But that’s no reason to be unhappy.

We have destroyed well over fifty per cent of the greenery that existed at the start of the Industrial Revolution. The CO2 has reportedly approximately doubled within the last 150 years and the temperature averages have historically followed the CO2 & Methane levels almost slavishly. Among all but a few tools, the debate about climate change is over. There’s no doubt about the data, no doubt about it being anthropogenic.

The global warming data is there. According to a former denier physicist PhD from California, who got a big grant from Charles and David Koch to go through the data, he is concerned that in the public there is this discussion as though there were any doubts about it. Global warming is real, and it’s anthropogenic. Period. His funders are less than ecstatic about it. The Guardian reported about the research and consequences, and I have high confidence in that, but the other part may not be as well sourced.

Among other stuff that we know about what we have done as far as releasing gigatons of toxic substances into fields and streams, oceans and the air we breathe. With food prices on the upward slant of the cycle, lots of virgin rainforest will be–not cut down and used–burned to sow a field of cattle feed. Also, that steak you had for dinner, was likely to be from Amazonas. When the minerals start running out, they burn another piece, if the rise continues.

When those fallow fields are left to their own devices the rains wash the loose material into rivers. This happens increasingly, when climate change continues to increase precipitation overall, and especially make for more torrential rainfall, so that in many areas what rain comes down over the year, comes over fewer days.

When the increased rainfall falls on sunburned fields after a draught, they do much more damage, because the soil cannot soak water as fast as it falls.

I don’t need to continue in this pessimistic vein.

There are things we can do, things to make this better in our own backyards. Demand regulations to how much pollution is acceptable. Some is always inevitable, but we don’t have to destroy the planet to feed and clothe ourselves.

All that talk about how it would cost too much to become greener, but actuarially it costs more in the long run to do nothing about it. Ask an insurance broker for a quote for a major building project. Your insurance premium comes down when you use better and more recyclable insulation, double or triple glazing, renewable energy for heating (they know what will most likely cost money in the future). All that can create jobs and give us opportunities that will more than cover for the jobs we possibly might lose by polluting less. It will be an effort, but then nothing good comes to us without a little effort.

I have used the pronoun we as much as I can. I realise that my standard of living, my gadgets, warm house & clean drinking water, all of that has a cost. I am one of the polluters whenever I make a choice to use more energy than I need. And I am very conscious of my grandchildren’s futures. Will they ask us why we didn’t stop this as long as we had a choice? Assuming we still do…

And I apologise if this comes out as “preachy” (which it is). I’m trying to say that science tells us there is a major crisis looming in the double whammy of resource depletion and population growth. Twenty years ago somebody said that in the 21st century, war will be mostly fought over water and other precious & scarce resources. The value of everyday necessities will remind us of itself when we are at risk of losing them (and writing at your blog, I’m conscious of stilted sentences–ouch).

(What’s funny is that in the 1960s the young people worried over pollution and depletion of resources. Now the same people (Boomers, I should say) are the worst polluters. What happened there? I remember hearing about Global warming in the late sixties or early seventies. It was more like a fad among the people. With us, it shouldn’t be a fad. We have a stewardship of this Earth. That means we are responsible for what we do with it. No one person can do much, but a lot of small acts grows into something meaningful. Besides, that stewardship rests on all of us.)

There’s also an interesting bit of apocryphal apostolic info here – my husband, who is Latino and served as both a Chinese-speaking and Spanish-speaking missionary in Texas was told by his mission president that Elder Holland responded to a request to keep open a Chinese branch in Houston in an interesting way. He said when there is a pressing need for a minority language unit in the United States (like Chinese), there will be temporary programs in place, but that none of them are long term. The only exception, Elder Holland said, is Spanish-speaking units. There will always be Spanish-speaking wards, stakes and missions in the US because “it is their land.”

And that Popularity & Prosperity theme never goes old. It’s as big of a problem now as it was 22 years ago when Elder Packer said that.

There is nothing wrong with being prosperous. But when one starts thinking too much in the vein that “I’ve earned it, therefore I can keep it and do whatever I want with it,” which is not actually true, if one wants to live the teachings of the Scriptures. If we do not use our substance to “feed the hungry and clothe the naked, to free the prisoners et.c” then we may not have earned it in the long run.

They could give you a good cutting-board and a meat cleaver (in the vein of Meaning of Life). That ought to dispel the ennui that the personnel sometimes suffer. ;)

But I believe that the reigning current medium (mostly smartphones) will shrink our vocabulary (well, not mine) and grammar skills and constrict our range of expression in various ways.

I still like full keyboard and I avoid using a spell-checker until I think I have finished. And still that “Send/Post/et.c” button gets clicked too early.

But that list was still a good one.