Monday 13th of July 2020

solving the endless waste and pollution from humanity?...


Scientists have found that the world's oceans are surprisingly resilient, despite the endless waste and pollution humanity has invoked on them. 

According to a major new scientific review, oceans can be restored to former glory within the next 30 years, but will not do so on their own. Climate change and the way we respond to it will have a significant impact on our oceans and their ability to recover. A major ramp up in efforts is needed.

The oceans have been exploited by humans for centuries, through rampant overfishing, oil spills and pollution poisoning the seas and its inhabitants and the influence of climate change bleaching corals and increasing the oceans acidity.

The review, published in the journal Nature, is focused on the Sustainable Development Goal 14 of the United Nations aims to “conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development”. 

Scientists report that we now have the knowledge to be able to save and restore the oceans wildlife and support the major services that the world’s population rely on, including food, coastal protection and climate stability. The measures needed to achieve this would cost billions of dollars a year. However, the scientists argue that this would bring benefits 10 times as high.

“We have a narrow window of opportunity to deliver a healthy ocean to our grandchildren, and we have the knowledge and tools to do so [..] Failing to embrace this challenge, and in so doing condemning our grandchildren to a broken ocean unable to support good livelihoods is not an option.” Said the review’s leading scientist, Prof Carlos Duarte, of King Abdullah University of Science and Technology in Saudi Arabia.

The review recognises the scale of the problems but also highlights the extraordinary resilience of our oceans. Since the ban on commercial whaling Humpback whale numbers have increased. The proportion of marine species assessed as threatened with global extinction by the IUCN has dropped from 18% in 2000 to 11.4% in 2019.

“Overfishing and climate change are tightening their grip, but there is hope in the science of restoration. “One of the overarching messages of the review is, if you stop killing sea life and protect it, then it does come back. We can turn the oceans around and we know it makes sense economically, for human wellbeing and, of course, for the environment.” Prof Callum Roberts, at the University of York, one of the review’s international team.


Read more:

toons and pictures about garbage...

against the wall

Picture by Gus Leonisky: Against the wall


serious recycling

Picture by Gus leonisky: Serious recycling at a convention...


other recycling

Other recycling


removing space junk

Removing space junk

the human species will be dumbed some more...

From the security of his office in Canberra, the nation's top doctor fielded questions from politicians across the ditch on Australia's response to COVID-19. 

Key points:
  • Nightclubs and music festivals to remain closed for foreseeable future
  • Industries like construction could close if virus rates worsen
  • Australia and New Zealand's "hard and fast" approach to virus is working


Brendan Murphy claimed an "illegal dinner party" attended by medics in Tasmania may have caused the latest coronavirus cluster. He later withdrew the remark.

Here's what else we learned.

The human race will change for good 

By closing the borders, quarantining travellers and clamping down on group gatherings, Australia has so far managed to "flatten the curve" and limit community transmission. 

So, many people are daring to dream of a post COVID-19 world where life can return to normal.

But Professor Murphy said, in some ways, this crisis will change human behaviour for good.


Read more:


Read from top.


There is no such a thing as a "human race". And do we think things will improve? the jury is out and the pocker machine will mostly spins lemons.


the unnatural animal...


The idea that “natural” is used with moral or theological connotations is not new. Nearly 40 years ago, Stephen Jay Gould wrote that we cannot find answers in nature to how we should behave in our everyday lives (1). It is too easy to cherry-pick examples of natural behaviors in favor of, or against, any practice in which we might choose to engage. Today, Levinovitz shows that unraveling the layers of moral and theological meanings associated with the notion of “natural” is a relevant endeavor, not just for scientists, ethicists, and policy-makers but for all human beings as we try to make sense of our relationship with the world around us.
In the afterword, Levinovitz provides a reflective account of how his own attitude toward “naturalness” changed through the journey of writing the book. Although he was initially skeptical about the use of the word, he came to recognize its importance as he unpacked the different values that people ascribe to it. The take-home message? Rather than dismissing “natural” altogether, we should strive to acknowledge and explore its many facets, depending on the context. In this sense, Levinovitz's book is an important call for more nuance over simplicity, for compromise over dogmatism, and for embracing uncertainty over certainty.

Read more:
Science  24 Apr 2020:
Vol. 368, Issue 6489, pp. 374


Illuminates the far-reaching harms of believing that natural means “good,” from misinformation about health choices to justifications for sexism, racism, and flawed economic policies.

People love what’s natural: it’s the best way to eat, the best way to parent, even the best way to act—naturally, just as nature intended. Appeals to the wisdom of nature are among the most powerful arguments in the history of human thought. Yet Nature (with a capital N) and natural goodness are not objective or scientific. In this groundbreaking book, scholar of religion Alan Levinovitz demonstrates that these beliefs are actually religious and highlights the many dangers of substituting simple myths for complicated realities. It may not seem like a problem when it comes to paying a premium for organic food. But what about condemnations of “unnatural” sexual activity? The guilt that attends not having a “natural” birth? Economic deregulation justified by the inherent goodness of “natural” markets?

In Natural, readers embark on an epic journey, from Peruvian rainforests to the backcountry in Yellowstone Park, from a “natural” bodybuilding competition to a “natural” cancer-curing clinic. The result is an essential new perspective that shatters faith in Nature’s goodness and points to a better alternative. We can love nature without worshipping it, and we can work toward a better world with humility and dialogue rather than taboos and zealotry.

This seems to be a good book to explain and manage our unnaturalness. We hope that we’ve been exploring this subject on this site as best as we could, in order to create a better democratic system. We humans have evolved in uncertainty, that’s for sure. We have modified nature to suit our growing unnatural needs to a point. Our foods are modified by our practice of mono-culture, seed selection, refining and herding. Our sense of beauty uses plants to create gardens and parks. We use the powers from nature, fire, electricity and natural motion from gravity such as water mills. Thus we still need nature… or do we? How far can our sciences take us a virulent world, when our social constructs are somewhat temporarily arrested by “having to fight nature”? And do we invent new unnatural needs in order to sustain the growth of our societies?

The answer is in the wind, my friend… as we have to be careful as not to destroy the balances in the planet ecosystems that could be nefarious to our well-being and that of our more natural fellow travellers… Yes I know, we’re on the way towards the cliff...

Read from top.

happy to see rubbish...



This cartoon from Sol, c.1990...


Read from top.