Looks like I'm not the only one thinking about the consequences of human actions on the environment and the importance of research. We gotta keep an eye on this stuff...:


http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7506109.stm

Thinking about a friend who wants to quit smoking. It seems like there are a lot of people thinking about quitting now that there is the smoking ban and they have to think about their smoking more often. Thinking about the habit gets in the way of the habit itself, and smokers seem to realize that every time they light up, they have a choice. I don't mind if people smoke, but yeah, one person's smoking effects everyone. Now that there is no smoking most places, people aren't so used to it and it seems to smell more, and when they notice, they are less tolerant. I noticed that I smelled smoke yesterday driving down the street. I could smell the smoke of someone puffing on the sidewalk in my truck without the heat on and with the windows rolled up. That's how strong that stuff actually is, how far it permeates, and how little I noticed it before, even though I don't personally smoke.

That lead to the thought of car exhaust. Can you imagine how clean the air would be, how much we'd notice one vehicle's stink, if the majority were no longer driving? How much we'd resent that one person for smelling up the place and making everyone else smell with it. When a smoker goes outside and smokes and then comes back in you'll notice the smell on their clothes, hair, breath. What would the world be like if a car driver walked into the cafe and you could smell the exhaust on their clothes because most of the people there walked or rode their bikes and didn't smell. We can't smell it now, because our air is full of it, our noses are so used to it we couldn't smell it if we tried. We'll notice when we take a trip to the mountains, or the forest, and then come back, but this is air we're talking about. Those places may have less stuff in the air than the city, but there is crap in the air there too that drifts in. There is nowhere on the planet that doesn't have a little.

Now, if only we could find a link between car exhaust and rising cancer rates, or even asthma and increased allergies. Something that'll be more tangible, something personal, because apparently the destruction of the planet and climactic change is too abstract and big for people to grasp and take a personal responsibility to change. Something that'll hit home every time we get into a vehicle and choose to drive. Something real to factor in and remember that driving is a habit, and having to think about that habit gets in the way, makes the choice conscious. Something like "Do I really want to drive there and arrive all smelly?"

So I'm reading Yahoo news and I look over at the ad. It said something about wildlife studies being "pork barrel" spending aka. a pointless waste of tax money. I could go on and on about wildlife and the importance of the environment for it's own merit, plus the benefits we reap on this planet because of the interconnected web of life, but I really don't think these arguments would get through to these people. So I got to thinking about the canary in the coal mine. The old miners would bring a canary down with them, being smaller and more sensitive to the air quality and other environmental factors, the canary functioned as an early warning system. If something happened to that bird the miners knew they had to either get out of there, or change something in their environment or they would be effected next. The wild lands and wildlife research often acts as a canary early warning system for people. If all the fish and frogs drop dead, don't drink the water right?

Back to the mines, what happens when no one pays any attention to the canary? The carbon dioxide just sneaks up and kills everyone. What happens when no one wants to pay for the canaries anymore? Then it is only a matter of time then until humans are in crisis because there was no warning and no ability to prepare. Then people die. That doesn't seem like a very effective plan to me. I'd call cutting wildlife research spending short sited, but that would just be a nice way of calling them blind.