While I'm looking forward to Dr. Dick Stafford's
eventual posting of a word summary of his Equation 1.27, the issue above would challenge
the best minds as to what can actually be done, knowing our political and cultural inertia.
For this, I would even deign to "forgive"
Scott Abernathy and converse ...though it's easy enough to just say my piece and sit back (:\~
As the song goes:
"The sword of the Lord don't mean nuthin' to me if he won't get down on the people makin' such a mess of the land and sea..." I appreciate the sentiment but I'm not letting a song determine my
stance on public policy issues.
Is "getting down on the people" going to provide the technical biology fix that is needed?
I say it won't.
Question is, who really are making the mess?
Forest fires undermine the oxygen base which is an ingredient in creating atmospheric ozone.
Tell me in technical terms where the following is mistaken:
If we harvest timber to create fire breaks and thin the forests so fuel loads are reduced and fires are easier to put out, this reduces total burning. I realize that may not have been the timber companies' main objective, but technical biology must be biology first, politics second.
Also, this reduces the need to log in other forests as the demand was partly met by cutting trees that might otherwise have simply burned.
I think we definitely need to reign in our sloppy consumption patterns, and we can do so without any terribly anti-free-market measures.
Why should WE THE PEOPLE choose to destroy the planet? Answer: We don't! We can freely choose
to built the future sustainably.