Don't Pee on the Bee

Still Greening Along!

As I finished flipping through the April/May 2010 issue of Kiwimagazine, one "turned down page" was an ad for several "greenfestivals" that will be happening throughout the nation.  (The one in San Francisco was last weekend.)  I had flipped down the page a few weeks ago because Bill McKibben, author of Hundred Dollar Holiday, (find previous posts in the Hundred Dollar Holiday category), was listed as one of the speakers.  I've been wondering what he's been up to.  I find it hard to believe that a man like him wouldn't have something meaningful going on!

Then a few days ago, my new issue of Utne Reader magazine arrived, and the Editor's Note mentioned McKibben and  a new organization that he has co-founded and a website called 350.  Now I try to not get too controversial here, so if you don't believe in climate change and global warming, you might not like this.  Anyway, he's working on a new mission, and 350 is it!  The following information is from the website.

What does the number 350 mean?

350 is the most important number in the world—it's what scientists say is the safe upper limit for carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

Two years ago, after leading climatologists observed rapid ice melt in the Arctic and other frightening signs of climate change, they issued a series of studies showing that the planet faced both human and natural disaster if atmospheric concentrations of CO2 remained above 350 parts per million.

Everyone from Al Gore to the U.N.’s top climate scientist has now embraced this goal as necessary for stabilizing the planet and preventing complete disaster. Now the trick is getting our leaders to pay attention and craft policies that will put the world on track to get to 350.

Is 350 scientifically possible?

Right now, mostly because we’ve burned so much fossil fuel, the atmospheric concentration of co2 is 390 ppm—that’s way too high, and it’s why ice is melting, drought is spreading, forests are dying. To bring that number down, the first task is to stop putting more carbon into the atmosphere. That means a very fast transition to sun and wind and other renewable forms of power. If we can stop pouring more carbon into the atmosphere, then forests and oceans will slowly suck some of it out of the air and return us to safe levels.

Is 350 politically possible?

It’s very hard. It means switching off fossil fuel much more quickly than governments and corporations have been planning. Our best chance to speed up that process will come in December in Copenhagen, when the world’s nations meet to agree on a new climate treaty. Right now, they’re not planning to do enough. But we can change that--if we mobilize the world to swift and bold climate action.

The Sibling Effect (Nurture Shock)

Freud was wrong.  Shakespeare was right.  Why siblings really fight.

Surprisingly, this was the shortest chapter in the book!  Yet my mind is swirling after reading this chapter!   How to organize my thoughts as I blog?  I've got my perspective as a mother with two siblings who are constantly fighting!  My thoughts as an administrator of child care programs for over 20 years!  A Masters Degree holder in Clinical Psychology with an emphasis on Advanced Family Therapy!  An oldest sibling myself!  AND a member of an extended family where, if the 5 siblings didn't go for it at least once or twice during a gathering, there was something seriously wrong!  I guess you'll have to sort it out yourself!

Bronson and Merryman begin the chapter with a discussion about all the studies over the years that have been done on only children, the premise being that only children are somehow different than children with siblings, especially when it comes to positive social skills.  Well, guess what!  Only children are notless skilled than children with siblings.  The question arises:  Could it be that as parents and scientists, we think that those never-ending interactions with sibs are positive, when in fact it could be just the opposite?

Studies show that siblings between the ages of three and seven fight/argue/torture their parents for approximately 10 minutes each hour.  According to one researcher, only about one of every 8 conflicts ends in a positive fashion.  The other seven interactions usually end with the siblings pulling away, usually at the expense of the youngest child. 

Another study watched how 4 year olds treated their siblings as opposed to their friends.  The results showed that the kids made 7x more controlling and negative comments to their siblings than to their friends.  A Scottish researcher believes that because siblings will always be there, there is no real incentive to act as nicely as they do to their friends.  She says, "Sibship is a relationship in which the boundaries of social interaction can be pushed to the limit.  Rage and irritation need not be suppressed, whilst politeness and toleration can be neglected."  (Italics mine!  Ringing any bells for any adult siblings out there???)