Innovation, Technology Not Earth-Centered Religion Part 2

by Lewis Loflin

See Innovation, Technology Not Earth-Centered Religion Part 1

18,000 years ago there was no English Channel and one could walk from what is today from London to Paris. Chesapeake Bay in Virginia was a river valley and in places along the East Coast one could walk out hundreds of miles into what's today is underwater. There was no Black Sea, but a freshwater lake. Perhaps our ancestors had SUVs?

As an interesting aside, Chesapeake Bay is the remains of meteor crater. (Stanley 450) Try taking a real college course in geology and Earth science and get back to me without all of this political scare mongering nonsense.

In other words when a species disappears for whatever reason other fill in the niche or existing species plants will adapt to changing conditions. Thus if CO2 levels rise plants will adapt and metabolize the additional CO2. Tests have proven that yes plants grow faster and healthier with additional CO2, environmentalist will attack this on the basis on the lack of nitrogen soil, not enough moisture, and so forth.

When plants and forest become more green and produce heavier growth and leaves this in itself will alter the climate to favor the plants. If there is a shortage of nitrogen in the soil, there are plants in nature that will fix nitrogen to the soil. Other plants which require less nitrogen or don't require other minerals will simply fill the niche. We call them weeds. This process is called evolution.

I'll address the bizarre subject of biodiversity that's treated as religious dogma. This is used by too many radical environmentalists to exclude human activities or interactions with nature. Nature is treated as something sacred, even a person with rights itself. This is total scientific absurdity. Insane environmentalists have actually gone out into their local forests tearing out non-native plants as if there's something wrong with those plants being present. The offense was the action of man transporting these plants to a new location.

Many of the plants in the forest behind my house are non-native plants brought in by man. There is not a thing wrong with this despite these the "belief" of biodiversity cultists. Nature is not sacred and these kinds of religious beliefs have no place in science. Those scientist who allow this kind of pseudo-religious nonsense to influence their scientific objectivity have no place making public policy or acting as expert witnesses at congressional hearings.

We have every right, regardless of what kind of science degree or position they may hold, to inquire into their political viewpoints and how they view nature. Our sole concern as scientists and with public policy is simply natural processes and how the real world functions on a pure material level. Anything else is religion and violates separation of religion and state.

Get it through your fat heads, nature is not sacred, is not a spiritual being, and has no rights or legal standing. That is nothing but pseudo-religious nonsense and while one can apply this to their personal property, they have no right to bring this religious garbage into government. Ever heard of the term separation of religion and state? That happens to apply to religion being incorporated into ecology. Ecology isn't even a science anymore.

Environmentalists constantly complain that mankind's activities are destroying the planet. This is simply not true, but changing the planet to accommodate human beings doesn't mean the planet is paved over from pole to pole with concrete.

People that are affluent, not starving to death, and have access to affordable and scalable energy and technology can do more to protect the environment than all the stupid windmills we could build. I could go into the amount of energy and materials it takes to make one of these windmills or solar panels, but most people do not care. They couldn't care less because it's about feelings. The Green cultists feed us guilt about carbon footprints and how we are creating a literal earthly hell and the sin of consumption, then sell us a path to salvation though rituals: recycle, eat organic, take cold showers.

And the Green priest caste will extort large sums of money and wealth as they lead us to an earthly Eden. Also don't forget, almost $30 billion a year in green subsidies and billions more in research grants are making certain people very rich.

Let's consider modern agriculture so hated and attacked by environmentalists. 120 years ago vast tracts of the United States were covered with low-yield family farms that have long since been abandoned. While this may sound romantic, this is a life of drudgery and misery these hypocritical environmental activists would never live themselves.

The fact is primitive lifestyles and poverty are very destructive on the environment. Here in Appalachia we have an abundance of deer, bears, and even elk many almost extinct at one time. Many areas of marginal farms or cow pastures today are lush forest full of wildlife. And this is true across vast areas east of the Mississippi. As one who grows his own food from a garden and raises chickens and eggs, there is no possible way to live any decent sort life without electricity and modern conveniences which enable me to protect my local environment.

Modern farming methods means I don't have to go out and kill every animal in the forest trying to get enough to eat. Imagine 320 million people cutting down trees for firewood. But I'm sure the same ecology loonies that advocate this nonsense would also outlaw wood stoves as they have in places like California.

Vaccines and modern medicine have saved millions of lives and more than doubled our lifespans from 100 years ago. Yet environmental extremists attack vaccines, attack animal research, and nearly everything else we can think of claiming this is bad and we need to go back to "natural" remedies. Please dear green nut jobs, the next time that you get an infection or cancer go out and guzzle some green tea so that you can die and we can get you out of the gene pool.

Regardless of all the doom and gloom predictions of fools like Paul Ehrlich today's modern farmers are raising record amounts of food. Food is so plentiful that the price of wheat has dropped 50% in the last few years. Even Russia when back in the era of communism couldn't feed its people, today is a major exporter! So much for Paul Ehrlich's predictions of mass starvation by 1990.

It's energy and technology, not Nature-centered religion.

Yet the same collection of fools attack modern farming methods, GMO crops, and pesticides that make this miracle of plentiful food a reality. There is not a shred of proof, and I mean verifiable empirical scientific proof, of ill effects with GMO crops. For example here in Appalachia about a century ago we lost all of our chestnut trees to a moth infestation.

The obvious solution is the bio-engineer a chestnut tree using GMO technology to resist the insects that destroyed the original trees. The environmental hacks and social justice jackasses would be the first to go out and cut down the saplings. "It's not natural, thus it will defile nature." I personally have no use for this kind of irrational thinking.

The fact is that nearly all plants including broccoli, cabbage, etc. organic or not contain carcinogens and toxins. Botulism toxin is one of the most dangerous poisons the world and is natural. Rhubarb leaves are highly toxic. Organophosphates are naturally occurring in many plants in order to resist insects. Yet the same types of synthetic organophosphates used in products such as Roundup brings howls of indignation from environmentalists. Once again you dear green fools, highly productive farming uses less land and fewer resources than the primitive low-yield farming in the past.

The same fanatics that constantly demand an end to fossil fuel use but block every practical alternative. We need energy that is affordable and scalable and romantic notions about using inefficient solar panels and windmills won't cut it. We have technology available right now to produce massive amounts of nuclear power in newer design, much safer reactors, that will recycle and reuse spent nuclear fuel rods! But because of ignorant anti-nuclear environmentalists we can't do it. There are few technical or engineering problems that we can't overcome in the near future, the problem is political fanaticism and scientific ignorance from environmentalists.

See Nuclear Power Green and Affordable

Do not kid yourself this is not about science or climate change or polar bears. It's about remaking society into a crappy socialist hell like that in Venezuela. They might be sitting in the dark and hungry, but at least they are going green - and have true equality.

Science and technology built on the basis of affordable and scalable energy not only saves lives and lifts millions out of poverty, but is the key to the preservation of the Earth itself environmental religionists claim to champion. We must divorce environmentalism from religious fantasy. The Earth is here to serve man and humans are far more important than rats, fungus, and insects, which are doing just fine - so are polar bears.

The next time I'm making deer jerky I'll think about my Green friends feeling guilty over nothing. Yummy! Wonder what bear jerky tastes like?

[ Challenge to Atheists 1 ] [ Challenge to Atheists 2 ]
[ Challenge to Atheists 3 ] [ Challenge to Atheists 4 ]
[ Challenge to Atheists 5 ]