This message is inspired by the fine music of the Rolling Stones, because I wanted to listen to “money” by the beatles but had the stones just sitting around.

So listen here’s the deal: we’ve all really fucked the environment up. It’s impossible to return things to their former state, damage is just going to continue to be done, and probably the best we can hope for is to figure out a way to keep living the way we do without… Well everyone dying. I dare say that hopefully a lot of people will die, I mean why not? I’ll probably be among the carcasses though this is something I’ve gone into before so it’s not worth repeating, but in any case if everyone is dead then that’s it.

As to global warming, global cooling, global dimming/dampening (the idea that there’s actually less light reaching us now than 50 or so years ago); I have no idea whether they’re part of the planet’s natural cycle, the result of “industrialization”, or some combination therein. I would wager on the third choice there. At the moment there is only weather data available for a very tiny portion of the earth’s existence, until new techniques are developed to try and sort out the past and the presently available data is sorted properly it’s really impossible to tell how much effect people have had. As to causes, “natural” ones would basically be celestial movement, including the earth’s position relative to the sun. I saw something a while ago that I’ve never looked into much that there’s evidence on the ocean floor to indicate that the earth’s magnetic poles have shifted multiple times. Whether that means that the earth actually moves in all directions or something else I have no idea, and probably other people only have theories. But if something like that is going on, there’s no way it wouldn’t alter temperatures and other things. As to “dimming”, it seems entirely possible to me that there might be other things in the way of the sun, off of the earth, in addition to pollution in the atmosphere of the earth. I have nothing to support that theory, but why not?

I will say that humans have destroyed the natural order in the ecosystem, but you can’t cast sole blame on oil usage, not even on pollution. By the way I personally think that nuclear power is a really bad thing but that’s another story, maybe. As an example of things that people don’t think of that have totally fucked up the environment, the introduction/export has totally fucked up the rivers and lakes of the world. Similarly moving wheat and corn and rice into places that they were not native has done things. Piping water from one place to another can’t be helping things. Bottled Water actually is probably a bigger threat to the environment than carbon monoxide emissions. You wonder why Greenland (it wasn’t Iceland was it? I don’t really care either way) is breaking off when yahoos are selling “glacial water”? yeah…. Recently there have been things about pharmaceutical drugs being found in water supplies around the world. Who would have thought of that? But it has gradually done shit to wildlife and so who knows what it’s doing to us. Actually what the hell is it doing to plants! I mean really, do they even test drugs on plants? Also mining in general, and salt production. Widespread desalinization of sea water is something that I can imagine really fucking things up somehow, it logically depends mostly on what they do with the salt that they separate from the water. But just think about the fact that they’re taking a lot (water and salt mostly of course, but you can’t tell me that other shit doesn’t get caught up in the process) from places that have to this point not had that much taken from them, and who knows just where it will be going? Well there are countless other things which I don’t know about , but you might. Feel free to write in. But in the end my point is that with all these things that we’re doing, there is no way that it’s having NO effect, it can just be really questionable exactly what the effect is, how “bad” it actually is, and what should be done about it.

So moving on there’s something I was thinking about that’s worth bringing up at this point, actually it’s what sparked this whole thing. So called “Organic” food. For those not familiar with the idea… all food that I know of (plants and animals) is technically an organic life form originally so this is somewhat of a redundant term, but it’s become pretty embedded now so what can you do. Anyway the idea behind “organic” food is that it’s “natural”, as in not genetically modified (including cloned), and grown without the use of chemical fertilizers or pesticides, and also not processed with such things (like preservatives). This is actually just about impossible to achieve because all water in the world is rife with chemicals but they have certain varying standards for what is and isn’t organic. The two main claims of those who produce organic food, and to a lesser extent organic materials (clothing mostly), is that it’s better for you to not have altered product, and that it’s better for the environment not to use such product. A lesser claim is that all things being equal organic food tastes better. I heard about a test in which monkeys would consistently choose “organic” fruit over other fruit.

I need a new paragraph. The only claim of the three regarding “organic” food that I’ll stand behind is taste, which is the main reason that I generally use organic ingredients. Just how harmful altered food is to people is really debatable. I’m not aware of any studies comparing lifeforms raised exclusively on one or the other to each other. An ideal testing situation would be cloning various specimens of given life forms a bunch of times and subjecting them to different types of feed. I have no idea what cloning really means for the world, it presents unique and useful scientific opportunities but whether it’s good or bad for anything else isn’t something I can speculate on. I’d say the same of gene modification. I’m more worried about the latter though. Anyway as to the benefits of organic farming to the environment… It becomes a complicated logistics issue. There’s no way in hell for instance that the production of organic maple syrup is good for the environment, whether or not it’s worse than chemically processed maple syrup. The main issue as far as organic crops goes is that you need to produce more, I don’t know how much more but at least 120% more and probably more like 150% more, in order to get the same yield in the first place as altered crops. And similarly if you don’t put preservatives in processed food (keep in mind that bread, cheesecake, tofu, and yogurt count as processed foods here) they won’t stay as good for as long so you ultimately end out wasting more of them, which means you’ll need more raw food, which similarly ramps up the amount that you need to produce. As far as I know the demand for organic almonds in the united states of america is vastly greater than what can be produced for example. Now, needing to produce more food means that you need more available arable land to cultivate, which translates to less area for wildlife and deforestation.

So with that last part in mind I ask you, what’s worse for the environment: A plot of land the size of your apartment complex growing chemically fertilized and genetically modified maize which has stems that can grow taller than buildings (as far as I know no such thing exists that grows edible corn but it should be possible eventually), needs comparatively less water and nutrients, and produces more than 1 ear of maize per stalk (supposedly the techniques and types of maize commonly grown produce less than an ear per stalk)? Or a plot of land the size of your neighborhood growing “organic” standard sized corn producing less than an ear per stalk? Actually, I really have no idea, who knows what the hell would happen to the plants of the world when bees (which might be dying out themselves, which in fact might herald the end of the human race as we know it) spread the pollen from that monster corn. But the latter would use up more land which is definitely the one finite resource in the world (water possibly is as well but since it’s the easiest thing in the world to recycle), and farming that larger area of land would almost certainly require more energy as well. Actually it’s a pretty tricky thing and I think we’re screwed either way which is pretty much my whole point here.

Well there are probably other issues here… Oh yeah, every single thing in your house is giving you cancer at this point. Even that organic American cotton shirt that cost you at least 5 times more than a cotton shirt made in china from the recycled rags taken off of dead bodies before cremation. Probably everything in the world is cancerous by now, even sunlight is after all, and there’s no way to change that. Going back to humans being organic, all things can be broken down to chemical compounds, so cancer is itself a chemical reaction (this is some pretty creative deductive reasoning going on here). A lot of research has been put into isolating exactly what factors go into this chemical reaction, some are obvious now like silicone and plutonium and petroleum but other things are vaguer. Not everyone that smokes cigarettes and drinks alcohol gets cancer after all. Most people do in the end though. I’m trying to remember now just how old cancer is, or if anyone knows. That might be something worth looking into for another time.

Until then remember, no matter what you’re going to die anyway so change what you want if you want, but there’s never any point in worrying about things. Go read a book and listen to the Stones or something. I’m really not sure whether it’s actually better to relax with a glass of juice than wine but I do know that wine is more relaxing and no matter what tastes worse than even juice of only a fair quality. Ridiculous bastards. Yeah go eat a crepe or something, and flip off the sun the next time you see it. Go have sex on the floor with the drapes drawn sometime, the only things you’ll hurt are your joints, unless you have carpet in which case there might be additional chafing.