Thoughts about some of, quite a lot of, the sane local adults behaviours.

For an adult to be burning wood, etc, on their land or in their garden, the following psychological condition must be present:

1. They don't understand that smoke pollution is harming their own health (Ignorance)

This conditions must be present because, for an adult to understand that, for example, smoke inhalation increases the probability of developing dementia, respiratory & cardiovascular diseases, etc, but to choose to expose themselves to smoke pollution anyway, would be an insane behaviour.

Ignorance causes implicit self harming behaviours.

#psychology #education #SmokePollution

Thoughts about some of, quite a lot of, the sane local adults behaviours.

For an adult to be burning wood, etc, on their land or in their garden, the following two psychological conditions must be present:

1. They don't understand that smoke pollution is harming their own health (Ignorance)

And

2. They don't care that smoke pollution is harming their own health.

Those two conditions must be present because, for an adult to understand that, for example, smoke inhalation increases the probability of developing dementia, respiratory & cardiovascular diseases, but to choose to expose themselves to smoke pollution anyway, would be an insane behaviour.

Ignorance causes implicit self harming behaviours.

#psychology #education #SmokePollution

Thoughts about some of, quite a lot of, the sane local adults behaviours.

For an adult to be burning wood, etc, on their land or in their garden, the following two psychological conditions must be present:

1. They don't understand that smoke pollution is harming their own health (Ignorance)

And

2. They don't care that smoke pollution is harming their own health.

Those two conditions must be present because, for an adult to understand that, for example, smoke inhalation increases the probability of developing dementia, respiratory & cardiovascular diseases, but to choose to expose themselves to smoke pollution anyway, would be an insane behaviour.

#psychology #education #SmokePollution

How to (really) stop the greenwashers.

*Prior knowledge needed to understand this post.

*Subjective = thoughts. What people think, believe, and say. What they may understand or not understand. What they may be honest or dishonest about.

*Objective = actions (activities). What people do and the effects of what they do.

*Thoughtlessness = Not thinking about the effects of actions (including behaviours). For example, not being consciously aware of medical knowledge (not informed or educated), which is the scientific literature (the consensus of that literature) that infers that air pollution is harmful.

*Delusion & illusion = How aligned are the subjective perceptions with objective reality? For example, if a person mistakenly believed that breathing in smoke was healthy, the research, the medical evidence, infers that that person is deluded. Or if a person did not generally think about smoke pollution, that is a, comparably, thoughtless psychology, or a lack of knowledge, that manifest as behaviours that cause harm. So, a delusion is an incorrect belief (perception) that causes harm. Whilst a benign or constructive belief can be termed an illusion (or in some contexts, an adaptation).

Being greenwashed is being deluded (because it causes harm). Therefore, intentional greenwashes are immoral. They know their disinformation is causing harm – they do it anyway (because they’re, comparably, immoral).
When thinking about sustaining ecology ("protecting the environment" or "saving the world"), what organizations are actually (objectively) leading the way? (Are leading by example) Which politicians or industry spokespeople are talking sense or nonsense? Which people are genuinely wanting to sustain ecology and which people are full of BS? Which people are informed, and which people are deluded?

There is so much greenwash & semi-greenwash - it would be constructive to credit those that are demonstrating that they are genuinely leading the way (on environmental issues). Leading by example, not leading people astray with their fake "green" BS. It would be constructive if greenwashes did not profit from their lies. However, the biggest greenwashes on Earth, the fuel industries, are making more profits than at any time in human history. The industries that have deluded so many are being rewarded for their criminal activities (have not been punished for them) https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/climate-deception-dossiers

It takes the knowledge of science to know what is, and what is not greenwash. Understanding that air pollution is harmful requires knowledge of the sciences of chemistry and biology. There are people that understand that air pollution is harmful. There are people that don’t understand, though they believe, or not, that air pollution is harmful, depending on what source of information they trust. Depending on who they trust, and which industries and politicians they trust. There are people that understand that air pollution is harmful, but say the opposite of that in public. In other words, some people become deluded (greenwashed) because they mistakenly trust the people, the industries, and the politicians, that lie about what they understand. Now, this disinformation would be mitigated “overnight” if the majority of people were generally scientifically literate, Unfortunately, that level of education won’t happen “overnight” because many adults are scientifically illiterate, and some adults are even anti-science (due to ignorance, paranoia and greenwash).

Whilst the fossil fuel industries and their associates are those that are most guilty of greenwash, there is also semi-greenwash. There are multitudes of semi-greenwash examples to choose from. For one example, the UK delivery company DPD advertises its "green" credentials by stating that some of its vehicles use biofuels. Burning biofuels is not "green". Suggesting that using biofuels is green – is greenwash. Biofuels are only less polluting when compared to the most polluting fuels such as diesel. Producing biofuels is not "green". Burning biofuels causes air pollution (therefore diseases) & Carbon Dioxide (though less CO2 than, for example, burning coal, diesel, or petrol). Therefore, biofuels are the opposite of "green". Advertising or promoting biofuels as “green” is mismarketing.

How to (really) stop the greenwashing.

This is not “rocket science”! (its ecology). There should be, must be, a (financially) independent science-based regulator, that provides guidelines on what is "green" & what is not. With the authority to stop greenwashing (e.g., fine greenwashes if they don’t comply with those guidelines. Close the repeat greenwash offending businesses). Of course, the greenwashes don’t want there to be a green regulatory authority. The explicit greenwashes are already demonstrating that they are immoral – so what they want (their cognitive bias), isn’t good for our cultures. In other words, we should not care about what “they” want (as their wants are causing an ecological crisis)

The UK delivery company, DPD, amongst many others, also incorrectly advertises its "recycled plastic" as "green". When in fact, true " green" is not using (fossil fuel-based) plastic in the packaging.

In summary, the "green" that many industries advertise, is nothing more than, at best, slightly less polluting. A national green regulator would be comparably easy to set up. Organisations that comply could be awarded a true green logo, that they can put on their products & services (e.g., electric delivery trucks). In other words, the businesses that are at least not greenwashing consumers and are using the best available sustainable methods. Without an effective regulator, greenwash will never be mitigated (there are too many people that are ignorant about what is "green" & or will lie for money).

A green regulator is not “rocket science” (complicated). We already use, for example, a 1,2,3, etc, or an A, B, C, etc, or a star rating system on product energy rating.
The green regulator can use an “eco’ rating traffic light system. For example:

1. Green = businesses (models) that are (scientifically) evaluated as being ecologically sustainable - are to be the only businesses that can use the true green logo on their products and services.

2. Amber = businesses that are (scientifically) evaluated as being not presently ecologically sustainable, however, have demonstrated that they are actively improving. Aiming to be ecologically sustainable.

3. Red = businesses that are (scientifically) evaluated as being not ecologically sustainable. And cannot be ecologically sustainable (not objectively possible. Not practical). Those businesses that are demonstrating that they are not ecologically sustainable and there is insufficient scope for improvement. For example, the coal industry (the fossil fuel industry).

Branded as criminals (because they are) = Those businesses that are demonstrating that they are not ecologically sustainable can never be ecologically sustainable but are deceiving the public about this. For example, the fossil fuel and biofuel industries (e.g., businesses that sell and promote Carbon-based fuels using “green” tech-sounding nonsense. E.g., “carbon capture”).

Note – some people may say, to paraphrase “why should scientists be the authority of what is green or is not green?. Who put them in charge!”. However, that’s an ignorant and biased point of view. A science-based regulator is only the organisation that is needed to make sure that businesses concur with the science. Because the regulator is based on the scientific literature, anyone that is knowledgeable of the scientific literature can know if, or not, that regulator is being scientifically informed (i.e., a transparent regulatory system in which any knowledgeable person can critically evaluate that system. i.e., a peer review regulator). This means that the regulatory system can be apolitical and only favour businesses that are demonstrating their green credentials. To reiterate, because there are many industries & lifestyles that are harming ecology, there are many people that will be against a scientific green regulator (there is a psychological reason why humans are trashing the planet & that reason isn’t prudence [a well-intended and informed intelligence])

So, if we have the knowledge to understand what is “green” (sustainable methods) and what is not - plus we can easily implement a scientific overseer to evaluate businesses' “green” credentials, what is stopping us? Are Ignorant and or immoral humans preventing “us” from sustaining ecology? The greedy greenwashes (the liars) are greenwashing the ignorant. The corrupt politicians that, on the one “hand” talk about mitigating climate change, and yet, on the other “hand” advocate opening a coal mine (e.g., UK’s Conservative party). Why don’t they advocate a green regulator that is “following the science”? Is it because they’re (rich &) corrupted by their own personal vested interests (rhetorical questions)

Fundamentally, mitigating human-caused climate change (ecological degradation), is about mitigating ignorance and corruption (crime). We honestly can sustain our environments (“nature”), but dishonesty and corruption mean they, the decision makers, are not (in general). To turn the “tide” of ecological destruction around, to reverse that trend, honesty must pay! Reverse the trend that, for example, the fossil fuel industries are making profits from their corruption (profit from their harm). Those that exploit nature, that exploit people's trust, are the worst of us (they must not be rewarded).

Sociopathological behaviours and ecocidal behaviours must not be rewarded!

#knowledge #intelligence #science #ecology #AirPollution

#politics #business #economics

#AntiIntelligence #GreenWash #propaganda #FossilFuelIndustry #BioFuels #WoodFuels #SmokePollution

How to (really) stop the greenwashers.

*Priors.

*Subjective = thoughts. What people think, believe, and say. What they may understand or not understand. What they may be honest or dishonest about.

*Objective = actions (activities). What people do and the effects of what they do.

*Thoughtlessness = Not thinking about the effects of actions (including behaviours). For example, not being consciously aware of medical knowledge (not informed or educated), which is the scientific literature (the consensus of that literature) that infers that air pollution is harmful.

*Delusion & illusion = How aligned are the subjective perceptions with objective reality? For example, if a person mistakenly believed that breathing in smoke was healthy, the research, the medical evidence, infers that that person is deluded. Or if a person did not generally think about smoke pollution, that is a, comparably, thoughtless psychology, or a lack of knowledge, that manifest as behaviours that cause harm. So, a delusion is an incorrect belief (perception) that causes harm. Whilst a benign or constructive belief can be termed an illusion (or in some contexts, an adaptation).

Being greenwashed is being deluded (because it causes harm). Therefore, intentional greenwashes are immoral. They know their disinformation is causing harm – they do it anyway (because they’re, comparably, immoral).
When thinking about sustaining ecology ("protecting the environment" or "saving the world"), what organizations are actually (objectively) leading the way? (Are leading by example) Which politicians or industry spokespeople are talking sense or nonsense? Which people are genuinely wanting to sustain ecology and which people are full of BS? Which people are informed, and which people are deluded?

There is so much greenwash & semi-greenwash - it would be constructive to credit those that are demonstrating that they are genuinely leading the way (on environmental issues). Leading by example, not leading people astray with their fake "green" BS. It would be constructive if greenwashes did not profit from their lies. However, the biggest greenwashes on Earth, the fuel industries, are making more profits than at any time in human history. The industries that have deluded so many are being rewarded for their criminal activities (have not been punished for them) https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/climate-deception-dossiers

It takes the knowledge of science to know what is, and what is not greenwash. Understanding that air pollution is harmful requires knowledge of the sciences of chemistry and biology. There are people that understand that air pollution is harmful. There are people that don’t understand, though they believe, or not, that air pollution is harmful, depending on what source of information they trust. Depending on who they trust, and which industries and politicians they trust. There are people that understand that air pollution is harmful, but say the opposite of that in public. In other words, some people become deluded (greenwashed) because they mistakenly trust the people, the industries, and the politicians, that lie about what they understand. Now, this disinformation would be mitigated “overnight” if the majority of people were generally scientifically literate, Unfortunately, that level of education won’t happen “overnight” because many adults are scientifically illiterate, and some adults are even anti-science (due to ignorance, paranoia and greenwash).

Whilst the fossil fuel industries and their associates are those that are most guilty of greenwash, there is also semi-greenwash. There are multitudes of semi-greenwash examples to choose from. For one example, the UK delivery company DPD advertises its "green" credentials by stating that some of its vehicles use biofuels. Burning biofuels is not "green". Suggesting that using biofuels is green – is greenwash. Biofuels are only less polluting when compared to the most polluting fuels such as diesel. Producing biofuels is not "green". Burning biofuels causes air pollution (therefore diseases) & Carbon Dioxide (though less CO2 than, for example, burning coal, diesel, or petrol). Therefore, biofuels are the opposite of "green". Advertising or promoting biofuels as “green” is mismarketing.

How to (really) stop the greenwashing.

This is not “rocket science”! (its ecology). There should be, must be, a (financially) independent science-based regulator, that provides guidelines on what is "green" & what is not. With the authority to stop greenwashing (e.g., fine greenwashes if they don’t comply with those guidelines. Close the repeat greenwash offending businesses). Of course, the greenwashes don’t want there to be a green regulatory authority. The explicit greenwashes are already demonstrating that they are immoral – so what they want (their cognitive bias), isn’t good for our cultures. In other words, we should not care about what “they” want (as their wants are causing an ecological crisis)

The UK delivery company, DPD, amongst many others, also incorrectly advertises its "recycled plastic" as "green". When in fact, true " green" is not using (fossil fuel-based) plastic in the packaging.

In summary, the "green" that many industries advertise, is nothing more than, at best, slightly less polluting. A national green regulator would be comparably easy to set up. Organisations that comply could be awarded a true green logo, that they can put on their products & services (e.g., electric delivery trucks). In other words, the businesses that are at least not greenwashing consumers and are using the best available sustainable methods. Without an effective regulator, greenwash will never be mitigated (there are too many people that are ignorant about what is "green" & or will lie for money).

A green regulator is not “rocket science” (complicated). We already use, for example, a 1,2,3, etc, or an A, B, C, etc, or a star rating system on product energy rating.
The green regulator can use an “eco’ rating traffic light system. For example:

1. Green = businesses (models) that are (scientifically) evaluated as being ecologically sustainable - are to be the only businesses that can use the true green logo on their products and services.

2. Amber = businesses that are (scientifically) evaluated as being not presently ecologically sustainable, however, have demonstrated that they are actively improving. Aiming to be ecologically sustainable.

3. Red = businesses that are (scientifically) evaluated as being not ecologically sustainable. And cannot be ecologically sustainable (not objectively possible. Not practical). Those businesses that are demonstrating that they are not ecologically sustainable and there is insufficient scope for improvement. For example, the coal industry (the fossil fuel industry).

Branded as criminals (because they are) = Those businesses that are demonstrating that they are not ecologically sustainable can never be ecologically sustainable but are deceiving the public about this. For example, the fossil fuel and biofuel industries (e.g., businesses that sell and promote Carbon-based fuels using “green” tech-sounding nonsense. E.g., “carbon capture”).

Note – some people may say, to paraphrase “why should scientists be the authority of what is green or is not green?. Who put them in charge!”. However, that’s an ignorant and biased point of view. A science-based regulator is only the organisation that is needed to make sure that businesses concur with the science. Because the regulator is based on the scientific literature, anyone that is knowledgeable of the scientific literature can know if, or not, that regulator is being scientifically informed (i.e., a transparent regulatory system in which any knowledgeable person can critically evaluate that system. i.e., a peer review regulator). This means that the regulatory system can be apolitical and only favour businesses that are demonstrating their green credentials. To reiterate, because there are many industries & lifestyles that are harming ecology, there are many people that will be against a scientific green regulator (there is a psychological reason why humans are trashing the planet & that reason isn’t prudence [a well-intended and informed intelligence])

So, if we have the knowledge to understand what is “green” (sustainable methods) and what is not - plus we can easily implement a scientific overseer to evaluate businesses' “green” credentials, what is stopping us? Are Ignorant and or immoral humans preventing “us” from sustaining ecology? The greedy greenwashes (the liars) are greenwashing the ignorant. The corrupt politicians that, on the one “hand” talk about mitigating climate change, and yet, on the other “hand” advocate opening a coal mine (e.g., UK’s Conservative party). Why don’t they advocate a green regulator that is “following the science”? Is it because they’re (rich &) corrupted by their own personal vested interests (rhetorical questions)

Fundamentally, mitigating human-caused climate change (ecological degradation), is about mitigating ignorance and corruption (crime). We honestly can sustain our environments (“nature”), but dishonesty and corruption mean they, the decision makers, are not (in general). To turn the “tide” of ecological destruction around, to reverse that trend, honesty must pay! Reverse the trend that, for example, the fossil fuel industries are making profits from their corruption (profit from their harm). Those that exploit nature, that exploit people's trust, are the worst of us (they must not be rewarded).

Sociopathological behaviours and ecocidal behaviours must not be rewarded!

#knowledge #intelligence #science #ecology #AirPollution

#politics #business #economics

#AntiIntelligence #GreenWash #propaganda #FossilFuelIndustry #BioFuels #WoodFuels #SmokePollution

If they aren't looking after their own health?

A case example: You walk up to a random adult & express your concern about wood smoke pollution. The person takes the cigarette out of his \her, etc, mouth & argues using some random ignorant gibberish.

If an adult isn't looking after their own health that well, they won't have the knowledge or wisdom to know how to take care of a cultures health.

A significant percentage of adults choose to burn wood & coal. In that, they argue against anyone that says it's a bad idea.

Not (that) smart! (Are they!)

#CleanAir #Health #Climate
#SmokePollution #AirPollution #ClimateChange

If they aren't looking after their own health?

A case example: You walk up to a random adult & express your concern about smoke pollution. The person takes the cigarette out of his \her, etc, mouth & argues using some random ignorant gibberish.

If an adult isn't looking after their own health that well, they won't have the knowledge or wisdom to know how to take care of a cultures health.

A significant percentage of adults choose to burn wood & coal. In that, they argue against anyone that says it's a bad idea.

Not (that) smart! (Are they!)

#CleanAir #Health #Climate
#SmokePollution #AirPollution #ClimateChange

It's not always easy to admit being wrong. For example, about twenty five years ago l lived in a house with an open fireplace - back then, I didn't give much thought about using coal for home heating.

To qoute "Wood smoke is astonishingly harmful. Though only 8% of households in the UK (mostly wealthy ones) have a wood-burning stove, they release more small particulates (the most dangerous pollutants) than all the vehicles on the road. Even a modern, approved, “eco-friendly” wood burner produces 750 times as many fine particulates as a heavy goods vehicle."

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/dec/27/wood-burning-stove-environment-home-toxins?utm_term=Autofeed&CMP=twt_gu&utm_medium&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1672143085

In Cumbria, England, wood burning & coal burning are the norm, not the exception. For example, a brief walk outside in the local villiages or towns, can leave the clothes smelling of smoke. That's why locally, l always wear an air pollution face mask.

#climate #ClimateAction #health #CleanAir

#AirPollution #SmokePollution #disease #WoodStoves

Is your government ignorant?

Why are too many governments recklessly incompetent within the context of sustaining a healthy environment? Considering the state of the #environment is a "little" bit important (vast understatement).

Of course - there are many monetary agendas. But that on its own would not make a government make so many #ecocidal
decisions. Whilst the fossil fuel industries are making profits now - climate change will cost societies far more than any fossil fuel corporations' profits. We can't buy back ice sheets, sea level rise, droughts, ocean acidification, and destroyed habitats that take thousands of years to develop.

So, why so eco-stupid? (some governments)

Because I have more experience listening to the rhetoric of the UK's conservative party government - I will generally relate this toot to them. Maybe the following sounds similar to your government if you live in a different country.

Evidently, most, if not all, government politicians are *not* ecologists. Most of them have a business background (or lawyers, etc). - therefore, within the context of sustaining ecology, they don't have the necessary background knowledge to be aware of what sustaining ecology means, and why sustaining ecology is mission-critical for any definition of long-term success.

For example, talk to many business people & economists - and their minds are on business (& money) - not ecology. They're interested in buying shares for the sake of gaining a profit - not sustaining ecology. In fact, all too often those shares are in ecologically degrading "business as usual" industries.

Exploiting nature is big money in the business-as-usual "empire".

It's clear that something is missing from some government leaders (decision-makers). The science is clear that we are in midst of the 6th mass extinction (this time caused by human activity).

"We’ve encroached on (and sometimes wiped out) the habitats of other species; we’ve released pollutants into the air, soil, fresh water, and oceans; and we’ve even changed the atmosphere and climate.

These changes are beginning to disrupt Earth’s systems at global scales — and are occurring rapidly.

Because of our burning of fossil fuels, carbon dioxide levels are rising faster than they ever have at any point in Earth’s history. It’s no surprise then that extinction rates have risen substantially in the last 500 years" https://evolution.berkeley.edu/mass-extinction/the-earths-sixth-mass-extinction/

And yet, in her extremely brief time as the UK prime minister - all Liz Truss went on about was, to paraphrase "Growth, Growth, Growth". And the current Conservative prime minister Rishi Sunak - wasn't even planning to attend this year's Climate Conference. Talk about showing publicly how little climate dedication Mr Sunak has. Again - Mr Sunak is only another business person. He didn't make his wealth by restoring ecology - quite the opposite.

Of course, Sunak like all those that went before him - will speak climate "blah blah blah" and then generally do the opposite. The conservatives are planning on opening a coal mine in England, Cumbria, Whitehaven. Apparently, they believe that burning that coal won't affect their climate commitments. They're generally correct - because their climate commitments are crap anyway. So, burning that coal is just more evidence of their backward climate "plans".

Also - a regular narrative in the British media is how a coal mine will bring money to the Whitehaven area. Again - business rather than sustaining ecology. In other words, the "business as usual" agendas are causing the 6th mass extinction and climate change.

Also - a regular narrative in the British media is how the local people want a coal mine.

"Older groups, where I have found support for the mine to be most pronounced, recount their memories of when Whitehaven was a thriving industrial hub. They can recall how, throughout much of the 20th century, dozens of pits were open along the coast, and Whitehaven harbour, where coal was shipped to the rest of the world, was a frenzy of activity." https://theconversation.com/cumbria-coal-mine-how-to-understand-local-support-for-the-new-pit-196546

Many people in WhiteHaven (& Cumbria in general) are completely ignorant of ecology. They don't know that their ideologies are threatening the younger generation's futures. However, the conservative government is also promoting the opening of the coal mine. And on *average* - older people tend to be more conservative-leaning. Looking back to the past - rather than forward to the future.

Opening the coal mine is all part of the conservative party's ideas of more growth. But why not spend that money on renewables & renewable industry Jobs in Whitehaven? It's very close to the Solway Firth which has a tidal estuary - is it suitable for tidal renewable energy?

"100% Clean and Renewable Wind, Water, and Sunlight All-Sector Energy Roadmaps for 139 Countries of the World" https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2542435117300120

When you hear Conservative politicians squawking about "growth" - they are not talking about the growth that plants do. What they're actually saying is "construction, construction, and more construction".

And that's general their economic agenda - more construction. For example, the conservatives want to fund the construction of more roads. But, surely even they're not so ignorant to believe that we can just keep concreting and tarmacking over more wildlife habitats?

Or perhaps they really are that ignorant! To reiterate - talk to many business people & economists - and their minds are on business (& money). Not ecology.

Evidently, most, if not all, government politicians are not ecologists. Most of them have a business background. - therefore, within the context of sustaining ecology, they don't have the necessary background knowledge to be aware of what sustaining ecology means, and why sustaining ecology is mission-critical for any definition of success.

Can it be that simple? Can they be simply that ignorant? They simply do not really know what they are mismanaging (ecology!). They simply do not understand and their greed cognitively blinds them.

I think they can be that simple because they make simply ignorant decisions & policies. Ecocide policies! And that's why you hear Conservative politicians squawking about more construction - in the midst of a global extinction event. An extinction event that their types of sociopolitical and socioeconomic ideologies and agendas caused (& are causing).

That's business as usual. And if business as usual isn't stopped - that will be all folks! (too late? or at least climate change will make it harder to adapt).

That's also why they often don't take their own scientific advisors' recommendations seriously - many business-minded people simply do not understand ecology (& knowledge shapes our perception of reality). Of course, there are also those business people that do understand that their products are harming the environment - but they continue to promote (e.g., advertise) and manufacture them anyway (because that's their business).

"Internal Fossil Fuel Industry Memos Reveal Decades of Corporate Disinformation" https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/climate-deception-dossiers

What about the general electorate? How much about ecology do they understand? Nothing? A bit? Or do they read a lot of disinformation in the UK's tabloid press? And who owns and controls most of the press? Business people!

The more astute reader will have noticed a general social pattern that is the leading cause of environmental negligence and the exploitation of nature. Ignorance, apathy, and greed (corruption).

Simply uneducated (in ecology) minds not knowing how to manage a complex ecological system. "Business" isn't fundamental to a healthy ecosystem at all. "Business" is what we make and do with the planet's resources. And yet, "business" has already driven too many species extinct and is changing the planet's climate.

It's become more urgent that societies do "business" very differently. What forms of growth will mitigate "business as usual"?

Growing forests and developing peatlands sequester carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Because timing is of the essence - prudent governments will invest in the growth of natural habitats. The UK conservative party government subsidizes too many farmers to mismanage land using methods that degrade ecology. They are the losers! They simply don't know it (yet)

The Lake District National Park (LDNP), Cumbria (again), England, is one example, of many, that have the potential to sequester carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere. But, rather than listen to scientific advice - the conservative government promotes sheep farming (Carbon & methane emissions) and bird game reserves (they poison and shoot birds of prey).

“The data in this report clearly show that raptor persecution remains at a sustained high level, especially in England, with over two thirds of the incidents connected to land managed for gamebird shooting."
https://www.rspb.org.uk/about-the-rspb/about-us/media-centre/press-releases/birdcrime-report-2021/

Furthermore, reforesting and restoring peatlands will mitigate the increase in flooding that is occurring in the area - but it's evident that the national government, local councils, local businesses, and local people are having none of that ecological advice.

Crazy! Considering. Also, the Lake District National park consists of many local people that choose to burn coal and wood. Crazy! Considering the amounts of local smoke pollution means too many of their children have asthma (plus all the other smoke pollution-related diseases).

Conclusion: “use of wood stoves may be linked to as many as 30% of all cancers occurring in the region”. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/27.6.936

But, since their direction of travel is evidently backward (e.g., a new coal mine) - maybe they will also want to bring back child chimney sweeps. Just as there used to be in the British "good old days"

Since the Victorian age (1800's) human genetics hasn't changed - they are the same people. It would seem their minds have not kept pace with the changes in technologies and science either.

Stone-age minds #EvolutionaryPsychology

#LDNP #tradition #money #Dumbria #Cumbria #Fossilfuel #greenwash #culture #AirPollution #SmokePollution #disease #CoalBurning #WoodBurning #CoalMine #SheepFarming #SheepWrecked #WildlifeExtinction #ShootingAtBirds #religion #EcologicallyUnsustainableCulture #ScienceIlliteracy

#ClimateAction #ClimateJustice #education #youth #protest #ExtinctionRebelion #XR

Is your government ignorant?

Why are too many governments recklessly incompetent within the context of sustaining a healthy environment? Considering the state of the #environment is a "little" bit important (vast understatement).

Of course - there are many monetary agendas. But that on its own would not make a government make so many #ecocidal
decisions. Whilst the fossil fuel industries are making profits now - climate change will cost societies far more than any fossil fuel corporations' profits. We can't buy back ice sheets, sea level rise, droughts, ocean acidification, and destroyed habitats that take thousands of years to develop.

So, why so eco-stupid? (some governments)

Because I have more experience listening to the rhetoric of the UK's conservative party government - I will generally relate this toot to them. Maybe the following sounds similar to your government if you live in a different country.

Evidently, most, if not all, government politicians are *not* ecologists. Most of them have a business background (or lawyers, etc). - therefore, within the context of sustaining ecology, they don't have the necessary background knowledge to be aware of what sustaining ecology means, and why sustaining ecology is mission-critical for any definition of long-term success.

For example, talk to many business people & economists - and their minds are on business (& money) - not ecology. They're interested in buying shares for the sake of gaining a profit - not sustaining ecology. In fact, all too often those shares are in ecologically degrading "business as usual" industries.

Exploiting nature is big money in the business-as-usual "empire".

It's clear that something is missing from some government leaders (decision-makers). The science is clear that we are in midst of the 6th mass extinction (this time caused by human activity).

"We’ve encroached on (and sometimes wiped out) the habitats of other species; we’ve released pollutants into the air, soil, fresh water, and oceans; and we’ve even changed the atmosphere and climate.

These changes are beginning to disrupt Earth’s systems at global scales — and are occurring rapidly.

Because of our burning of fossil fuels, carbon dioxide levels are rising faster than they ever have at any point in Earth’s history. It’s no surprise then that extinction rates have risen substantially in the last 500 years" https://evolution.berkeley.edu/mass-extinction/the-earths-sixth-mass-extinction/

And yet, in her extremely brief time as the UK prime minister - all Liz Truss went on about was, to paraphrase "Growth, Growth, Growth". And the current Conservative prime minister Rishi Sunak - wasn't even planning to attend this year's Climate Conference. Talk about showing publicly how little climate dedication Mr Sunak has. Again - Mr Sunak is only another business person. He didn't make his wealth by restoring ecology - quite the opposite.

Of course, Sunak like all those that went before him - will speak climate "blah blah blah" and then generally do the opposite. The conservatives are planning on opening a coal mine in England, Cumbria, Whitehaven. Apparently, they believe that burning that coal won't affect their climate commitments. They're generally correct - because their climate commitments are crap anyway. So, burning that coal is just more evidence of their backward climate "plans".

Also - a regular narrative in the British media is how a coal mine will bring money to the Whitehaven area. Again - business rather than sustaining ecology. In other words, the "business as usual" agendas are causing the 6th mass extinction and climate change.

Also - a regular narrative in the British media is how the local people want a coal mine.

"Older groups, where I have found support for the mine to be most pronounced, recount their memories of when Whitehaven was a thriving industrial hub. They can recall how, throughout much of the 20th century, dozens of pits were open along the coast, and Whitehaven harbour, where coal was shipped to the rest of the world, was a frenzy of activity." https://theconversation.com/cumbria-coal-mine-how-to-understand-local-support-for-the-new-pit-196546

Many people in WhiteHaven (& Cumbria in general) are completely ignorant of ecology. They don't know that their ideologies are threatening the younger generation's futures. However, the conservative government is also promoting the opening of the coal mine. And on *average* - older people tend to be more conservative-leaning. Looking back to the past - rather than forward to the future.

Opening the coal mine is all part of the conservative party's ideas of more growth. But why not spend that money on renewables & renewable industry Jobs in Whitehaven? It's very close to the Solway Firth which has a tidal estuary - is it suitable for tidal renewable energy?

"100% Clean and Renewable Wind, Water, and Sunlight All-Sector Energy Roadmaps for 139 Countries of the World" https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2542435117300120

When you hear Conservative politicians squawking about "growth" - they are not talking about the growth that plants do. What they're actually saying is "construction, construction, and more construction".

And that's general their economic agenda - more construction. For example, the conservatives want to fund the construction of more roads. But, surely even they're not so ignorant to believe that we can just keep concreting and tarmacking over more wildlife habitats?

Or perhaps they really are that ignorant! To reiterate - talk to many business people & economists - and their minds are on business (& money). Not ecology.

Evidently, most, if not all, government politicians are not ecologists. Most of them have a business background. - therefore, within the context of sustaining ecology, they don't have the necessary background knowledge to be aware of what sustaining ecology means, and why sustaining ecology is mission-critical for any definition of success.

Can it be that simple? Can they be simply that ignorant? They simply do not really know what they are mismanaging (ecology!). They simply do not understand and their greed cognitively blinds them.

I think they can be that simple because they make simply ignorant decisions & policies. Ecocide policies! And that's why you hear Conservative politicians squawking about more construction - in the midst of a global extinction event. An extinction event that their types of sociopolitical and socioeconomic ideologies and agendas caused (& are causing).

That's business as usual. And if business as usual isn't stopped - that will be all folks! (too late? or at least climate change will make it harder to adapt).

That's also why they often don't take their own scientific advisors' recommendations seriously - many business-minded people simply do not understand ecology (& knowledge shapes our perception of reality). Of course, there are also those business people that do understand that their products are harming the environment - but they continue to promote (e.g., advertise) and manufacture them anyway (because that's their business).

"Internal Fossil Fuel Industry Memos Reveal Decades of Corporate Disinformation" https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/climate-deception-dossiers

What about the general electorate? How much about ecology do they understand? Nothing? A bit? Or do they read a lot of disinformation in the UK's tabloid press? And who owns and controls most of the press? Business people!

The more astute reader will have noticed a general social pattern that is the leading cause of environmental negligence and the exploitation of nature. Ignorance, apathy, and greed (corruption).

Simply uneducated (in ecology) minds not knowing how to manage a complex ecological system. "Business" isn't fundamental to a healthy ecosystem at all. "Business" is what we make and do with the planet's resources. And yet, "business" has already driven too many species extinct and is changing the planet's climate.

It's become more urgent that societies do "business" very differently. What forms of growth will mitigate "business as usual"?

Growing forests and developing peatlands sequester carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Because timing is of the essence - prudent governments will invest in the growth of natural habitats. The UK conservative party government subsidizes too many farmers to mismanage land using methods that degrade ecology. They are the losers! They simply don't know it (yet)

The Lake District National Park (LDNP), Cumbria (again), England, is one example, of many, that have the potential to sequester carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere. But, rather than listen to scientific advice - the conservative government promotes sheep farming (Carbon & methane emissions) and bird game reserves (they poison and shoot birds of prey).

“The data in this report clearly show that raptor persecution remains at a sustained high level, especially in England, with over two thirds of the incidents connected to land managed for gamebird shooting."
https://www.rspb.org.uk/about-the-rspb/about-us/media-centre/press-releases/birdcrime-report-2021/

Furthermore, reforesting and restoring peatlands will mitigate the increase in flooding that is occurring in the area - but it's evident that the national government, local councils, local businesses, and local people are having none of that ecological advice.

Crazy! Considering. Also, the Lake District National park consists of many local people that choose to burn coal and wood. Crazy! Considering the amounts of local smoke pollution means too many of their children have asthma (plus all the other smoke pollution-related diseases).

Conclusion: “use of wood stoves may be linked to as many as 30% of all cancers occurring in the region”. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/27.6.936

But, since their direction of travel is evidently backward (e.g., a new coal mine) - maybe they will also want to bring back child chimney sweeps. Just as there used to be in the British "good old days"

Since the Victorian age (1800's) human genetics hasn't changed - they are the same people. It would seem their minds have not kept pace with the changes in technologies and science either.

Stone-age minds #EvolutionaryPsychology

#LDNP #tradition #money #Dumbria #Cumbria #Fossilfuel #greenwash #culture #AirPollution #SmokePollution #disease #CoalBurning #WoodBurning #CoalMine #SheepFarming #SheepWrecked #WildlifeExtinction #ShootingAtBirds #religion #EcologicallyUnsustainableCulture #ScienceIlliteracy

#ClimateAction #ClimateJustice #education #youth #protest #ExtinctionRebelion #XR

Is your government ignorant?

Why are too many governments recklessly incompetent within the context of sustaining a healthy environment? Considering the state of the #environment is a "little" bit important (vast understatement).

Of course - there are many monetary agendas. But that on its own would not make a government make so many #ecocidal
decisions. Whilst the fossil fuel industries are making profits now - climate change will cost societies far more than any fossil fuel corporations' profits. We can't buy back ice sheets, sea level rise, droughts, ocean acidification, and destroyed habitats that take thousands of years to develop.

So, why so eco-stupid? (some governments)

Because I have more experience listening to the rhetoric of the UK's conservative party government - I will generally relate this toot to them. Maybe the following sounds similar to your government if you live in a different country.

Evidently, most, if not all, government politicians are *not* ecologists. Most of them have a business background (or lawyers, etc). - therefore, within the context of sustaining ecology, they don't have the necessary background knowledge to be aware of what sustaining ecology means, and why sustaining ecology is mission-critical for any definition of long-term success.

For example, talk to many business people & economists - and their minds are on business (& money) - not ecology. They're interested in buying shares for the sake of gaining a profit - not sustaining ecology. In fact, all too often those shares are in ecologically degrading "business as usual" industries.

Exploiting nature is big money in the business-as-usual "empire".

It's clear that something is missing from some government leaders (decision-makers). The science is clear that we are in midst of the 6th mass extinction (this time caused by human activity).

"We’ve encroached on (and sometimes wiped out) the habitats of other species; we’ve released pollutants into the air, soil, fresh water, and oceans; and we’ve even changed the atmosphere and climate.

These changes are beginning to disrupt Earth’s systems at global scales — and are occurring rapidly.

Because of our burning of fossil fuels, carbon dioxide levels are rising faster than they ever have at any point in Earth’s history. It’s no surprise then that extinction rates have risen substantially in the last 500 years" https://evolution.berkeley.edu/mass-extinction/the-earths-sixth-mass-extinction/

And yet, in her extremely brief time as the UK prime minister - all Liz Truss went on about was, to paraphrase "Growth, Growth, Growth". And the current Conservative prime minister Rishi Sunak - wasn't even planning to attend this year's Climate Conference. Talk about showing publicly how little climate dedication Mr Sunak has. Again - Mr Sunak is only another business person. He didn't make his wealth by restoring ecology - quite the opposite.

Of course, Sunak like all those that went before him - will speak climate "blah blah blah" and then generally do the opposite. The conservatives are planning on opening a coal mine in England, Cumbria, Whitehaven. Apparently, they believe that burning that coal won't affect their climate commitments. They're generally correct - because their climate commitments are crap anyway. So, burning that coal is just more evidence of their backward climate "plans".

Also - a regular narrative in the British media is how a coal mine will bring money to the Whitehaven area. Again - business rather than sustaining ecology. In other words, the "business as usual" agendas are causing the 6th mass extinction and climate change.

Also - a regular narrative in the British media is how the local people want a coal mine.

"Older groups, where I have found support for the mine to be most pronounced, recount their memories of when Whitehaven was a thriving industrial hub. They can recall how, throughout much of the 20th century, dozens of pits were open along the coast, and Whitehaven harbour, where coal was shipped to the rest of the world, was a frenzy of activity." https://theconversation.com/cumbria-coal-mine-how-to-understand-local-support-for-the-new-pit-196546

Many people in WhiteHaven (& Cumbria in general) are completely ignorant of ecology. They don't know that their ideologies are threatening the younger generation's futures. However, the conservative government is also promoting the opening of the coal mine. And on *average* - older people tend to be more conservative-leaning. Looking back to the past - rather than forward to the future.

Opening the coal mine is all part of the conservative party's ideas of more growth. But why not spend that money on renewables & renewable industry Jobs in Whitehaven? It's very close to the Solway Firth which has a tidal estuary - is it suitable for tidal renewable energy?

"100% Clean and Renewable Wind, Water, and Sunlight All-Sector Energy Roadmaps for 139 Countries of the World" https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2542435117300120

When you hear Conservative politicians squawking about "growth" - they are not talking about the growth that plants do. What they're actually saying is "construction, construction, and more construction".

And that's general their economic agenda - more construction. For example, the conservatives want to fund the construction of more roads. But, surely even they're not so ignorant to believe that we can just keep concreting and tarmacking over more wildlife habitats?

Or perhaps they really are that ignorant! To reiterate - talk to many business people & economists - and their minds are on business (& money). Not ecology.

Evidently, most, if not all, government politicians are not ecologists. Most of them have a business background. - therefore, within the context of sustaining ecology, they don't have the necessary background knowledge to be aware of what sustaining ecology means, and why sustaining ecology is mission-critical for any definition of success.

Can it be that simple? Can they be simply that ignorant? They simply do not really know what they are mismanaging (ecology!). They simply do not understand and their greed cognitively blinds them.

I think they can be that simple because they make simply ignorant decisions & policies. Ecocide policies! And that's why you hear Conservative politicians squawking about more construction - in the midst of a global extinction event. An extinction event that their types of sociopolitical and socioeconomic ideologies and agendas caused (& are causing).

That's business as usual. And if business as usual isn't stopped - that will be all folks! (too late? or at least climate change will make it harder to adapt).

That's also why they often don't take their own scientific advisors' recommendations seriously - many business-minded people simply do not understand ecology (& knowledge shapes our perception of reality). Of course, there are also those business people that do understand that their products are harming the environment - but they continue to promote (e.g., advertise) and manufacture them anyway (because that's their business).

"Internal Fossil Fuel Industry Memos Reveal Decades of Corporate Disinformation" https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/climate-deception-dossiers

What about the general electorate? How much about ecology do they understand? Nothing? A bit? Or do they read a lot of disinformation in the UK's tabloid press? And who owns and controls most of the press? Business people!

The more astute reader will have noticed a general social pattern that is the leading cause of environmental negligence and the exploitation of nature. Ignorance, apathy, and greed (corruption).

Simply uneducated (in ecology) minds not knowing how to manage a complex ecological system. "Business" isn't fundamental to a healthy ecosystem at all. "Business" is what we make and do with the planet's resources. And yet, "business" has already driven too many species extinct and is changing the planet's climate.

It's become more urgent that societies do "business" very differently. What forms of growth will mitigate "business as usual"?

Growing forests and developing peatlands sequester carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Because timing is of the essence - prudent governments will invest in the growth of natural habitats. The UK conservative party government subsidizes too many farmers to mismanage land using methods that degrade ecology. They are the losers! They simply don't know it (yet)

The Lake District National Park (LDNP), Cumbria (again), England, is one example, of many, that have the potential to sequester carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere. But, rather than listen to scientific advice - the conservative government promotes sheep farming (Carbon & methane emissions) and bird game reserves (they poison and shoot birds of prey).

“The data in this report clearly show that raptor persecution remains at a sustained high level, especially in England, with over two thirds of the incidents connected to land managed for gamebird shooting."
https://www.rspb.org.uk/about-the-rspb/about-us/media-centre/press-releases/birdcrime-report-2021/

Furthermore, reforesting and restoring peatlands will mitigate the increase in flooding that is occurring in the area - but it's evident that the national government, local councils, local businesses, and local people are having none of that ecological advice.

Crazy! Considering. Also, the Lake District National park consists of many local people that choose to burn coal and wood. Crazy! Considering the amounts of local smoke pollution means too many of their children have asthma (plus all the other smoke pollution-related diseases).

Conclusion: “use of wood stoves may be linked to as many as 30% of all cancers occurring in the region”. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/27.6.936

But, since their direction of travel is evidently backward (e.g., a new coal mine) - maybe they will also want to bring back child chimney sweeps. Just as there used to be in the British "good old days"

Since the Victorian age (1800's) human genetics hasn't changed - they are the same people. It would seem their minds have not kept pace with the changes in technologies and science either.

Stone-age minds #EvolutionaryPsychology

#LDNP #tradition #money #Dumbria #Cumbria #Fossilfuel #greenwash #culture #AirPollution #SmokePollution #disease #CoalBurning #WoodBurning #CoalMine #SheepFarming #SheepWrecked #WildlifeExtinction #ShootingAtBirds #religion #EcologicallyUnsustainableCulture #ScienceIlliteracy

#ClimateAction #ClimateJustice #education #youth #protest #ExtinctionRebelion #XR

Is your government ignorant?

Why are too many governments recklessly incompetent within the context of sustaining a healthy environment? Considering the state of the #environment is a "little" bit important (vast understatement).

Of course - there are many monetary agendas. But that on its own would not make a government make so many #ecocidal
decisions. Whilst the fossil fuel industries are making profits now - climate change will cost societies far more than any fossil fuel corporations' profits. We can't buy back ice sheets, sea level rise, droughts, ocean acidification, and destroyed habitats that take thousands of years to develop.

So, why so eco-stupid? (some governments)

Because I have more experience listening to the rhetoric of the UK's conservative party government - I will generally relate this toot to them. Maybe the following sounds similar to your government if you live in a different country.

Evidently, most, if not all, government politicians are *not* ecologists. Most of them have a business background (or lawyers, etc). - therefore, within the context of sustaining ecology, they don't have the necessary background knowledge to be aware of what sustaining ecology means, and why sustaining ecology is mission-critical for any definition of long-term success.

For example, talk to many business people & economists - and their minds are on business (& money) - not ecology. They're interested in buying shares for the sake of gaining a profit - not sustaining ecology. In fact, all too often those shares are in ecologically degrading "business as usual" industries.

Exploiting nature is big money in the business-as-usual "empire".

It's clear that something is missing from some government leaders (decision-makers). The science is clear that we are in midst of the 6th mass extinction (this time caused by human activity).

"We’ve encroached on (and sometimes wiped out) the habitats of other species; we’ve released pollutants into the air, soil, fresh water, and oceans; and we’ve even changed the atmosphere and climate.

These changes are beginning to disrupt Earth’s systems at global scales — and are occurring rapidly.

Because of our burning of fossil fuels, carbon dioxide levels are rising faster than they ever have at any point in Earth’s history. It’s no surprise then that extinction rates have risen substantially in the last 500 years" https://evolution.berkeley.edu/mass-extinction/the-earths-sixth-mass-extinction/

And yet, in her extremely brief time as the UK prime minister - all Liz Truss went on about was, to paraphrase "Growth, Growth, Growth". And the current Conservative prime minister Rishi Sunak - wasn't even planning to attend this year's Climate Conference. Talk about showing publicly how little climate dedication Mr Sunak has. Again - Mr Sunak is only another business person. He didn't make his wealth by restoring ecology - quite the opposite.

Of course, Sunak like all those that went before him - will speak climate "blah blah blah" and then generally do the opposite. The conservatives are planning on opening a coal mine in England, Cumbria, Whitehaven. Apparently, they believe that burning that coal won't affect their climate commitments. They're generally correct - because their climate commitments are crap anyway. So, burning that coal is just more evidence of their backward climate "plans".

Also - a regular narrative in the British media is how a coal mine will bring money to the Whitehaven area. Again - business rather than sustaining ecology. In other words, the "business as usual" agendas are causing the 6th mass extinction and climate change.

Also - a regular narrative in the British media is how the local people want a coal mine.

"Older groups, where I have found support for the mine to be most pronounced, recount their memories of when Whitehaven was a thriving industrial hub. They can recall how, throughout much of the 20th century, dozens of pits were open along the coast, and Whitehaven harbour, where coal was shipped to the rest of the world, was a frenzy of activity." https://theconversation.com/cumbria-coal-mine-how-to-understand-local-support-for-the-new-pit-196546

Many people in WhiteHaven (& Cumbria in general) are completely ignorant of ecology. They don't know that their ideologies are threatening the younger generation's futures. However, the conservative government is also promoting the opening of the coal mine. And on *average* - older people tend to be more conservative-leaning. Looking back to the past - rather than forward to the future.

Opening the coal mine is all part of the conservative party's ideas of more growth. But why not spend that money on renewables & renewable industry Jobs in Whitehaven? It's very close to the Solway Firth which has a tidal estuary - is it suitable for tidal renewable energy?

"100% Clean and Renewable Wind, Water, and Sunlight All-Sector Energy Roadmaps for 139 Countries of the World" https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2542435117300120

When you hear Conservative politicians squawking about "growth" - they are not talking about the growth that plants do. What they're actually saying is "construction, construction, and more construction".

And that's general their economic agenda - more construction. For example, the conservatives want to fund the construction of more roads. But, surely even they're not so ignorant to believe that we can just keep concreting and tarmacking over more wildlife habitats?

Or perhaps they really are that ignorant! To reiterate - talk to many business people & economists - and their minds are on business (& money). Not ecology.

Evidently, most, if not all, government politicians are not ecologists. Most of them have a business background. - therefore, within the context of sustaining ecology, they don't have the necessary background knowledge to be aware of what sustaining ecology means, and why sustaining ecology is mission-critical for any definition of success.

Can it be that simple? Can they be simply that ignorant? They simply do not really know what they are mismanaging (ecology!). They simply do not understand and their greed cognitively blinds them.

I think they can be that simple because they make simply ignorant decisions & policies. Ecocide policies! And that's why you hear Conservative politicians squawking about more construction - in the midst of a global extinction event. An extinction event that their types of sociopolitical and socioeconomic ideologies and agendas caused (& are causing).

That's business as usual. And if business as usual isn't stopped - that will be all folks! (too late? or at least climate change will make it harder to adapt).

That's also why they often don't take their own scientific advisors' recommendations seriously - many business-minded people simply do not understand ecology (& knowledge shapes our perception of reality). Of course, there are also those business people that do understand that their products are harming the environment - but they continue to promote (e.g., advertise) and manufacture them anyway (because that's their business).

"Internal Fossil Fuel Industry Memos Reveal Decades of Corporate Disinformation" https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/climate-deception-dossiers

What about the general electorate? How much about ecology do they understand? Nothing? A bit? Or do they read a lot of disinformation in the UK's tabloid press? And who owns and controls most of the press? Business people!

The more astute reader will have noticed a general social pattern that is the leading cause of environmental negligence and the exploitation of nature. Ignorance, apathy, and greed (corruption).

Simply uneducated (in ecology) minds not knowing how to manage a complex ecological system. "Business" isn't fundamental to a healthy ecosystem at all. "Business" is what we make and do with the planet's resources. And yet, "business" has already driven too many species extinct and is changing the planet's climate.

It's become more urgent that societies do "business" very differently. What forms of growth will mitigate "business as usual"?

Growing forests and developing peatlands sequester carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Because timing is of the essence - prudent governments will invest in the growth of natural habitats. The UK conservative party government subsidizes too many farmers to mismanage land using methods that degrade ecology. They are the losers! They simply don't know it (yet)

The Lake District National Park (LDNP), Cumbria (again), England, is one example, of many, that have the potential to sequester carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere. But, rather than listen to scientific advice - the conservative government promotes sheep farming (Carbon & methane emissions) and bird game reserves (they poison and shoot birds of prey).

“The data in this report clearly show that raptor persecution remains at a sustained high level, especially in England, with over two thirds of the incidents connected to land managed for gamebird shooting."
https://www.rspb.org.uk/about-the-rspb/about-us/media-centre/press-releases/birdcrime-report-2021/

Furthermore, reforesting and restoring peatlands will mitigate the increase in flooding that is occurring in the area - but it's evident that the national government, local councils, local businesses, and local people are having none of that ecological advice.

Crazy! Considering. Also, the Lake District National park consists of many local people that choose to burn coal and wood. Crazy! Considering the amounts of local smoke pollution means too many of their children have asthma (plus all the other smoke pollution-related diseases).

Conclusion: “use of wood stoves may be linked to as many as 30% of all cancers occurring in the region”. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/27.6.936

But, since their direction of travel is evidently backward (e.g., a new coal mine) - maybe they will also want to bring back child chimney sweeps. Just as there used to be in the British "good old days"

Since the Victorian age (1800's) human genetics hasn't changed - they are the same people. It would seem their minds have not kept pace with the changes in technologies and science either.

Stone-age minds #EvolutionaryPsychology

#LDNP #tradition #money #Dumbria #Cumbria #Fossilfuel #greenwash #culture #AirPollution #SmokePollution #disease #CoalBurning #WoodBurning #CoalMine #SheepFarming #SheepWrecked #WildlifeExtinction #ShootingAtBirds #religion #EcologicallyUnsustainableCulture #ScienceIlliteracy

#ClimateAction #ClimateJustice #education #youth #protest #ExstinctionRebbelion #XR

Is your government ignorant?

Why are too many governments recklessly incompetent within the context of sustaining a healthy environment? Considering the state of the #environment is a "little" bit important (vast understatement).

Of course - there are many monetary agendas. But that on its own would not make a government make so many #ecocidal
decisions. Whilst the fossil fuel industries are making profits now - climate change will cost societies far more than any fossil fuel corporations' profits. We can't buy back ice sheets, sea level rise, droughts, ocean acidification, and destroyed habitats that take thousands of years to develop.

So, why so eco-stupid? (some governments)

Because I have more experience listening to the rhetoric of the UK's conservative party government - I will generally relate this toot to them. Maybe the following sounds similar to your government if you live in a different country.

Evidently, most, if not all, government politicians are *not* ecologists. Most of them have a business background (or lawyers, etc). - therefore, within the context of sustaining ecology, they don't have the necessary background knowledge to be aware of what sustaining ecology means, and why sustaining ecology is mission-critical for any definition of long-term success.

For example, talk to many business people & economists - and their minds are on business (& money) - not ecology. They're interested in buying shares for the sake of gaining a profit - not sustaining ecology. In fact, all too often those shares are in ecologically degrading "business as usual" industries.

Exploiting nature is big money in the business-as-usual "empire".

It's clear that something is missing from some government leaders (decision-makers). The science is clear that we are in midst of the 6th mass extinction (this time caused by human activity).

"We’ve encroached on (and sometimes wiped out) the habitats of other species; we’ve released pollutants into the air, soil, fresh water, and oceans; and we’ve even changed the atmosphere and climate.

These changes are beginning to disrupt Earth’s systems at global scales — and are occurring rapidly.

Because of our burning of fossil fuels, carbon dioxide levels are rising faster than they ever have at any point in Earth’s history. It’s no surprise then that extinction rates have risen substantially in the last 500 years" https://evolution.berkeley.edu/mass-extinction/the-earths-sixth-mass-extinction/

And yet, in her extremely brief time as the UK prime minister - all Liz Truss went on about was, to paraphrase "Growth, Growth, Growth". And the current Conservative prime minister Rishi Sunak - wasn't even planning to attend this year's Climate Conference. Talk about showing publicly how little climate dedication Mr Sunak has. Again - Mr Sunak is only another business person. He didn't make his wealth by restoring ecology - quite the opposite.

Of course, Sunak like all those that went before him - will speak climate "blah blah blah" and then generally do the opposite. The conservatives are planning on opening a coal mine in England, Cumbria, Whitehaven. Apparently, they believe that burning that coal won't affect their climate commitments. They're generally correct - because their climate commitments are crap anyway. So, burning that coal is just more evidence of their backward climate "plans".

Also - a regular narrative in the British media is how a coal mine will bring money to the Whitehaven area. Again - business rather than sustaining ecology. In other words, the "business as usual" agendas are causing the 6th mass extinction and climate change.

Also - a regular narrative in the British media is how the local people want a coal mine.

"Older groups, where I have found support for the mine to be most pronounced, recount their memories of when Whitehaven was a thriving industrial hub. They can recall how, throughout much of the 20th century, dozens of pits were open along the coast, and Whitehaven harbour, where coal was shipped to the rest of the world, was a frenzy of activity." https://theconversation.com/cumbria-coal-mine-how-to-understand-local-support-for-the-new-pit-196546

Many people in WhiteHaven (& Cumbria in general) are completely ignorant of ecology. They don't know that their ideologies are threatening the younger generation's futures. However, the conservative government is also promoting the opening of the coal mine. And on *average* - older people tend to be more conservative-leaning. Looking back to the past - rather than forward to the future.

Opening the coal mine is all part of the conservative party's ideas of more growth. But why not spend that money on renewables & renewable industry Jobs in Whitehaven? It's very close to the Solway Firth which has a tidal estuary - is it suitable for tidal renewable energy?

"100% Clean and Renewable Wind, Water, and Sunlight All-Sector Energy Roadmaps for 139 Countries of the World" https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2542435117300120

When you hear Conservative politicians squawking about "growth" - they are not talking about the growth that plants do. What they're actually saying is "construction, construction, and more construction".

And that's general their economic agenda - more construction. For example, the conservatives want to fund the construction of more roads. But, surely even they're not so ignorant to believe that we can just keep concreting and tarmacking over more wildlife habitats?

Or perhaps they really are that ignorant! To reiterate - talk to many business people & economists - and their minds are on business (& money). Not ecology.

Evidently, most, if not all, government politicians are not ecologists. Most of them have a business background. - therefore, within the context of sustaining ecology, they don't have the necessary background knowledge to be aware of what sustaining ecology means, and why sustaining ecology is mission-critical for any definition of success.

Can it be that simple? Can they be simply that ignorant? They simply do not really know what they are mismanaging (ecology!). They simply do not understand and their greed cognitively blinds them.

I think they can be that simple because they make simply ignorant decisions & policies. Ecocide policies! And that's why you hear Conservative politicians squawking about more construction - in the midst of a global extinction event. An extinction event that their types of sociopolitical and socioeconomic ideologies and agendas caused (& are causing).

That's business as usual. And if business as usual isn't stopped - that will be all folks! (too late? or at least climate change will make it harder to adapt).

That's also why they often don't take their own scientific advisors' recommendations seriously - many business-minded people simply do not understand ecology (& knowledge shapes our perception of reality). Of course, there are also those business people that do understand that their products are harming the environment - but they continue to promote (e.g., advertise) and manufacture them anyway (because that's their business).

"Internal Fossil Fuel Industry Memos Reveal Decades of Corporate Disinformation" https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/climate-deception-dossiers

What about the general electorate? How much about ecology do they understand? Nothing? A bit? Or do they read a lot of disinformation in the UK's tabloid press? And who owns and controls most of the press? Business people!

The more astute reader will have noticed a general social pattern that is the leading cause of environmental negligence and the exploitation of nature. Ignorance, apathy, and greed (corruption).

Simply uneducated (in ecology) minds not knowing how to manage a complex ecological system. "Business" isn't fundamental to a healthy ecosystem at all. "Business" is what we make and do with the planet's resources. And yet, "business" has already driven too many species extinct and is changing the planet's climate.

It's become more urgent that societies do "business" very differently. What forms of growth will mitigate "business as usual"?

Growing forests and developing peatlands sequester carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Because timing is of the essence - prudent governments will invest in the growth of natural habitats. The UK conservative party government subsidizes too many farmers to mismanage land using methods that degrade ecology. They are the losers! They simply don't know it (yet)

The Lake District National Park (LDNP), Cumbria (again), England, is one example, of many, that have the potential to sequester carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere. But, rather than listen to scientific advice - the conservative government promotes sheep farming (Carbon & methane emissions) and bird game reserves (they poison and shoot birds of prey).

“The data in this report clearly show that raptor persecution remains at a sustained high level, especially in England, with over two thirds of the incidents connected to land managed for gamebird shooting."
https://www.rspb.org.uk/about-the-rspb/about-us/media-centre/press-releases/birdcrime-report-2021/

Furthermore, reforesting and restoring peatlands will mitigate the increase in flooding that is occurring in the area - but it's evident that the national government, local councils, local businesses, and local people are having none of that ecological advice.

Crazy! Considering. Also, the Lake District National park consists of many local people that choose to burn coal and wood. Crazy! Considering the amounts of local smoke pollution means too many of their children have asthma (plus all the other smoke pollution-related diseases).

Conclusion: “use of wood stoves may be linked to as many as 30% of all cancers occurring in the region”. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/27.6.936

But, since their direction of travel is evidently backward (e.g., a new coal mine) - maybe they will also want to bring back child chimney sweeps. Just as there used to be in the British "good old days"

Since the Victorian age (1800's) human genetics hasn't changed - they are the same people. It would seem their minds have not kept pace with the changes in technologies and science either.

Stone-age minds #EvolutionaryPsychology

#LDNP #tradition #money #Dumbria #Cumbria #Fossilfuel #greenwash #culture #AirPollution #SmokePollution #disease #CoalBurning #WoodBurning #CoalMine #SheepFarming #SheepWrecked #WildlifeExtinction #ShootingAtBirds #religion #EcologicallyUnsustainableCulture #ScienceIlliteracy

#ClimateAction #ClimateJustice #education #youth #protest #ExstinctionRebbelion #XR

Is your government ignorant?

Why are too many governments recklessly incompetent within the context of sustaining a healthy environment? Considering the state of the #environment is a "little" bit important (vast understatement).

Of course - there are many monetary agendas. But that on its own would not make a government make so many #ecocidal
decisions. Whilst the fossil fuel industries are making profits now - climate change will cost societies far more than any fossil fuel corporations' profits. We can't buy back ice sheets, sea level rise, droughts, ocean acidification, and destroyed habitats that take thousands of years to develop.

So, why so eco-stupid? (some governments)

Because I have more experience listening to the rhetoric of the UK's conservative party government - I will generally relate this toot to them. Maybe the following sounds similar to your government if you live in a different country.

Evidently, most, if not all, government politicians are *not* ecologists. Most of them have a business background (or lawyers, etc). - therefore, within the context of sustaining ecology, they don't have the necessary background knowledge to be aware of what sustaining ecology means, and why sustaining ecology is mission-critical for any definition of long-term success.

For example, talk to many business people & economists - and their minds are on business (& money) - not ecology. They're interested in buying shares for the sake of gaining a profit - not sustaining ecology. In fact, all too often those shares are in ecologically degrading "business as usual" industries.

Exploiting nature is big money in the business-as-usual "empire".

It's clear that something is missing from some government leaders (decision-makers). The science is clear that we are in midst of the 6th mass extinction (this time caused by human activity).

"We’ve encroached on (and sometimes wiped out) the habitats of other species; we’ve released pollutants into the air, soil, fresh water, and oceans; and we’ve even changed the atmosphere and climate.

These changes are beginning to disrupt Earth’s systems at global scales — and are occurring rapidly.

Because of our burning of fossil fuels, carbon dioxide levels are rising faster than they ever have at any point in Earth’s history. It’s no surprise then that extinction rates have risen substantially in the last 500 years" https://evolution.berkeley.edu/mass-extinction/the-earths-sixth-mass-extinction/

And yet, in her extremely brief time as the UK prime minister - all Liz Truss went on about was, to paraphrase "Growth, Growth, Growth". And the current Conservative prime minister Rishi Sunak - wasn't even planning to attend this year's Climate Conference. Talk about showing publicly how little climate dedication Mr Sunak has. Again - Mr Sunak is only another business person. He didn't make his wealth by restoring ecology - quite the opposite.

Of course, Sunak like all those that went before him - will speak climate "blah blah blah" and then generally do the opposite. The conservatives are planning on opening a coal mine in England, Cumbria, Whitehaven. Apparently, they believe that burning that coal won't affect their climate commitments. They're generally correct - because their climate commitments are crap anyway. So, burning that coal is just more evidence of their backward climate "plans".

Also - a regular narrative in the British media is how a coal mine will bring money to the Whitehaven area. Again - business rather than sustaining ecology. In other words, the "business as usual" agendas are causing the 6th mass extinction and climate change.

Also - a regular narrative in the British media is how the local people want a coal mine.

"Older groups, where I have found support for the mine to be most pronounced, recount their memories of when Whitehaven was a thriving industrial hub. They can recall how, throughout much of the 20th century, dozens of pits were open along the coast, and Whitehaven harbour, where coal was shipped to the rest of the world, was a frenzy of activity." https://theconversation.com/cumbria-coal-mine-how-to-understand-local-support-for-the-new-pit-196546

Many people in WhiteHaven (& Cumbria in general) are completely ignorant of ecology. They don't know that their ideologies are threatening the younger generation's futures. However, the conservative government is also promoting the opening of the coal mine. And on *average* - older people tend to be more conservative-leaning. Looking back to the past - rather than forward to the future.

Opening the coal mine is all part of the conservative party's ideas of more growth. But why not spend that money on renewables & renewable industry Jobs in Whitehaven? It's very close to the Solway Firth which has a tidal estuary - is it suitable for tidal renewable energy?

"100% Clean and Renewable Wind, Water, and Sunlight All-Sector Energy Roadmaps for 139 Countries of the World" https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2542435117300120

When you hear Conservative politicians squawking about "growth" - they are not talking about the growth that plants do. What they're actually saying is "construction, construction, and more construction".

And that's general their economic agenda - more construction. For example, the conservatives want to fund the construction of more roads. But, surely even they're not so ignorant to believe that we can just keep concreting and tarmacking over more wildlife habitats?

Or perhaps they really are that ignorant! To reiterate - talk to many business people & economists - and their minds are on business (& money). Not ecology.

Evidently, most, if not all, government politicians are not ecologists. Most of them have a business background. - therefore, within the context of sustaining ecology, they don't have the necessary background knowledge to be aware of what sustaining ecology means, and why sustaining ecology is mission-critical for any definition of success.

Can it be that simple? Can they be simply that ignorant? They simply do not really know what they are mismanaging (ecology!). They simply do not understand and their greed cognitively blinds them.

I think they can be that simple because they make simply ignorant decisions & policies. Ecocide policies! And that's why you hear Conservative politicians squawking about more construction - in the midst of a global extinction event. An extinction event that their types of sociopolitical and socioeconomic ideologies and agendas caused (& are causing).

That's business as usual. And if business as usual isn't stopped - that will be all folks! (too late? or at least climate change will make it harder to adapt).

That's also why they often don't take their own scientific advisors' recommendations seriously - many business-minded people simply do not understand ecology (& knowledge shapes our perception of reality). Of course, there are also those business people that do understand that their products are harming the environment - but they continue to promote (e.g., advertise) and manufacture them anyway (because that's their business).

"Internal Fossil Fuel Industry Memos Reveal Decades of Corporate Disinformation" https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/climate-deception-dossiers

What about the general electorate? How much about ecology do they understand? Nothing? A bit? Or do they read a lot of disinformation in the UK's tabloid press? And who owns and controls most of the press? Business people!

The more astute reader will have noticed a general social pattern that is the leading cause of environmental negligence and the exploitation of nature. Ignorance, apathy, and greed (corruption).

Simply uneducated (in ecology) minds not knowing how to manage a complex ecological system. "Business" isn't fundamental to a healthy ecosystem at all. "Business" is what we make and do with the planet's resources. And yet, "business" has already driven too many species extinct and is changing the planet's climate.

It's become more urgent that societies do "business" very differently. What forms of growth will mitigate "business as usual"?

Growing forests and developing peatlands sequester carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Because timing is of the essence - prudent governments will invest in the growth of natural habitats. The conservative party subsidizes too many farmers to mismanage land and degraded conditions. They are the losers! They simply don't know it (yet)

The Lake District National Park (LDNP), Cumbria (again), England, is one example, or many, that has the potential to sequester carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere. But, rather than listen to scientific advice - the conservatives promote sheep farming and bird game reserves.

Furthermore, reforesting and restoring peatlands will mitigate the increase in flooding that is occurring in the area - but it's evident that the national government, local councils, local businesses, and local people are having none of that ecological advice.

Crazy! Considering. Also, the Lake District National park consists of many local people that choose to burn coal and wood. Crazy! Considering the amounts of local smoke pollution means too many of their children have asthma (plus all the other smoke pollution-related diseases).

But, since their direction of travel is evidently backward (e.g., a new coal mine) - maybe they will also want to bring back child chimney sweeps. Just as there used to be in the British "good old days"

Since the Victorian age (1800's) human genetics hasn't changed - they are the same people. It would seem their minds have not kept pace with the changes in technologies and science either.

Stone-age minds #EvolutionaryPsychology

#LDNP #tradition #money #Dumbria #Cumbria #Fossilfuel #greenwash #culture #AirPollution #SmokePollution #disease #CoalBurning #WoodBurning #CoalMine #SheepFarming #SheepWrecked #WildlifeExtinction #ShootingAtBirds #religion #EcologicallyUnsustainableCulture #ScienceIlliteracy

#ClimateAction #ClimateJustice #education #youth #protest #ExstinctionRebbelion #XR

Is your government ignorant?

Why are too many governments recklessly incompetent within the context of sustaining a healthy environment? Considering the state of the #environment is a "little" bit important (vast understatement).

Of course - there are many monetary agendas. But that on its own would not make a government make so many #ecocidal
decisions. Whilst the fossil fuel industries are making profits now - climate change will cost societies far more than any fossil fuel corporations' profits. We can't buy back ice sheets, sea level rise, droughts, ocean acidification, and destroyed habitats that take thousands of years to develop.

So, why so eco-stupid? (some governments)

Because I have more experience listening to the rhetoric of the UK's conservative party government - I will generally relate this toot to them. Maybe the following sounds similar to your government if you live in a different country.

Evidently, most, if not all, government politicians are *not* ecologists. Most of them have a business background (or lawyers, etc). - therefore, within the context of sustaining ecology, they don't have the necessary background knowledge to be aware of what sustaining ecology means, and why sustaining ecology is mission-critical for any definition of long-term success.

For example, talk to many business people & economists - and their minds are on business (& money) - not ecology. They're interested in buying shares for the sake of gaining a profit - not sustaining ecology. In fact, all too often those shares are in ecologically degrading "business as usual" industries.

Exploiting nature is big money in the business-as-usual "empire".

It's clear that something is missing from some government leaders (decision-makers). The science is clear that we are in midst of the 6th mass extinction (this time caused by human activity).

"We’ve encroached on (and sometimes wiped out) the habitats of other species; we’ve released pollutants into the air, soil, fresh water, and oceans; and we’ve even changed the atmosphere and climate.

These changes are beginning to disrupt Earth’s systems at global scales — and are occurring rapidly.

Because of our burning of fossil fuels, carbon dioxide levels are rising faster than they ever have at any point in Earth’s history. It’s no surprise then that extinction rates have risen substantially in the last 500 years" https://evolution.berkeley.edu/mass-extinction/the-earths-sixth-mass-extinction/

And yet, in her extremely brief time as the UK prime minister - all Liz Truss went on about was, to paraphrase "Growth, Growth, Growth". And the current Conservative prime minister Rishi Sunak - wasn't even planning to attend this year's Climate Conference. Talk about showing publicly how little climate dedication Mr Sunak has. Again - Mr Sunak is only another business person. He didn't make his wealth by restoring ecology - quite the opposite.

Of course, Sunak like all those that went before him - will speak climate "blah blah blah" and then generally do the opposite. The conservatives are planning on opening a coal mine in England, Cumbria, Whitehaven. Apparently, they believe that burning that coal won't affect their climate commitments. They're generally correct - because their climate commitments are crap anyway. So, burning that coal is just more evidence of their backward climate "plans".

Also - a regular narrative in the British media is how a coal mine will bring money to the Whitehaven area. Again - business rather than sustaining ecology. In other words, the "business as usual" agendas are causing the 6th mass extinction and climate change.

Also - a regular narrative in the British media is how the local people want a coal mine.

"Older groups, where I have found support for the mine to be most pronounced, recount their memories of when Whitehaven was a thriving industrial hub. They can recall how, throughout much of the 20th century, dozens of pits were open along the coast, and Whitehaven harbour, where coal was shipped to the rest of the world, was a frenzy of activity." https://theconversation.com/cumbria-coal-mine-how-to-understand-local-support-for-the-new-pit-196546

Many people in WhiteHaven (& Cumbria in general) are or completely ignorant of ecology. They don't know that their ideologies are threatening the younger generation's futures. However, the conservative government is also promoting the opening of the coal mine. And on *average* - older people tend to be more conservative-leaning. Looking back to the past - rather than forward to the future.

Opening the coal mine is all part of the conservative party's ideas of more growth. But why not spend that money on renewables & renewable industry Jobs in Whitehaven? It's very close to the Solway Firth which has a tidal estuary - is it suitable for tidal renewable energy?

"100% Clean and Renewable Wind, Water, and Sunlight All-Sector Energy Roadmaps for 139 Countries of the World" https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2542435117300120

When you hear Conservative politicians squawking about "growth" - they are not talking about the growth that plants do. What they're actually saying is "construction, construction, and more construction".

And that's general their economic agenda - more construction. For example, the conservatives want to fund the construction of more roads. But, surely even they're not so ignorant to believe that we can just keep concreting and tarmacking over more wildlife habitats?

Or perhaps they really are that ignorant! To reiterate - talk to many business people & economists - and their minds are on business (& money). Not ecology.

Evidently, most, if not all, government politicians are not ecologists. Most of them have a business background. - therefore, within the context of sustaining ecology, they don't have the necessary background knowledge to be aware of what sustaining ecology means, and why sustaining ecology is mission-critical for any definition of success.

Can it be that simple? Can they be simply that ignorant? They simply do not really know what they are mismanaging (ecology!). They simply do not understand and their greed cognitively blinds them.

I think they can be that simple because they make simply ignorant decisions & policies. Ecocide policies! And that's why you hear Conservative politicians squawking about more construction - in the midst of a global extinction event. An extinction event that their types of sociopolitical and socioeconomic ideologies and agendas caused (& are causing).

That's business as usual. And if business as usual isn't stopped - that will be all folks! (too late).

That's also why they often don't take their own scientific advisors' recommendations seriously - many business-minded people simply do not understand ecology (& knowledge shapes our perception of reality). Of course, there are also those business people that do understand that their products are harming the environment - but they continue to promote (e.g., advertise) and manufacture them anyway (because that's their business).

"Internal Fossil Fuel Industry Memos Reveal Decades of Corporate Disinformation" https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/climate-deception-dossiers

What about the general electorate? How much about ecology do they understand? Nothing? A bit? Or do they read a lot of disinformation in the UK's tabloid press? And who owns and controls most of the press? Business people!

The more astute reader will have noticed a general social pattern that is the leading cause of environmental negligence and the exploitation of nature. Ignorance, apathy, and greed (corruption).

Simply uneducated (in ecology) minds not knowing how to manage a complex ecological system. "Business" isn't fundamental to a healthy ecosystem at all. "Business" is what we make and do with the planet's resources. And yet, "business" has already driven too many species extinct and is changing the planet's climate.

It's become more urgent that societies do "business" very differently. What forms of growth will mitigate "business as usual"?

Growing forests and developing peatlands sequester carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Because timing is of the essence - prudent governments will invest in the growth of natural habitats. The conservative party subsidizes too many farmers to mismanage land and degraded conditions. They are the losers! They simply don't know it (yet)

The Lake District National Park (LDNP), Cumbria (again), England, is one example where there is the potential to sequester carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere. But, rather than listen to scientific advice - the conservatives promote sheep farming and bird game reserves.

Furthermore, reforesting and restoring peatlands will mitigate the increase in flooding that is occurring in the area - but it's evident that the national governments, local councils, and local people are having none of that ecological advice.

Crazy! Considering. Also, the Lake District National park consists of many local people that choose to burn coal and wood. Crazy! Considering the amounts of local smoke pollution means too many of their children have asthma.

But, since their direction of travel is evidently backward (e.g., a new coal mine) - maybe they will also want to bring back child chimney sweeps. Just as there used to be in the British "good old days"

Since the Victorian age (1800's) human genetics hasn't changed - they are the same people. It would seem their minds have not kept pace with the changes in technologies and science either.

Stone-age minds #EvolutionaryPsychology

#LDNP #tradition #money #Dumbria #Cumbria #Fossilfuel #greenwash #culture #AirPollution #SmokePollution #disease #CoalBurning #WoodBurning #CoalMine #SheepFarming #SheepWrecked #WildlifeExtinction #ShootingAtBirds #religion #EcologicallyUnsustainableCulture #ScienceIlliteracy

#ClimateAction #ClimateJustice #education #youth #protest #ExstinctionRebbelion #XR

Is your government ignorant?

Why are too many governments recklessly incompetent within the context of sustaining a healthy environment? Considering the state of the #environment is a "little" bit important (vast understatement).

Of course - there are many monetary agendas. But that on its own would not make a government make so many #ecocidal
decisions. Whilst the fossil fuel industries are making profits now - climate change will cost societies far more than any fossil fuel corporations' profits. We can't buy back ice sheets, sea level rise, droughts, ocean acidification, and destroyed habitats that take thousands of years to develop.

So, why so eco-stupid? (some governments)

Because I have more experience listening to the rhetoric of the UK's conservative party government - I will generally relate this toot to them. Maybe the following sounds similar to your government if you live in a different country.

Evidently, most, if not all, government politicians are *not* ecologists. Most of them have a business background (or lawyers, etc). - therefore, within the context of sustaining ecology, they don't have the necessary background knowledge to be aware of what sustaining ecology means, and why sustaining ecology is mission-critical for any definition of long-term success.

For example, talk to many business people & economists - and their minds are on business (& money) - not ecology. They're interested in buying shares for the sake of gaining a profit - not sustaining ecology. In fact, all too often those shares are in ecologically degrading "business as usual" industries.

Exploiting nature is big money in the business-as-usual "empire".

It's clear that something is missing from some government leaders (decision-makers). The science is clear that we are in midst of the 6th mass extinction (this time caused by human activity).

"We’ve encroached on (and sometimes wiped out) the habitats of other species; we’ve released pollutants into the air, soil, fresh water, and oceans; and we’ve even changed the atmosphere and climate.

These changes are beginning to disrupt Earth’s systems at global scales — and are occurring rapidly.

Because of our burning of fossil fuels, carbon dioxide levels are rising faster than they ever have at any point in Earth’s history.10 It’s no surprise then that extinction rates have risen substantially in the last 500 years" https://evolution.berkeley.edu/mass-extinction/the-earths-sixth-mass-extinction/

And yet, in her extremely brief time as the UK prime minister - all Liz Truss went on about was, to paraphrase "Growth, Growth, Growth". And the current Conservative prime minister Rishi Sunak - wasn't even planning to attend this year's Climate Conference. Talk about showing publicly our little climate dedication Mr Sunak has. Again - enough (rich) business people. He didn't make his wealth by restoring ecology - quite the opposite.

Of course, Sunak like all those that went before him - will speak climate "blah blah blah" and then generally do the opposite. The conservatives are planning on opening a coal mine in England, Whitehaven. Apparently, they believe that burning that coal won't affect their climate commitments. They're generally correct - because their climate commitments are crap anyway. So, burning that coal is just more evidence of their backward climate "plans".

Also - a regular narrative in the British media is how a coal mine will bring money to the Whitehaven area. Again - business rather than sustaining ecology. In other words, the "business as usual" agendas are causing a 6th mass extinction and climate change.

Also - a regular narrative in the British media is how the local people want a coal mine.

"Older groups, where I have found support for the mine to be most pronounced, recount their memories of when Whitehaven was a thriving industrial hub. They can recall how, throughout much of the 20th century, dozens of pits were open along the coast, and Whitehaven harbour, where coal was shipped to the rest of the world, was a frenzy of activity." https://theconversation.com/cumbria-coal-mine-how-to-understand-local-support-for-the-new-pit-196546

Many of these older groups in WhiteHaven (& beyond) are or completely ignorant of ecology. They don't know that their ideologies are threatening the younger generation's futures. However, the conservative government is also promoting the opening of the coal mine. And on *average* - older people tend to be more conservative-leaning (looking back to the past - rather than forward to the future)

Opening the coal mine is all part of the conservative party's ideas of more growth. But why not spend that money on renewables & renewable industry Jobs in Whitehaven? It's very close to the Solway Firth which is a tidal estuary - is it suitable for tidal renewable energy?

"100% Clean and Renewable Wind, Water, and Sunlight All-Sector Energy Roadmaps for 139 Countries of the World" https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2542435117300120

When you hear Conservative politicians squawking about "growth" - they are not talking about the growth that plants do. What they're actually saying is "construction, construction, and more construction".

And that's general their economic agenda - more construction. For example, the conservatives want to fund the construction of more roads. But, surely even they're not so ignorant to believe that we can just keep concreating and tarmacking over more wildlife habitats?

Or perhaps they really are! To reiterate - talk to many business people & economists - and their minds are on business (& money). Not ecology.

Evidently, most, if not all, government politicians are not ecologists. Most of them have a business background. - therefore, within the context of sustaining ecology, they don't have the necessary background knowledge to be aware of what sustaining ecology means, and why sustaining ecology is mission-critical for any definition of success.

Can it be that simple? Can they be simply that ignorant? They simply do not really know what they are mismanaging. (ecology!)

I think they can be that simple because they make simply ignorant decisions & policies. Ecocide policies! And that's why you hear Conservative politicians squawking about more construction - in the midst of a global extinction event. An extinction event that their types of sociopolitical and socioeconomic ideologies and agendas caused (& are causing)

That's also why they often don't take their own scientific advisors' recommendations seriously - many business-minded people simply do not understand ecology (& knowledge shapes our perception of reality). Of course, there are also those business people that do understand that their products are harming the environment - but they continue to promote (e.g., advertise) and manufacture them anyway (because that's their business).

"Internal Fossil Fuel Industry Memos Reveal Decades of Corporate Disinformation" https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/climate-deception-dossiers

What about the general electorate? How much about ecology don't they understand? Nothing? A bit? Or do they read a lot of disinformation in the UK's tabloid press? And who owns and controls most of the press? Business people!

The more astute reader will have noticed a general social pattern that is the leading cause of environmental negligence and the exploitation of nature. Ignorance, apathy, and greed (corruption).

Simply uneducated (in ecology) minds not knowing how to manage a complex ecological system. "Business" isn't fundamental to a healthy ecosystem at all. "Business" is what we make and do with the planet's resources. And yet, "business" has already driven too many species extinct and is changing the planet's climate.

It's become more urgent that societies do "business" very differently. What forms of growth will mitigate "business as usual"?

Growing forests and developing peatlands sequester carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Because timing is of the essence - prudent governments will invest in the growth of natural habitats. The conservative party subsidizes too many farmers to mismanage land in degraded condition.

The Lake District National Park (LDNP), Cumbria (again), England, is one example where there is the potential to sequester carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere. But, rather than listen to scientific advice - the conservatives promote sheep farming and bird game reserves.

Furthermore, reforesting and restoring peatlands will mitigate the increase in flooding that is occurring in the area - but it's evident that the national governments, local councils an local people are having none of that ecological advice.

Crazy! Considering. Also, the Lake District National park consists of many local people that choose to burn coal and wood. Crazy! Considering the amounts of local smoke pollution means too many of their children have asthma.

But, since their direction of travel is evidently backwards (e.g., a new coal mine) - maybe they will also want to bring back child chimney sweeps. Just as there used to be in the British "good old days"

Since the Victorian age (1800's) human genetics hasn't changed - they are the same people. It would seem their minds have not kept pace with the changes in technologies and science either.

Stone-age minds #EvolutionaryPsychology

#LDNP #tradition #money #Dumbria #Cumbria #Fossilfuel #greenwash #culture #AirPollution #SmokePollution #disease #CoalBurning #WoodBurning #CoalMine #SheepFarming #SheepWrecked #WildlifeExtinction #ShootingAtBirds #religion #EcologicallyUnsustainableCulture #ScienceIlliteracy

#ClimateAction #ClimateJustice #education #youth #protest #ExstinctionRebbelion #XR

RT @AirFairy04
Very true & the impact on neighbours is always overlooked!
#WoodBurning #WoodSmoke #SmokePollution
#AirPollution #Health https://twitter.com/JohnSodeau/status/1584902009437753345