No, but we are subject to Nature and Acts of God. Neither can be litigated nor responsibility accessed. Willful Acts of Man on the other hand can be mitigated and in today's world, litigated. No one cares about God's Contributions - to quote Solomon, it rains on the just and unjust alike. And yes, any rational person, ( Cosmic most likely fits that description, but he should be the judge of that, LOL), considers saying in a forum that ....caused the dust bowl singularly means it was only due to those factors. When we think of Dust Bowl historically, we are referring specifically to the contributions of over plowing ...and how it did contribute .... to the disaster that followed the drought.
My response, (if I am wrong in my assumption, I concede my assumption), is that when someone is quick to point out the word contribution, it is a latent attempt to minimize conversations around the actual disastrous impact man has on his surrounding environment while maximizing the impact nature contributes. I agree that nature can be a dirty and fickle partner. But it is a partner, and when we fail to do our part in being a partner with nature, the fickleness of nature is exacerbated and magnified negatively. The Mississippi Delta region is a case in point. Human carelessness and lack of planning and utilizing resources around the Delta magnified the impact of Katrina on New Orleans. The city would have been slapped hard by the hurricane - no doubt. It was given a near KO because humans obliterated many of the natural protections that nature had build up over the years.
I live maybe seven miles south of the San Andreas fault. I know where I live. I would NEVER live in a masonry home built of bricks in this area. Water resources are scarce and yet, with proper planning, we maintain a 53 year reserve of ground water that is replenished each year through careful planning. Many would say why not use the water you already have rather than look for other sources that cost way too much in comparrsion? Because not only is the water gone when it is gone, the impact on the valley floor on a sinking valley would destroy and put at risk of an even more magnified eventual earthquake the people who live here.
Do environmentalist have all the answers? No. But we won't move toward a reasoned solution so long as discussions like the one in this thread are always shut down by negativity - not that this was your intent because I know it wasn't. My response really was less a reply to you directly and more a reply to the overall responses of many others who love to jump on the ...yeh man, but what about this... argument. I regret any confusion in my initial reply. Forums suck at nuance. As always, I do appreciate your thoughtful contributions to discussions.
My response, (if I am wrong in my assumption, I concede my assumption), is that when someone is quick to point out the word contribution, it is a latent attempt to minimize conversations around the actual disastrous impact man has on his surrounding environment while maximizing the impact nature contributes. I agree that nature can be a dirty and fickle partner. But it is a partner, and when we fail to do our part in being a partner with nature, the fickleness of nature is exacerbated and magnified negatively. The Mississippi Delta region is a case in point. Human carelessness and lack of planning and utilizing resources around the Delta magnified the impact of Katrina on New Orleans. The city would have been slapped hard by the hurricane - no doubt. It was given a near KO because humans obliterated many of the natural protections that nature had build up over the years.
I live maybe seven miles south of the San Andreas fault. I know where I live. I would NEVER live in a masonry home built of bricks in this area. Water resources are scarce and yet, with proper planning, we maintain a 53 year reserve of ground water that is replenished each year through careful planning. Many would say why not use the water you already have rather than look for other sources that cost way too much in comparrsion? Because not only is the water gone when it is gone, the impact on the valley floor on a sinking valley would destroy and put at risk of an even more magnified eventual earthquake the people who live here.
Do environmentalist have all the answers? No. But we won't move toward a reasoned solution so long as discussions like the one in this thread are always shut down by negativity - not that this was your intent because I know it wasn't. My response really was less a reply to you directly and more a reply to the overall responses of many others who love to jump on the ...yeh man, but what about this... argument. I regret any confusion in my initial reply. Forums suck at nuance. As always, I do appreciate your thoughtful contributions to discussions.
