Comments Due February 9, 2018
There’s a seafloor in Central Park. It crops out from under fallen ginkgo leaves, in black hunks sparkling with muscovite. This familiar rock was laid down as deep-sea muck half a billion years ago in a strange ocean haunted by alien exoskeletons, and gelatinous things that pulsed and squirmed. But you can’t find fossils in this Central Park seabed — they were all cooked to schist tens of millions of years later in titanic continental collisions that pushed snowcapped mountains into tropical New England skies. As you can imagine, this was all a very long time ago — but then again, you can’t imagine it. This is the central insight of geology. The world is old beyond comprehension, and our story on it is short. The conceit of the Anthropocene, the supposed new epoch we’re living in, is that humanity can already make claims to its geological legacy. But if we’re to endure as a civilization, or even as a species, for anything more than what might amount to a thin layer of odd rock in some windswept canyon of the far future, some humility is in order about our, thus far, infinitesimal part in the history of the planet. Astronomy gets much of the credit for decentralizing the role of humans in the story of the cosmos, but just as Edwin Hubble placed our island universe in deep space, the geologist James Hutton placed us in deep time, gawking in awe in 1788 at the chasms of history that confronted him in the rocks at Siccar Point on the east coast of Scotland. To grasp the extent of this abyss, the present-day geologist Robert Hazen proposes going for a walk, with each step representing a century back in time. Let’s walk 500 million years back, roughly to the strange age of the Central Park seafloor. With a nod to the space folks, we’ll start out at the American Museum of Natural History’s Hayden Planetarium on the Upper West Side and head west. We can’t even get to the sidewalk before all of recorded history — all of the empires, the holy books, agriculture, the architecture, all of it — is behind us. But since it is geological time, not human history that we’re after, we keep walking down city streets in a world now populated by woolly mammoths and giant ground sloths. We walk past Broadway to Riverside Park, eventually hitting the Hudson River. We’ve already put more than a thousand centuries behind us, but we’ve got a long way to go. So we march up the West Side Highway and cross the George Washington Bridge to New Jersey. Despite our sore feet, and having covered untold millenniums over several miles, we’re stupefied to learn that we’ve scarcely gone back a million years — an all but insignificant amount to geologists. In fact, we haven’t even emerged from the pulsating ice age that has waxed and waned for the past 2.6 million years. The scale of the task dimly dawning on us, we push on, trudging along the rumble strip of Interstate 80 in New Jersey, battered by gusts of passing tractortrailers. After walking for more than 24 hours we make it clear across the state, stumbling into Pennsylvania. Morale now collapsing, we’re further gutted to learn that walking as the crow flies 300 miles across the Keystone State won’t even bring us back to the age of dinosaurs. That august period begins in Ohio and, though all of human civilization lasted only those first few dozen footsteps out of the museum, the age of dinosaurs will continue through the rest of the state. Then Indiana. Then Illinois. Then Iowa. It’s not until we reach the middle of the Triassic somewhere in Nebraska (and some 235 million years ago) that the first humble dinosaurs appear. But we’re still nowhere near that ancient sea world entombed in the Manhattan schist. So we keep going, across prairies, over the Rocky Mountains, through Utah’s Martian wastes, then Nevada’s bleak Basin and Range, as untold millions of years slip past. Finally, scrambling over the Sierras and across the San Joaquin Valley to San Francisco, we arrive at the edge of the continent, more than 100 miles, and tens of millions of years, short of the Cambrian world revealed in Central Park. Having reached the Pacific Ocean, we have covered 10 percent of earth’s history. It has been cynically observed by some politicians that over this vast scope of time, “Earth’s climate is always changing.” Indeed, in our transcontinental walk through earth history, it’s true. The planet’s climate in those first few miles of our walk, through the freeze-thaw seesaw of the recent ice ages, is, in fact, far different from the carbon-dioxide infused wasteland inferno of the early Triassic, more than a thousand miles later. Over the grand sweep of earth history our planet has been many different worlds — a snowball earth colonized by sponges, a supercontinental broiler ruled by crocodile kin. But during the brief window of the past few thousand years in which all of civilization has emerged — those first few steps in our journey — we’ve enjoyed an almost miraculously equable interglacial climate, the most stable of the past several hundred thousand years. It’s these pleasant few footsteps that allowed complex societies to blossom. But in the next few footsteps, we’re projected to return to climates last seen hundreds, if not thousands of miles in our past. In this century alone, a time scale so laughably brief as to effectively not exist to geologists, we could send the planet back to a climate system not seen for many millions of years. One study recently estimated that humanity has the capacity in the next few centuries to make the planet warmer than it has been in at least 420 million years. The story of life on earth so far isn’t one of a tidy march of progress, culminating in humanity’s “end of history.” Other alien worlds have claimed this planet for unimaginably longer spans, relinquishing their place only under the duress of mindbending episodes of chaos, like asteroid hits And contrary to some accounts of our current moment, we’re not even the first, or only, organism to threaten the planet with mass extinction. At the end of the Ediacaran period, 540 million years ago, burrowing animals and filter feeders might have wiped out vast swathes of exotic life clinging to the seafloor. Almost 200 million years later at the end of the Devonian period, the evolution of trees might have driven such convulsions in climate and ocean chemistry that 97 percent of the world’s vertebrates died. In the next few decades we will decide whether humanity’s legacy will be a sliver of clay in the limestone strata — a geological embarrassment accessible only in remote outcrops to eagle-eyed geologists of the far future — or an enduring new epoch like the reign of dinosaurs. But even if it’s the former, and we collapse almost as soon, in geologic time, as we got started, the record in the rocks of the extinctions we caused will remain, as eternal as the schist in Central Park.( Peter Brannen NYT)
It isn't news that humans have had a huge impact on the Earth for the short time we were here and that we are only now starting to learn about what this could mean for the future. However, I do want to bring up the point that even when our population numbers were smaller, we were still causing vast problems with infertile farming lands, particularly in the region once known as the Fertile Crescent. The problem is that, for all our science and philosophy, we just cannot control how the environment will respond to certain stresses. While we now have a better idea and understanding, we will never be able to state with 100% accuracy what our actions may lead to in terms on environmental health and sustainability. While we can try to mitigate our impacts on climate change and the environment, greed still compels us to only fight for our survival and the survival of our families. Therefore, humanity will never be 100% on board with environmental legislations designed to protect the environment from our own actions.
ReplyDeleteYANG Peidong
ReplyDeleteuman species only stayed on this planet for a brief time, but make the planet warmer than it has been in at least 420 million years. The brief period human experienced is a stable climate and environment compared to periods before. Thus, it is quite a good luck for human beings live this stable period, which allows the blossom of various societies. However, in the next few decades, we may witness the climate turn back to be extreme before, like the ice age. I think expect for the climate cycle, us human still combine efforts to slower the climate’s progress to be extreme. Rio Declaration on environment and development is a good example for human species’ combined efforts on environmental protection, recognizing the indispensable relation between nature and human. In this Declaration, many principle are listed. For example, the principle 7 states that all states in the world should cooperate to in a spirit of global partnership to conserve the environment. The principle 11 also states that all states should enact effective environmental legislations. I think if all nations work together under these principles, enormous achievements in environment conservation will definitely be got. What’s more, since countries in the world have various economic levels, it is reasonable for developed countries to shoulder more responsibility of environmental protection, and provide support for those countries with lower economic capability to solve nature problems by providing technologies and financial assistance.
In my opinion the decisions made by our policy makers, rarely have our best interest in mind. We do just enough to keep our foundation from falling underneath us. The 27 principles would seem to be a creation to keep those that are weary of our future happy. Essentially to provide a false hope to our future generations. In recent times the push back to support sustainable development has been very blatant. The Dakota Access Pipeline comes to mind and that goes against the basic definition of sustainable development. In reality it's become an ineffective legislation, proof is in our current Administration dismissing the idea of climate change. We'll continue to look only as far as the present and continue our ignorance towards the future. We're a society of amnesia and we'll consistently be our own worst enemy. In my opinion it seems we'll continue to pass the buck and let future generations deal with the problems we've created with our ignorance.
ReplyDeleteGeological records contain evidence of the ways in which Earth’s conditions, like climate for example, has changed in the past, as well as forecasting it in the future. The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development is a great way to guide countries in future sustainable development. This declaration gives people the right to be involved in the development of their economy and to protect their environment. It sets principles for sustainable development throughout the world. The only way to have any form of long term growth is to ensure that it is grounded in environmental protection. I agree with the principles of the declaration, some of which state how people are entitled to a healthy and productive life with nature, it is best to handle environmental issues with all concerned citizens, and that all states should work together to meet the needs of the majority of people in the world to stop poverty. I think it’s important to have a say and be involved in our environment’s development since we are the ones living in it.
ReplyDeleteDeShawn McLeod
ReplyDeleteI wish that this type of knowledge was something that is taught to us from kindergarten on. The impact of humans on the earth, I think, needs to be taught in order for future generations to understand why its pertinent to revere and take care of the Earth. This isn’t public knowledge, nor is it highly sought after. How could the minds of new Americans be changed if they were objectively told about the mistakes humans made in the past? This article adds a facet to a holistic view of what the land we reside, and rely on, actually is. Reading this, I realized I take for granted how much I do rely on the earth and how it encompasses everything that I do. Even though I don’t see the physical destruction of earth in my daily life, understanding how important this planet is to my livelihood puts me into a perspective that I might actually care about what it means to be sustainable. I’m not sure if, in my lifetime, I will see the degradation of the earth heavily impact my day-to-day activities. However, I wonder if changing my consumption habits, with minute shifts, might make a difference.
It is clear that the current state of our environment is declining due to human behaviors, however, it is also only up to humanity to positively impact and change the direction of our future. The principles outlined in Rio clearly state the importance of all states coming together and working together to promote sustainability. Being proactive and willingly helping other states is the only way to ensure future improvements and long-term success. However, I think it is difficult for individuals and states to fully comprehend the impacts of human behavior because the consequences are not always visible during a single lifetime. Though the affects of humans are greater than all previous centuries before us, societies cannot accept this. Because of our selfish and learned behaviors, it is hard to recognize the huge changes that the environment has endured without viewing scientific facts. It is not a day-to-day change therefore it is nearly impossible to get all nations on board. Yet, the fact that the human race may face extinction sooner than most think, the need to implement new polices and sustainable development in all areas is only increasing. The study that revealed “humanity has the capacity in the next few centuries to make the planet warmer than it has been in at least 420 million years” should be enough to take the principles outlined years ago seriously. We have the potential to completely destroy our environment, but also have the resources and technology to make it better than ever before. I think the first principle encompasses the desired goals perfectly by stating that humans must live in harmony with nature in order to live a healthy life. This harmony includes environmental developments, global support, and continually advancing research and goals.
ReplyDeleteAs we all know, climate change is unanimously accepted by 97% of the scientific community. The effects that humanity has had on the environment are quite apparent. It baffles me that there are still people who question climate change (for religious reasons or plain ignorance) and politicians who are paid off by oil companies to use their platform to deny climate change. We as a species have caused so much damage to this planet in such a short amount of time, and in turn the earth is rejecting us. The first principle on the Rio Declaration says, "Human beings are at the centre of concerns for sustainable development. They are entitled to a healthy and productive life in harmony with nature." The key part of this principle is "in harmony with nature." So far, throughout our history we have not lived in harmony with nature; we have exploited nature and only taken into account our own wellbeing. The world is a chain of ecosystems that depend on each other in order to maintain balance and humans have disrupted this balance. We seem to have forgotten that WE need the earth to survive, but the earth does not need us to continue on.
ReplyDeleteWhile it is shocking that the human species era has made the earth the warmest it’s been in 420 million years, there is still little we know on our overall impact. As the above article points out, our time here is only a blink in a geologist’s eye. Yes, we have set a record in the rocks for the amount of extinctions caused by our ignorance to environmental harm. But, it is difficult to determine the fate of the unforeseeable future of the earth when considering how many different evolutions have taken place over the past millions and millions of years. However, it is interesting to note that other alien worlds would have never foreshadowed an end to the planet without the chaos of an asteroid or something of that nature. Us, however, recognize the harmfulness of our own errors and our own self-destructing human behavior that would lead to extinction. And because of this, it calls for a need for attention and repair through regulation. The Rio sustainability principles create a good framework for how this should be done. All development should not be approved without the consideration of sustainability and the potential harm caused. I liked that principle 17 states “environmental impact assessment, as a national instrument, shall be undertaken for proposed activities that are likely to have a significant adverse impact on the environment and are subject to a decision of a competent national authority.” This eliminates the issue of different environmental boards having different goals. With a national authority, all decisions would be made on the same environmental framework, resulting in a proactive and efficient solution.
ReplyDeleteOn page 53 of our reading, the authors mentioned that by 2025, 80% of the world population will live in a developing country and 20% will reside in developed countries. In contrast, in 1950, 40% of the world lived in developed countries and 60% lived in developing countries. This is significant because it shows the growing wealth gap between ‘developing’ and ‘developed’ nations.
ReplyDeleteEven though it is no secret that humans have changed the entire scope of the world around us, we do not often speak of the political, social and economic causes for our current environment. While steps forward to create documents and legislation similar to the Rio Declaration of the Environment are integral to the Earth’s and human species’ long-term survival, we also need to examine the economic systems we currently operate within to make radical changes.
In its essence, capitalism as a market system creates much individual competition to reach the top of the societal social pyramid through accumulating a lot of wealth, which inherently means that people are left at the bottom of the pyramid. On the global stage, this is perpetuated even through the idea of calling a country ‘developing’ or ‘developed’, as if one is more legitimate than the other. Under the capitalist system, general trends show that developed countries’ “production and consumption patterns may be more geared toward luxury goods, and toward increasing economic benefits at the cost of environmental and social benefits.” (pages 66-67).
Until we review how we economically operate and explicitly acknowledge that it impacts our social relationships, there will be little room for sustainable development. Sustainable development requires consideration for making measured, long-term, and collectivist goals so that we can survive as a society, species and preserve the Earth. Prioritizing sustainable development also allows every country the opportunity to contribute to a global culture, and also supports the current group classified as ‘poor’ in attaining their basic needs for survival on a widespread basis.
Daniella Antolino
ReplyDeleteNow taking so many economic courses this is not surprising to me. I was educated on a lot new aspects and became aware of the environmental problems we have surrounding us today. Some people aren't educated or are aware but have no desire to change but our earth is deteriorating and our environments are becoming more tarnished and damaged. We as a whole need to come together and work hard to change the future generations and create a sense of sustainability.
People are focused on wealth and desires, they are not willing to sacrifice dangerous hazardous actions to save the earth. People think short term not long term damages they are occurring on the earth and atmosphere around them. We have lost so many species due to ignorance and stupidity. We have killed animals habitats and homes to build houses and buildings. We have polluted the air and killed fishes from plastic waste. We need to make legislation and laws for the relationship between humans and the environment. There needs to be more structure and discipline because if we leave it up to people changing on their own free will it won't happen.
We need the repair process to start happening faster than we realize. We can not afford to keep damaging the environment. We have lost so many beautiful things in this world we need to save what we have left.
I haven’t really thought about how much humans have changed planet Earth up until I took a science course at Pace University last year. Reflecting on a few of the words above, when we really think about how much the Earth has been through throughout time, we can’t really picture it in our minds because it is beyond our imagination. I believe the example above, of walking across the nation gave a better understanding of how long and how much it really takes to get to the seafloor of Central Park and how complex the Earth is. If we look at a 24-hour clock of Earth’s history, we can see that humans have only been on the Earth for a minute and seventeen seconds. If we want to put that more into a perspective, I divided 86,400 (seconds in a day) by 77 (seconds humans have been on Earth), I got 0.00089. Humans have been on Earth 0.00089 out of 1. For a species that has been on Earth for so little we have sure done a lot of damage. If we take a look at The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development of 1992, we see people taking action toward their environment’s sustainability by drawing out principles to follow. This declaration is a clear depiction of the basic ideas and the concerning attitudes of the individuals and nations toward their environment and its development. The declaration makes sure to state that long-term economic progress is only possible if the protection of the environment is existent along with it. One of the principles that stuck out to me was fifth principle, “All States and all people shall cooperate in the essential task of eradicating poverty as an indispensable requirement for sustainable development, in order to decrease the disparities in standards of living and better meet the needs of the majority of the people of the world.” This principle essentially states that poverty must be put an end to and differences in the living conditions among people around the world must dwindle if sustainable development can be achieved while meeting the general consensus of needs of people. I thought this was an important principle because it touches sustainable development from a social perspective.
ReplyDeleteIt is honestly crazy to think how long the earth has existed and being able to compare that to our existence by simply using a "take a walk in my shoes" viewpoint. I like how geologist are able to see the time of human existence and see how it does not compare in size to how much time has gone by in the earths existence. We as humans feels as though we have existed on this planet for a while which is very far from true considering how much of a distance occurs between an age with dinosaurs and the first recorded events in human history. One thing that mainly took me by surprise is how it is assumed that in centuries time, human behavior will make the hottest climate the earth has seen in over 420 million years! It really opens your mind to see just how much this planet has endured in terms of climate shifts. I believe we are all well aware of how much climate has changed in the past few decades and our desire to become more green can be seen as maybe too late. I honestly have no clue just how much of an impact our behavior will have in the future, that is something we will have to wait and see. I believe that something like this should be taught to kids in grade school so that they are able to grasp a better understanding of environmental sustainability.
ReplyDeleteThis post is very eye opening to how insignficant humanity is in the grand scheme of the earth. So much has happened before we even existed and it is very possible that much will happen after we are gone. We all know that the earth has changed and species have gone extinct, but I think it is hard to imagine that happening to the human species. I think, we as humans, are very blind to the way the earth is change and brush it off as just slight changes in weather and population, when it may be something more major. Climate change and global warming is a big topic, but there are still many who feel that it is not even real. As mentioned in the post, it is very possible that the earth could be becoming warmer than it has been in millions of years, and that is not something that should be ignored. Is there something that we can do to sustain the earth as it is? If so, should we do it? Or should we allow the earth to continue to change as it has since it's existence? These questions are some that this post raises, and some that I'm not sure there are any right answers to.
ReplyDeleteXin Jiang
ReplyDeleteThe earth resources are limited. Other creatures must be phased out while human beings develop. The human niche will not be able to coexist as the needs of the material life become wider and wider.
In addition, the balance of nature's species is due to the constraints of the food chain and the energy pyramid, but it seems that human beings are not constrained by this. When mankind has renovated the Earth more suitable for its own survival, there is no natural enemy and population growth will inevitably lead to extinction . So sustainable development can really be achieved? What exactly do we want in the future? My ideal has always been to keep human beings and other creatures alive. Obviously, this is the law of nature's existence and does not apply to mankind. There is only competition, symbiosis and parasitism between humans and other living beings. Can this unsustainable development be sustainable?
I think it depends on human actions and awareness of their own, environmental protection and economic development should be parallel. Without economic development, environmental protection can not be implemented because environmental protection requires a lot of money. However, economic development and paying little attention to environmental protection are just suicidal acts to mankind. Today, our predatory acquisition of nature will eventually lead to the depletion of resources and the serious deterioration of the environment, not to mention economic development. Therefore, while economic development, the awareness of environmental protection must be deeply rooted in the heart and people can get rid of the current unsound development.
Our world is forever in an entropic state. Since the beginning of time, species have become extinct while new ones were being formed, climates shift drastically (of course, not as exponentially quickly as climate change is mitigating right now), life on earth is and always has been a constant of creation and destruction. Only when humans started to separate themselves from nature is when massive destruction took place. This happened when capitalism overtook after Western Christianity directly infiltrated our modern world of technology and science when christianity had virtually entirely overtaken paganism. The reason this is so momentous is because the idea of animism, which was essentially man’s major protector from the destruction of nature since the beginning of agricultural permeation, begins to dissipate. We learn that pre–Christian ideals were based on a theory that time was cyclical and had no beginning. However, Christianity teaches that God created the world in such a way that humans were the dominant creatures simply because they were given the authority to put names to animals, plants, etc. Prior the infiltration of Christianity, there was also originally a definite notion that nature had spiritual value, and therefore it would be ghastly to destroy nature, i.e. by mining into a mountain, or cutting down forests for one’s own financial gain. Obviously all life forms can modify the world around them, however in this current period humans are the major catalyst for ecological devastation via the poor social construct of values in institutions that frame our existence through the infiltration of Western Christianity. Nature in the view of Christianity has no intrinsic value and is entirely instrumental according to John Locke. This pursued the conception that unless one was to mix his labor with nature, it has no value. This was fundamentally the beginning of our capitalistic economic system and in turn our downfall as a species to protect and perpetuate our planet.
ReplyDeleteAccording the teachings of Western Christianity, humans are superior to the natural process and this is the sole component that as humans, we can attain enough knowledge about our scientific world that we can always create technologies to replace nature because it is valid to do so since the ultimate human goal in Christianity is to seek salvation via emulation of God. However, it must be renounced that what we do about our current ecological crisis is extremely dependent on the “man-nature relationship.” Our current socioeconomic paradigm will continue to worsen our current ecological crisis as long as its sole component is that nature alone has no correlation to the salvation of the human race to reach "heaven". In order to come up with a solution to our ecological crisis, we need to incorporate a set of environmental ethics into our relationship with not only nature but also the fundamental teachings of values of our moral construct beginning in our social institutions as well as our economic system. Until this paradigm shift, we (humans and all other species) seem to only be living to die in the "end of history".
Liyuan Zhang
ReplyDeleteLooking into the past on a broad time span, it is clearly that human species only habitat on this planet for a relatively short range of them. Before the appearance of human species, there is long history with other species out there. In the past, there has been changes in climate and so it is with the future. One of the goal of sustainable development is to protect, restore and promote the continually sustainable development of the ecosystem for all the species to live. Biodiversity was important for both the planet and our society.
In addition, this article enlightens us to think about human impact on the Earth and environment. For instance, the streets we are now familiar with may be mountain and seas in the previous time. Human activities do change the surrounding environment the Earth used to have. And if we are not given thoughts about this, there can be more species in danger of dying out. From this aspect, it is of critical importance for people to think about their daily activity and small acts may actually make a big difference.