The Amazon Forest is Burning - Who cares?

If one only read some of the mainstream media and selected Facebook posts - one could easily believe that all of a sudden the Amazon forest is in imminent danger of disappearing. Quite clearly from all of the information available and from the comments of such world leaders such as our own Justin Trudeau, Brazil needs to do something immediately before the world's environment is destroyed. While I do not disagree with the sentiment, I do wish folks would get their facts right. Even better, I wish that they actually did something as opposed to wringing their hands at the foolishness of others while refusing to make significant changes in their lifestyle - that same lifestyle that is leading to so many of the world's environmental problems. The sad fact is that that forest and others like it have been under constant pressure since (at least) the 1950s.

The total number of rain forest acres around the world has, on a yearly basis, been getting smaller and smaller. This is frequently done by burning the forest. Some of the fires are set intentionally either to drive out the indigenous populations, to clear the land for agriculture or to gain access to valuable timber or minerals. Other fires occur - as they do in Canada through lightning strikes or human carelessness. On a yearly basis, there are fires within the Amazon basin. This year, compared to last year is much worse. This year compared to the number of fires is worse than in 2013, but it is not the worse year on record. There are numerous sites available if one wants to have all of the facts (see the end of blog for a shortlist of sites). While it would be nice if someone could figure out how to put out the fires, it would be better to figure out how to stop the forests' continuous planned destruction.

It is so easy for the western world to demand that someone do something to stop the destruction of the forest. As we sit in our nice homes, some (many) of them single dwelling units perched on some of the best agriculture land in Canada, it is easy for us to ignore the pollution in our rivers and lakes that we have created. We demand that other countries stop using their natural resources or cutting down their forest when we do it every day in our own country. As we wear our pretty jewellery or use our high tech toys containing rare earth minerals, we forget where those substances come from. We expect others to deal with the destruction of our atmosphere while we continue to cruise along our roads, frequently alone in our five-passenger SUV or pick-up truck.

Some of the postings I have seen on Facebook, have suggested that we all need to stop eating meat as some of the rain forests are being cut down to make room for corn and other silage to feed beef cattle. Not much has changed from when I first stopped eating meat some 40 years ago - one of the bits of logic (I use that word loosely) was that the forest in Argentina was being destroyed so that fast food outlets could get cheap beef. In fact, the western world's lifestyle and constant demand for cheap products has ensured that forest all over the world have been cut down to produce pineapple or palm oil or etc etc. If we do not agree that Brazilians should use their forests to expand their economy, perhaps we should both stop doing it ourselves and stop demanding the exotic woods and precious metals that their forest provides to us.

In the short term, Canada could offer the skills and expertise of its forest firefighters to assist - except that I am not all that convinced that we are that skilled at putting out fires. It seems to take us long enough. We could offer to donate money so that they could hire and train their own firefighters or if we had them - we could send down some Martin Mars water bombers. But then someone would complain about how we are sending money to another country rather than helping people here.

Maybe we should just quit talking about what others should do - and do something ourselves.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/08/23/amazon-fire-history-since-2003/
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/amazon-rainforest-on-fire-2019/
https://www.science20.com/robert_walker/nasa_say_the_amazon_is_burning_at_below_average_rates_yet_many_news_stories_say_record_rates-240959

Being a Canadian - What's in a Name

I may have pondered this question before - but if I have, I am clearly no closer to understanding it than I was the last time. Quite simply, I don't understand dual citizenship. Most of us (or our families) came from somewhere else. Whether our ancestral roots lie in the Middle East, Europe, Asia, the lower Americas or Africa - if we live in Canada - we are Canadians. I am really glad that so many people from so many parts of the world have chosen to live here. The fact that all of us are here is what makes Canada so great. I can appreciate that those who have moved here have pride and an interest in the country of their origins. I can understand those people wanting to visit that country and even doing business with that country. But I am unclear why so many people have two citizenships. Either one is Canadian or one is not. One can't be Syrian and Canadian at the same time. It feels as if people can't really decide who to be and therefore they are hedging their bets.

I suspect that at least one of the reason why people maintain citizenship in their country of origin is that is economically advantageous to do so. It is easier to enter and do business in one' s birth country if one still is a citizen of the country. I would guess that for most purposes, no one knows who has dual citizenship. No one at least until that person gets into trouble with the state and then asks for help from Canada to rescue them.

Two examples - Some of the citizens of Hong Kong have, for the past eleven weeks, have held massive demonstrations against the Chinese government in Beijing. Some of the protests have turned violent with the Chinese authorities using aggressive crowd control techniques to discourage the protests. The protesters have even closed down the international airport. The Canadian government has announced that it is working on plans to ensure that Canadian citizens living in Hong Kong can get out if the situation worsens. My question is why are Canadian citizens living in Hong Kong. The answer would appear to be obvious - they can live in Hong Kong making money and living in a culture they are comfortable with while at the same time have all of the advantages of being a Canadian. I'm sorry - but this just feels wrong. If someone wants to live in China - great. If they want to live in Canada -that is equally as great. But they need to decide which. They cannot be the Canadian's government responsibility if they chose to live elsewhere.

The other example regards a young man who is a holder of both a British passport and a Canadian passport. Or at least that was true until Britain stripped Jack Letts of his citizenship - leaving the Canadian government to figure out what to do. Letts who had gone to Syria to be part of the ISIS "movement" and who has been branded as a terrorist. He is presently incarcerated in a Kurdish prison. He has never lived in Canada but because his dad is a Canadian he gets a Canadian passport. By what stretch of the imagination (never mind logic) is Letts a Canadian? There is no way that Canada should assume any responsibility for his release. It is simply not our problem.


In both of the above examples, a few Canadians are using their passports as alternatives of last resort. They are/were quite content to be citizens of another country until that country either fails them or life becomes dangerous. Then they will expect the Canadian government to rescue or protect them. Quite frankly - they should have thought about which country was their true home before deciding that they had the right to have the best of both worlds.

Greta Thunberg - A Prophet or a Pawn?

One of the more interesting stories this summer is about Greta Thunberg, the 16-year-old climate activist from Sweden and her decision to travel to the United Nations Climate Action Summit in September on a 60-foot, carbon-neutral sailboat to avoid flying. The story is interesting in part because it highlights the success one individual can have in attracting world attention to a specific issue. Thunberg rose to fame as the young person who was the catalyst behind young people's, particularly in the west, the decision to demand their governments take aggressive action to stop climate change. In my mind, it does not particularly matter whether or not she is the real reason why high school students started talking more about climate change. It is not even that useful to debate how she got to be that person. What is important is that a new approach was created to potentially attract the attention of those in powerful positions in industry and government who chose to ignore the reality of our climate changing. Anytime and anyway we can keep this issue in the news - it is a good thing.

However, in spite of the success of this movement that attracted the attention and action of thousands of high school-aged students, in spite of the newsworthy charms of a young woman who speaks with such passion and conviction, we should not be taken in by the manipulations of the media to make this story more than it is. The media always manipulates information. Someone always decides what is important to report, what can be ignored, what should be focused on - over-reported on and what can safely be placed, if at all, in the back pages. It is in the media's own self-interest to report - some would say create - news that will attract readers/viewers so that income can be generated. I am delighted that the media took hold of this story and made Thunberg a celebrity. Maybe someone will listen to her - they are not listening to the experts. She has been designated by the media as a spokesperson for all young people and she appears to be good at that job.

Unfortunately, she is not a scientist, she only knows what she has read or been told, and she probably has little understanding of the industrial complex that controls our lives. In fact, one cannot help but wonder if she has been set up as some sort of straw dog that can be easily attacked and her beliefs taken apart or ignored. For example, while the press and her supporters have made much about the fact that she chose not to fly to New York because of the carbon footprint of such travel, she is sailing in a very expensive boat made of some composite materials, a boat that uses solar power and other complex technologies to cross the ocean. The boat may use no carbon generating device to move, but I have no doubt it is full of rare earth minerals and other materials whose extraction and manufacture have had an impact upon the planet. The boat itself cost millions to build and probably an extraordinary amount of money to be maintained. It is the product of a culture that supports the unequal distribution of wealth. I am sure that the boat trip will be uncomfortable at times - but it sounds like an adventure to me - not some sort of noble sacrifice.

Greta Thunberg may be a remarkable young lady who might change the world. Equally as possible, she might be someone who is being manipulated into being a celebrity - giving false promise to all who have been tricked into believing that the solution to changing the world is just to ask nicely but with passion. I really want the former to be true - I suspect that the latter is the reality we live in.

Change will happen when we as individuals make the changes in our lifestyle. Asking others to make those changes first will not work.