You are correct. Joe and Jane just don't care. Our ethical structure is based on anthropocentrism, and until the overall philosophy of modern society changes, we must operate within that realm. The problem is they are also EXTREMELY short-sighted.
The upside? Remember in Star Wars Episode 1 when Quagon (sp?) says that "greed can be a powerful ally?" Well this is true of all vices. So what about anthropocentrism and short-sightedness can be capitalized on? Rather than trying to change the world, something that takes forever, maybe we should be trying to work within its bounds???? So, what can we as leaders identify to accomplish our agenda to "save the rest of the world and humanity from humanity?" Anyone care to brainstorm???? On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 8:38 PM, Brendan Rogers <[email protected]> wrote: > Okay, I'm the average Joe or Jane, concerned with my kids' educations, > mortgage payments, a failing economy, crime, and sometimes endangered > species. When the media warns of global warming, they most often cite three > reasons why I should care: > > 1) more heat waves > 2) more storms > 3) sea level rise > > I'm thinking, 100 years ago we hadn't flown a plane, landed on the moon, or > fought off the Nazis. We didn't have computers, cell phones, or the > internet. Why is everyone so up-tight about global warming if all we have to > conquer in the next 100 years are some more heat waves, a few more > hurricanes, and some lost shoreline?? Sounds like a fairly short order. > > Now, I know. I'm a graduate student studying climate change. I understand > the interconnected ecology of the natural world and how rapid climate change > can be detrimental to its fabric in the geologic short-term. What I don't > understand is why hardly anybody mentions mass extinctions when they warn of > global warming. Here's what I can gather: as far as we know, there have been > five major mass extinctions in Earth's history where up to 95% of all > species vanish. Most believe all five were either directly or indirectly > results of rapid climate change. Right now, today, when the effects of > climate change are beginning to be felt but pale in comparison to those > likely ahead of us, extinctions are occurring at a rate orders of magnitude > above the pre-historical "background rate". This is mainly from habitat > destruction and invasive introductions. However, add to this rapid climate > change where even mobile species must negotiate a patchwork landscape of > roads, agriculture, and cities. Can you imagine an Earth with 95% of its > species lost? I can't. > > I don't know. Maybe I'm missing something or maybe my information is off. If > it's not, then maybe mass extinction just isn't that big a deal. If it is a > big deal, and I'm pretty sure of that one, then maybe Joe and Jane just > don't care that much. But if we can get the general public to care about > pandas and koalas and spotted owls, surely we can get them to care about the > rest. The truth is, I think I know the answer. People need consequences that > can directly relate to them, someone they know, or for the slightly more > enlightened, some other group of people. But the rest of the environment > becomes a bit more removed and theoretical. Plus, climate change isn't an > issue that can be solved by the preservation of some wildlands or even by > mildly altered behaviors. It requires a whole-sale restructuring of our > global energy grid, and if we succeed, there will be significant short-term > economic repercussions. But I'm still left wondering why no one TRIES to > communicate this threat to the public. Any opinions are greatly welcomed. > > Humbly, > > Brendan Rogers > -- Malcolm L. McCallum Associate Professor of Biology Texas A&M University-Texarkana Editor, Herpetological Conservation and Biology http://www.herpconbio.org http://www.twitter.com/herpconbio Fall Teaching Schedule & Office Hours: Landscape Ecology: T,R 10-11:40 pm Environmental Physiology: MW 1-2:40 pm Seminar: T 2:30-3:30pm Genetics: M 6-10pm Office Hours: M 3-6, T: 12-2, W: 3-4 1880's: "There's lots of good fish in the sea" W.S. Gilbert 1990's: Many fish stocks depleted due to overfishing, habitat loss, and pollution. 2000: Marine reserves, ecosystem restoration, and pollution reduction MAY help restore populations. 2022: Soylent Green is People! Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
