speech

Last year 13,348 people were incarcerated in state and federal prisons. This year, that percentage is supposed to increase. Between 1925 and 1972, incarceration rate increased by 104%, but only four decades later the incarceration rates increased by 705%, making the U.S lead the world in incarceration rates. Today, about 2.3 million prisoners are held in federal or state penitentiaries costing the government more than $50,000 to maintain each prisoner. But whats worse about the current prison system is not the financial black hole it creates, but the harm it does to its occupants. Instead of rehabilitating and reintegrating law-breakers into society, they are judged as criminals for the rest of their lives. When the government should be trying to recreate a functional citizen for society, it is putting inmates in a situation where they are told they are criminals and will be criminals for the rest of their lives. Inmates should be given the opportunity to recreate themselves in prison so that when they leave they may avoid the past situations that led them to prison and lead a new and successful life. The prison system should be built to guide law-breakers back to the path of righteousness, not treat them like outsiders to our society as it as for so many years.

The penitentiary system in America seems to revolve around producing inmates. Even though the U.S has only 5% of the world's population, it imprisons over a quarter of the world's inmates. The U.S ranks first in inmate population among all other countries with 2.3 million inmates, only followed by China's 1.6 million, a distant second. This outstanding incarceration rate comes from the court system's tendency to judge low level threat offenders harshly. According to the U.S Department of Justice, 55% of inmates are classified at either a minimum or low security level meaning that these inmates have committed non-violent crimes and are not considered a strong threat to society. And yet 58% of all inmates will spend more than five years in a jail cell. Instead of rehabilitating offenders, America seems more concerned with punishing them and keeping them in a jail cell.

The penitentiary system not only collects a large number of inmates, but also keeps released inmates in the court system. Upon release from prison, an ex-con has a 60% chance of walking right back into prison in the next decade. The harsh punishment the prison system invokes on its occupants forces them to believe that they will always be criminals. Instead of helping and supporting inmates, the prison system constantly reminds them of their past behavior and misdeeds. Instead of recovering and becoming a functional member of society, inmates are led to believe that their past incarceration makes them a criminal and an outsider from society for the rest of their lives. The purpose of the prison system is to punish criminals of society and to prevent them from committing any further crimes, but sadly the system has only lived up to the first part of that purpose.

Even in terms of finance, the prison system is inefficient. The government spends about $50,000 on each of the 2.3 million inmates. Of that $50,000, $19,000 is spent of security while only $1,500 is spent on rehabilitation programs. While the government has been able to maintain a $115 billion budget on prisons, in 10 years it won't be so easy. Currently, the average inmate age is 39 years old with somewhere between a 5 to 15 year sentence. This means that the government will be paying much more than $115 billion in the upcoming years to pay for the medical expenses of most inmates whose age has deteriorated their health. If the current prison system is not reformed quickly enough to reintegrate inmates into society and release inmates from prisons, it won't just be the government paying for their medical needs. The money will be coming from this generation and even the next.

Some people say that the current prison system is the most effective and no other dependable or financially sound solution exists. They would be wrong. In Norway, Sweden, and parts of Finland, a new movement is underway where people are actually advocating for the abolition of traditional prisons to be replaced with rehabilitation centers. These centers would be equipped with several opportunities for the inmates including a built in high school and classes that teach them skills necessary for a future career such as wielding and practicing law. Inmates would be free to move in and out of their cells, cook in kitchens, and enjoy luxuries such as horseback riding, skiing, and swimming. The purpose of the new system would be to rehabilitate inmates rather than punish them and show the inmates respect so that they will show other respect. Inmates would be given these opportunities so that when they are released from prison they can pursue a new and better life rather than return to their old habits. Prisons like these already exist in Norway with more on the way. Instead of the 60% recidivism rate the U.S encounters and the 50% the U.K experiences, Norway now experiences a low 20% recidivism rate. Instead of punishing inmates like the U.S and U.K, Norway has learned to reintegrate inmates into society so that they may be progressive citizens that create profit for society rather than cost it money.

Prison reform has already begun here in America. The Department of Justice has decided to tackle the obstacle that accounts for 50% of incarcerations: drug offense. By setting up a series of courts called drug courts, the Department of Justice hopes to set up nonviolent drug offenders in a system that turns them into sober individuals who can readapt to society. Instead of feeding them to the prison system, the government has decided to rehabilitate these offenders. So far, these courts have been successful. 75% of graduates from Drug Courts remain out of jail for 2 years. The courts have also shown tremendous financial benefits, saving $4,000 to $12,000 on every client. But this system only applies to specific genre of offenders. This type of reform is needed in entire prison system, not just a small sector of it. If a reform like this proliferated to all aspects of the prison system then changes would be seen in the recidivism rate, inmate population, and spending costs. But more importantly, law-breakers would have the opportunity to redefine and detach themselves from their past actions so that they might pursue a better life and avoid old habits. It would change the system so that not only would society see justice at work, but also see the American Dream at its finest.

Work Cited

"Drug Courts Work." Nadcp.org. National Association of Drug Control Professionals. Web. 11 Dec. 2011. .

"How Much Does It Cost to Incarcerate an Inmate?" Lao.ca.gov. Legislative Analyst's Office. Web. 11 Dec. 2011. .

James, Erwin. "What Are Prisons in Norway Really Like?" Guardian.co.news. Guardian News, 13 Nov. 2008. Web. 11 Dec. 2011. .

Liptak, Adam. "U.S Prison Population Dwarfs That of Other Nations." Nytimes.com. New York Times Company, 23 Apr. 2008. Web. 11 Dec. 2011. .

"Office of National Drug Control Policy." Whitehouse.gov. United States Federal Government. Web. 11 Dec. 2011. .

Peirce, Neil. "America Behind Bars: The Time Is Ripe for Prison Reform." Seattletimes.nwsource.com. Seattle Times Company, 15 Aug. 2010. Web. 11 Dec. 2011..

"Prison Count 2010." Pewcenteronthestates.org. The Pew Center on the States, Apr. 2010. Web. 11 Dec. 2011. Prison_Count_2010.pdf>.

"Quick Facts About the Bureau of Prisons." Bop.gov. U.S Department of Justice. Web. 11 Dec. 2011. .

poor little johnny

There was a time when chubby kids were considered cute, and Johnny was one of them. His parents assumed that his little rolls of fat would simply melt right off with age. But when their little angel grew to weigh more than them before he even hit puberty, which in turn caused him to suffer from asthma, diabetes, and depression, they were horrified. The adorable toddler, who was once showered with compliments of his little blonde curls and chubby, rosy cheeks whenever in public, had grown older and was now looked upon with scorn and disgust by others. He had become obese. Johnny’s parents were desperate for a remedy, but the only way to undo what had been done was by eating healthy and exercising, which did not yield results overnight and required discipline.

Nearly one-third of the teenage population is now suffering a similar fate to Johnny. Obesity has become one of the most common eating disorders of our time, constituted by an excessive accumulation of body fat that is disproportional to one’s height. Teenage obesity is a battle we must put forth our greatest effort to conquer. We must hold individuals accountable and support them in turning around their life for the better. The best way to do so is to understand the problem from its core.

The two most common causes of obesity are lack of exercise and an unhealthy diet. Some even attribute them both to the way society is shaped. One only has to ask “how many of the foods in a grocery store don’t come in a bag, box, or can? How many hours does the average American sit at a computer or desk per day? How many teenagers play videogames or watch movies on a daily basis instead of engaging in physical activity? And how many times a week does the typical American eat fast food?” The answers to these are quite inimical, and most defiantly detrimental to the uneducated or recalcitrant individuals who chose to ignore the pleas of doctors and nutritionists alike.

Teen obesity does not only affect the way one looks or is perceived by others, but it is also dangerous for the health. The excess fat inhibits the internal organs from working properly, can cause diabetes, hypertension, and even orthopedic complications. Obese teens have an increased risk of heart diseases and may suffer from sleep and breathing problems. In addition, the emotional consequences are grave; many obese teens suffer from depression, anxiety, and/or obsessive compulsive disorder.

Although the majorities blame society and parents for teen obesity, I believe the individual is to be held responsible. If teens can make their own decisions concerning drugs, sex, and alcohol, and are “mature” enough to drive themselves wherever and whenever they so please, why is it that the blame is cast upon their parents, schools, and fast food restaurants? There is no need for teenagers to be idle and overweight just because life has been made easier for them.

Exercising on a daily basis and eating healthy are the two most effective ways to combat obesity. All teenagers, even those who are not concerned with their weight, should make an effort to combat the obstacles placed by society for the purpose of “convenience”, such as fast food more than once a week, or preferably 3 weeks, going for a run instead of perusing social networking sites all day, and walking those two blocks to get your groceries instead of driving.

Overall, obesity has gotten out of hand. Roughly about 20% of teenagers are suffering from this epidemic, and we as fellow teens must take care of our bodies and encourage those around us to do the same. Blaming parents or schools will not solve the problem, so it is our responsibility to make the right decisions that will.

Bibliography

"Teen Obesity." Doctors, Patient Care, Health Education, Medical Research | PAMF. Web. 12 Dec. 2011. .

"Obesity In Children And Teens." American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry. Web. 12 Dec. 2011. .

"Teen Obesity Statistics - Troubled Teen." Troubled Teen - Issues, Suicide, Depression, Pregnancy. Web. 12 Dec. 2011. .

"Teen and Childhood Obesity." ObesityHelp - Gastric Bypass, LAP-BAND® System, DS and Other Surgical and Non-Surgical Weight Loss Options. Web. 12 Dec. 2011. .

Documentary: Food Inc.

Global Warming

Imagine, a polar bear in the arctic, stranded on one piece of ice, about 20 meters in diameter. That piece of ice is slowly melting away. That polar bear is alone on that small piece of ice that broke away from a much larger piece. The monster referred to as global warming caused the ice to melt separating the polar bear from its family. Now imagine a penguin. The penguin relies on small organisms for survival. Those small organisms rely on other tiny organisms, such as algae, for their survival. With the temperatures on the rise, the amounts of algae are decreasing, which creates a big large hiccup in the food chain. The penguin is struggling to find food, and we can thank global warming for that, too. Global warming is a problem we have been facing for years, and a problem that has gotten out of hand. People all around the world believe global warming is just another idea that can be pushed to the side, but the time for change is now. Some of you may believe that global warming doesn’t exist and that this topic is just how the earth is changing on its own. However, there is proof that global warming exists. Global temperatures are rising, sea levels are rising and ice sheets shrinking are just some of the evidence of global warming. We must find a solution for reducing or even stopping the causes of global warming.
We’ve all heard the term global warming at some point in our lives, but do we know what really causes it? An article published on the National Geographic entitled “Causes of Global Warming” stated: “One of the first things scientists learned is that there are several greenhouse gases responsible for warming, and humans emit them in a variety of ways. Most come from the combustion of fossil fuels in cars, factories and electricity production. The gas responsible for the most warming is carbon dioxide, also called CO2. Other contributors include methane released from landfills and agriculture (especially from the digestive systems of grazing animals), nitrous oxide from fertilizers, gases used for refrigeration and industrial processes, and the loss of forests that would otherwise store CO2.” So what effects has global warming had on the Earth? One of the major things is the rise in global temperatures. According to NASA, most of the warming has been occurring since the 1970’s and the surface temperatures are continuing to increase. So for the past 40 years, this problem has been happening right in front of us, yet we still have not fully addressed how to control it.
Additionally, the shrinking ice sheets and rising sea levels are becoming more and more of a problem due to global warming. With the increase of temperatures comes the melting of ice sheets in record numbers. Antarctica lost close to 152 cubic kilometers of ice between 2002 and 2005. That equals to 36 cubic miles or the volume of 144,000 Empire State Buildings! As I previously stated, polar bears depend on ice in order to stay alive. The ice allows them to raise their family and hunt for food (maybe those penguins), but without this essential part of their environment they could face extinction. In addition, as the ice melts, the sea levels rise. In the last 100 years, the sea level has increased by 17 centimeters…that’s almost seven (7) inches! Al Gore provided us as with the chilling images of New York City being submerged by the Atlantic Ocean. We must not wait until it’s too late to reverse these effects.
So how can we fix this problem? There are actually some pretty simple steps you can work into your daily routine. For instance, you can change your standard light bulbs to fluorescent bulbs. According to EnergyStar, this will reduce energy use by up to 616 million kilowatt hours of electricity in one year, keeping 974 million pounds of carbon dioxide out of the environment. Now, if you don’t feel like putting the effort into changing your bulbs, unplug some of the electronic devices you are not using. This requires minimal effort and only takes a nanosecond to accomplish. This could reduce the amount of CO2 that enters the atmosphere tremendously.
In conclusion, let’s go back to that poor little polar bear and the penguin I discussed earlier and let’s imagine now that global warming didn’t exist (for real though, not just because some of you don’t want to believe it). Let’s imagine that temperatures were increasing abnormally, that ice sheets weren’t melting, and that sea levels weren’t rising so rapidly. The polar bear would be happily hunting for food with its three cubs with no worries, as well as barely having to swim to the closest ice glacier. That penguin we talked about would delightfully be chowing-down on all those little shrimp that feed on all that algae that is flourishing in the perfect water temperatures. We see images everyday of global warming and the toll it’s beginning to take on our environment. The time to start reversing the effects of global warming is now, for the sake of our future generations.

Bibliography:
Guggenheim, Davis, Dir. An Inconvenient Truth. Perf. Gore, Al. Paramount: 2006, Film.
7 Terrifying Global Warming Pictures. Web. 27 Jul 2011. http://www.treehugger.com/galleries/2009/03/7-terrifying-global-warming-pictures.php
"Global Warming: the Two Sides Seen through a Logical Perspective." Free Articles Directory Submit Articles - ArticlesBase.com. Article Base, 2 Jan. 2011. Web. 27 July 2011. .
"Climate Change: Evidence." Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet. Ed. Amber Jenkins. NASA. Web. 27 July 2011. .
Pertman, David. "Extensive Damage Seen in Wake of Rising Sea Levels." San Francisco Article [San Francisco] 27 July 2011: A10. Print.
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/co2.html
http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/gw-causes/

speech

One of my favorite shows right now is Modern Family and aside from Glee, it’s the only show I watch primetime instead of DVR-ing it for the weekend. So instead of sitting for 22 minutes without any commercial interruptions, like when I watch a recording, I sit and enjoy 30 minutes of pure comedy along with the always aggravating TV commercials. From the most recent holiday episode, there were movie trailers for New Year’s Eve and Young Adult, retail and car commercials for Best Buy and Toyota, and of course, prescription drug ads like Cymbalta and Claritin. Not only are these medicinal commercials on the rise during TV shows on major networks, they are also on in between the news, and even featured on family friendly channels like abc family and TLC.

The United States is the only developed country that allows the direct-to-consumer advertising or DTCA of prescription medication. These prescription medication commercials have increased compared to a decade ago and have become so effective that pharmaceutical companies choose to spend millions of dollars just to advertise them for 40 seconds. This has raised the awareness of diseases in audiences, better called consumers, to ask doctors for prescriptions. Not only has this distorted what “sick” means but has persuaded consumers to take medication that can be harmful to their health.

Aside from people who use Netflix or watch DVR recordings all the time, the majority of TV viewers are familiar with multiple jingles for many drugs. Although I know the typical “Live Claritin Clear” (giant smiley face) or “Depression hurts, Cymbalta can help,” my brother who watches more TV was easily able to recite even more. “All you need is Midol. Because your period's more than a pain. ” or “The nighttime sniffling sneezing coughing aching stuffy head fever so you can rest medicine by NyQuil.” Not only was he able to remember the name of the drug, but its uses, and what it treats. More and more of these commercials have become memorable featuring celebrities or using emotional appeals which Big Pharma companies will spend over 30 billion dollars like in 2005.

Before this commercial craze, prescription drugs were advertised in pamphlets at doctors’ offices while people were waiting for their appointment. Such awareness of a vast amount of drugs were relatively unknown compared to the amount of knowledge we have today.

With the increased presence of drug commercials, there is a growing awareness of medicine and its uses so people are becoming more paranoid, thinking they may be showing signs of diseases. The meaning of “sick” has been blurred by pharmaceutical companies emphasizing vague symptoms that anyone can show. Is that cough that sounded slightly different this morning a sign? Does “at risk” equal you’re sick? Can you really be diagnosed by a TV pitchman who you’ve never seen before? Consumers think so. People will go to doctors with a grocery list of prescription drugs that they think they need. And many times, doctors will prescribe it because they are also a part of the business world. Although people think this will solve all their problems, in many cases, it can have the opposite effect and be detrimental to their health. For example, Lyrica or Topamax which are both drugs that treat seizures have been used for migraines and general pain. And the use of painkillers has gone up 88% in the last 9 years.

At the same time, some will say that it is worth pharmaceutical companies spending and essentially investing so much money to advertise their products because it does raise awareness. While the United States may be advanced in medicine, many don’t see the point in routine check-ups when they think nothing is wrong. Although the awareness of drugs can exaggerate diseases, people are nonetheless knowledge of it.

It’s not right when a 12-year-old boy knows at least five jingles for prescription drugs and can recite them one after another without even understanding what period pains are. It’s wrong when a commercial for Cialis, an erectile dysfunction drug is featured on abc family. And something really needs to change if pharmaceutical companies can call themselves educational and research organizations when they spend 24.4% on advertising compared to 13.4% on research of $235.4 billion. In the last decade, awareness seems to have increased just as much as the amount of money companies have made. Instead of making news about the latest research and advances made in medicine, pharmaceutical companies are making records of how much they have been able to make.

Prescription drug commercials are like the pop-up ads on the Internet with the blinking lights, or the fraudulent emails people get of a sob story asking for money. Everyone knows it’s fake and not to click on it, but there’s that one person, that one person, who gives in to the urge to do so. Pharmaceutical companies are no longer research institutions to help people in need. Instead, they are a multi-billion dollar big pharma business corporation in search of the next product to make big bucks.

Ronit, Ridberg, Prod. Big Bucks, Big Pharma: Marketing Disease & Pushing Drugs. A Media Education Foundation Production: 2006, Film.

“Cymbalta Commercial.” Courtesy of medstores.net: 22 Aug 2010. Television. 2 Aug 2011.

Moynihan, Ray, and Alan Cassels. Selling Sickness: How the World’s Biggest Pharmaceutical Companies Are Turning Us All Into Patients. First. New York, NY: Nation Books, 2005. Print.

Rosenberg, Martha. “How Big Pharma’s Deceptive Advertising Helps Addict Patients, Screw Over Doctors and Jack Up Insurance Rates.” AlterNet(18 April 2011): n. pag. Web. 1 Aug 2011.

Gapper, John. “In Praise of Big Pharma’s Me-Too Drugs.” Financial Times UK 2 December 2004: n. pag. Web. 3 Aug 2011.

The captivity of dolphins and whales began in the 1960s with the movie and then show “Flipper.”The star of which was a bottlenose dolphin named Kathy. The success of the show ignited the demand for aquatic based entertainment and the exploitation of dolphins and whales for entertainment began. Since then thousands of whales, dolphins, and porpoises have been taken from their natural habitats and moved into captivity all over the world. The captivity of these animals is cruel. It’s ecologically damaging, harmful to the animals and dangerous for humans.
September marked the beginning of another dolphin hunting season in Japan. During which, pods of dolphins are trapped in a cover; dolphin trainers select which ones will be sold into captivity; and the rest are slaughtered. This season, 6 have been sold into captivity, 28 were released, and 134 were killed. Captivity is just as cruel as killing them. We take animals used to swimming hundreds of miles a day and put them in tank. They’re used to constant socialization with other members of their pod and we isolate them. Dolphins and whales are surprisingly a lot like humans. They have a need for contact. Just like newborn babies need skin on skin contact to create bonds and develop, whales and dolphins travel in very close nit pods and touch each other with their flippers to create that social interaction. In captivity, that is taken away from them. Dr. John Lilly researched dolphins in particular and discovered that they breathe voluntarily. He found that if dolphins, whales, or porpoises are kept in isolation, their social deprivation may be so severe that they commit suicide by voluntarily ceasing to breathe and/or eat. Several of Lilly’s research animals died in this way.
Dolphins and whales have always been considered intelligent and kind animals. They come very close to a human brain aptitude; have some form of communication, self awareness, and an expanded capacity for processing emotions. The early Greeks believed that dolphins actually descended from men who had jumped overboard, and for that reason they were always kind to humans. A few years ago there was a scuba diver who was hit by a boat. He was found 32 hours later, unconscious and surrounded by about a hundred dolphins! They had taken turns holding the diver above the water so he wouldn’t drown. This incident is a perfect example of the great lengths that dolphins and also whales go to, to help and protect humans. Why can’t we do the same for them?
Ecologically, the demand in whales and dolphins for the entertainment industry is a major threat to wild populations. There are now ten different types of endangered whales, including the blue and sperm whale. There are four species of dolphins that are now endangered, and the Baiji River Dolphin is the number one on the recently extinct species list. Captivity has caused pathologies among the animals, such as dorsal fin collapse which is seen in 60 to 90 percent of captive populations of killer whales. This is in no way an indicator of the health of the animals, but it is a huge indicator of the artificiality of captivity and the unnaturalness of it.
Marine parks are increasingly claiming that the research done with the captive animals is critical to the protection and conservation of wild cetaceans. However, the research done in captivity is not applicable to wild populations. The physical restrictions on conditions in captivity, along with the unnatural socialization, differing diets, and stress caused by the requirements to perform, clearly show that captivity bears little resemblance to a natural environment. Studies of the behavior or health of the animals is not relevant to wild animals and has very little potential to improve the conservation of wild cetaceans.
In 2009 the trainer of Tilikum, a 5400 kg bull orca was pulled under water by her ponytail and drowned by the whale responsible for two other deaths. The death of Dawn Brancheau was the latest in a string of incidents since the beginning of captivity. Since the 70s there have been 24 attacks by killer whales, some of them fatal. Some believe that this number is surprisingly low for the size and strength of killer whales. However, when compared to the attacks in the wild it is incredibly high. In 40 years there have been 3 attacks none of which have been fatal. Controversially, there motive behind the attack is unclear and experts say they will never know why Tilikum pulled her under. It is unclear whether it was an act of aggression, overabundant playfulness, or a premeditated action. This tragedy demonstrates the unpredictability of and strength of killer whales and the true lack of control we have over them.
You may ask yourself, what can I do to help? You can help by not endorsing the captivity of dolphins and whales by not visiting marine parks and other facilities where captivity is celebrated. In doing this you will be indirectly protecting whales, dolphins, and porpoises from the cruelties, stress and early death that awaits them in these parks, and getting us one step closer to ending captivity.
http://library.thinkquest.org/17963/captivity.html
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=killer-whale
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killer_whale
http://bed2.gremm.org/eng/pag.php?PagRef=2-5-4-1
http://www.wdcs.org/stop/captivity/index.php
http://marinelife.about.com/b/2010/02/24/arguments-for-keeping-whales-in-captivity.htm
http://www.littletownmart.com/dolphins/
http://news.discovery.com/animals/dolphin-intelligence-explained.html
http://www.wdcs.org/submissions_bin/capmayerscijustifications.pdf

normal font

You take a piece of paper, it is .1 milimeters thick. You cut this paper in two and stack those two pieces on top of each other, your paper is now .2 milimeters thick. You split it and stack the halves and its .4 milimeters now;if you were to repeat this process a mere 100 times the thickness of the stack would be 1.33x10^12 light years.

This amazing fact simply demonstrates exponential, or geometric, growth. This style of growth is one that we all are very familiar with, whether it be from math class, the depreciation of your car’s value once you drive it off the car lot, or the trend that the population of the world follows. Everybody here should know that just recently, the good old human race finally passed the 7 billion person mark. Bells and whistles, everyone has put in their fair share and deserves their bottle of victory gin and pack of victory cigarettes right? Not necessarily, the Earth isn’t suited to accommodate this many resource hungry individuals.The time has come where every single person needs to put effort into conserving more, wasting less, and maintaining an Earth worthy of bequeathing onto many generations to come.

Our population has, for so long, been depicted on that graph with the backwards “L” shape on it. “We start HERE *finger pointing*, at some date thousands of years ago, it doesn't matter how many thousands, this number is around 10 to 100 million. We move over, and over, and over, until we hit a little less then one million people in the late 1800’s then BAM the line goes vertical. Up, and up, and up, we are at the year 2000 and what do you know, we are rocking a solid 4 billion people; we go up and up and up and we find ourselves in September of 2012 and the 7 billionth child is born, her name is Danica May Camacho and she lives in Manila. We reach out into the future and in 2050, we will have a population just over 9 billion people, which is the predicted terminal point of the human race.

Our population is growing, SO WHAT? Well, homo sapiens (sensible humans) have managed to manipulate the environment to support more then the 10 million hunter gathering humans that populated the Earth more then 10 thousand years ago. But how long can we really manage to feed this massive, and growing, population? We really haven't been able to for a while now, thousands of people a day die from starvation, yet America gets to flout the title of ‘country with the highest obesity rate’. Joel Cohen, a population biologist at Rockefeller University, states that it takes 2.1 hectares of land to provide for the average human; on the other hand, it takes nearly 10 hectares of land to feed an American. If the American standard was adopted by every human being, we would need 4 earths just to keep everybody fed. So as our population is shooting up the side of that population graph we need to consciously reduce the amount of food we take in; along with the amount of everything else we use in excess.

For so long, we have been able to maintain, and thrive because of exaggerated agricultural practices and artificial energy. When these practices were started, nobody really could see how much damage it would actually do to the world; everyone was just thinking a short term scale. For the longest time, humans have lessened the quality and length of life of animals to increase ours. We have also dug, blasted, pumped, and fracked our way into a huge environmental issue, pollution; but more specifically, and controversially global warming. This is a problem that will just become more pressing and less easily ignored with more people driving and more cows farting.

This problem is one that we can not simply fix. One of mankind’s greatest achievements, is the exact same thing that started the vertical bump on the population chart. Focus on the science of medicine and ultimately away from religion, greatly increased the human life expectancy and made even an honorable death much less inviting. Our greatest achievement is ultimately going to kill us off.

So we, as Americans, need to start a trend that will elongate the livability of Earth. As it is plausible that we can start shipping people off to the moon to live, it is not something that we should depend on, because how many people can we pump to the moon from a population that is growing by thousands of people a day? We are part of a species that has lived its entire existence by making everything else adapt to us, it is about our time to be the ones to harmonize with the environment.

Attenborough, David. How Many People Can Live on Planet Earth. Dir. Olly Bootle. Documentary
Johnson, Boris. "Global Over-population Is the Real Issue." The Telegraph 25 Oct. 2011, Final ed.
Print.
Hopkins, James. "Overpopulation: The Human Population Crisis." Web log post.Cosmosmith Creations - Awesome T-Shirts with Free Shipping! Cosmosmith, 10 Feb. 2012. Web. 11 Dec. 2011. <http://www.cosmosmith.com/human_population_crisis.htm>.

Global Warming- A (Hopefully) Unique Take on a Topic Beaten to Death

The subject of global warming is a controversial one. The differing opinions on it, the consistent denials from some groups, the cries of “it’s a natural cycle!” Global warming is something America has been unable to agree on. But is it even necessary to agree on it? Is the real issue at hand whether or not global warming is “real?” I propose that it is not a question of “if,” but “what if?” What if it’s not just a natural cycle? What if we’re actually killing our planet, however slow the process may be? If we do nothing, if we do not act now as both a country and indeed a people, the chance of us destroying our planet far outweighs any proposed drawbacks to the “green movement” in terms of importance. Americans need to be the first to move forward in energy technologies, something we’re certainly capable of doing.

Consider the implications of our actions. For the sake of argument, let’s assume that global warming isn’t “real.” It’s all a hoax, invented by Democrats to spend all our money, as my very own father would put it. We don’t need to invest in alternative energy sources like solar panels or geothermal buildings! Let’s just buy foreign oil forever, and burn an endless amount of coal; the air’s not getting any dirtier! Disregarding the fact that air pollution is absolutely undeniable, this “lifestyle” the US and most other developed countries live is reckless and self-destructive. We should be setting the example on new energy technologies, but instead we’re far behind, with countries like Costa Rica pledging to be carbon neutral by 2021.

Why isn’t America one of the forerunners? One major consideration- our refusal to sign the Kyoto protocol. Introduced in late 1997 in an effort to stabilize greenhouse gasses in our environment, the United States is the ONLY major developed country to not sign this international treaty, and currently has no plans to. While separate movements and treaties have been passed since the introduction of the Kyoto Protocol in the US and other countries, this initial rejection proved from the start that we weren’t interested in, or at least largely divided by, environmental issues of this importance. However, this contradicts the example we set forth in the Montreal Protocol, designed to eliminate CFCs and other freons in the atmosphere. The United States, along with every other member of the United Nations has signed and ratified this treaty, so why can’t we do the same with the Kyoto Protocol?

As far as foreign oil goes, the solution isn’t, “start drilling on our own land.” It’s to cut oil out of the picture entirely. The fact that such a limited, dirty, hard-to-get resource became so widespread is ridiculous in its own right. The oil industry may be a booming, lucrative, job-providing industry, but it’s an industry on a crash course. It’s going to end soon, and, like the ghost towns created by the Pennsylvanian oil rush, or the Texas Oil Boom, be completely abandoned. Petroleum WILL run out at some point, and we know this as an absolute fact. So why not heavily invest now in alternatives?

All of this needs to be done in grand strides within the next 10 years to set a strong foundation for the inevitable future when oil reserves have run dry. We need to upgrade our infrastructure now to protect ourselves from this event. It shouldn’t be a particularly difficult process, and it will create jobs stateside, something else we desperately need. To relate this back to global warming, it shouldn’t matter to you or anyone else whether it’s a phenomenon that’s actually occurring or not. The proposed solutions to global warming are natural steps we should be taking regardless of whether or not it’s happening. Once the Earth’s natural resources are all but depleted, where will we turn? Cleaner air is a goal we should all strive towards. So is cutting dependency on foreign oil. So is establishing a future for our nation, and the entire planet, that isn’t based on guesswork. That “What if?” should be removed from the equation entirely. We need to err on the side of caution and invest in these new energies, or risk suffering the consequences for it in the future, however drastic those may or may not be.

Bibliography:

• An Inconvenient Truth. Dir. Davis Guggenheim. Prod. Laurie David, Lawrence Bender, and Scott Z. Burns. Perf. Al Gore. Paramount Pictures Corp., 2006. DVD.
• James Balog: Time-lapse Proof of Extreme Ice Loss. Perf. James Balog. TED: Ideas worth Spreading. TED.com, Sept. 2009. Web. 7 Aug. 2011.
• Knighten, Dana. "Climate Change: Cool Solution for a Warming Planet - Baltimoresun.com." The Baltimore Sun | Breaking News, Sports, Weather and Traffic in Baltimore - Baltimoresun.com. The Baltimore Sun, 8 Aug. 2011. Web. 9 Aug. 2011.
• Pappas, Stephanie. "Heat Unlikely to Cool Climate Change Debate - Technology & Science - Science - LiveScience - Msnbc.com." Msnbc.com - Breaking News, Science and Tech News, World News, US News, Local News- Msnbc.com. MSNBC, 3 Aug. 2011. Web. 9 Aug. 2011.
• Pappas, Stephanie. "Heat Unlikely to Cool Climate Change Debate - Technology & Science - Science - LiveScience - Msnbc.com." Msnbc.com - Breaking News, Science and Tech News, World News, US News, Local News- Msnbc.com. MSNBC, 3 Aug. 2011. Web. 9 Aug. 2011.