Environmental Golden Rule

Those of you who have wasted your time reading my blog probably realize that I am quite skeptical about many of the arguments presented by the Global Warming Crowd, Al Gore in particular. Lest it be thought that I am not a serious conservationist, I now present my Golden Rule of Environmentalism.


As a scholar once said of another pithy summation, “All else is commentary.”

By committing ourselves to the preservation of habitat, so many questions are made simple, or even unnecessary. Global warming, caused by inefficient use of resources, will take care of itself. Urban sprawl, non-point water pollution, acid rain, all are covered under the rubric of habitat preservation. The only motivation for this is an ethical one: the belief that other living things have a right to exist just as we do, and that we should take care not to extinguish their species. Everything flows from this simple imperative, but if one does not accept this, then it all unravels. The apocalyptic environmentalist often fears the consequences of industrialization out of simple self-preservation or fear for his or her progeny. This is justified, but it doesn’t get at the root of the problem, and it frequently leads to silly arguments and alarmist statements about how we are “destroying the earth,” “poisoning the earth,” or putting civilization in great danger…take your pick. Well, are you afraid for civilization or for the non-human inhabitants of the planet? Make up your mind.

You don’t have to choose between them, but you do have to think.

6 Responses to Environmental Golden Rule

  1. Misanthropic Scott says:

    I have done a lot of thinking about this subject. I am not in fear for my progeny. I have none and will have none. That was easy. I am not in fear for humanity except for the fact that I fear that we cannot either go extinct or dramatically reduce our numbers to a sustainable level without killing off a lot of species I find more beautiful than our own. Our current population is sustained solely by stealing from future generations to feed the current one.

    This can’t last.

    I don’t mean that it is immoral (it is) or that we should not continue to breed like rabbits (though, of course, we shouldn’t). I mean literally that we cannot continue this way. It is simply not an option. This planet does not have unlimited resources. By definition, if we keep breeding as we have been, eventually (and not that far in the future) we will reach a point where the human population has greater mass than the planet.

    This physically cannot happen. Literally, it can’t.

    Earth on the other hand is fine. The planet will be fine until the sun engulfs it in 4.5 billion years. Even life will be fine. 10 or 50 million years from today, life will be as varied and complex as it was before we came on the scene. However, a lot of species I find far more beautiful than our own are likely to be gone. We have already caused the sixth great extinction on this planet. This one is already greater than the extinction that took out the non-avian dinosaurs 65.3 million years ago. Some already say it is worse than the Permian/Triassic extinction 250 MYA, the prior record holder.

    This is not sustainable.

    We can’t continue to destroy habitat the way we have been and expect to have a habitable biosphere in which we or many other species can survive. So, in that respect, you and I agree 100%. It is all about habitat preservation. The problem is that the habitat is the entire planet. And, global warming is one of many things already destroying habitat. Already, polar bears are drowning because the ice is decreasing. Global warming is real. It is not our only problem. But, it is one of many enormous problems we must deal with.

    I think that you and I are mostly in agreement. I just think that you may be ignoring the enormity of our present situation. We have many times the level of human population that this planet can sustain. Time is a huge factor that many people are failing to consider. Sustainability must include rim frames that humans are simply ill-prepared to comprehend. Sustainability must include geological time frames not just human time frames if we are to be a long lived species like horseshoe crabs, sharks, and crocodilians.

    I’d be curious to get your opinion on a thread of mine regarding the sustainable human population of the planet.

  2. sarah says:

    i think polar bears are SO cute!!!!!! anything new???

  3. brianna says:

    polar bears are so cute and AMAZING i love them<333

  4. sarah says:

    hi bre

  5. kirsty says:

    i love them they are so nice lol

  6. Environmental Golden Rule | Journey to Perplexity

    […]More expensive to invest in but in the long term will be value environment friendly as well as lessening the load on our environment.[…]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

<span>%d</span> bloggers like this: