Whoops. In my penultimate sentence I left out an important "not." The sentence should read-- > The fact that we are a part of nature does NOT mean we can argue that we > should be comfortable with any actions we take because they are "natural." Sent from my iPad
> On Oct 27, 2013, at 5:01 PM, "Hawkins, Dave" <dhawk...@nrdc.org> wrote: > > Without making an argument that we should never pursue any form of > geoengineering, let me note an obvious response to Oliver's arguments quoted > below. > The fact that we are already manipulating "nature" in many ways does not > support an argument that we should therefore manipulate it in all ways that > human imagination can conceive. Our job is to exercise good judgement in > deciding where to go and where to stop. So purely as an intellectual matter, > the option of not doing some forms of geoengineering cannot be rejected. It > is not a valid argument to respond to criticisms of specific forms of > geoengineering by saying we already manipulate nature a lot. > > (I put "nature" in quotes to start because humans are of course part of > nature. We don't act on nature; we act in nature. But our capacity to change > the functioning of many ecosystems previously largely uninfluenced by humans, > is enormous. The fact that we are a part of nature does mean we can argue > that we should be comfortable with any actions we take because they are > "natural." That stance conveniently would discard any responsibility we have > for considering the impacts of our actions.) > > Sent from my iPad > > On Oct 27, 2013, at 3:34 PM, "Ronal W. Larson" > <rongretlar...@comcast.net<mailto:rongretlar...@comcast.net>> wrote: > > List cc Andrew > > This interview is of course not good news; Dr. Shiva has a pretty strong > following in environmental circles. > > I add a few comments here for three reasons > > First because she has said all of the same things about biochar (not > mentioned in the transcript below) on several occasions. She wrote a very > confused forward (as though she hadn't read it) to a major biochar book by > Albert Bates (at his invitation) - should anyone want to see more on her > CDR/biochar views. Albert, a leader in both fields, says that mostly the > Permaculture movement is behind biochar, not listening to her. Her views on > biochar are the same as given below. > > Second, because I have today read the following in Oliver Morton’s > excellent book (“Eating the Sun”) on photosynthesis. He comments on views > like hers in the last chapter where he reports (pages 389ff) on the views of > (former “Geo" list member) Peter Read. > a. Oliver wrote p 392: “What’s more, we are rearranging the world……. > in a decentralized, slapdash way. The idea we might do it better should not > be rejected for an unworkable if understandable desire that we not do it at > all.” > b. A paragraph later: “We can’t let a romantic idea that nature > should be free to carry on regardless dominate our thinking; nature is > everywhere under our influence already. > c. One more paragraph later. We are on the flight deck, and we are > alone. We are at the controls and we have no option but to use them. And > we know where we want to go. The fact that we have only a dim idea of how to > fly means we must act carefully and thoughtfully, not that we must not act. > All of Oliver’s book was written before the name “biochar” was > selected (in 2007 at a biochar conference - because of Peter). Dr. > Shiva’s views were probably the same then and I feel are refuted nicely above > in these three excerpts. These apply as well to George Monbiot, whose > similar views are on p 389. They were also given recently even more strongly > in an e-mail response to Albert Bates, saying: > > > > On Oct 25, 2013, at 6:05 PM, Andrew Lockley > <andrew.lock...@gmail.com<mailto:andrew.lock...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > http://www.nogeoingegneria.com/interviste/terra-futura-2013-interview-with-vandana-shiva-about-geoengineering/ > > TRANSCRIPT OF THE INTERVIEW > > NoGeoingegneria: So, first, thank you very much for your time because you’re > an incredible woman and you always have so much time for everybody. and it’s > great. We wanted to speak a little bit about geoengineering with you. It’s > something that embraces everything: food and water and what is happening now > in the world in a situation of climate change, and great change, and risk of > collapse at every level. I saw the interview you had with Amy Goodman. So, > first, what is, for you, at this moment, the role of geoengineering? > > 00:55 Vandana: the role of geo-engineering should, in a world of > responsibility, in a world of scientifically enlightened decision making and > ecological understanding, it should be zero. There is no role for > geo-engeneering. Because what is geoengineering but extending the engineering > paradigm? There have been engineered parts of the earth, and aspects of > ecosystems and organisms through genetical engineering: the massive dam > building, the re-routing of rivers. These were all elements of geoengineering > at the level of particular places and we have recognized two things: one, > that when you don’t take into account the way ecological systems work, then > you do damage. Everyone knows that in effect climate change is a result of > that engineering paradigm. We could replace people with fossil fuels, have > higher and higher levels of industrialization, of agriculture, of production, > without thinking of the green-house gases we were admitting, and climate > change is really the pollution of the engineering paradigm, when fossil fuels > drove industrialism. To now offer that same mindset as a solution is to not > take seriously what Einstein said: that you can’t solve the problems by using > the same mindset that caused them. So, the idea of engineering is an idea of > mastery. And today the role that we are being asked to play is a role based > on informed humanity. > > 2:45 NoGeoingegneria > In my eyes geoengineering started in the 50s with atomic tests, because in > this period they started to make geoengineering of the atmosphere of earth in > a global sense, in a bigger sense, and a lot of projects in the 50s started > to organize the earth, the planet, in a new way, with a new idea of > engineering really the whole planet. With the power of atomic bomb scientists > made a shifting in their mind, in my eyes. So in this period, in the 50′s > weather modification also started very energically. It is part of geo > engineering, and you have here the map of the ETC group, in the whole world, > they are doing it, and you cannot do local modifications without changing the > whole system. I know in India, in Thailand, and Australia weather > modification maybe is more discussed, more open than in Europe. For example > in Italy they made weather modification in the 80′s and people don’t know it. > What do you think about the role of weather modification in a sense of > geoengineering for food, for water, for the whole system? > > 4:21 Vandana > > Weather modification is a very small part of geo engineering. Geoengineering > right now is the hubris of saying: “all this climate change, and we’re living > in the anthropocene age and now human beings will be the shapers of our > future, that totally control the overall functions of not just our planet, > but our relationship with other planets, so many of the solutions offered > have been putting reflectors in the sky to send the sun back as if the sun > was a problem rather than the very basis of life, or to put pollutants into > the atmosphere in order to create a layer of pollution that would stop the > sun from shining. But the instability of the climate that is the result of > the greenhouse effect will just be aggravated by these interventions. Now > weather modifications done in a narrow-minded way, to say “we are not getting > rain so let us precipitate rain artificially so that agriculture doesn’t > fail” is something that for example the Chinese did for the olympics. They > made sure there would be no rain during the Olympics. It is a lower level of > hubris than the larger project of geoengineering. > > 5:47 you know this map…..? > > 5:49 Vandanayes of course i know Etcetera. > > 5:52 N: and you see that the ETC Group also published only a part, it’s only > a part because everyday something else is coming out, in the whole world they > are doing it, so if you make in a lot of points. > > 6:07 V: it’s not too much the points > > 6:08 N: what does it mean for weather extremes for example? > > 6:11 V: the first thing is it creates more instability, and we are dealing > with instability, therefore we must deal more with actions that create > insurance against instability, rather than aggravating the instability. It’s > like I’m driving a car and I know there’s a precipice there, I should put the > car in reverse and then turn into another direction. What geo engineering is > doing is saying “let’s put our foot on the accelerator”. And the precipice is > climate instability, climate unpredictability. And at the root of it is the > false idea that these silly little actions will be able to control and > regulate the weather and climate. But the second most important part of why > geo engineering is so so wrong is that is ultimate expression of patriarchal > irresponsibility. Patriarchy is based on appropriating rights and leaving > responsibility to others. In this case the scientists who are playing these > games, the who are investors financing it, are all doing it without having > any consent for these experiments, any approval for these experiments, > locally or globally, and worse, without thinking of the consequences or what > it can lead to, and without ever ever being bound to responsibility. > Therefore it is the ultimate expression of all the destructive tendencies of > patriarchy. > > 7:50 N: Yeah, and you see you can take one name Edward Teller. He comes from > the atomic bomb. He had the idea of controlling the weather by atomic bomb. > He proposed the shield for sun radiation management, so the same persons, the > same power structure is organizing this type of management of the planet and > of space. So, you know about the intention of control ….? > > 8:22 V: Well for some people the intention is really one of making others > suffer. And therefore aspects of geo- engineering are about links with > military warfare. How do you alter the climate so that you can just make rain > fall or fail in a particular area and let agriculture suffer. But in other > cases, even if there isn’t that military intention of harm to the other there > is an ignorance….. > > 8:56 N: There is also economic interest …… > > 8:58 V: Not all, the reason that there is such a battalion of scientists > behind it….. > > 9:00 N: You know oil and not soil, the food and water ……. > > 9:05 V: The people are pushing it have a money interest. The people who are > pushing it have a military interest. , people are pushing to have a military > interest. The players merely have the arrogance that ” I have the solution”. > And it’s the combination of stupidity combined with the arrogance of the > little players, and the evil projects of the ones who control it, that > combination is what makes it toxic. Because if the scientific community could > only recognize its responsibility to society and the planet and say “I will > not be part of your games”, which is how Scientists for Social Responsibility > was created, which is how the group that started to monitor the whole nuclear > issue, those were all scientists. This is a marriage of stupid scientists > with evil minds, and we need scientists with responsibility to be the > counterforce to say this is not science, just as we need in genetic > engineering. And it is as the community of scientists who really know the > science start to speak more and organize better, that the stupid scientists > of the biotech industry will quieten down. And biotech and geo engineering > have the same mindset, of engineering, of power, of control, of mastery of > nature > > 10:30 N: you spoke also of the dams. It’s big geoengineering also in India > and in the whole world and there are now the big interests of water and here, > the last time we had an interview with Pat Mooney he said that big dams, > energy production, water control, and weather control, it’s one thing. So > it’s not only a small intervention to have crops. It’s something more. > > 11:06 V: No as I said it’s the ultimate hubris, that’s what it is! Hubris on > a planetary scale! > > 11:19 N: Uh….. what do you think about the fact they will spray nano > particles? That’s the program! > > 11:29 V: Each of these issues has a particular aspect thats different but i > think those particular aspects are very small compared to the overall damage > and the overall irresponsibility. For me the first issue is, how dare you do > this. How dare you. That has to be humanity’s response. Then the rest of the > little thing of how nano particles can harm or have too much sulphur in the > atmosphere can harm, those are specific details but this is a civilizational > issue. And in civilizational issues you don’t look at the tiny details as the > debate. You have to look at the big picture! > > Transcript by lukinski&trishy > Vandana Shiva – > > Biography:Vandana Shiva, a world-renowned environmental thinker, activist, > physicist, feminist, philosopher of science, writer and science policy > advocate, is the Director of The Research Foundation for Science, Technology > and Natural Resource Policy. She serves as an ecology advisor to several > organizations including the Third World Network and the Asia Pacific People’s > Environment Network. In 1993 she was the recipient of the Right Livelihood > Award, commonly known as the “Alternative Nobel Prize”. A contributing editor > to People-Centered Development Forum, she has also written several works > include, “Staying Alive,” “The Violence of the Green Revolution,” “Biopiracy: > The Plunder of Nature and Knowledge,” “Monoculutures of the Mind” and “Water > Wars: Privatization, Pollution, and Profit,” as well as over 300 papers in > leading scientific and technical journals. Shiva participated in the > nonviolent Chipko movement during the 1970s, whose main participants were > women. She is one of the leaders of the International Forum on Globalization, > and a figure of the global solidarity movement known as the > anti-globalization movement. She has argued for the wisdom of many > traditional practices, as is evident from her book “Vedic Ecology” that draws > upon India’s Vedic heritage. Shiva has fought for changes in the practice and > paradigms of agriculture and food. Intellectual property rights, > biodiversity, biotechnology, bioethics, genetic engineering are among the > fields where Shiva has contributed intellectually and through activist > campaigns. She has assisted grassroots organizations of the Green movement in > Africa, Asia, Latin America, Ireland, Switzerland and Austria with campaigns > against genetic engineering. In 1982, she founded the Research Foundation for > Science, Technology and Ecology. Her book, “Staying Alive” helped redefine > perceptions of third world women. Shiva has also served as an adviser to > governments in India and abroad as well as non governmental organisations, > including the International Forum on Globalisation, the Women’s Environment & > Development Organization and the Third World Network > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "geoengineering" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to > geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<mailto:geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. > To post to this group, send email to > geoengineering@googlegroups.com<mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com>. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "geoengineering" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to > geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<mailto:geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. > To post to this group, send email to > geoengineering@googlegroups.com<mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com>. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "geoengineering" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
