September 29, 2006
-
Repent and be saved!
I have recently decided that I am not just spiritual, I am religious.
My religion is Environmentalism. As a disciple of this religion, it is
a duty to question my assumptions and dig deeply into the fundamental
assertions of this religion.A
major theme of my religion, spoken by me and others by me is this:
Humanity needs to redeem itself lest it face the apocalypse. If we do
not reduce our energy consumption, we will face the apocalypse. If we
do not reduce our population to sustainable levels before we run out of
our non-renewable resources, we will face the apocalypse. Our
redemption lies upon the path of reducing our energy consumption soon
enough that we have time to reduce our population without having to
face the apocalypse.My religion requires me to evangelize, to
bear witness. See, our redemptions don’t lie in our own beliefs and our
own actions. It will be all of us or none of us. To find redemption, we
must redeem all of humanity.If you wonder if I am overstating our problems with energy usage and population, you need to read this article. If you think I’m probably more or less right but you don’t really intuitively sense it, you need to read this article. If you get it and know that there is truth to what I’ve been talking about but have trouble explaining it, you need to read this article.
It
is long. It isn’t a hard read – the transcript is fairly “humorous”. It
will require a bit of ability to imagine the visual aids he is using,
and it will take you a while to read. Grab a cup of your favorite
beverage and give it time to sink in.“facts do not cease to exist because they’re ignored”
Aldous HuxleyFact:
The amount of oil we are currently pulling out of the ground amounts to
1.7 liters per person per day – 0.45 gallons. If you are using more
than 0.45 gallons a day – in every aspect of your life, you are using
it faster than we’re pulling it out of the ground.Fact: It is
impossible for us to continue pulling the current amount of oil out of
the ground indefinitely. It does not get “regenerated” – once its gone,
its gone.Fact: The average American diet requires over a gallon of oil a day to produce.
(also, if you’ve more time, read The Oil We Eat)Fact:
We consume far more energy than just what goes into our diet.
Commuting, computing, heating, lighting, power, clothing, etc.Fact:
After you get used to the total amount of energy you use, tack on the
energy your society uses in your name – how many gallons of oil does a
aircraft carrier burn anyway?
“I do not feel obliged to
believe that the same god who has endowed us with sense, reason and
intellect has intended us to forgo their use”
- GalileoFortunately,
my religion allows me to think and question as much as I can, but no
matter what angle I look at it from, the answer comes back the same -
we’re in deep deep trouble, and if redemption is “Good” and the
resource/population apocolypse is “Evil” we are clearly serving evil.
Both as a culture, and, in most cases, individually.My religion
offers me faith as well. I have faith that a sustainable lifestyle
exists that is fairly satisfying. A lifestyle that probably allows more
liesure time than I currently have. A lifestyle that is healthy and
long and has lots of good food. A lifestyle that allows me a moderate
amount of travel – plenty if I’ve the time for it. Allows me to have
music, wine, books and dance. A lifestyle that, given a reduced
population, leaves enough resources available that all we humans of
different cultures and beliefs can live in peace as long as we all
limit our consumption to this sustainable amount.But, for that
“paradise” to exist, we have to cut back, we have to use what reserves
we have remaining in a manner that lets us avoid the war and despair
and famine that is the only possible result of our current population
levels (let alone growth).Like many faiths, my faith is
fractured into many sects. The sect I belong to thinks that science and
technology are not inherently evil. They give us the capability to have
more and do more with amount of resources we have available – whatever
that amount happens to be. The inventions of the past century will
allow us to continue to be healthier and “richer” than our ancestors,
even if we reduce our consuption to sustainable levels – as long as we
also reduce our population.We have a choice between “paradise” and “hell”. We make and reaffirm that choice many times a day with every decision we make.
Kasanof
concluded with one of the most profound observations I’ve seen in
years, he says, in the same way, democracy can not survive over
population. Human dignity can not survive over population. Convenience
and decency cannot survive over population. As you put more and more
people into the world, the value of life not only decline it
disappears. It doesn’t matter if some one dies, the more people, there
are the less one individual matters.
- Dr. Albert BartlettWaste
not, want not. We’re wasting an amazing amount, and we are currently
heading towards a very nasty collision with the “want” side of the
aphorism.
Comments (3)
Okay, so all 3 links are the same article – that was actually a relief after getting through the first link.
I need warnings if I’m about to encounter math, I understand it well enough but I absolutely abhor it. 
I’m going to print out that article and reference it a lot. I have been saying for well over a decade now that the #1 problem in the world is too many people, but it’s damn near impossible to convince anyone to do anything about it. One year at ‘Con I argued with a friend of mine until I was blue in the face on this issue. He wholeheartedly agreed that overpopulation was the #1 problem, but he insisted he *had* to procreate because he was so intelligent (or so he thinks). And other friends of mine swear up and down that they absolutely do not ever want children, yet they haven’t done anything to make certain they won’t have children, which I don’t understand at all – why take the chance? Why add to the overpopulation by “accident” when it’s such an easy thing to take care of? Anyway, sorry for the rambling, I’ve got insomnia, dead tired but can’t fall asleep for anything. 
Mel
*nodnod*
I think I’ve mentioned before, but I do hope to have a child someday. My view of it is this : If each couple has 1 – 2 children and not every child grows up to have children (some are gay, some are celibate, some are infertile, some die), we’ve got a significantly negative population growth.
I’ve got a magnet on my desk that quotes Ghandi – “Be the change you wish to see in the world.”. Its a fair challenge, and I am certainly working on that, but ultimately I retain too much selfishness to be willing to be MORE than the change I wish to see in the world.
I believe that a reasonably steep decline in population combined with a quite steep decline in energy consumption and we’ll be OK.
Ultimately, we’re going to get it one way or another. The stored energy will run out and if we haven’t stretched it far enough to get our population down in time, things are going to happen more painfully.
At least your honest about your opinion and position, I can respect that. I guess from my point of view I feel about this issue how Thidwick feels about people driving cars; if everyone thinks that their contribution to the problem is so small it doesn’t have a negative impact, then no one changes their ways and we are doomed. Unfortunately, I see very many families today with 3 or more children. It is because we are raised in a society that very sincerely teaches us, even if subconsciously, that being single and/or childless is “abnormal”. I’m certainly not arguing the issue of being a good parent versus a bad parent; that simply won’t matter. As I pointed out to Thidwick in the past, we can raise children with all the best of everything to teach them right, but we cannot control what another person will do once they are free of the restraints of childhood. We have no way of knowing if “Joe” will turn out to be gay, or if despite being gay he will find a female friend to procreate with anyway. I’m not trying to be a bitch or anything, I understand where you are coming from as I was there myself about 10 years ago, but for me the longer I went without having kids the easier it was to see that I didn’t really want them anyway. So I do understand the biological need to have children.
Melissa