Michael, I tend to be a little metaphorical or something in my statements, but raping the land means abusing it against the rules of nature, I guess. American farmers may be productive, but because of the way they farm the land gets worn out very quickly, and has to rest every few years. This is called lying fallow. The insecticides they use poison the land, and actually the groundwater under it as well. And the powerful machinery that is used to till the land causes much of it to be lost--ending up as dust, and silt in creeks--every year. America has actually lost much of its topsoil. I am not a plant scientist, and I do not have specific figures, but they are easily attainable.
I went to U.C. Davis, which began as an agriculture university. I am very aware of what happens on farms already. Using land effectively includes nurturing it, conserving it, and not poisoning it. American agriculture is a huge business. There is nothing in it about loving and conserving the land, just using it until it gives out. The chemical companies pay universities millions of dollar every year to do research for them on pesticides, etc. Ditto for the biogenetic engineering companies. It really compromises the integrity of the research, I think. And since the state of California needs big business to support its public university system, the state is also very much in the hands of big agriculture. They also have a hugely powerful lobby.
When individual farmers tilled the land, they wanted to preserve it, to feed their families and the rest of the nation from its bounty, but to continuallly restore and maintain it as well, so it could feed subsequent generations. Now most farmland is owned by huge supermarket chains, etc. They want the land to keep working so they can make money, but there isn't any love or nurture involved. They are really out of touch with the earth, and poison it and degrade it whenever that makes a profit for them. When the demand for organic produce becomes profitable, then they will change, but not before. Since the dangers of pesticides are not really brought out by U.S. government agencies, that is going to take awhile to happen.
There was an article in the "San Francisco Chronicle" yesterday, from the AP news service, about a town called Quincy in Washington state, where it had been discovered that fertilizers were full of low-level radioactive waste, lead, poisons, etc. Apparently the government has absolutely no standards whatsoever for what goes into fertilizers, although most industrialized countries do so. Did anyone else see this? It amazed me how little government regulates the safety of our food production.
Michael, lots of people here have given you a lot of scientific evidence about global warming, melting ice caps, dying fish populations, etc. Derek wrote about how he had watched glaciers retreat. We have satellite pictures of the holes in the ozone, getting bigger every year. What I am really curious about is your underlying motivation in insisting--a lot of measurable evidence to the contrary--that most of this is some sort of a liberal conspiracy, or something, nothing to worry about.
I realize I am simplifying your responses, but basically, no matter what anyone says you always keep the same position. I understand that some of the scientists who predicted global warming in the 70's and early 80's got the time predictions wrong. But I don't understand why that is a reason to say it isn't happening. It is very hard to predict exactly WHEN things will happen that have never happened before, but huge masses of scientific evidence certainly show they ARE happening.
You certainly don't have to share this here, because I realize it is a little bit of a personal question, but I know you are religious, and get a lot of information from your church. I'm wondering what your church tells you about global warming and the environment, and how they tie their position about it in with their religious teachings. Anyway, I'd like to know if you feel like telling me. |
