Chernobyl's Effects Live On
jamesbently writes: "Scientists have discovered that our ecosystem isn't healing itself as fast as they originally thought: bans on consumption of certain plants and animals in areas affected by radiation from the 1986 Chernobyl disaster have been revised upward."
We have created a place where everything we do kills us. Kills the environment. Kills everything that is living. Once upon a time we didn't have to worry about cancer. We didn't have to worry about light. We didn't have to worry about intoxicating chemicals. We didn't have to worry.
Today we have to. Today we have to suffer what we've been doing to Earth. Nuclear Power. Super fast airplanes that can fly above the O-Zone.
What was wrong with a world witout all this technology? It simply wasn't enough. We needed more. We had to have more. Well, now we have it! NOW WHAT?
"Time is long and life is short, so begin to live while you still can." -EV
but why doesn't this story appear on the main page?
J.
Fortunetly, VA Linux purchased most of Michigan and turned it into tropical jungle.
Awe c'mon you think that early humans were just running around eating berries and having free love and playing volleyball? :) Ever heard of volcanos? A decent sized volcanic erruption can do a helluva lot of environmental damage real quick. Remember those tigers... what do you think they like to eat? The whole "natural" thing pisses me off. Cow farts are natural and contribute a helluva lot to the carbon monoxide level. Tar is "natural", venomous snakes and spiders are "natural" volcanos and earthquakes and hurricanes and tornados and floods and forest fires and lightning and birth defects and malaria and sharks and carp and radiation and... well you get the idea. I'm not saying we shouldn't try to use our resources as efficiently as possible but looking back to the "good old days" isn't a very good argument.
:)
I think we're weaking the gene pool by fixing birth defects (even my glasses for near-sightedness) and not allowing the whole survival of the fittest to run it's course. I'm damn glad they made my glasses and took my gall bladder out a few months ago. If you want to walk to work and not undergo surgery when your gut really hurts and not wear glasses and run around naked in the winter and live in a cave, then I will support your decision by all means. However I like my computers and my car and my house and I'm not going to give them up.
Guess I'm a selfish bastard.... I'd heard that but I never really knew till now
I honestly didn't intend for my reply to attack, but I was in a mood and I can see how it came across that way and am sorry. Still, I can't agree with the concept of "balanced" nature.
From the dinosaur's point of view... I bet they'd have something to say about nature's balance. That is if we're talking about nature in the sense that the earth is a tiny little ball of mud in the universe and asteroids etc. are natural.
As the supposedly most inteligent species on the planet then it falls to us to keep it habitable for as long as possible. But the planet will run out of natural resources at some point in time no matter what we do.... unless of course we all die and our bodies decompose and replenish the natural resources for the next inteligent species to use.
Greg
We know this not to be the case. Lovelock and Gaia aside, ecosystems of all types are in flux and have always been in constant flux. Everything living alters its surrouding environment in some manner. Sure, there are often cycles, but even those are subject to the whims of nonlinear dynamics.
Life changes it's environment. Humans are just reaaallly good at it.
Is humanity going to destory the planet? No. Is humanity going to destroy all life on the planet? No. Is humanity going to destroy countless species and ruin the ecosystems of many others? Yes. Is humanity going to render the planet uninhabitable for humanity? Quite possibly. The earth will survive. Life will probably survive. We just probably won't. Give it a billion years or so, and the giant, ugly, sentient roaches will be posting here instead of us.
----
----
"I used to listen to Null Device before they sold out."
I don't feel comfortable with the time scale we use to make decisions. What we should be thinking about is the long term effects of agriculture on the land. For a laboratory we can use isolated islands, and see that when we expand the human population desertification occurs. In extreme cases, without outside assistance, the population crashes with accompanying famine, plague, cannibalism etc.
Easter Island is the best example. Seems it was a forest when first settled, but an oligarchy ran the place until all the trees were gone, and when there were no trees left, there was no more fishing. (The descendants of the remnants were pretty much exported by the Spanish to Peruvian silver mines).
Now we have 6,000,000,000 or so people on a planet which we don't think can support a tenth of that in the long term. An all too huge part of that population haven't reached an age to add to the problem, but surely will. No parent will worry for more than their grandchildren's generation, but the damage we do with agriculture, let alone modern industrial society, doesn't show that fast.
We're coping now with the decisions made in the early twentieth century, which were made to cope with the effects of the decisions made a century before. The notable thing is that until now, there was always new wilderness to tame. There's no unmapped territory left on the planet. It doesn't take prophesy to know that without a wild, uncivilized resevoir, agriculture will expand until desertification sets in. Folks, Iraq was once the Fertile Crescent, Egypt was the breadbasket of Rome. Both are better known now as desert lands, importers of food.
Civilization depends on agriculture, agriculture depends on a viable ecology, and we've been taking short term advantage of practices which do not appear to work on the multi-generational time frame. Pretty natural, actually, as we've managed to civilise agricultural so that farmers won't worry more than a year ahead.
Ed Craig "Who cares what you think?" George W. Bush, 4th of July 2001