Environmentalism Goes Spaceship Earth

A new breed of environmentalist do-gooders has emerged, those who call for man to take charge of “Spaceship Earth.”

On a full-page spread, the Washington Post declared on January 3, 2011 “More and more environmentalists and scientists talk about the planet as a complex system, one that human beings must aggressively monitor, manage and sometimes reengineer. Kind of like a space ship, “Spaceship Earth.” In a leftist disingenuous fashion, the paper generalizes and exaggerates the number of environmentalists and scientists who think this way.

“The new way of thinking green” is a departure from “viewing nature as something that must be protected from human beings – not managed by them.” Mark Lynas writes in his book, “The God Species: Saving the Planet in the Age of Humans,” “Nature no longer runs the Earth, We do. It is our choice what happens from here.”

Who knew or even guessed that humans were so powerful that we could determine the movement of the stars, planets, the sun, the moon, weather, hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, floods, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions, and other natural calamities?

Emma Harris, another environmentalist, advocates for an interventionist and managerial role in the “restoration ecology” movement that manages forests and other natural systems.

The article talks about the wilderness movement of John Muir in the 19th century and Teddy Roosevelt’s in the 20th century, which “sought to draw boundaries between civilization and nature.”

Rachel Carson’s book, “Silent Spring,” giving “detailed” ecological damage such as singing birds disappearing, managed to ban DDT, the only pesticide that kept mosquitoes under control. Three million people die each year from malaria thanks in part to Rachel Carson’s unfounded scaremongering.

Eco-protectors cite ice core drillings in Greenland that show a “chemical signature of the Industrial Revolution.” What the author fails to mention is that ice core drillings in the Arctic have shown pollution from Roman times when they did not necessarily have an Industrial Revolution and the planet had less, much less than 7 billion people.

“Influential thinkers” believe that invasive species that have stowed away on planes and boats and migrated from one area of the planet to another should no longer be eradicated but “relocated” in order to stay ahead of climate changes.” What a huge undertaking that would be, and who will pay for it?

Stewart Brand, “the dean of technological environmentalism,” a 1960s hippie who wrote “Whole Earth Catalog” in 1968, promotes in his “Whole Earth Discipline: An Ecopragmatist Manifesto” the use of genetically modified organisms and nuclear power, “solar radiation management” through cloud-seeding, and “geo-engineering” to control climate change.

Another expert on greenology, my word for the faux science of environmentalism, Albert Borgmann, a professor of philosophy at the University of Montana, is concerned about overreliance on technology “to fix problems that humans have made.” I did take a course in philosophy in my lengthy college career and I know that it had nothing to do with science.

Another expert greenologist said that the March 11, 2011 earthquake in Japan “wasn’t supposed to be possible.” That is because science was only prepared for an earthquake of 8.4 on Richter scale, not a 9.0, and the generated tsunami waves were 18.7 feet high, far exceeding the planned 13 feet. Nature could have been controlled and harnessed if science would have been more accurate. Generators were located too low. Japan is an island, which by definition, no matter where you locate something, it is going to be low in some areas or possibly below the sea level.

Activist Bill McKibben published “Eaarth” in 2011 in which he advocates for “a new planet, not so pleasant for human beings, with new values and aspirations.” In case you are anxious to know what such planet would look like, it will be “decentralized in political power, energy generation and food production.” In his mind, decentralized power would prevent “small problems from exploding into societal catastrophes.”

“The future should belong, and could belong, to the small and many, not the big and few.” (Bill McKibben)

Richard B. Alley, Penn State climate scientist and author of “Earth: The Operator’s Manual,” said, “We are as gods and have to get good at it.” I personally only recognize one God and I am a mere blink in His plan.

We have been around this type of tribalism, which resulted in extinction from disease, lack of food, lack of energy sources, proper shelter, clothing, draughts, lack of mobility, invasions of pests, and of neighboring tribes. I do not think humanity would like to revisit such a societal organization. Only in the warped minds of a few greenologists would return to the sordid and uncivilized past is a great idea. We are not gods and we need a well-organized society in order to live and thrive. If we unite and work in cooperation, we survive. If we divide into small tribes and communities, we fail miserably.