HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ddeocamp@pearl.tufts.edu (DANIEL M. DEOCAMPO)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: The Criterion for Ecocentrism
Date: 7 Nov 92 09:43:00 GMT
Organization: Tufts University - Medford, MA
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <Bx9Ltt.3EH@quake.sylmar.ca.us>, brian@quake.sylmar.ca.us (Brian K. Yoder) writes...
> 
> think it is important to point out that the most important issue in all of
>this is that the environmentalists want to impose POLITICAL strategies on
>the use of these resources, while the rest of us want to see individual
>freedom to trade and contract to do so.  That's why you see little Hitlers
>like Al Gore pushing this idea so much...he wants to rule over everyone's
>private lives, and environmentalism is the perfect vehicle for this.
> 
>Read his book if you don't believe me.
> 
> 
>--Brian

I have read his book, and it is hardly a _Mein Kampf_.

Daniel Deocampo                          Undergrad (I have an excuse for    
ddeocamp@pearl.tufts.edu                            any silly comments.)
                                         Department of Geology
---------------------|                   Environmental Studies Program
"Be gneiss to me,    |                   Tufts University
 I'm going through   |
 a lot of schist."   |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: parson_r@cubldr.colorado.edu (Robert Parson)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Bison Burgers (Re: <None>)
Date: 10 Nov 92 00:33:23 GMT
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder

In article <JMC.92Nov7175444@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>, jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy) writes:
> Very likely, the distribution of bison meat is restricted to a few
> states, because the supply is small.  If it is popular enough at
> prices that are profitable, doubtless the supply and the area where it
> is sold will be expanded.
> 
> How much extra does it cost?
> --
 Checked yesterday - $3.69/lb for ground bison, as compared with $2.49/lb
 for extra-lean (93%) ground beef (judging from its behavior in the frying
 pan, the bison has about the same fat content as this) and $3.29 for the
 highest grade "ground round" beef. Definitely in the "gourmet" price range.
From: alanm@hpindda.cup.hp.com (Alan McGowen)
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 01:28:34 GMT
Subject: Ecosystem "Services" or Functions?
Organization: HP Information Networks, Cupertino, CA
From: wolfone@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Patrick Chester)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Rights for Rocks
Date: 10 Nov 92 03:50:43 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX

In article <1dh1orINNl7h@gap.caltech.edu> carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU writes:
](From a flyer I found attached to the door of the building in which I work)
]
]                          STOP THE CUTTING OF ROCKS
]                        *Just say NO to Lithosection*


Gee. I wonder what they'd say to mining asteroids. 
:):):):):):):)


(Besides saying it's "just science fiction"):(


-- 
Patrick Chester            |----------------------------------------------------
wolfone@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu |"The earth is too fragile a basket in which to keep
Politically Incorrect      |  all your eggs." Robert A. Heinlein
Future Lunar Colonist      |"The meek shall inherit the Earth. The rest of us
#^%$!! Militarist          |  are going to the stars." Anonymous
(Of the Sun Tzu mentality) |----------------------------------------------------
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: The Criterion for Ecocentrism
Date: 5 Nov 92 17:19:22 GMT
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <4NOV199217052654@pearl.tufts.edu>, ddeocamp@pearl.tufts.edu (DANIEL M. DEOCAMPO) writes:
>In the US, the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment estimates 50,000
>premature deaths from respiratory or cardiac problems caused by air pollution. 
>The American Lung Association estimates 120,000 deaths per year from the same
>cause.

Both those statistics are pretty meaningless.  Just HOW premature were the
deaths?  It would seem to me that dying 5 minutes prematurely is a far cry from
dying 20 years prematurely.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL

Disclaimer:  Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS.  That's what I get paid for.  My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below).  So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it.  If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: Historic levels of methane by bison (was Re: Perot ad and methane from cattle)
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
	<13045@optilink.UUCP> <27809@castle.ed.ac.uk>
Date: 6 Nov 92 21:47:43

Bison are raised for food in the U.S. on a small scale.  The people
who do it seem to concentrate on some restaurants.  However, I'm
sure that yuppie supermarkets would stock some if it were offered -
even at a premium price.  I regard it as a romantic view that
bison produce as much meat per acre as cattle that have been bred
with that end in view for hundreds of years.

Maybe the writer of the New Scientist article was correct, but a lot
of the things in that magazine have a slightly yellow tinge.
--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.

Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: pld@fc.hp.com (Paul_Dineen)
Subject: Re: Articles on companies that pollute?
Organization: HP CLO/CoLL, Fort Collins, CO
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.4 PL6]
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 22:25:35 GMT

:    I suspect that John's criticism has to do with the subject line, where
: it says "companies that pollute". Deciding that the companies are
: polluting sure sounds like a conclusion to me. How about "companies that
: discharge waste into the atmosphere or aquatic environment"? Then part of
: the research involves deciding whether the waste is pollution or not.
: I know: it doesn't make a nice neat subject line, but it is more "objective".

  Ok, I can see that.  My goal was to fit it into the subject line,
  expecting that people would know what I meant.  My wife expressed it
  to me in the same way you did, "...companies that discharge
  toxic/carcinogenic substances into the atmosphere...".  I take the
  blame for not being able to express that within the limit.
From: gil@Gilsys.DIALix.oz.au (Gil Hardwick)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: The Criterion for Ecocentrism
Distribution: world
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 02:46:57 GMT
Organization: STAFF STRATEGIES - Anthropologists & Training Agents


In article <1dmfrvINNha9@gap.caltech.edu> carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU writes:

 > In article <1992Nov9.172217.2590@vexcel.com>, dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska)
 > writes:
 > =If the propert is collective and society wants to preserve it,
 > =then it does not need to determine a quantitative value.
 >  
 > Just how do we determine that "society wants to preserve it"?  Ask Dean Alaska,
 > and if he says society wants to preserve it, then society wants to preserve it?

Well, Carl, this *is* a science forum, isn't it?

Reliable research methods for analysing what societies want and expect
have long been available.

Yes?

--
Gil Hardwick                                      gil@Gilsys.DIALix.oz.au
Independent Consulting Ethnologist                            3:690/660.6
PERTH, Western Australia                                 (+61 9) 399 2401
   * * Sustainable Community Development & Environmental Education * *
Newsgroups: sci.environment,talk.environment,rec.backcountry
From: cls@truffula.sj.ca.us (Cameron L. Spitzer)
Subject: Re: Lot of questions about hemp
Organization: Save the Humans!
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 92 07:31:31 GMT
Summary: Where to get _The Emperor Wears No Clothes_

In article <1992Nov3.141629.23009@infodev.cam.ac.uk> dahe@cl.cam.ac.uk (David Elworthy) writes:
>I think the original poster on this thread asked for source materials on
>hemp. There is a book on its history and use, and the politics behind it
>becoming illegal, called "The Emperor Wears No Clothes".

_Emperor_ was self-published by Jack Hehrer.  
Available through Help End Marijuana Prohibition,
5632 Van Nuys BLVD STE 210
Van Nuys CA 91401
(818)377-5886
Old Jack rants a bit, but the appendix is well worth looking at,
and I haven't seen this history collected elsewhere.
Check out the reproduced _Popular Mechanix_ article on mechanical
decortication, the invention which made hemp hurds an economic threat to
wood pulp for papermaking in the early '30s.
_Scientific American_ gave _Emperor a favorable review a couple of years
ago.

Also of interest, _Marijuana, the First 10,000 Years_ by Abel,
(check _Books in Print_)
and the 1942 USDA film _Hemp for Victory_, available on VHS through
Truth in Marijuana Education
POB 7036
Chico CA 95927
(with _Reefer Madness_ on the same tape).

>
>-- david elworthy
>

Cameron, in the state that just elected two women Senators, and
simultaneously barred them from ever achieving enough seniority to
chair a committee.  Tom Lehrer was right: political satire is obsolete.
cls@truffula.sj.ca.us
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: Interdisciplinary Science
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
	<1992Oct31.165224.9196@slustl.slu.edu> <19060@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu>
Date: 9 Nov 92 20:07:28

Once criteria for retention and promotion in a university become subjective,
the skills of a courtier become important for success.  Get someone
to tell you what happened to the East German academic world.  Much
less than half of East German university professors meet the standards
for retaining their posts.
--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
From: dhembrow@eoe.co.uk (David Hembrow)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Wanted: bumperstickers promoting environmentalism/recycling
Date: 12 Nov 92 13:10:04 GMT
Organization: EO Europe Limited, Cambridge, UK
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

Matthew Harrington (ph600fcy@sdcc14.ucsd.edu) wrote:
: I'd like to decorate my bumper with some stickers promoting
: environmentalism and recycling.  Does anyone know a  source
: for these?
: 
: 					Thanks in advance,
: 
: 					Matt Harrington

If you really want to do anything for our environment, it would
be rather better not to drive the car. I don't quite see how
anything is to be improved by putting some stickers on it.
-- 
David Hembrow                   EO Europe Ltd.,
email:  dhembrow@eoe.co.uk      Abberley House, Granhams Road,
                                Great Shelford, Cambridge CB2 5LQ, England
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: parson_r@cubldr.colorado.edu (Robert Parson)
Subject: OH, CH4, etc. (Re: Historic levels of methane by bison PRINT
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 20:18:40 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.121758.1242@wega.rz.uni-ulm.de>, SCHLOERER@rzmain.rz.uni-ulm.de (Jan Schloerer) writes:
> 
> -  The present understanding of tropospheric chemistry is unsatisfactory,
>    to say the least. 	Just one example:  OH  plays a central role in
>    tropospheric chemistry, among many others it is involved in methane
>    oxidation.  The 'climate' Working Group I of the IPCC deplores that
>    there are no direct measurements of OH which can give reliable
>    information on the global distribution or changes over time.  There
>    are attempts at indirect measurement, but presently it seems not even
>    clear whether OH is increasing or decreasing globally.  A recent
>    estimate based on a simple tropospheric box model deduced a trend
>    of  +1.0 % +- 0.8 %  over the past decade, but this is hardly a
>    definitive result.  (Climate Change 1992  -  The Supplementary Report
>    to the IPCC Scientific Assessment, J. Houghton et al, eds, Cambridge
>    Univ. Press 1992, p 60).
> 
 The 22 May 1992 issue of _Science_ has some useful articles on these questions.
 Part of the difficulty is that while increasing levels of CH4 and CO result
 in a loss of OH, increasing levels of tropospheric ozone can result in more
 OH. This could be enhanced by depletion of _stratospheric_ ozone (more UV 
 would increase the rate of dissociation of _tropospheric_ ozone, thereby
 increasing the rate of production of OH from O + H2O.) It is likely that OH 
has decreased since preindustrial times, but it is not clear whether it will 
continue to do so - different models give different results.

 Direct OH measurements are getting better (pp 1154 and 1187 of the same issue)
 but there's a ways to go yet. A _lot_ of effort is being devoted to OH 
measurements as well as laboratory studies of OH chemistry.

 Robert
From: gst@gnosys.svle.ma.us (Gary S. Trujillo)
Subject: Speaking of Rocks (NM rock question)
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 02:55:17 GMT

I haven't followed the whole controversy about "rights for rocks," but
reading a bit of that thread brought to mind a question raised recently
on a mailing list (NATIVE-L at TAMVM1.TAMU.EDU) that I facilitate (it's
about the Native peoples of the world.)

From: aragorn.ori.org!wanda (Wanda Ballentine)
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1992 09:08:47 GMT

I have some general questions:

1.  Has anyone out there heard of "the rock that breathes water" somewhere
in New Mexico?  Evidently it was well known to Native Americans in the area
and now some commercial enterprise has gotten hold of it.

...
--
    Gary S. Trujillo                            gst@gnosys.svle.ma.us
Somerville, Massachusetts              {wjh12,bu.edu,spdcc,ima,cdp}!gnosys!gst
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Ecocentric Criterion and the Population Question
Date: 9 Nov 1992 20:38:49 GMT
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Distribution: world
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <1992Nov9.174031.3072@vexcel.com>, dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska) writes:
>Your point was that human action is more the result of capabilities
>than values.  In what ways has the capability to own other human
>decreased?

The more relevent question is, in what way has the capability to accomplish
with machinery the things that used to be done by slaves changed?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL

Disclaimer:  Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS.  That's what I get paid for.  My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below).  So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it.  If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.
From: ddeocamp@pearl.tufts.edu (DANIEL M. DEOCAMPO)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Historic levels of methane by bison (was Re: Perot ad and methane from cattle)
Date: 7 Nov 92 09:38:00 GMT
Organization: Tufts University - Medford, MA
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <JMC.92Nov4204641@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>, jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU writes...
> 
 [ stuff about bison ]

>I understood that, but precisely who made them and where were they
>published?
>--
>John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
>*
>He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.

I confess I don't have a journal reference for the numbers.  They came from an
introductory environmental science text, Miller, GT, 1992,
 _Living in the Environment_, Wadsworth Publishing Company, Belmont, California.

Two pertinent references listed for the chapter are:

Roe, FG, 1970, _The North American Buffalo_. Toronto, University of Toronto
Press.

Vecsey & Veneables, eds, 1980, _American Indian Environments: Ecological Issues
in Native American History.  Syracuse, University of Syracuse Press.

Daniel Deocampo                          Undergrad (I have an excuse for    
ddeocamp@pearl.tufts.edu                            any silly comments.)
                                         Department of Geology
---------------------|                   Environmental Studies Program
"Be gneiss to me,    |                   Tufts University
 I'm going through   |
 a lot of schist."   |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: The Criterion for Ecocentrism
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Gannett Technologies Group
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 00:47:39 GMT

In article <1992Nov4.085915.6593@kth.se> tpalm@nada.kth.se (Thomas Palm) writes:
>In article <1992Nov3.203220.5129@ke4zv.uucp>, gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman) writes:
>|> 
>|> What we want is to arrive at optimum useage of resources, not neccessarily
>|> at maximum use of resources, with the people gaining the benefits paying
>|> the costs. Clean air, for example, is not free. To gain that benefit for
>|> some, others must forego actions that would benefit them, such as closing 
>|> a factory and losing their jobs. This cost must be distributed fairly to
>|> those who benefit.
>
>Are you proposing an air tax!? After all everybody benefits from clear air, or
>at least there is no way that only those who wants to pay for it can recieve
>the benefit.

Yeah, that's the problem. There's no effective way to market clean air.
Everybody benefits, but nobody pays except those forced to stop the actions
that consume clean air. Thus a market value for clean air can't be determined
in the usual way. Consumption taxes generally distort the market by using
the coersion of government in place of freely negotiated contracts. Thus we
don't have a good measure of the value placed on the resource by individuals.
An air consumption tax is probably the only way to spread the lost opportunity
cost among the beneficiaries, however.

Gary
From: 471-1@.arizona.edu (E. Shane Jimerfield)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Cattle
Date: 5 Nov 92 07:50:42 GMT
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson
Originator: 471-1@air.atmo.arizona.edu

In article 16929 of sci.environment J. McCarthy writes:
>We do other things with the land than just grow cattle.  However, I am

Oh, you bet we do.... we grow the feed for the cattle.
70% of all grain grown in the U.S. is feed to cattle.

> the rest of the clutter was deleted.

Take 'er easy.... Shane
..watch out for the lightning (a large-scale high-tension natural electric
discharge in the atmosphere)......!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
...informal... a sudden usually improbable stroke of fortune.......
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska)
Subject: Re: The Criterion for Ecocentrism
Organization: VEXCEL Corporation, Boulder CO
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 18:15:46 GMT

In article <1dbl2qINNjhu@gap.caltech.edu> carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU writes:
>In article <4NOV199217052654@pearl.tufts.edu>, ddeocamp@pearl.tufts.edu (DANIEL M. DEOCAMPO) writes:
>>In the US, the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment estimates 50,000
>>premature deaths from respiratory or cardiac problems caused by air pollution. 
>>The American Lung Association estimates 120,000 deaths per year from the same
>>cause.
>
>Both those statistics are pretty meaningless.  Just HOW premature were the
>deaths?  It would seem to me that dying 5 minutes prematurely is a far cry from
>dying 20 years prematurely.

Given that these 50-120 thousand premature deaths are probably spread
over different amounts of prematureness, I imagine many die years early
but it would be interesting to know the spread.

>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL
>
>Disclaimer:  Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS.  That's what I get paid for.  My
>understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below).  So
>unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
>organization responsible for it.  If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
>hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.


-- 

		dingo in boulder	(dean@vexcel.com)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: dsc@gemini.tmc.edu (Doug S. Caprette Bldg. 28 W191 x3892)
Subject: Re: Historic levels of methane by bison (was Re: Perot ad and methane from cattle)
Organization: NASA GSFC CDP VLBI
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 17:48:34 GMT

In article <1992Nov4.170756.9476@cs.rochester.edu> dietz@cs.rochester.edu (Paul Dietz) writes:
>In article <1992Nov4.124648.26720@news.acns.nwu.edu> len@schur.math.nwu.edu (Len Evens) writes:
>
>> I think it is fair to say that Paul Dietz has consistently suggested
>> technological `fixes' for environmental problems.   This has tended
>> to produce adverse reactions from many of us who react viscerally
>> to such suggestions.   However, it is arguable that things have
>> gone so far, or are likely in the future to go so far, that compensating
>> measures by the human race on a global scale will be necessary.
>> I think this deserves some serious discussion.
>
>I think my earlier post implied that a better action would be to
>reduce CO emissions by controlling biomass burning -- hardly
>a technical fix.
>

Actually, reducing CO emissions by controlling the burning of biomass
most certainly would be a technical fix.  Such control would come about 
by substituting other technology, or modifying current technology.

And, I see nothing wrong with that.
From: gil@Gilsys.DIALix.oz.au (Gil Hardwick)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Historic levels of methane by bison (was Re: Perot ad
Distribution: world
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 02:59:13 GMT
Organization: STAFF STRATEGIES - Anthropologists & Training Agents


In article <1992Nov10.013911.10934@meteor.wisc.edu> tobis@meteor.wisc.edu writes:

 > I suggest that the comparison between bison and cattle is not as simple as
 > it might appear, as the bison biomass was _supported_ by the territory, while
 > the cattle biomass is regularly _exported_ (every three years is it?) It
 > would be very surprising to see that after a century of breeding the 
 > efficiency of deliberate cattle ranching were only comparable to that
 > of natural buffalo herds (enormous though they were). But it seems to me
 > that directly comparing the populations of the beasts is not an appropriate
 > way to measure it.

There also appears to have been a problem of what to do with all the
cattle which had bred up while ranchers were away fighting during the
years of the Civil War, creating the great cattle drives of the post-
war years to get them to market which gave rise to the cowboy legend.

Now, if the cattle are so poorly adapted to the North America prairie,
how did they manage to reach such population levels untended? Would
cattle numbers become as great as the bison if similarly left free of
overt human interference?

Indeed, are both cattle and bison numbers down *because* of humans?

--
Gil Hardwick                                      gil@Gilsys.DIALix.oz.au
Independent Consulting Ethnologist                            3:690/660.6
PERTH, Western Australia                                 (+61 9) 399 2401
   * * Sustainable Community Development & Environmental Education * *