Something to Ponder
 

I was reading an interview with Pixy Liao, a Chinese photographer who is living/working in Tennessee.
She said...
China is like that in many places because the economy is more important than the environment. That's what Pittsburgh, and a bunch of other cities were like in the first half of the 20th century. You could almost walk on the Delaware River if you weren't overcome by the smell.

We've made great progress cleaning up the air and water, despite the bitching and grousing about the federal bullies.
Do Not Throw That Away.

I don't believe that we are. Is there something specific that makes you concerned Bruce?

Every disaster movie starts with a politician or government committee not listening to a scientist.

My concern is water and air. Of course those two affect everything. I don't want to go back to drinking beer because it's safer than water. I don't want people having to wear particle masks, it scrunches my beard.

We have the ability, the technology, to at least slow the warming of the Earth and the ocean. We don't even know what's living in 95% of the ocean. Like they just discovered the "White Shark Cafe" out in the Pacific. That's a big area where we didn't know anything was living, but at least when we found it we knew what they were. Other ocean expanses and everything deeper, they find new things constantly, which sounds productive but we don't go there very often. What they do know and can monitor is the oceans are absorbing more carbon dioxide and getting warmer.

This is the biggest nose cutting off to spite ours faces ever. In a couple years I'll be dead, but I feel bad for the puppies and kittens that will suffer... but I guess they'll get by eating dead children.

There is a school of thought that says, a nation must become fairly prosperous before it concerns itself with pollution. It is a middle class concern. Once a nation reaches the point where they can afford the environment to be a cause that people worry about -- as opposed to the jobs they need which, typically, create that pollution -- that is when they clean things up.

I believe that to be the case and so there is really very very little chance that "we", the West, will reverse direction.

And it's a hopeful thought for the second and third world, too; once "they" reach that level, where they have a middle class that has been around for a generation, and isn't going away, and has the ability the speak politically and move for change, the problem will be focused upon.

"78 Environmental Rules on the Way Out Under Trump"

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...-reversed.html

I guess that's one more reason plutocrats want to squeeze out the middle class.

This is the kind of thing that makes you sound like you're not really from here.

Of course you are, and I know from personal experience that this is your real voice. But asking questions, neutral open ended questions at the start of a conversation like this is... Uncommon.

He wants specific points he can work on. ;)

We have a problem in that when a scientist/group releases a paper with significant new shit, it's peer reviewed and pondered by people in that field.
Now the author of that paper is pretty happy, but if he tried to tell people about it, anyone but his barber and wife would fall asleep because nobody understands it who doesn't work in that field.

Along comes his savior, the hero who will tell the world how he deserves praise. That is the trusty science reporter. Now our hero tells his hero all about his quest against great odds, and how he successfully destroyed the ring, and the deatheaters, and the commie guerrillas.

But our hero's hero is just one of the science reporters vying to find the biggest story because like the scientist they'll get published or perish. So he digs through his notes and tries to find something that will give his editor a boner. He might have to stress some of the lessor points, play up the finding it will kill some microbes, to it will kills all communicable diseases. And play down the important finding because it won't fire up the public.

So the science reporter gets another paycheck, the scientist doesn't want to say anything because he's pleased his boss. The Public gets fired up about the wrong thing which doesn't pan out and sours them on scientists, citing all the promises that didn't happen.

But cheer up Bunky, all is not lost. That report circulates the important findings within the field of science and more important findings through other fields. Other scientists use that information to build on in their research. Baby steps till that eureka moment when it all comes together. Science is not broken, but the respect and trust of science is, and that slows acceptance of the eureka moments.

Add to that certain people who would lose money if some discoveries are implemented. If they are unscrupulous they could influence misdirection and further mistrust. Really murdoch the waters and make it clear as mud but covers the ground.

The last player is a successful senior scientist, worked hard, won some accolades, made fellow or chair, the guy the papers call for comment. He's the one the papers say after his name, "who wasn't involved in the study". But now the papers are calling less and jr scientists aren't coming for advice and consent anymore. They're busy finding things he had overlooked in his work. But the people who want to murdoch the waters would put him back in the limelight, and assure comfortable golden years. All he has to do is express their opinion.

There are damn few provable facts in science, it's interpretation of evidence, opinions, theorems, logical conclusions, and best guess until there's more evidence. It's facts based on current knowledge. But it's foolhardy to ignore it. Stupid to not do things that may not help but we're sure won't hurt. If you don't believe it's right, cool, present your evidence. Saying I don't believe it because other things I was told(or thought that's what I was told) turned out to be not true, is totally dishonest.

I completely accept your diplomatic criticism. Even agree looking from your perspective.

Maybe there’s something better that I can contribute here. The next effort should be a bit better. Possibly. I’ll work on it.

Thanks for giving me the benefit of the doubt, Bruce. :)

I assumed you disagreed and were asking for specific points or examples you could debate. No matter how long you live in the Philippines you'll always have Republican roots. :lol:

Bruce knows about Slang's root.[/snicker]

The first time we met I had mine out. He came up the hill at Forks to help me get stuff out of my car and I was taking a leak behind a tree. :haha:

"Smog might turn to stars someday" - Neil Young

Trump pulled out of the Paris Accord, and couldn't care less about the environment it seems.

I've heard air pollution is very bad in L.A., but I don't know about other US cities. Here in the UK, air pollution kills 30,000 people per year, which is a horrendous statistic, and I'm very surprised that people aren't talking about it more. The figure for China must be through the roof.