Hi Ewan and all,

I am about half way through the reading list. Please tell Annelene that I will get back and answer the questions she possed. I am discovering some interesting things from the inside that I think are important but want to finish before I post. Meanwhile I have been going nuts with winter's oncoming and closing fall duties around the farm.

However this is just out so I thought you should be aware of this new Climate Change movie. See it. http://www.thegreatwarming.com/

---

With Love, John

"The real voyage of discovery lies not in seeking new landscapes but in having new eyes." Marcel Proust

Hi all,

I would like to resurrect this Integral Climate Change thread. I am a little disappointed that there have been so many viewers and so few posts. Maybe some of our Integral Sustainability practitioners could contribute. The good news is that Annelene Decaux’s injunction, to read the websites she so generously supplied, have had a positive influence in getting me off the fence. So, I would like to respond to Ewan’s post 6932. You can find the list of links above at that post. Below are Annelene’s questions.

Read the web links…

As you do so, I invite you to conduct 2 inquiries (UL):

-          Do you feel trustful, or distrustful, of the material? What makes you trust, or distrust it? (some LL elements)

-          What else do you feel as you read the material? (e.g. fear, sadness, boredom, excitement, inspiration?)

When you’re done, take a moment and ask yourself (UL):

-          What did you learn from the exercise? About the topic? (LR) About what/who you trust? (LL) About how you learn? (UL)

-          What actions will you take based on what you learnt? (UR)

I read all of the web pages directed by the links. For a long time I have been aware of the unsustainable manner in which we as a species live on this planet, and have tried to account for this in my personal life choices, but have been swayed to sit on the fence of indecision on the issue of Global Warming; how bad, is it real, can we do anything, etc. I now feel that global climate change and its associated social, cultural, economic, health, and mental affects will be the defining challenge of this century.

I feel trusting of most of the material I have read because a lot of it is grounded in solid peer reviewed science. Also because of learning that large amounts of money have been poured into disinformation on the other side of the argument. I did a bit of research and spent some time reading the counter arguments to global warming--tried to feel into their fears and rejection of the idea of climate change. A lot of people that fear change or are happy with traditional business and belief systems have a lot to loose. Many companies and sustainability proponents see that those that make the shift have more profits to make in sustainable business practices than those that don’t.

Since completing Annelene’s exercise I have made significant changes, of which I will elaborate on a few. While I have lived off-grid and produced about 60% of my own food for many years now, I felt it important to further reduce greenhouse gas emissions. While we generate all of our electricity by photovoltaic panels we have used propane for refrigeration and cooking. Recently we upgraded our solar system by the addition of two more panels, which involved buying another mounting rack, to be able to run an electric refrigerator. I also bought 4 additional panels as an investment; the price of panels has doubled in the last 6 years due to demand.

I have also started a sustainability awareness group in my local community and hope to introduce Integral Sustainability…we will see. Tipping my scales also gave me motivation to tip my career into the field of sustainability. We are also remodeling a building we own into a multi purpose business and are now engaged in building it ”Green.”

As I read the material I felt a twinge of sadness because all of the links seemed to be resonating from the rational lower right quadrant and I don’t believe that the situation can be solved at just the rational wave or that the initiatives can be successfully implemented as just techno/economic solutions without an integral approach. Though I will have to state that after reading most of Barrett Brown’s papers from the FILES and considering Ken’s writings in some of his “excerpt” material, I feel that shifts in the Lower Right quadrant, i.e., better technology, market acceptability, green materials accessibility, etc., are extremely effective tools to shifting the other quadrants.

I also would like to report a shift that has emerged as a result of this little exercise. As I have been aware of the sustainability issues for the last 30 years or so I have taken more of a pessimistic view of the outcome as an imagined future and I must admit that sitting down and being further convinced that global climate change, in my mind, is a definitive fact, was more depressing. From continued reading and investigation I started to delve into the solutions. Reading “Natural Capitalism” inspired me to see the future in a more positive light; more of a potentiality.

I would love to hear what others have noticed, are doing, are feeling; and Ewan, I would like to hear back from Annelene.

---

With Love, John

"The real voyage of discovery lies not in seeking new landscapes but in having new eyes." Marcel Proust

Welch slams Bush administration manipulation of science

Published: Wednesday, January 31, 2024
By Candace Page
Free Press Staff Writer

Rep. Peter Welch, D-Vt., was still shaking his head at mid-afternoon Tuesday over an anecdote told at a morning hearing in Washington on the Bush administration's apparent political interference with government scientists studying climate change.

"There was a story about a scientist who got authorized to speak at a conference. He was prohibited from using the phrase 'global warming.' He was allowed to say 'global,' and he could say 'warming,' but he couldn't put them next to each other. It became a charade," Welch said.

The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee is holding hearings on what Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., calls the administration's determination "to mislead the public by injecting doubt into the science of global warming."

A number of scientists have complained publicly about the ways in which political appointees with no science background have rephrased their conclusions and altered their reports to downplay or suppress the significance of climate change.

Welch said he had read such newspaper accounts, but hearing the testimony made a greater impact.

"It's a stunning personal experience to hear directly from scientists whose life work has been compromised, who live in fear of retaliation or compromised careers if they adhere to their code of ethics as scientists," he said.

Two private advocacy organizations, the Government Accountability Project and the Union of Concerned Scientists, presented the committee with findings from in-depth interviews of 40 government scientists and a survey of nearly 300 more.

Nearly half said they had seen or personally experienced pressure to eliminate the words "climate change" and similar terms from reports and other communications. Two in 5 said they had seen or personally experienced changes or edits that altered the meaning of their scientific findings.

Administration officials did not testify Tuesday. In the past, the White House has said it sought only to inject balance into reports on climate change. President Bush has acknowledged concerns about global warming, but strongly opposes mandatory caps on greenhouse gas emissions.

Welch said legislation might be needed to better protect scientists and whistleblowers, but that oversight by a Democratic Congress might by itself pressure the administration to lessen its interference.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

---

With Love, John

"The real voyage of discovery lies not in seeking new landscapes but in having new eyes." Marcel Proust