partly because Europe’s domestic shale-gas industry is many years behind America’s (and may never catch up) and partly because it will take time for Europe to build an infrastructure to import liquefied-natural gas in large amounts. The relative price of coal and gas is crucial to the health of European utilities. At the beginning of November 2012, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance, a research firm, power utilities in Germany were set, on average, to lose €11.70 when they burned gas to make a megawatt of electricity, but to earn €14.22 per MW when they burned coal.

No room for gas in the Energiewende

The difference reflects the prices of the fuels concerned. But there is more to it than that. Germany has an ambitious plan to shift from fossil fuels and nuclear power to renewables like solar and wind (this is called the Energiewende, or energy transformation). Electricity from renewables gets priority on the grid. That has allowed wind and solar to grab market share from fossil energy during the most profitable times of day, when utilities used to make most of their money and burning gas made sense (German electricity prices are at their highest in the middle of the day when solar generation is also strongest). By displacing conventional forms of energy this way renewables have undermined utilities’ finances. Moody’s, a ratings agency, recently said the whole sector’s creditworthiness is under threat.

In response, companies are switching from gas to coal as fast as they can, so renewables are in fact displacing gas but not coal. In Germany, RWE, the biggest user of coal in Europe, generated 72% of its electricity from coal and lignite (a dirtier, low-grade form of coal) in the first nine months of 2012, compared with 66% over the same period in 2011. Germany needs new capacity because it is closing down its nuclear plants: RWE is building a new coal-fired plant in Hamm, in North Rhine-Westphalia and another in Emshaven in the Netherlands. E.ON, Germany’s biggest power producer, is also building a new coal-fired plant in North Rhine-Westphalia. It and its partners are considering shutting down a gas-fired plant in Bavaria. Vattenfall, a Swedish state-owned company, has just completed a lignite-fired plant in eastern Germany and is building a coal plant near Hamburg. EnBW, based in southern Germany, is building a coal-fired plant in Karlsruhe, and another jointly with RWE in Mannheim.

Even in countries that are not building new coal-fired power stations, the amount of coal burned is going up. In April 2012 coal took over from gas as Britain’s dominant fuel for electricity for the first time since early 2007. The amount of the country’s electricity provided by coal in the third quarter of last year was 50% greater than the year before.

Companies would be dashing for coal anyway because it is cheap, but the dash is made the more frantic by looming policy changes. Under a European Union directive which comes into force in 2016, utilities must either close coal-fired plants that do not meet new EU environmental standards or else install lots of expensive pollution-control devices. The deadline for companies to decide which course to take is this month. If a company closes a plant, it will be given a maximum number of hours to run before it must be shut down (depending on how much pollution it produces). This is a big incentive to burn a lot of coal quickly.

Does this mean the current surge in coal demand is a blip? Tom Brookes of the European Climate Foundation, a non-governmental organisation based in The Hague, says yes. In 2008 Europe’s utilities had plans for 112 new coal plants. Since then, 73 have been abandoned and nothing further has happened with 14, so he reckons a huge amount of coal capacity will be lost as existing plants are shut down over the next 12 to 18 months. All the same, that still leaves two dozen new plants planned or under construction. Moreover, if you count the number of applications for permits to build coal-fired power stations—as the World Resources Institute, a think-tank in Washington, DC, does—the number of planned new coal plants in Europe is much higher: 69, with a proposed capacity of over 60 gigawatts, roughly equivalent to the capacity of the 58 nuclear reactors that provide France with most of its electricity.

So higher levels of coal use may continue for a while, at least in some countries. Bloomberg has looked in detail at the impact of EU environmental standards on the countries most affected: Britain, Germany and Poland. It reckons British coal capacity will indeed fall, from 33GW now to 14GW by the time the new rules take full effect. But Germany’s coal capacity will barely budge, because it is building new coal plants which meet the new standards.

This coal surge is making a nonsense of EU environmental policies, which politicians like to claim are a model for the rest of the world. European countries had hoped gradually to squeeze dirty coal out of electricity generation. Instead, its market share has been growing.

The EU aims to reduce carbon emissions to 80% of their 1990 levels by 2020. Thanks in part to the recession, by 2009 it was most of the way there—a bit more than 17% down on the 1990 level. In 2010, though, emissions began rising. Bloomberg calculates that carbon emissions from power plants rose around 3% in 2012, pushing total emissions 1% higher than they were in 2011.


In theory, Europe’s carbon price, provided by a cap-and-trade system, the emissions trading scheme (ETS), should have stopped all this from happening. The ETS carbon price should in principle go up when emissions do, as more emissions mean more demand for the carbon credits that the scheme works with. So you might expect the carbon price to have soared in 2012. In fact the price was flat for most of the year, trading between €6 and €8 per tonne (see chart).

Carbon beyond price

The problem is that when the system was set up, regulators allowed companies overly generous permits to pollute, in part because of lobbying and in part because the effects of the recession were not foreseen. This oversupply has swamped the impact of emissions from coal-fired power plants. On November 12th the European Commission, the EU’s executive arm, proposed that some of the excess carbon credits be withdrawn. But the proposal, which has been held up by opposition from Poland, might not do all that much.

Policy uncertainties are growing. The EU has a lot of other things on its plate, so no one has much appetite for tough decisions about energy at the moment, such as how to save the ETS. In 2014 there will be a new European Commission and a new European Parliament, which means Europe-wide decisions about energy risk being put off for a couple more years at least. As Europe’s energy targets (on renewables use and efficiency) are supposed to be met by 2020, this timetable suggests there will be years of policy delay followed by a last-minute scramble.

Faced with such uncertainties, businesses are doing what you would expect: going elsewhere. Jesse Scott, the head of environment policy at EURELECTRIC, an association of electricity producers, asked European energy utilities which also have an international portfolio where they were expecting to invest over the next few years; 85% replied “outside Europe”.

If policies work as intended, electricity from renewables will gradually take a larger share of overall generation, and Europe will end up with a much greener form of energy. But at the moment, EU energy policy is boosting usage of the most polluting fuel, increasing carbon emissions, damaging the creditworthiness of utilities and diverting investment into energy projects elsewhere. The EU’s climate commissioner, Connie Hedegaard, likes to claim that in energy and emissions Europe is “leading by example”. Uh-oh.

[BirdBrain]

In all seriousness, think of the wasted potential for actually achieving something of value - if these nutjobs would only put a fraction of all their passion and energy into a cause where they could actually effect a positive change. Sad.

Flip side: It is a shame that enough of those who are "sane" don't take up the cause. There are easy things that most agree on, but not enough care about.
I watched a show on Netflix called Ghost Bird. Bottom line: Ivory Woodpecker wiped out because Singer cut down last habitat for sewing machine boxes.
Yes, I love birds and I have seen too many decline in numbers in just my lifetime. Redheaded Woodpecker, Bluebird, and Scarlet Tanager to name 3.
I am not an extremist. But it is a shame that the balanced view is obscured by the nut-jobs.

[Train Wreck]

[QUOTE=BirdBrain;1405911]Flip side: It is a shame that enough of those who are "sane" don't take up the cause. There are easy things that most agree on, but not enough care about.
I watched a show on Netflix called Ghost Bird. Bottom line: Ivory Woodpecker wiped out because Singer cut down last habitat for sewing machine boxes.
Yes, I love birds and I have seen too many decline in numbers in just my lifetime. Redheaded Woodpecker, Bluebird, and Scarlet Tanager to name 3.
I am not an extremist. But it is a shame that the balanced view is obscured by the nut-jobs.[/QUO

I I know, and you're right.. I'm a passionate advocate for animal rights but not in the PETA sense of the word.

[BirdBrain]

I know, and you're right.. I'm a passionate advocate for animal rights but not in the PETA sense of the word.

This is why we get little done. People want extreme views or they want to portray others as having extreme views. I find we, as a people, have a lot in common. However, there are certain forces that benefit from having us at each others throats. This site is not political, nor should it be. Suffice it to say that I care more about this ball we are flying through space than many that claim to care and I am of a political persuasion that is portrayed as not caring. We need balance and we need to work together. If we can get away from the soundbites and the stereotypes we might be able to make a difference. I wish I could be more specific, but it would start a fight. Of all people, hikers should understand that we can't afford to be divided by people who have never hiked.

[atmilkman]

3 models currently available depending on your budget and preference from cheap to expensive :
A. Allergy mourner - red eyed & sniffly
B. Sulky Emo teen - pre-dressed in black, wishes he was dead along with you
C. Full on sqalling female - wanna-be opera diva
Too funny TW. You're on your game with this one.

[BirdBrain]

3 models currently available depending on your budget and preference from cheap to expensive :
A. Allergy mourner - red eyed & sniffly
B. Sulky Emo teen - pre-dressed in black, wishes he was dead along with you
C. Full on sqalling female - wanna-be opera diva

Funny stuff.

[Lone Wolf]

double rainbow all the way!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQSNhk5ICTI

[BirdBrain]

double rainbow all the way!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQSNhk5ICTI

Doesn't this belong in the "sex on the trail" thread?

[BirdBrain]

posted on appropriate thread.

[Chuckie V]

This is the stuff of pure brilliance, from the great George Carlin (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovbF0D2wySI). "The Planet Is Fine"


We're so self-important. So self-important. Everybody's going to save something now. "Save the trees, save the bees, save the whales, save those snails." And the greatest arrogance of all: save the planet. What? Are these ****ing people kidding me? Save the planet, we don't even know how to take care of ourselves yet. We haven't learned how to care for one another, we're gonna save the ****ing planet?

I'm getting tired of that crap. Tired of that crap. I'm tired of ****ing Earth Day, I'm tired of these self-righteous environmentalists, these white, bourgeois liberals who think the only thing wrong with this country is there aren't enough bicycle paths. People trying to make the world save for their Volvos. Besides, environmentalists don't give a **** about the planet. They don't care about the planet. Not in the abstract, they don't. Not in the abstract they don't. You know what they're interested in? A clean place to live. Their own habitat. They're worried that some day in the future, they might be personally inconvenienced. Narrow, unenlightened self-interest doesn't impress me.

Besides, there is nothing wrong with the planet. Nothing wrong with the planet. The planet is fine. The PEOPLE are ****ed. Difference. Difference. The planet is fine. Compared to the people, the planet is doing great. Been here four and a half billion years. Did you ever think about the arithmetic? The planet has been here four and a half billion years. We've been here, what, a hundred thousand? Maybe two hundred thousand? And we've only been engaged in heavy industry for a little over two hundred years. Two hundred years versus four and a half billion. And we have the CONCEIT to think that somehow we're a threat? That somehow we're gonna put in jeopardy this beautiful little blue-green ball that's just a-floatin' around the sun?

The planet has been through a lot worse than us. Been through all kinds of things worse than us. Been through earthquakes, volcanoes, plate tectonics, continental drift, solar flares, sun spots, magnetic storms, the magnetic reversal of the poles...hundreds of thousands of years of bombardment by comets and asteroids and meteors, worldwide floods, tidal waves, worldwide fires, erosion, cosmic rays, recurring ice ages...And we think some plastic bags, and some aluminum cans are going to make a difference? The planet...the planet...the planet isn't going anywhere. WE ARE!

We're going away. Pack your ****, folks. We're going away. And we won't leave much of a trace, either. Thank God for that. Maybe a little styrofoam. Maybe. A little styrofoam. The planet'll be here and we'll be long gone. Just another failed mutation. Just another closed-end biological mistake. An evolutionary cul-de-sac. The planet'll shake us off like a bad case of fleas. A surface nuisance.

You wanna know how the planet's doing? Ask those people at Pompeii, who are frozen into position from volcanic ash, how the planet's doing. You wanna know if the planet's all right, ask those people in Mexico City or Armenia or a hundred other places buried under thousands of tons of earthquake rubble, if they feel like a threat to the planet this week. Or how about those people in Kilauea, Hawaii, who built their homes right next to an active volcano, and then wonder why they have lava in the living room.

The planet will be here for a long, long, LONG time after we're gone, and it will heal itself, it will cleanse itself, 'cause that's what it does. It's a self-correcting system. The air and the water will recover, the earth will be renewed, and if it's true that plastic is not degradable, well, the planet will simply incorporate plastic into a new paradigm: the earth plus plastic. The earth doesn't share our prejudice towards plastic. Plastic came out of the earth. The earth probably sees plastic as just another one of its children. Could be the only reason the earth allowed us to be spawned from it in the first place. It wanted plastic for itself. Didn't know how to make it. Needed us. Could be the answer to our age-old egocentric philosophical question, "Why are we here?" Plastic...***hole.

So, the plastic is here, our job is done, we can be phased out now. And I think that's really already started already, don't you? I mean, to be fair, the planet probably sees us as a mild threat. Something to be dealt with. And the planet can defend itself in an organized, collective way, the way a beehive or an ant colony can. A collective defense mechanism. The planet will think of something. What would you do if you were the planet? How would you defend yourself against this troublesome, pesky species? Let's see... what might?...Viruses. Viruses might be good. They seem vulnerable to viruses. And, uh...viruses are tricky, always mutating and forming new strains whenever a vaccine is developed. Perhaps, this first virus could be one that compromises the immune system of these creatures. Perhaps a human immunodeficiency virus, making them vulnerable to all sorts of other diseases and infections that might come along. And maybe it could be spread sexually, making them a little reluctant to engage in the act of reproduction.

Well, that's a poetic note. And it's a start. And I can dream, can't I? See I don't worry about the little things: bees, trees, whales, snails. I think we're part of a greater wisdom than we will ever understand. A higher order. Call it what you want. Know what I call it? The Big Electron. The Big Electron...whoooa. Whoooa. Whoooa. It doesn't punish, it doesn't reward, it doesn't judge at all. It just is. And so are we.

For a little while.

[Train Wreck]

posted on appropriate thread.

I made Pepe leave the room :eek:

[BirdBrain]

The Passenger Pigeon, Carolina Parrot, and Ivory Woodpecker are not fine. Maybe they are not that important to many. I certainly don't think they are more important that the existence of people. But, to suggest that we don't have an effect is (insert inflammatory word). We do have an effect. I like the outdoors. I like my conveniences too. There has to be a way to have them both. But, making fun of an real issue is (insert inflammatory word).

[BirdBrain]

I made Pepe leave the room :eek:

Who?...........

[Train Wreck]

Who?...........

HB's pet skunk and BFF

[BirdBrain]

Moving on from my environmental rant. I just really like my planet the way it was designed. By the time we get done fighting about what is real, much of it will go the way of the cod fish.

Quoting from:
A Cruising Guide to the Maine Coast

"Captain John Smith, Governor of Virginia, sailed up the coast in 1614 to the Isles of Shoals and Monhegan. It was Smith's lyric descriptions of the beauty, lushness, and potential of New England that fired the English imagination and spurred the growth of the new colonies. And it was Smith who realized that the real treasure of the Maine coast was not gold or silver, but codfish."

Try to catch one in Cod Cove now.