• Death of environmentalism… – Salon.com

    Here’s an excerpt from an article I read while convalescing this morning:

    Death of environmentalism, saving the planet, nature, science, love – Salon.com

    I found some of the article interesting, discussing the overzealousness of some environmentalists, and seeming to suggest that we can go too far on both sides of the climate change debate. I buy this argument, to a point. Nature is never unchanging, and the question of preservation is not as clear cut as it seems. The question of “what do we preserve” is valid, in that nature itself is not much for preservation. You lose me when you discount mankind’s impact, suggesting that we’re not any worse than nature itself. The article suggests the changes we’ve seen in climate since the dawn of the industrial age are no worse than other times of rapid species die offs. I get the point… the Earth is pretty tough… it will somehow overcome even us. But I don’t see how comparing mankind to the cataclysms that precipitated species die offs in the past is a flattering analogy for mankind.

    “Hey, we’re no worse than a comet strike! Woo hoo!”

    While industrialization has had an upside: conquering many diseases, leading to lower infant mortality and longer, healthier lives… it’s also had it’s downside, in some cases undermining the good: pollution leading to more asthma, etc. It seems to me that, reasonable, measured environmentalism can be a win-win. Investment in environmentally friendly technologies can be a economic boost; not only because it boosts a new segment of the economy, but because any research can have unexpected spin-off benefits. And as I suggested before, environmentalism isn’t just about saving spotted owls, it’s about saving ourselves. Polution, deforestation, etc. doesn’t just effect the survival of rare species, it effects our health… our lives. Speaking of asthma; my wife and both my kids have it. It causes more illness, which causes less productivity, which is a drain on the economy. How often are these subtle impacts on the economy accurately calculated when determining the cost of pollution? (I’m sure someone attempts to calculate the cost, but I suspect it’s vastly underestimated.)

    Here’s where the author really lost me:

    A new politics requires a new mood, one appropriate for the world we hope to create. It should be a mood of gratitude, joy, and pride, not sadness, fear, and regret. A politics of overcoming will trigger feelings of joy rather than sadness, control rather than fatalism, and gratitude rather than resentment. If we are grateful to be alive, then we must also be grateful that our ancestors overcame. It is thanks to them and the world that made them possible that we live.

    What the fuck is that supposed to mean? The next time I go to my doctor and she sees that my cholesterol is rising, imagine her saying, “Fuck it John, life is short. You’ve got good insurance, and you can always just take a pill.” Isn’t that, in effect, what the author is saying? Should I thank my lucky stars for the Farm Bill and big corn subsidies, without which we wouldn’t have cheap “corn syrup,” and the countless empty calories on the grocery store shelves that I love so much?

    Hell, can’t we feel just as good about averting catastrophe as we can about overcoming it? If we can’t, what does THAT say about human nature?

  • Camera crisis

    Last night my camera (an old Olympus C-2100 Ultra-Zoom) went kaput. I suspect there’s a little motor that’s responsible for moving the lenses to adjust focus, and it’s failed… as neither the auto, nor the manual focus work. (Unlike an SLR, the “manual” focus is still electronic – pressing buttons rather than twisting a ring on the lens.)

    I mentioned this in a post yesterday, but I wanted to talk about it again because it’s a crushing blow. My camera is like my various writing tools… I don’t put them to as good a use as some, but I enjoy the heck out of using them. A part of me saw the camera breaking as an oportunity. When I bought the camera, it was a bit of a compromise. I truly loved my film cameras before it: a fully manual Pentax, and a Canon EOS. I’m no artist, but I had great fun playing with focus, depth of field and exposure on my film SLRs. Each of these adjustments are either impossible to play with, or so poorly arranged on a point-and-shoot camera that it’s hardly worth bothering. The Olympus was somewhere in between. Using shutter priority or aperture priority mode was easy enough, but going fully manual on exposure was a mess (and “manual” focus was completely impractical, unless you had five minutes to compose your shot… and even I’m not that patient).

    But, it was a digital camera, so it had a huge advantage over my film cameras… instant feedback. With my film cameras I never remembered how I took a picture by the time I had it developed, so when they came out bad it was tough to learn from my mistakes. Occasionally I’d take notes as I took pictures, but carrying around a notepad when I was out on a hike was a big pain in the but (and took away from the purpose of the hike: to relax).

    I said before that a small part of me saw this as an opportunity, because this is a chance to right a wrong. I could do it right this time and get a nice digital SLR. I’ve read good things about the Pentax Nikon D40 (Macworld thinks highly of it), and I can see myself on a hike with the kids, snapping pictures and sharing them with the kids as we go. (Every time I take a picture the kids always rush over to see how it came out. It’s adorable and makes picture taking an event, not just a throw away moment. Beth has even become quite the critic, commenting on the more technical aspects she likes in a picture. It’s a lot of fun… a hobby I can truly share with the kids.)

    But, that old problem rears it’s ugly face again: money. We just got a computer. We just sprung a leak somewhere in the house, and plumbing can get expensive to fix. Under the circumstances, just getting a new camera will be a hard sell to the wife, let alone doubling (or tripling) the cost of a simple point and shoot to spring for a digital SLR.

    My consumer sense is tingling again.

  • My thick head

    I’m beginning to suspect my headaches aren’t sinus related. It’s my doctor’s fault, really. She planted a seed in my head last week when she said, “I think your headaches may be caused by something other than sinusitis.”

    I’m pretty quick, eh?

    And yet, when Singulair didn’t work she prescribed another round of steroids. What do both of those drugs have in common? If you guessed they’re allergy related, you win the prize!* I guess I’ll humor the good doctor for now… long enough to finish off this latest round of ‘roids, but I think I may need to get a little more aggressive on my visit with her next week. (I called the office this morning after a long weekend, expecting my next appointment would get bumped up, or she’d try another approach; so another script for steroids was a bit of a disappointment, particularly when she was the one that suggested they may not be allergy related.)

    With Beth pushing the OCD envelope lately, I need to be on top of my game; and in my world, headaches and patience are just about mutually exclusive.

    Cheryl thinks I’m having migraines. I’d prefer to delude myself into believing they’re sinus related. Sinuses seem like they’d be easier to treat… and these headaches did start when I stopped taking allergy shots. Although, it was also when I started chemo… and the shots were doing their best to kill me (I kept having reactions to the shot), so I can’t exactly start them right up again. Still, it’s a small sign they could be my sinuses, right? Maybe I’ll try that neti pot again. If nothing else, my daughter gets a kick out of watching.

    *No, not really.