Biggest Environmental Problem?

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Mischa E Gelman

unread,
Feb 15, 1996, 3:00:00 AM2/15/96
to
OK, I'm a lurker here but wish to know a few things

1.What does everyone consider the most important short-term hazard
environmentally?
2.What is the problem that gets TOO mUCH media attention?
3.What is the major prolbem long-term?

I think Environmentalists should answer these Qs so as to come up with a
more clear plan with which to lobby the Congress.

OK, going back to reg.games.frp.dnd soon and returning to lurking here,
so feel free to flame away.
--
Are your friends as good at killing Firbolgs as you are?-Tristan Kendrick
Well, we kind of like to make a hobby of it-Finnellenn, the dwarf


Josh Howlett

unread,
Feb 16, 1996, 3:00:00 AM2/16/96
to
megs...@pitt.edu (Mischa E Gelman) wrote:
>OK, I'm a lurker here but wish to know a few things
>
>1.What does everyone consider the most important short-term hazard
>environmentally?

Clean water for drinking and irrigation.

>2.What is the problem that gets TOO mUCH media attention?

G/H effect.

>3.What is the major prolbem long-term?

Major climatic change.

IMO, jh.


Mike Conway

unread,
Feb 19, 1996, 3:00:00 AM2/19/96
to
> >1.What does everyone consider the most important short-term hazard
> >environmentally?
>

Habitat loss and degradation

> >2.What is the problem that gets TOO mUCH media attention?

Everything gets so little attention, Its hard to say.

> >3.What is the major prolbem long-term?
>

Population, Global Climate Change, Global Habitat Loss

Mark Shippey

unread,
Feb 21, 1996, 3:00:00 AM2/21/96
to
Mike Conway (mcc....@mhs.adp.unc.edu) wrote:
: > >1.What does everyone consider the most important short-term hazard

: > >environmentally?
: >
:
: Habitat loss and degradation

Envrionmentalists who get caught up in illusions and promote propaganda
to convince the public of these illusions both of which wastes time and
gets in the way of solving real problems.

:
: > >2.What is the problem that gets TOO mUCH media attention?


:
: Everything gets so little attention, Its hard to say.

Reference above. The illusions tend to get too much media attention
because they give people something to believe in and are excellent ways
to sell publications, increase fundraising, generate membership in
organizations and expand political power.

: > >3.What is the major prolbem long-term?


: >
:
: Population, Global Climate Change, Global Habitat Loss

The major long term problem facing the world is economic and
technological development so that all people have a comfortable
lifestyle equal to that now enjoyed by the developed world. This,
along with increased education will lead to population balance,
increased food production and increased manufacturing to provide
all people with a high standard of living. As free enterprise
expands world-wide, this will lead to more scientific, techonolgical
and industrial breakthroughs that will bring to the marketplace
environmental solutions. All of the above combined with intelligent
resource management and protection are the most important problems
we are now faced with.

John M. Sully

unread,
Feb 22, 1996, 3:00:00 AM2/22/96
to

In article <4g03q2$e...@usenet.srv.cis.pitt.edu>, megs...@pitt.edu writes:

> 1.What does everyone consider the most important short-term hazard
> environmentally?

Biodiversity/Habitat Loss/Habitat Fragmentation

> 2.What is the problem that gets TOO mUCH media attention?

I don't think there is one which get too much media attention. The
media really don't pay much attention to environmental problems,
except to parrot the conservative "property rights" line these days.

> 3.What is the major prolbem long-term?

Overpopulaton, Global Warming, Biodiversity/Habitat Loss/Habitat
Fragmentation.

> I think Environmentalists should answer these Qs so as to come up
> with a more clear plan with which to lobby the Congress.

No problem, I think most groups have answered these questions and have
come up with answers similar to these. Basically, though it comes
down to one thing: there are too many people on the earth right now
making too many demands of it's resources. *All* of these problems
stem from the same root.

--John

Don Baccus

unread,
Feb 23, 1996, 3:00:00 AM2/23/96
to
In article <4gef5l$6...@fnord.dfw.net>,
Mark Shippey <kpri...@dfw.dfw.net> wrote:
>Mike Conway (mcc....@mhs.adp.unc.edu) wrote:

>: Habitat loss and degradation

> Envrionmentalists who get caught up in illusions...

Do you have evidence that habitat loss is an illusion?
--

- Don Baccus, Portland OR <do...@rational.com>
Nature photos, site guides, and other goodies at:
http://www.xxxpdx.com/~dhogaza

FMims

unread,
Feb 24, 1996, 3:00:00 AM2/24/96
to
The biggest environmental problem is misinformation in any form and from
any source. There is a moral imperative for misinformation to be revealed
by those who become aware of it.

Forrest M. Mims III

GlenY31305

unread,
Feb 25, 1996, 3:00:00 AM2/25/96
to
The biggest enviro problem would be education.This would include the
disinformation that is so common today.


Mark A. Friesel

unread,
Feb 26, 1996, 3:00:00 AM2/26/96
to

Thank you, thank you, thank you!!!!

Chris X. Guldi

unread,
Feb 27, 1996, 3:00:00 AM2/27/96
to

Kind of intresting everybody seems to think it's information. or more
appropiately misinformation. I am going to be starting a non-profit
organization to support, and teach about the environment
internationally. If anybody has any suggestions, ideas, or comments I
would appreciate this. Spread the word around I'd like to here from as
many people as possible.


Stuff my in-box please.


Chris X.

cxav...@airmail.net


Jamie Outlaw

unread,
Feb 28, 1996, 3:00:00 AM2/28/96
to cxav...@airmail.net
I think you should stress in your educational program
the importance of considering ALL sides of environmental
problems. I have seen too many people that ignore various
facts and/or theories simply because they are contradict
their opinions. I guess this falls under "misinformation".
I think it would be beneficial for you to discuss how
environmental standards are developed (ie. discharge standards
for municipal waste water plants, air emmissions standards, etc)
as well as what the various environmental laws mean and where
they apply.

The Ground Water Institute at The University of Memphis
is developing a similar program that will deal with
ground water flow and contaminant transport to educate
the general public. I would be interested in hearing
more specific information on your educational program.
ALso, we would be happy to provide some information to
you.


--
=========================================================
James Outlaw, Research Associate Phone: (901) 678-4315
Ground Water Institute Fax: (901) 678-3078
The University of Memphis
Memphis, Tennessee 38152
ja...@ce5.gwi.memphis.edu http://gwint1.gwi.memphis.edu
=========================================================


Chris Mentzel

unread,
Mar 2, 1996, 3:00:00 AM3/2/96
to
In my perception, the 70% of the population that consider themselves
'environmentalists' are the silent majority as opposed to the well
organized lobbyists of pollution.

The Planet needs a voice !

Aloha from Maui!

Chris
================================================================
I Save the Planet! Surf http://pkp.com for the most exciting I
I environmental organization today. If you do not have WWW I
I access, email to 'in...@pkp.com'. I
================================================================

Michael Tobis

unread,
Mar 3, 1996, 3:00:00 AM3/3/96
to
FMims (fm...@aol.com) wrote:
: The biggest environmental problem is misinformation in any form and from
: any source. There is a moral imperative for misinformation to be revealed
: by those who become aware of it.

My position is close to this. The biggest environmental problem
is the difficulty that the public has in a democracy in identifying
and implementing rational policy. The problem is not that misinformation
goes unchallenged or unrefuted. It is that it is very difficult for the
general public to identify which is the information and which the
misinformation.

I am not convinced the world is overpopulated yet given current
science and technology, but it appears to have already exceeded
the supportable population given its social and political maturity.
Though technically feasible solutions exist, they cannot be identified
by the political process and implemented. The problem traces not
only to the existence of misinformation but also to its persistence.

Democracy under the technologies of mass communication has become
almost purely adversarial. The central environmental
problem in my opinion is that society at large is hypnotized by
a vindictive and secretive model of discourse peddled by journalists,
lawyers, and many politicians. This situation makes the identification
of genuine expertise, an intrinsically difficult endeavor, spectacularly
more difficult. So the public is left utterly confused even as to which
environmental issues are real and which are fabrications. A measured
and appropriate response, though it may exist, is rarely found.

Science presents a model for progress that, while containing an adversarial
component, is ultimately based on a shared search for rational truth.
If there is a solution to our situation avoiding both catastrophe and
totalitarianism it must lie in the advance of the scientific model
(a cooperative search for truth) over the judicial (a competitive
clash of models). This means more than intellectual honesty and a
willingness to question our own beliefs. It also includes a modicum of
respect for our rivals, an understanding that however misguided they may
be they surely are thinking and acting as they see fit. Regardless of
your point of view, however alarmist or skeptical, if you allow it to
become contempt, disrespect, and hostility towards your rival you are
making matters worse and not better.

To summarize, I think the greatest environmental problem is the shabby
and irresponsible state of what passes for discourse nowadays. I really
think that if there were more of a tendency to treat one another with
respect and open-mindedness, reasonable solutions to all our problems
would emerge and the sense of genuine progress (rather than mere chaotic
and pointless acceleration) would reappear. On the other hand if we
continue to behave like Serbs and Croats, we will proudly reduce the
world to rubble, each side righteously sure the fault belongs with the
others.

Ultimately our biggest problem is war, whether literal or figurative.

mt


John McCarthy

unread,
Mar 3, 1996, 3:00:00 AM3/3/96
to
Michael Tobis includes:

To summarize, I think the greatest environmental problem is
the shabby and irresponsible state of what passes for
discourse nowadays.

I can't agree. It would be quite dismal if Stanford were so
politically correct as to fire me on the basis of the opinions in my
Web page, but it is hard to say that it would have much effect on
infant mortality in Bangladesh.

As long as the world remains ununified, the effects of localized
stupidity will be overcome. If I am right about nuclear energy, the
experience of the countries going ahead with it will eventually affect
the U.S. Humanity has survived enormous quantities of shabby and
irresponsible discourse. No-one today remembers the shabby and
irresponsible religious discourse which caused persecutions, wars and
massacres. Think what had to be said in justification of the
extermination of the Albigensians.

--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/progress/

Steinn Sigurdsson

unread,
Mar 8, 1996, 3:00:00 AM3/8/96
to
In article <4hk30h$j...@main.freenet.hamilton.on.ca> af...@freenet.hamilton.on.ca (Scott Nudds) writes:


Michael Tobis (to...@skool.ssec.wisc.edu) wrote:
: Scott Nudds (af...@freenet.hamilton.on.ca) ignored the substance of
: a post he responded to and squawked: (excerpts)

: : SQUAWK mindless SQUAWK

: Yes this is exactly what I meant. Thanks for the fine example of
: the biggest environmental problem.

You have no hope of understanding the problem unless you know from
where it is originating.

Ah! I join Mike in thanking you for illustrating it so beautifully.

dcwhite

unread,
Mar 18, 1996, 3:00:00 AM3/18/96
to
In article <4hk30h$j...@main.freenet.hamilton.on.ca>,

af...@freenet.hamilton.on.ca (Scott Nudds) wrote:
>Michael Tobis (to...@skool.ssec.wisc.edu) wrote:
>: Scott Nudds (af...@freenet.hamilton.on.ca) ignored the
substance of
>: a post he responded to and squawked: (excerpts)
>
>: : SQUAWK mindless SQUAWK
>
>: Yes this is exactly what I meant. Thanks for the fine
example of
>: the biggest environmental problem.
>
> You have no hope of understanding the problem unless you
know from
>where it is originating.
>

I've had the misfortune to exchange several notes with Scott.
I know where the problem originates. Perhaps we can get
Scott talking with Archimedes Plutonium. Wouldn't that be a
sight? Those two would flame on each other so long that we
would never hear from either of them again. One can only
hope.

dcw...@phoenix.net

Scott Nudds

unread,
Mar 18, 1996, 3:00:00 AM3/18/96
to

On Mon, 18 Mar 1996, dcwhite wrote:
> I've had the misfortune to exchange several notes with Scott.
> I know where the problem originates.

Kiss me you fool!

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages