Harumph!

LabRat over at Atomic Nerds has an interesting rant about the controversy over climate science.

I tend to agree with him. I'm also somewhere in the middle on this question.

We know the natural environment is being destroyed in a lot of ways, but we are fixated on the whole carbon/global warming thing, and don't tackle the things that we could actually do something about.

I tend to lean towards the "do no harm" end of the scale on environmentalism. We should continue to exploit the bounty that we are blessed with, but we should do so in a way that doesn't destroy the beauty that comes with it, and in a way that ensures that the bounty is there for later generations.

I love seafood, but I only eat it once in a blue moon. Mostly that's because I feel guilty eating something that's been overfished and may not be there for my grandkids.

I prefer to drive my own car instead of taking a bus. But I know that I'm adding pollutants to our already polluted air here in the Ohio valley, so I drive as efficient a vehicle as I can get away with and still have room to transport the various people, children, dogs, and other mammals that I have.

I buy locally grown produce as much as I can. It tastes better than something that's been shipped from Chile, and it's better for me.

So, before I make a long post longer, I try to enjoy what's available to me, but try to make sure I don't do so in a way that does any harm that can't be avoided.

How about you?