by Heather Stockford
August 25, 2003
The F.B.I. suspects an ecoterrorist group is responsible for burning down a five-storey apartment complex that was under construction in the University Town Centre area of San Diego on August 1. One-hundred foot flames were unstoppable by the time 100 fire fighters, 13 fire engines, two ambulances, and two rescue units crowded onto the scene, as reported by NBC 7/39. Over 500 nearby residences were evacuated, and $20 million in damages were done. Luckily no one was hurt.
FBI told NBS 7/39 that a banner wielding the message ‘If you build it, we will burn it’, was found near the scene marked with initials ‘ELF’. Officials believe the letters stand for an underground ecoterrorist group called Earth Liberation Front, which would be no surprise if you take a look at this groups’ web page.
ELF’s claim to fame appears to be burning and/or attacking things, and members boast to have caused $50 million in damages to ski lodges, luxury homes, and sports utility vehicles since 1997. The loose-knit group’s mission is to use "direct action in the form of economic sabotage to stop the destruction of the natural environment."
Associated Press reports that this may have confused Capt. Jeff Carle of the San Diego Fire Department, who reasons that more trees will have to be cut down to rebuild the structure.
Maybe the sky isn't falling after all
by Heather Stockford
As the global economy grows, so does the horror of thinning atmosphere layers, dwindling forests, and toxic air pollution, and it is easy for the public to assume that the earth has a steadily declining health bill. However, this years’ annual Index of Leading Environmental Indicators, a report that focuses on overlooked U.S. government environmental data, provides an optimistic look on environmental progress over the last generation. This is the eighth year Steven F. Hayward, along with the American Enterprise Institute and Pacific Research Institute, have published the Index, traditionally covering issues such as deforestation, air pollution, water quality, and toxic chemicals. A special study on forests proves that forest coverage has slightly increased in the United States, according to the Forest Service, and by 2001, two million acres of abandoned farmland a year was being planted with trees. Polls have shown that Americans believe that air quality is falling, but a 2001 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) report shows that aggregated emissions of the six major pollutants have declined by 25 percent. According to the EPA, water quality has improved over the last 30 years, and the amount of toxic chemicals released from industries has declined 51.2 percent since 1988.
The Index has broadened its reports to include a media critique section monitoring weaknesses in media coverage of environmental issues, as well as a retrospective report on major environmental issues such as the Kyoto Protocol and The UN World Summit on Sustainable Development.
Don't blame mankind
by Heather Stockford
A recent study by astronomers Willie Soon and Sallie Bauliunas concludes that mankind is not responsible for global warming, a debate against the theory that gases emitted from industry fossil fuel burnings are trapping the suns’ heat and causing global temperatures to rise.
The Wall Street Journal reports that the study was published in the Climate Research paper, and since then the scientific study has been widely cited by White House officials.
Senators John McCain (R., Ariz.) and Joseph Lieberman (D., Conn.) planned to introduce an amendment calling for mandatory caps on U.S. emissions of carbon dioxide, but the Bush administration opposed it. Mr. Inhofe, speaking for the opposition, cites Dr. Soon’s study, stating that "the claim that global warming is caused by man-made emissions is simply untrue and not based on sound science."
The study has even replaced contradicting research by University of Virginia scientist Michael E. Mann in a recent Environmental Protection Agency report. Dr. Manns’ research, showing that the rise in global temperatures is more than just a natural occurrence, was deleted and replaced with a reference to Dr. Soon’s paper. But what if the Dr. Soon Harvard study was wrong?
Hans Von Stoich, editor-in-chief of Climate Research, protests the journal’s review process that approved the study and states "It was flawed and it shouldn’t have been published."
Senator Jefford’s staff was looking into the paper to use in a hearing in July, and Dr. Von Stoich wanted to speed an editorial into print criticizing the study. But when publisher Otto Kinne declined him, Dr. Von Stoich, along with two other editors, resigned.
Flash mobbing new fad?
by Heather Stockford
Hundreds of people squeezed into the greeting card section of Harvard Coop bookstore in Cambridge Massachusetts on July 31. Was there a blowout special of the century on Harry Potter books, or did Oprah stop by to give life advice and free autographs? Neither. It turned out that hundreds of unacquainted people just wanted to buy a card for their friend "Bill from New York", or at least that’s what they all claimed. The seemingly random swarm freaked out cashiers, had security guards scrambling, and bewildered customers who were there to look at books.
This event was part of a new flash mob fad that was first started by 28-year-old Bill in New York, when hundreds of people gathered in Central Park to chirp like birds. These gatherings are co-ordinated through websites and emails, with the purpose of bringing a bunch of people together to be surprising, spontaneous, and silly. In this case, the anonymously moderated Yahoo told participants in the Cambridge event group called "bostoncitymob," to gather in designated areas outside of the Coop. No instructions were given until 12 minutes prior to the event. Their mission: Enter the bookstore by any means possible at 7:13 p.m., explain to confused bystanders that you need a card for Bill from New York, exit the bookstore at 7:21 p.m. And that’s exactly how it went down--no harm done, no point made, mission accomplished. To top the icing on the cake, a completely unplanned outbreak of ‘Happy Birthday’ was sung and applauded at before the mob made its exit.
Those who choose to look deeper into the event, such as Howard Rheingold, author of the new book, Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution, believe these flash mobs prove internet technologies lower the "threshold for collective action" and foreshadow future styles of political events, social gatherings, and markets.
This new fad could reveal a flash of future crowds gathered for a more purposeful and powerful reason, but for now, spontaneous mobbing is just "joyous fun," explains Suzie Sims-Fletcher, mob enthusiast, to The Christian Science Monitor. "It breaks down everybody’s routine…and there’s a certain weird camaraderie."
Perhaps it won’t be long until flash mobbing grabs a spot after Blind Date on the reality T.V channel.
Debut of Nanotechnology
by Heather Stockford
A tiny revolution in technology has sprouted in laboratories worldwide, bearing blooms of tiny man-made structures no bigger than a few atoms thick. The invention of these microscopic structures is called Nanotechnology, and it is believed that with the right nutrients (aka fundings) the science could project a $40 billion to $70 billion market by 2010 and impact areas from electronics to manufacturing, as reported by the Wall Street Journal. The newspaper reports that Nanotechnology has already received billions in support from governments and private organizations, but like many recent advancements in technology, Greenpeace is on the scene with its garden hoe of environmental heroism, ready to scrape the threat to humanity off the face of the earth. As stated by Mark Modzelewski, director of the New York trade group NanoBusiness Alliance, some environmentalists’ fears appear inspired by science-fiction scenarios dealing with swarms of tiny, deadly robots, like those portrayed in Michael Critchton’s "Prey."
Greenpeace commissioned a 70-page report warning against dangers imposed by this "whole new class of non-biodegradable pollutants." The Environmental Protection Agency is planning to fund $4 million towards research, in addition to the $700 million being funded by the U.S National Nanotechnology. Evidence that nano particles pose a danger towards human health and the environment is yet to be found. Rob Atkins, director of New Technology Product, plainly says, "It’s typical of Greenpeace to try and throw sand in the gears of a promising innovation like nano when really it’s just getting off the ground."