> nothing in The End Of The World As We Know It scenarios requires that any
> single locality must slide over the edge into the abyss. A shift to
> bioregional understanding will save your community and your grandchildren
The idea that 'individual communities' (whatever they are: is there such a thing
anywhere on the planet as a community which is independent of the whole, which has
its own autonomouys culture, technology, history, etc? Don't think so.) can survive
if the ecosphere as a whole is destroyed, is surely wrong. Also a misreading of
bioregionalims, which is about the *interdpendence* of biomes and the need to
preserve the whol ecosphere in order to preserve each species, locale etc, and
vice-versa (that's called dialectics).
For some years now I like many others have wasted my time arguing with people about
the dangers of global warming, and I tried to show in an admittedly amateurish way,
how anthropogenic climate forcing correlates with other fundamental dynamics of
resource and energy use. Nothing I see happening makes me think that even the most
apocalyptic forecasts of runaway warming, total ecosphere collapse and the
heat-death of the planet, were not actual probabilities, even if not the only or
most likely outcome. In the circumstances, hoping to save *one's own* grandchildren
is also just daydreaming. You can either save the totality, or you lose everything.
Mark
_______________________________________________
Crashlist resources: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/crashlist
