HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gil@tillage.DIALix.oz.au (Gil Hardwick)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: What's Necessary?
Distribution: world
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 92 09:37:56 GMT
Organization: STAFF STRATEGIES - Anthropologists & Training Agents


In article <1466602010@igc.apc.org> alanm@igc.apc.org writes:

 > Climatic fluctuations can perturb an ecosystem away from a 
 > coevolutionary equilibrium. Nevertheless, the tendency to 
 > approach such an equilibrium is unavoidable, and is the most 
 > probable explanation for the diversity and coadaptedness 
 > of life.

Has it not yet occurred to you, Alan, that instead of some sort of
hypostatic equilibrium you posit here, an explicit *management* of
ecosystems may be in practice? As humans and all other species seek
to modify and control their own little patch in order to optimise
its capacity for meeting their own distinct needs, ranging from
bacteria breaking down rocks in turn sustaining moss and lichens,
through to the spiders building webs and foxes which patrol their
boundaries each night, all the way through to humans building their
camps, villages, towns and cities.

The humans who have lost those basic management skills are totally
dependent like children on those who wisely retain them, while the
individuals of other species unable to fulfil out their own unique
*habitus* simply die, yes?

--
Gil Hardwick                          Internet:  gil@tillage.DIALix.oz.au
Independent Consulting Ethnologist                  Fidonet:  3:690/660.6
PERTH, Western Australia                         Voice:  (+61 9) 399 2401
   * * Sustainable Community Development & Environmental Education * *
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: jgacker@news.gsfc.nasa.gov (James G. Acker)
Subject: Enviro-industry on ABC
Organization: Goddard Space Flight Center
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 16:41:27 GMT


	Just wanted to note that last night's ABC News had a piece
on Japan's push for environmental industries.  One talking head
predicted that enviro-industry will be the biggest industry going
by the end of the decade.  Japan is sponsoring a national push
in all areas, selling technology to developing countries as part of
a $9 billion gift announced at the Rio conference, and already
making inroads in the Chinese market.

	The Vice-President elect brought up this point in his book
and in his debates.  The ironic point noted in the report is that the
technologies being developed in Japan were originally developed in the
U.S., such as scrubber stacks for power plants and factories.  But now
Japan makes the best.

	The most amazing idea was GENESIS, a worldwide system of linked
solar farms for electrical generation.  While China was in the dark,
Saharan solar farms would provide electricity.  Feasible?  I don't
know.  Being considered?  You betcha.

	Anybody else see this?   I'm surprised I'm the first one to
note it.

	Jim Acker
	jgacker@neptune.gsfc.nasa.gov
From: alanm@igc.apc.org (Alan McGowen)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Carrying Capacity and Sanity
Date: 13 Dec 92 00:40:00 GMT
Nf-ID: #R:hpindda.cup.hp.com:149180155:cdp:1466601979:000:217
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!alanm    Dec 12 16:40:00 1992



I do describe the choice in "stark terms", Dean, because I believe that
this is the best way to get the largest number of readers to think
about it. A little controversial language isn't a bad thing on UseNet.

Alan
From: mmm@cup.portal.com (Mark Robert Thorson)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Geiger counter
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 92 18:04:04 PST
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Distribution: world

I bought a Geiger counter kit from Electronic Goldmine (602) 451-7454
and am very satisfied with it.  It cost $40.  The same place used to
offer several Geiger counter kits, including kits with meters and thin-
window devices suitable for measuring alpha radiation, however their most recent
catalog does not list them.  I suspect that these kits are still available,
however.

The kit I bought was part number C6447.
Newsgroups: sci.environment,sci.systems
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: free Beyond the Limits program
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
	<JMC.92Dec14100718@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
	<1992Dec14.203214.18031@vexcel.com>
Date: 14 Dec 92 13:41:16

In response to my question about the vertical axes of the graphs in _Limits to
Growth_ being unlabelled Dingo offers the excuse:

     For the readers who haven't seen the graphs, each one
     contains quite a few curves, each corresponding to some
     aggregate measurement, such as population, industrial
     output, etc.  To label a single graphs with a half dozen or
     so vertical axes would be quite crowded.  Since each graph
     started in 1900, they included historical values so the
     future portion of the graph can be interpreted by comparing
     to the first part of the curve.  To know the actual number,
     you would have to look up the actual value in a statistical
     abstract.  I believe that some benchmarks were provided for
     this purpose for at least some of the curves, such as
     population, but I don't know if they were provided for all
     of the curves.

We can indeed look up what the population was in 1900.  Suppose
we wanted to look up the amount of pollution in 1900, what would
we do?  Is it defined well enough to be meaningful, let alone
look-up-able?
--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
From: v151luy2@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Scott D McGinnis)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Foresty Service.
Date: 17 Dec 92 16:26:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

Hello:
	I am interested in getting information about applying tp
the U.S. Forestry Service for a job. I would like to ask if any
one out there has the address I would need to write for info
and an application. Thanks in advance.

							Scott
From: gil@tillage.DIALix.oz.au (Gil Hardwick)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: The Ecocentric Criterion (again)
Distribution: world
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 01:51:21 GMT
Organization: STAFF STRATEGIES - Anthropologists & Training Agents


In article <STEINLY.92Dec7124044@topaz.ucsc.edu> steinly@topaz.ucsc.edu writes:

 > Huh, I thought the CW was that agricultural societies (and h-g's)
 > went for large families to help with local sustenance labour (and
 > overcome very high mortality rate), and that urbanization led to
 > a disincentive for large families and a lower birth rate but with
 > a generational lag and resultant population bulge especially
 > when combined with higher life expectancy due to centralised health
 > care and other factors...

Well, the trends remain indicative that *regardless* of what economic
base drives the particular culture; h-g, swidden, nomad, agricultural,
industrial, whatever, affluence brings with it small families. An
excellent reference on h-g affluence is

        Sahlins M.  1974
        Stone Age Economics
        London: Tavistock

in particular, Ch.1, "The Original Affluent Society".

Certainly the Australian Aboriginal people, supposed to be the *most
primitive* of all h-g societies living in a *most arid* environment,
kept a complex bush pharmacopoeia and practiced a sophisticated birth
control program. Although the actual processes of kinship are also
complex and merit discussion elsewhere, it is worth stating here that
generally barely 2-3 hours per day were required to reap an abundance,
leaving the rest of the day to pursue a highly developed cultural
life. They are known to have never borne large families, and rank
about the same as Westerners.

Bearing children is dangerous for women, and they will actively avoid
it while there is a better life to be had. On the other hand, those
most *impoverished* societies constantly at the brink of annihilation,
especially under a constant threat from invasion and/or being overrun
by warring factions, are known for their many offspring borne from a
systematic strategy for group survival. I understand that the average
family size in contemporary Somalia exceeds seven children . . .

I do not disagree with your thesis, steinly, only pointing out that
you need to redefine the premises from which you build your argument.
It is not relevant what economic base a society may be built on; the
correlates are very large families positively associated with extreme
poverty, which is something of a Catch 22 situation, yes?

--
Gil Hardwick                          Internet:  gil@tillage.DIALix.oz.au
Independent Consulting Ethnologist                  Fidonet:  3:690/660.6
PERTH, Western Australia                         Voice:  (+61 9) 399 2401
   * * Sustainable Community Development & Environmental Education * *
From: "Michael Smith" <p00004@psilink.com>
Subject: Re: E-Link: Ticket America Ca
Organization: Performance Systems Int'l
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 23:44:16 GMT
X-Mailer: PSILink-DOS (3.3)

>DATE:   13 Dec 92 06:26:00 GMT
>FROM:   Paul Burnett <paul.burnett@pcs.sj.ca.us>

>Touching somebody's car even so much as to put a ticket on it is
>technically illegal "tampering" in some jurisdictions - your operatives
>may be subject to detention by the owner and arrest by the responding
>officer; also you may trigger some cars' burglar alarms and get a panic
>reaction by owners involving inappropriate use of force - i.e., from
>those owners insured by Smith & Wesson.  Be careful.

I've often felt that one of the worst things cars do to people is to make 
them crazy: one more reason to get away from the damn things. This post 
illustrates my point.

--Michael Smith

Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: andrewt@watson.ibm.com (Andrew Taylor)
Subject: Re: Australia, farming, and kangaroos
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 17:10:39 GMT
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

In article <JMC.92Dec13214833@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU writes:
>I find myself in agreement with Gil Hardwick on this one.

How parochial. You believe Gil Hardwick should ignore my refutations and
corrections of his claims about Australia if I do not hold Australian
citzenship!  As my postings were largely about biology, I assume you think
Australians should ignore any foreign statements about Australian biology
including, for example, the fundamental work done on the Kookaburra by Germans.

Of course, Gil Hardwick's belief that you can determine someone's citzenship
from their address is another error.

Andrew Taylor
From: alanm@igc.apc.org (Alan McGowen)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: The Return of Nasty, Brutish and Sh
Date: 12 Dec 92 08:35:00 GMT
Nf-ID: #R:hpindda.cup.hp.com:149180148:cdp:1466601975:000:2646
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!alanm    Dec 12 00:35:00 1992



/* Written 11:47 am  Dec 10, 1992 by steinly@topaz.ucsc.edu in igc:sci.environmen */

I wrote:
>
>   We've been here before.
>
>   The *factual* evidence is that hunter-gatherer societies often have *lower*
>   infant mortality and birth rates than do peasant societies, and lower birth
>   rates than early industrial societies did. Consult any standard modern intro 
>   textbook on cultural anthropology for info and references.
>

Sigurdsson:
>"... A nomadic lifestyle, for example, may have more inherent risks
>to birth and life than does a sedentary existence. Consequently, most
>hunting and gathering groups have a greater number of spontaneous
>abortions and stillbirths, a higher infant mortality rate, and a
>generally shorter life span than do most cultivators."
>
>from "Cultural Anthropology" F. Plog and D.G. Bates, p. 144 

My  copy (third edition,  1990) doesn't contain this quote on  p. 
144 -- nor anywhere in that chapter, which is on horticulture.


I suggest that the reader do a little library work before 
accepting Siggurdsson's plausible-sounding asseverations. A great 
deal of work has been done on birth rates, infant mortality, and 
population sizes. The discussion of these topics in 
sci.environment proceeds in an intellectual vacuum, as if the 
eyeball estimations of anyone with some training in physical 
science or computer programming were the only equipment needed 
for an instant assay of any topic. 

What I find appalling is an intellectual arrogance which is 
unwilling to attempt to learn something of a field and the 
reasons for its methodology before condemning it as loaded with 
contradictions -- which may well reflect problems with a 
superficial understanding, rather than with the field. I have 
seen that happen with concepts from ecology -- which Sigurdsson 
once sneered at as "big eco-words" -- assuming that if *he* was 
unable to see much in a concept, it must be the concept, rather 
than his grasp of it, which is shallow. 

This sort of hubris boarders on anti-intellectualism, and is only 
a barrier to the growth of one's understanding of nature. Don't 
emulate it -- no matter how much patina of physics-chic is 
painted on it. A particle of fundamental self-doubt is the germ 
of all learning, and facile self-confidence about areas one 
hasn't studied thoughtfully is *not* the sign of an intellectual, 
but a sign, at best, of intellectual immaturity, and at worst of 
little potential for growth. -- And lack of awareness of the 
existence of whole relevant fields of work is solid proof that a 
subject has not been considered thoughtfully. 

------------
Alan McGowen    
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: roelle@uars_mag.jhuapl.edu (Curtis Roelle)
Subject: Re: SAVE THE TREES!
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
Date: 15 Dec 92 19:58:49 GMT

mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman) writes:

>Now, Mr. Vandeman, has it occurred to you that Christmas
>trees are grown on Christmas tree farms, that the tree will be cut
>whether or not you buy it, and that the only effect of a drop in the
>number of Christmas trees purchased will be to make Chrstmas tree
>farmers grow other crops or develop their properties?

Good point.  So, let's enjoy the Christmas trees while they live, for
without the tree industry, we'd have fields of corn stubble instead of
hillside after hillside of trees.  IMOHO Christmas isn't Christmas
without the scent of a tree in one's family room.  I bought an 8' tree
at a farm just up the road from my house.  My office-mate got his 12'
tree from another farm down the road from me.  It helps the local farm
economy and makes it feel like Christmas is coming despite a mailbox
full of Christmas special advertising.
From: gil@tillage.DIALix.oz.au (Gil Hardwick)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: The Return of Nasty, Brutish and Sh
Distribution: world
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 03:09:11 GMT
Organization: STAFF STRATEGIES - Anthropologists & Training Agents

Silly argument between Stein and Alan deliberately not quoted.

Both of you, since you bear so much of your differences on the work
of Anthropology, let me suggest that you *both* rely far too much on
published sources taken out of a far wider context, and *both* fail
to make valid comparisons across the board in order to generate
between you a sufficiently reliable analysis of the situation. You
appear to miss the point that ethnographers are not engaged in a
positive scientific logic, but support with specific examples the
wider community of anthropological discourse which is intended to
reveal something else again in the trends and patterns of society
and history as the object of study and discussion.

It is simply inadequate to cite a particular phenomenon observed in
one particular society as being *caused* by one particular set of
circumstances. The trends are in fact, across the board, that small
group size is *not* the result of a shortage of food per se, but the
outcome of explicitly deliberate management of family size in order to
achieve a high level of affluence allowing members to relax and enjoy
life as far away from the brink of starvation as possible.

The processes are no different for any given economy one might want to
analyse; certainly the Bog Irish are enraged at the idea that theirs
was traditionally a primitive economy limited by the availability of
food. Certainly the population of Irish Catholic stock known for large
families increased quite markedly with the introduction of the potato
from the New World, and suffered massive starvation during The Famine
when the potato blight wiped out their crops, but those people were
invaded by the very highly militaristic British colonising power, then
marginalised, subjugated and impoverished under what became known as
the Anglo-Irish Ascendency.

The humble potato, which just happened to grow as they did in the acid,
marginal farmland the toffs didn't want, did not represent food as such,
but hope and a symbolic revival stimulating the large families those
people subsequently became known for, who might underwrite the future
of the traditional Irish culture. It is just that the blight struck at
the wrong time, bringing with it such frustration and bitterness we are
still witnessing today.

Of course ethnographers have prefered working with the "primitive" h-g
societies; the poor farmers and peasants hate just about everyone else
on earth . . .

--
Gil Hardwick                          Internet:  gil@tillage.DIALix.oz.au
Independent Consulting Ethnologist                  Fidonet:  3:690/660.6
PERTH, Western Australia                         Voice:  (+61 9) 399 2401
   * * Sustainable Community Development & Environmental Education * *
From: gil@tillage.DIALix.oz.au (Gil Hardwick)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: The Ecocentric Criterion (again)
Distribution: world
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 92 01:12:02 GMT
Organization: STAFF STRATEGIES - Anthropologists & Training Agents


In article <1992Dec7.221906.13388@meteor.wisc.edu> tobis@meteor.wisc.edu writes:

 > Yes, I thought so too. Dean, on what basis do you make the statements
 > that "destruction of traditional social structures" results in an INCREASE
 > in population? Usually one hears it the other way around. Traditional
 > societies generally equate large families with comfort, wealth, and
 > good fortune, which, in an underpopulated and pretechnical world would
 > be quite true. Less developed countries have much higher population growth
 > rates than more developed ones (except China I think) and some European
 > countries' population is actually shrinking if I recall correctly.

Sorry, only those societies dominated by a foreign power "equate large
families with comfort, wealth, and good fortune". Breeding like rabbits
is their way of sticking it right up the dominating society.

Please do note that "less developed countries" remain dominated by the
"more developed countries", and so obviously their family size will be
larger as a survival strategy. Please also note that in all societies
once freed from foreign domination the women will opt spontaneously for
fewer children, and begin to argue fiercely indeed for liberation from
their child-bearing domesticity and for parity with their own men-folk.

It is an extremely poor quality of social research which ignores the
relationship between large family size and foreign domination on the
one hand, and small family size and feminist liberation on the other.

--
Gil Hardwick                          Internet:  gil@tillage.DIALix.oz.au
Independent Consulting Ethnologist                  Fidonet:  3:690/660.6
PERTH, Western Australia                         Voice:  (+61 9) 399 2401
   * * Sustainable Community Development & Environmental Education * *
From: alanm@igc.apc.org (Alan McGowen)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: What's Necessary?
Date: 18 Dec 92 06:50:00 GMT
Nf-ID: #R:hpindda.cup.hp.com:149180179:cdp:1466602010:000:275
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!alanm    Dec 17 22:50:00 1992


Climatic fluctuations can perturb an ecosystem away from a 
coevolutionary equilibrium. Nevertheless, the tendency to 
approach such an equilibrium is unavoidable, and is the most 
probable explanation for the diversity and coadaptedness 
of life.

------------
Alan McGowen
From: paul.burnett@pcs.sj.ca.us (Paul Burnett) 
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Carrying Capacity and
Date: 14 Dec 92 07:06:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: PCS-BBS - San Jose, CA - 408-270-4085
Reply-To: paul.burnett@pcs.sj.ca.us (Paul Burnett) 

TO: dean@vexcel.com

  >>A little controversial language isn't a bad thing on UseNet.
  >>
  >>The *ideal* way to increase readership is to be interesting and
  >>entertaining. But if you are too lazy/busy/harried/tired or temporarily
  >>brain-dead, the second best way to do it is to be controversial.

DA>This may be true of the population in general (unfortunately), but it is
  >not true of those with a scientific perspective.

Is it really not true, or is that just an ideal - it _should_ not be
true, but because we all have a human streak corrupting our cold godlike
professionalism, it unfortunately _is_ true?  <G>

DA>On the other hand,
  >considering the incredibly long-winded responses to the various
  >Greenpeace press releases, maybe you are right.  Its also a good
  >question as to whether this gets them thinking _constructively_.

It depends on your audience - in responding to Greenpeace and its
sympathizers, or the media, for example, you should use "simple
sentences consisting of Anglo-Saxon monosyllables" (Churchill?
Hemingway?), lest you be misunderstood.  They will paraphrase and
mistranslate what you say anyway, so you might as well do the
translating - saves a step, and might get closer to the right message.
---
 . QMPro 1.0 41-8688 . ...from San Jose, CA
From: parson_r@cubldr.colorado.edu (Robert Parson)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Arctic ozone Hole? (Re: ECO Geneva
Date: 14 Dec 92 19:26:40 GMT
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder

In article <277800095@peg.pegasus.oz.au>, webink@peg.pegasus.oz.au writes:
> 
> It s nice to see people in the North being so complacent shame we
> share a planet. season greetings Mik P.
> 
 It's not so nice to see people assuming that an attempt to put a one-sided
 post into perspective, by going back to the primary scientific literature,
 is evidence of "complacency". 

 Perhaps I should apologize for trying to inject some science into sci.env?

 Robert
From: alanm@igc.apc.org (Alan McGowen)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Australia, farming, and kangaroos
Date: 14 Dec 92 07:26:00 GMT
Nf-ID: #R:724295977snx@tillage.dialix.oz.a:990152630:cdp:1466601998:000:320
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!alanm    Dec 13 23:26:00 1992


Naturally, McCarthy will support anything that sounds like an
expression of nationalism. 

Division is the very essence of ultraconservatism. It attempts to
prevent cooperative arrangements from emerging at every opportunity.
The more divided we are, the more unchecked are the most powerful.

------------
Alan McGowen
From: paul.burnett@pcs.sj.ca.us (Paul Burnett) 
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: E-Link: Ticket Americ
Date: 16 Dec 92 20:39:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: PCS-BBS - San Jose, CA - 408-270-4085
Reply-To: paul.burnett@pcs.sj.ca.us (Paul Burnett) 

TO: VIC@QUCDN.QueensU.CA

Q>Auto-addicted netlanders show a real uneasiness about the TICKET AMERICA
 >campaign.

That's true - I'm afraid some of those starry-eyed naifs putting
"tickets" on cars are gonna get hurt.

Q>The car-addicts

...how about the hype-addicts?
---
 . QMPro 1.0 41-8688 . ...from San Jose, CA