The Earth may well be warming slightly. Most likely it is going through a cyclic Climate Change and always has. The Anasazi left their Chaco canyon homeland after 50 years of no rain. There once was a dustbowl in Oklahoma. In short all weather --local and global follows cycles--deforestation can also cause long term drying conditions and desert formation such as we now see in Africa.

Carbon dioxide has increased since the industrial age but has a miniscule greenhouse effect. Water vapor caused by weather has far more effect. So does methane from decaying vegetation. Co-2 is the byproduct of all forms of combustion--notably --we exhale a bunch of it each day by the process of breathing and heating our bodies by "burning" food mtetabolically.

Global warming is a false religion ( like all religion) complete with the selling of "indulgences" such as "Carbon Offsets". There are those who seek power and profit from it's prothelestizing. It's more pap for the masses.

Global weather patterns throw water vapor up to very high altitudes. The engine for these climate cycles is the sun--it follows all kinds of cycles--sunspots and long-term cyclic variations in energy output. Ice cores taken at the south pole show a 1500 year cycle of warming and cooling. Don't forget we just got over an Ice Age--all without increasing CO-2. Were it not for global warming the midwest would still be covered by glaciers half way down Illinois or more --so global warming has been around and can be our friend. It is foolish to blame it all on CO-2.

Al Gore is a disgrace to our native Tennessee-This big Turkey has several homes --one of which uses a dozen times the electricity of the average home--John Edwards is another one preaching austerity and draconian measures to choke off our way of life while wallowing in all of its wonderful excess themselves.

I am reminded of the Chicken Little aspects of "the Y2K" problem

If the seas do rise then we might need to raise our seawalls or build a few feet further back from the dunes. If you have been to the coast of California or Massachucetts you know that much of the shore area drops down to the ocean from high bluffs and cliffs dozens of feet above sea level. We probably will need this extra water to desalinize via nuclear power to resupply our fresh drinking and crop water.

Yes we are possibly in a period of warming --but the thing to fear is the stupid ideas of what to try to do about it.

---

...cyclic Climate Change...

That's my best guess as well.

When in college, one of my first teachers in the most basic of Astronomy classes hit on this after my bringing up a NOVA or Discovery program (bear in mind, this is eons ago) and after much discussion, this was the likely culprit.

The Earth & sun are cyclic.. any changes we see are merely "of the norm" so to speak.
this isn't to say was shouldn't try to react to it. However, futile our actions may be.

is a false religion ( like all religion)

That was unnecessary.
"The Universe, it seems, is nothing more than a passing thought in the mind of God"
~Roger Penrose

---

...cyclic Climate Change...

http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?6ff906ec-be2f-4270-808c-d39fdbcb887c
http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?e9e9ac7e-64b1-4fc5-a8ae-fe52f699adac

---

The Earth may well be warming slightly. Most likely it is going through a cyclic Climate Change and always has.

There has indeed been a continuous series of cyclical changes. Nice gentle steady cyclical changes.

The BIG difference about this present 'cycle' is that we're almost in freefall off a cliff edge. Our planet has never before seen such unnatural RAPID change since mammals ran across the earth.

Carbon dioxide has increased since the industrial age but has a miniscule greenhouse effect. Water vapor caused by weather has far more effect. So does methane from decaying vegetation. ...

Very wrong.

CO2 and water vapour are good reasons why life is so comfortable on Earth. Water vapour has a greater effect, but is very short lived of just a few days and constantly gets recycled.

However, CO2 adds its own proportion and also regulates the proportion of water vapour taking effect. CO2 lingers in the atmosphere for over a CENTURY.

You can imagine CO2 as the "throttle control" on the other greenhouse effects that are essential to our life. At the moment, that throttle is getting slammed towards the endstop. The juggernaught of our climate is responding far more quickly than ever imagined possible, until that is we've started looking just recently.

The story is clear.

Global warming is a false religion ...

The false religion is the FUD perpetrated by the big energy companies that have directors that wish to enjoy a happy rich retirement whilst their children suffer the ensuing chaos. Many people are going to die from all this, and not only in Africa.

Yes we are possibly in a period of warming --but the thing to fear is the stupid ideas of what to try to do about it.

And the Marketing scams that will exploit people's ignorance.


Our atmosphere is very thin and very finite. We've already gone through the stages of polluting our rivers and lakes and cleaning those up. Next is our atmosphere itself, and then likely the oceans.

The oceans are already getting to be so acidic from the increased levels of CO2 that shell creatures are getting themselve dissoved away to an early extinction. That is happening in some areas already...


Now, check further?
And from reliable sources rather than oil-sponsored propaganda sites?

We've only our one planet...

Regards,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

...cyclic Climate Change...

That's my best guess as well.

When in college, one of my first teachers in the most basic of Astronomy classes hit on this after my bringing up a NOVA or Discovery program (bear in mind, this is eons ago) and after much discussion, this was the likely culprit.

The Earth & sun are cyclic.. any changes we see are merely "of the norm" so to speak.
this isn't to say was shouldn't try to react to it. However, futile our actions may be.

is a false religion ( like all religion)

That was unnecessary.
"The Universe, it seems, is nothing more than a passing thought in the mind of God"
~Roger Penrose

Thankyou for your comments. I do not think that Roger Penrose, nor for that matter Einstein ("God does not play dice") were thinking of an anthropomorphic God or of earthbound religion. Most likely they were expressing awe in the unravelled mysteries and complexity of Nature.

---

There has indeed been a continuous series of cyclical changes. Nice gentle steady cyclical changes.

The BIG difference about this present 'cycle' is that we're almost in freefall off a cliff edge. Our planet has never before seen such unnatural RAPID change since mammals ran across the earth.

CO2 and water vapour are good reasons why life is so comfortable on Earth. Water vapour has a greater effect, but is very short lived of just a few days and constantly gets recycled.

However, CO2 adds its own proportion and also regulates the proportion of water vapour taking effect. CO2 lingers in the atmosphere for over a CENTURY.

You can imagine CO2 as the "throttle control" on the other greenhouse effects that are essential to our life. At the moment, that throttle is getting slammed towards the endstop. The juggernaught of our climate is responding far more quickly than ever imagined possible, until that is we've started looking just recently.

That's funny, these sound remarkably like what we heard in the articles posted previously in this thread... You know, when we were all going to die because of the coming Ice Age. When all the "scientists" were in complete agreement. When such unparalleled catastrophes were unavoidable unless we did something drastic right THEN.

The story is clear.

To you, maybe. Best of luck with that.

The false religion is the FUD perpetrated by the big energy companies that have directors that wish to enjoy a happy rich retirement whilst their children suffer the ensuing chaos. Many people are going to die from all this, and not only in Africa.

How about this: The false religion is the FUD perpetrated by the fanatics in the environmentalist groups that have ideologues that wish to impose their view of the world upon others whilst others pay for their worldview. Many people are trying like hell to avoid paying for all this, and not only in the U.S.

And the Marketing scams that will exploit people's ignorance.

And the ideologues that will exploit people's ignorance.

Now, check further?
And from reliable sources rather than oil-sponsored propaganda sites?

And from reliable sources rather than fanatic-sponsored propaganda sites?

Lookie folks!! I can do it too! I don't have to present any argument or reasoning whatsoever! I say these things, and voila'!! they're true because I said they were!! Now listen to exactly what I said and go forth and waste!!

We've only our one planet...

Yeah, one that will be here for billions of years after we're gone, regardless of how many CFL lightbulbs you install.

---

Cordially,
Rush

elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com
Remove the obvious...

Lookie folks!! I can do it too! I don't have to present any argument or reasoning whatsoever! I say these things, and voila'!! they're true because I said they were!! Now listen to exactly what I said and go forth and waste!!

Ya know, Rush. There are times that I completely disagree with your positions....and times when I do agree ( to a point ) with you.

But things like that portion of your post remind me that sometimes, just sometimes, I do like your style.....lol

---

Air Cold, the blade stops;
from silent stone,
Death is preordained

Calm Chaos Forums : Everyone Welcome

Well that just about takes the biscuit. Global Warming is politics? You really have lost any sense of any understanding of Global Warming, haven't you. The scientists involved in Global Warming and Climate Change would reel in horror at the SETI understanding that this is primarily about politics. Yes, you can turn the survival of the Inuit into politics if you like, you can turn anything and drag it down into politics. But Global Warming is a science, with scientists addressing it in forefront with people and nations, not just politicians, making use of scientific findings on Global Warming and Climate Change.

And what about this 'fun' in the title. Is that political? Or just Cafe nonsense with someone trying to take the mick out of a serious subject?

---

flaming balloons

Well that just about takes the biscuit. Global Warming is politics? You really have lost any sense of any understanding of Global Warming, haven't you. The scientists involved in Global Warming and Climate Change would reel in horror at the SETI understanding that this is primarily about politics. Yes, you can turn the survival of the Inuit into politics if you like, you can turn anything and drag it down into politics. But Global Warming is a science, with scientists addressing it in forefront with people and nations, not just politicians, making use of scientific findings on Global Warming and Climate Change.

And what about this 'fun' in the title. Is that political? Or just Cafe nonsense with someone trying to take the mick out of a serious subject?

I respect your opinion, Longshanks, but while Climatology is a science, any possible solutions to the problem must come from politics. So, this issue kinda fits either of the two new boards. Rush's initial post that started this thread was political in nature, so I picked politics. I apologize for the offense to you that was caused by my moving this thread to here. In the initial confusion, I kinda jumped the gun moving this thread. After I did, Eric clarified the guidelines. If Rush wishes, I can move this thread either back to the Cafe or to the Science (non-SETI) board.

In any case, Longshanks, peace man, and be well.

Well that just about takes the biscuit. Global Warming is politics? You really have lost any sense of any understanding of Global Warming, haven't you. The scientists involved in Global Warming and Climate Change would reel in horror at the SETI understanding that this is primarily about politics. Yes, you can turn the survival of the Inuit into politics if you like, you can turn anything and drag it down into politics. But Global Warming is a science, with scientists addressing it in forefront with people and nations, not just politicians, making use of scientific findings on Global Warming and Climate Change.

And what about this 'fun' in the title. Is that political? Or just Cafe nonsense with someone trying to take the mick out of a serious subject?

I respect your opinion, Longshanks, but while Climatology is a science, any possible solutions to the problem must come from politics. So, this issue kinda fits either of the two new boards. Rush's initial post that started this thread was political in nature, so I picked politics. I apologize for the offense to you that was caused by my moving this thread to here. In the initial confusion, I kinda jumped the gun moving this thread. After I did, Eric clarified the guidelines. If Rush wishes, I can move this thread either back to the Cafe or to the Science (non-SETI) board.

In any case, Longshanks, peace man, and be well.

OK MajorKong, you have a point, or two. Politics can explain anything away, make it frivolous, make it whatever you want. If that's what you want.

---

flaming balloons

Rush's initial post that started this thread was political in nature, so I picked politics. I apologize for the offense to you that was caused by my moving this thread to here. In the initial confusion, I kinda jumped the gun moving this thread. After I did, Eric clarified the guidelines. If Rush wishes, I can move this thread either back to the Cafe or to the Science (non-SETI) board.

Whatever you guys decide is fine. But be consistent. There are a number of other threads that should come over here, if this is political.

---

Cordially,
Rush

elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com
Remove the obvious...

Cutting CO2 or a Sneak Attack on Porsche, Ferrari?: Doron Levin

By Doron Levin

July 10 (Bloomberg) -- If one of the more extreme responses to global warming comes true, driving a sports car anywhere but on a racetrack might be relegated to history's dustbin.

Fast, powerful cars within a few years may be outlawed in Europe, an idea that has been raised ostensibly because Ferraris and Porsches produce too much carbon dioxide. For those who abhor sports cars as vulgar symbols of affluence (along with vacation homes, furs and fancy jewelry), such a ban could be a two-fer: Saving the planet while cutting economic inequality.

Who are these people anyway who decide on behalf of everyone what car is proper to drive? In the U.S. they're members of Congress, which is considering fuel-efficiency standards that will affect vehicle size. In Europe, it's the ministers and parliamentarians of the European Union, which wants to limit how much CO2 cars can emit as a proxy for a fuel- consumption standard.

Chris Davies, a British member of the European Parliament, is proposing one of the most-extreme measures -- a prohibition on any car that goes faster than 162 kilometers (101 miles) an hour, a speed that everything from the humble Honda Civic on up can exceed. He ridiculed fast cars as ``boys' toys.''

The proposed ban would take effect in 2013. Davies told the Guardian newspaper that ``cars designed to go at stupid speeds have to be built to withstand the effects of a crash at those speeds. They are heavier than necessary, less fuel-efficient and produce too many emissions.''

His last point is telling, even though there are many reasons why cars are heavier, including safety measures such as air bags and steel-reinforced crumple zones.

Focused on Cars

The idea is to limit CO2, a so-called greenhouse gas blamed for causing the earth's temperature to rise.

But the debate isn't just about how much carbon dioxide to allow into the atmosphere and whether the amount actually matters. It's also about disdain some hold for the size or speed of the cars others drive.

``Automobiles always seem to be the focus, even though they only consume 15 percent or 20 percent of energy,'' said Csaba Csere, editor of Car & Driver magazine. If politicians really cared about the atmosphere they might concentrate first on power plants or factories, he said.

The folks against sports cars in Europe and big sport utility vehicles in the U.S. often are same ones who hate McMansion-sized homes, corporate jets, jumbo freezers, yachts, 60-inch flat-screens TVs, overnight-delivery services and other trappings of Western-style wealth and energy use.

Do people demonize these goods because they can't afford them? Or because they think others shouldn't have them? Proposals to limit carbon dioxide often sound like basic opposition to prosperity and rising living standards.

Planet in Peril?

Outside of a handful of command economies, few today would agree that a central authority ought to regulate who owns what. But attacking those who ``waste'' energy achieves the same goal.

Many ardent environmentalists are convinced that the planet is in peril. Why can't they be just a bit cautious, humble or skeptical in their advocacy of reduced energy consumption, which in turn must mean reduced global economic growth?

The main reason I'm wary of Al Gore's call for radical, immediate reduction of worldwide energy consumption is that he's way too sure that the human race is on the cusp of catastrophe. With no credentials of his own, Gore relies on scientists who insist we must hurry because we're approaching a point of no return.

But how about other scientists, ones who aren't sure we're on the brink? Richard Lindzen of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, a leading climatologist, says that even if nothing is done to limit CO2, the world will heat up by 1 degree Celsius, or a couple of degrees Fahrenheit, in the next 50 to 100 years.

Move Inland

We know from everyday experience that weather forecasting is a notoriously inexact. And if the world got a bit warmer there might be more arable land and longer growing seasons in northern latitudes. Is it heresy to suggest that if seas rise, moving back from the shore might be more practical than trying to change the weather?

The polar bear population, supposedly close to being wiped out, is ``not going extinct, or even appear to be affected at present,'' Mitchell Taylor of the Department of the Environment, Government of Nunavut, told the Toronto Star last year. One population in the eastern Arctic has grown to 2,100 from 850 since the mid-1980s, he said.

A half-century ago Rachel Carson popularized the modern environmental movement with ``The Silent Spring,'' a book claiming that the pesticide DDT was destroying America's wildlife. The book's impact was reduced use of the pesticide DDT, thereby leading to the unintended consequence of more mosquitoes and more malaria deaths in developing countries.

One Little Bite

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and other health agencies noted an alarming rise of malaria in places like South Africa and Peru after DDT was banned in the late 1970s. Since the mid-1990s, when DDT spraying resumed, the incidence of the disease has fallen.

Calls for limits on carbon dioxide ignore a basic point. People are likely to be better judges of the benefits of fast cars, TVs, air conditioners, and jets than government planners.

Besides, the brunt of government limits on energy use may well fall on the world's poorest nations, which need more energy -- thus generating more carbon dioxide -- to provide lighting, refrigeration, harvesting, water purification and transportation.

What right do environmentalists in rich countries have to deny residents of poorer ones the benefits of higher living standards?

I have a hunch that a ban on sports cars won't be enacted soon in Europe, largely because the Italians love their Lamborghinis, the British their Bentleys and the Germans their Porsches. But this won't be the last time that anti-consumption crusaders come disguised as guardians of the Earth.

(Doron Levin is a Bloomberg News columnist. The opinions expressed are his own.)

To contact the writer of this column: Doron Levin in Southfield, Michigan, at dlevin5@bloomberg.net

Thanks MajorKong, I found that quite thought provoking.

---

"Living by the wisdom of computer science doesn't sound so bad after all. And unlike most advice, it's backed up by proofs." -- Algorithms to live by: The computer science of human decisions.

Finally figured out how to post a JPEG.
Brad White is a psuedonym that I use.
What do you think of DADDIO ??

---

DADDIO IS BLIND TO MODERN DAY INDULGENCES

---

DADDIO IS BLIND TO MODERN DAY INDULGENCES

"My electric bill -- now there's an inconvenient truth." -- Al Gore

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

Things we can all do to stop global warming

By Naomi Oreskes; professor of science history at the University of California San Diego (UCSD).

July 13, 2007

With our daily routines of work, shopping, cooking and getting the kids to and from school and sports and piano lessons, stopping global warming is not high on most of our “to-do” lists. But with summer here, we might look back to last year and be reminded that this is an issue that does affect us all.

The summer of 2006 – like the hurricane season of 2005 – showed us what global warming looks like. It's not pretty. Here in California, 150 people died in the record-breaking heat waves that seared the state. To put this in perspective, in a typical year, the county surrounding Modesto loses one person to a heat-related death. Last summer, they lost 29. Statewide, farmers lost more than a billion dollars worth of crops – grapes, corn, tomatoes, walnuts and plums – and more than 16,000 cattle. Since California is the nation's fruit basket, and a major producer of meat and dairy products as well, these kinds of impacts ramify throughout the economy.

Doubters may argue that no one heat wave can be blamed on global warming, and that's true. There have always been heat waves, and there always will be. But when we see record-breaking heat waves across the country and in Europe – as we are seeing again this summer – added to the record-breaking warm years we've seen now for more than a decade, then we know that something different is going on.

Scientists are convinced that this is just not normal weather. And that's not all. The evidence of global warming includes melting polar ice, rising sea level and animals shifting their habitats. Many of these changes were predicted 10, 25, even 50 years ago, and now they are happening.

What can any of us do about it? Plenty. Unfortunately, if you surf the Internet, most of the suggestions you'll find are demanding and expensive, such as wrapping your hot water heater with insulation or installing solar panels. Don't get me wrong, these are good things to do. But how many of us are likely to do them?

Yet, there is a lot we can do in our everyday lives. Most of these things are easy, and some of them can save you money, too.

Here are 10 things we can do to stop global warming:

- Teach your children the truth about global warming. One of the most important things we can do is to educate our children, because there is a lot of misinformation on the Internet, radio and television. Even many teachers are confused about the facts. Here, in a nutshell, are the facts: Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, which means that it lets in light but traps heat. When we burn fossil fuels, we release carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, where it builds up. Scientists predicted a long time ago that this buildup would lead to global warming, and that prediction has come true. The evidence is everywhere – increasing temperatures, melting ice, rising sea level, displaced habitats, oceans becoming acidic, increased intensity of extreme weather events. These changes cannot be explained by natural variability alone.

- Don't rush out to buy a hybrid car, but do consider fuel efficiency when it's time to buy. It takes an enormous amount of energy to produce a new car, so rushing out to buy a new one, even a hybrid, is not a good idea. But it is a good idea to pay attention to fuel efficiency when you do buy a new car. About one-third of all energy used in America goes for transportation, but studies show that most consumers pay more attention to the placement of cup holders than to fuel economy. If you are buying cars for your kids, tell them that fuel efficiency is up there along with safety and they have to pay attention or you won't help pay for the gas.

- Do buy a new refrigerator. Most new models are a lot more energy efficient than old ones. If yours is more than 10 years old, replace it. You'll save money on electricity, too.

- Change half your light bulbs to compact fluorescents. Many people don't like the blue color of fluorescent light or the delay when you turn them on. But most household fixtures contain more than one bulb. If you change half the bulbs in fixtures, your light will still look pretty, and you'll save money and energy.

- Think globally, but buy locally. Many products in the supermarket are shipped enormous distances, using lots of energy. Sometimes there is something you need, or really want, that comes from Paris or Australia, but most of the time there are perfectly good products made closer to home. Usually they cost less, too.

- Get taken care of locally also. How much time do you spend driving to the gym, to hairdressers, dentists, doctors and the like? I once knew a woman in northern New Hampshire who drove to Boston every month to get her hair done! We all know good hairdressers are worth their weight in gold, but, honestly, couldn't she have found one closer to home?

- Inflate your tires. If you are like me, you rarely have time to stop to check your tire pressure. But we should, because cars with properly inflated tires use less fuel. They're safer, too.

- Ask a local scientist to speak at your children's school. Most teachers are trained in early childhood education, and they just don't know very much about global warming, but nearly every major university has a scientist working on climate change. Call your local college or university earth science department and invite their resident expert to your school. Then ask him or her to speak at your church and book group, too. Elizabeth Kolbert's “Field Notes from a Catastrophe” is a great book group choice.

- Support your local town, city or state initiative on global warming. Polls consistently show that Americans rate global warming very low on their lists of concerns, so it's not surprising our elected officials do, too. Let your local officials know that you care. To learn more about what is being done in California, check out http://www.climatechange.ca.gov/.

- Don't listen to the naysayers who say global warming is unproven. It's just not so. There has been a lot of misinformation spread by a tiny handful of people who love the limelight they get for being contrary. (Some of them love the money they've gotten from the fossil fuel industry, too.) But the vast majority of climate scientists have been in agreement for a decade or more about the reality of global warming and its human causes. Scientists have done their part; now it's time for us to do something before things get worse.

Oh, there are a couple more things: If you can, do wrap that water heater. Maybe install some solar panels, too.

---

me@rescam.org

Fear of a global 'coldening'
LAST month Australians endured our coldest June since 1950. Imagine that; all those trillions of tonnes of evil carbon we've horked up into the atmosphere over six decades of rampant industrialisation, and we're still getting the same icy weather we got during the Cold War...

---

me@rescam.org

Global dimming as Rush mentioned below

Vid: 50 mins BBC

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=39520879762623193&q=en

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Planting trees: Benefits go far beyond carbon footprints

By Scott Sabin

July 18, 2007

A lot of attention, not all of it complimentary, has been given to the trend for celebrities and others to plant trees to offset their “carbon footprint.” While some congratulate this effort, others have likened it to the infamous practice of buying indulgences to offset your sins. All agree that it is, at best, a partial solution to climate change.

But the effort should not be so quickly discounted. There are many other good reasons to plant trees, especially in the tropics. I work with a Christian humanitarian agency, Floresta, which began planting trees nearly 25 years ago, when we realized that deforestation was a major contributor to rural poverty in poor countries. The connection between trees and poverty may seem obscure at first, but there is a remarkable connection between the two.

Though largely hidden from our sight and consciousness, farmers working at or near subsistence levels still make up a huge proportion of the world's population. Many of them, working with crude hand tools, eke their living from rocky hillsides, while walking for hours to get water and firewood. Among the poorest of the poor, they lag in almost every area of human development. Their soil and their water are their only assets, the only things they have on which to build a life.

And their soil and water are dependent upon the health of their watershed – upon the forests upstream and the trees in their communities. Trees are vital for preventing soil erosion and can even help to build the soil by fixing nitrogen, bringing buried nutrients to the surface and by contributing leaf litter and other organic matter to the soil. Where the trees have been stripped from the hillsides, massive soil erosion follows, robbing the poor farmer of one of his or her most valuable possessions.

Water availability and quality are also dependent on the health of the forest. Absence of trees results in a decrease in the local rainfall. This is magnified by the fact that when the rain does fall, there is little to stop it from immediately running off before it is able to soak into the ground. Where the soil is protected by a canopy of trees to break the fall of precipitation, leaf litter slows runoff, roots increase soil permeability and water is able to infiltrate and replenish local aquifers.

On the other hand, on uncovered soil, water can simply be the engine for erosion and downstream flash floods. If the water does not soak in, the water table will drop, and the local environment will become drier. This is one of the contributing factors to desertification and the increasing incidence of drought in many places.

Farmers of many countries can point to rivers that were once reliable sources of water but which today flow only during heavy rains – and at those times, flood higher than ever in the past. These farmers often spend hours a day simply carrying water to and from their homes. Where the land has been stripped of trees, a desert is soon created. Nevertheless, it is a reversible process.

The trees also act as a filter. Studies have shown a direct correlation between the absence of forest cover and the presence of E. coli and other contaminants in the water supply. This especially impacts the rural poor who cannot afford to have water piped into the home or to buy bottled water to drink. Instead, family members, especially women, often walk hours to fetch water and additional hours to collect the firewood necessary to purify water by boiling.

Moreover, as firewood becomes scarcer and its collection costs more time and money, people are less likely to boil their water or even adequately cook their food, increasing health risk and contributing to the downward cycle of desperation. Families who already have no safety net are forced to take greater risks with their well-being.

There is also a direct correlation between deforestation and a number of infectious diseases. Recent studies show a direct link between malaria and deforestation, and in some locations, it has been shown to be one of the most important variables in the incidence of parasitic diseases including leishmaniasis and hookworm.

Ultimately, deforestation is one of the root causes of rural emigration, as people leave the unproductive countryside in hope of a job in the overcrowded cities or they cross illegally into the United States. One of the reasons that we began planting trees and working with poor farmers in the state of Oaxaca 10 years ago was the realization that much of our immigration problem in Southern California is rooted in declining opportunities in the mountains of Oaxaca – a state that has been referred to as the most eroded spot on Earth.

However, as we have happily found, this situation can be reversed. Land can become productive again. At Floresta, we have seen rivers and streams restored, and farm productivity dramatically increase. Families, split by lack of opportunity and illegal immigration, are thrilled to stay together.

So don't discount planting trees. By all means let's make the big lifestyle changes to reduce carbon emissions. And, as you plant trees to offset what you can't change, make sure that the organization you are working with is doing more than merely sticking trees in the ground.

By finding an organization that is working in collaboration with the poor to plant trees and restore degraded lands, your tree planting can do much more than assuage your guilt. It can literally give sustenance and health to a poor child and hope to a struggling family.

Sabin is executive director of the San Diego-based Floresta (www.floresta.org), an international Christian charity.

---

me@rescam.org