quarta-feira, outubro 31, 2007

Cães de Guerra

See just this Post & Comments / 0 Comments so far / Post a Comment /   Home
Up, Down.

Cães de Guerra
: What happened to the kid General Hudson?
: The trauma of a whole generation.
: No one leaves comments on his blog, Colonel.

The cat's in the well and the servant is at the door.
The drinks are ready and the dogs are going to war.


     Bob Dylan, Cat's in the Well, 1990.

"They make it easier for Sudan to take credit for announcing cease-fires that it has no intention of honoring, agreeing to peacekeepers that it has no intention of cooperating with and attending peace conferences that have no realistic possibility of bringing peace. Meanwhile, the genocide goes on."
     NYT Editorial November 1, Playing Sudan’s Game, Source.

"We feel that with the ground sinking and the sea water rising, Bangkok will be under water in the next 15 to 20 years — permanently."
     Smith Dharmasaroja, Bangkok gets that sinking feeling, Bangkok Post, November 3 2007., Source.

"And efforts to close the regulatory gap must overcome one particularly thorny issue: some uncertified companies accused of selling counterfeit drugs are owned by the government itself."
     NYT, Chinese Chemicals Flow Unchecked Onto World Drug Market, October 31, Source.

Down.

segunda-feira, outubro 29, 2007

Pigs, Death ... & stuff

See just this Post & Comments / 0 Comments so far / Post a Comment /   Home
Up, Down.

I like this phrase:

" ... may help to concentrate people's minds."

     Gwynne Dyer.



This short essay by Verlyn Klinkenborg caught my attention:

25 October, NYT, The Rural Life, Two Pigs.

Very soon, a farmer and his son will come to the farm to kill our two pigs. If that sentence bothers you, you should probably stop reading now — and you should probably also stop eating pork. The pigs weigh nearly 300 pounds apiece, and killing them is the reality of eating meat. I talk to the pigs whenever I’m in their pen, and ever since June I’ve been slowly taming them, getting them used to being scratched. There are two reasons. I truly love being with the pigs. And taming them means it will be that much easier for the farmer and his son to kill them swiftly, immediately. If I had no more foreknowledge of my death than these two pigs will have of theirs, I’d consider myself very lucky.

The questions people ask make it sound as though I should be morally outraged at myself, as if it’s impossible to scratch the pigs behind the ears and still intend to kill them. If I belonged to a more coherent, traditional rural community — one that comes together for pig-butchering in the fall — I would get to celebrate the ritual in it all, the sudden abundance a well-fed pig represents. It’s hard to act that out when the cast is a gruff farmer and son, and my wife and me, who have been silenced by the solemnity of what we’re watching.

Because we do watch. That’s part of the job. It’s how we come to understand what the meat itself means. And to me, the word “meat” is at the root of the contradictory feelings the pig-killing raises. You can add all the extra value you want — raising heritage breed pigs on pasture with organic grain, all of which we do — and yet somehow the fact that we are doing this for meat, some of which we keep, most of which we trade or sell, makes the whole thing sound like a bad bargain. And yet compared with the bargain most Americans make when they buy pork in the supermarket, this is beauty itself.

Knowing that you’re doing something for the last time is a uniquely human fear. I thought that would be the hardest thing about having pigs. In fact, it’s not so hard, though it does remind me that humans have trouble thinking carefully about who knows what. One day soon I’ll step into the pen and give the pigs a thorough scratching, behind the ears, between the eyes, down the spine. Their tails will straighten with pleasure. It will be the last time. I will know it, and they simply won’t.

============================================================================

That it stuck at all is because it is obviously (to me at least) but subtly incomplete ... there is a quality I cannot yet put my finger on that makes it so. It seems to dip beneath a respectable and bourgeois surface ... and yet does not.

More later maybe.

============================================================================

And a story about a recent human death, say, a recent homicide by the RCMP:

17/10/07, CTV, Man who died in airport likely asking for help: mom, Source.
19/10/07, CBC, Witness blames RCMP, Vancouver airport for death of Tasered man, Source.
26/10/07, Mark Hume - Sunny Dhillon, Questions hang over taser death, Source.
26/10/07, Editorial, The tragic death of Mr. Dziekanski, Source.



More useless Canadian hand-wringing.

A-and another RCMP cover-up underway: Witness going to court to retrieve Taser video, Bill Cleverley, Times Colonist, Source.

============================================================================

And a story about general death:

Gwynne Dyer, Climate Change: Evasion Replaces Denial.

     When denial fails, try evasion. Almost all the climate change deniers, even President George W. Bush, now allow the forbidden phrase to pass their lips, but that doesn't mean they have really accepted the need to do something about it. The preferred tactics now are distraction, diversion and delay.

     That's why the US government held a mini-summit on climate change last week just two days after the United Nations held a one-day summit to prepare for the December meeting in Indonesia that must set the targets for deeper cuts in greenhouse gas emissions in the period after 2012, when the current Kyoto Protocol expires. The Bush administration, which refused to ratify the Kyoto pact, doesn't want any hard targets at all, so the name of the game is sabotage.

     "Each nation must decide for itself the right mix of tools and technology to achieve results that are measurable and environmentally effective," Mr Bush said. In other words, there should not be negotiated targets for actual cuts in emissions, with penalties for those who do not meet them. "By setting this goal, we acknowledge there is a problem," said the US president. "And by setting this goal, we commit ourselves to doing something about it."

     What he proposes to do about it is to host another conference next year to "finalise the goal" (but not a mandatory goal, you understand) and discuss ways of attaining it. Then there could be another conference in 2009, and another in 2010....

     Evasion and delay. The aim is to prevent the Kyoto accord's 144 signatories from setting hard targets for deep emission cuts, or at least to provide a plausible political shelter for governments that oppose mandatory cuts but need to look like they are fighting climate change in the eyes of their own peoples. That shelter, which is now called the Asia-Pacific Partnership, was set up last year, and last week it gained a new recruit: Canada.

     The six existing members are the United States and Australia (huge emitters of greenhouse gases that never joined the Kyoto process, and until recently were climate change deniers); China, India and South Korea (Kyoto signatories that, as developing countries, were exempt from emission limits under the existing treaty, but fear that they would face limits in the next phase); and Japan (which accepted a Kyoto target for 2012, but has no hope of meeting it now without heroic efforts). Together, they account for half of the world's emissions.

     The new member, Canada, is a big emitter that committed itself to reduce emissions under Kyoto but made no effort to reach its target. The fault mostly lies with previous Liberal governments, but the new Conservative prime minister, Stephen Harper, is a former climate change denier who is seeking a way to welsh on the commitment. A large majority of Canadians support Kyoto, so he needs political cover, and the Asia-Pacific Partnership might give him some.

     The Bush administration has thus succeeded in splitting the world in two on the climate change issue. An overwhelming majority of the 39 developed countries have agreed to get back below their 1990 level of greenhouse gas emissions by 2012, and will meet their targets (usually about 5 percent below) or at least come close. A few rogue industrial countries have shunned the Kyoto process entirely or missed their targets very badly, and they have now joined with the most rapidly developing countries (whose emissions are soaring) to subvert or evade the next phase of cuts.

     It's exactly what you would expect in any large undertaking that involves many different countries, and there's no point in getting upset about it. The only question is how to get past it.

     Australia will probably join the post-Kyoto process as soon as Australian voters have dumped Prime Minister John Howard, a serial climate change denier who looks certain to lose the election later this year. After six years of intense drought, Australians are losing their scepticism about climate change. So are Americans.

     Seventy percent of Americans now identify climate change as a major problem, and in the face of the federal government's obstructionism many states are pressing ahead with their own greenhouse gas reduction programmes. As California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger (who has committed his state to deep cuts) said at the UN summit: "California is moving the United States beyond debate and doubt to action..What we are doing is changing the dynamic."

     An even bigger problem is the Asian giants, China and India, whose hopes of achieving full developed-country status depend on historically unprecedented economic growth rates. They will not abandon those hopes while other countries still live in lavish consumer societies. So how can they be persuaded to accept emission controls?

     With great difficulty, but it is their climate too. The deal will require the old industrialised countries to take even deeper cuts in their emissions in order to leave the emerging ones some room to grow. It must also involve technology transfer and direct subsidies from the old rich countries to help them switch from CO2-intensive technologies for power generation (like two new coal-fired generating stations in China each week) to cleaner ones.

     That will be one of the most difficult political bargains that has ever been negotiated, but the prospect of global disaster may help to concentrate people's minds.

============================================================================

All of this was bringing me down ... then my daughter called and later on I went to the beach at Itaipu with a bunch of kids and cooked for a while in the hot spring sun. It worked. Lizard brain woke up, Death disappeared up the stairs into the nearest bank.

Use 'defeat', 'deduct', 'defence', and 'detail' in a sentence ... De feet of de duck went over de fence before de tail ...

A-and then there is Bob Dylan selling Cadillac cars. He looks younger in the Cadillac pic (?), airbrush I guess, or maybe working for Cadillac does that to you, even maybe owning one or two? Cadillac & Victoria's Secret ... hummm ... there's a pattern here huh? ...




: But you said no one would get hurt ...
: And it's true, they're going to kill us.
: So all we can do is pray or drink.
: Go read the Bible, the fridge is mine.


Down.

quinta-feira, outubro 25, 2007

Cousin Caterpillar

See just this Post & Comments / 0 Comments so far / Post a Comment /   Home
Up, Down.

My cousin has great changes coming
One day he'll wake with wings

Cousin Caterpillar, seven pairs of legs for you
Cousin Caterpillar, can you tell me what they do?

Well, all that I can say
Is that they seem to help some way
To pull my little body along

Well first I didn't know their use
But worrying you only lose
So I said I love you and I love what you do
Come on do your thing

Cousin Caterpillar, white and silky threads for you
Cousin Caterpillar, can you tell me what they do?

My cousin as you see
Takes his changes easily

O happy we
Could we take each change so easily

Then all that we could say
Is that it would seem to help some way
To pull our little bodies along
So we say I love you and I love what you do
Come on do your thing


Down.

terça-feira, outubro 23, 2007

Lap Dancing

See just this Post & Comments / 0 Comments so far / Post a Comment /   Home
Up, Down.

This man, Geoffrey Miller, knows how to go about getting an idea across - now, if he would just take up Global Warming ...

It started here: It's All Good Nudes For Fertile Strippers.

Sky News, Monday October 15, 2007.

Lap dancers who are at the peak of their fertility earn more in tips than their colleagues, a new study has shown. Fertile women send out secret signals. It provides more evidence that women send out "secret signals" to men at times when they are ready to conceive.

Previous studies have shown that women dress and behave differently shortly before they menstruate. Now a new study has shown that dancers who are "on heat" receive more tips than those on the Pill or in the non-fertile periods of their menstrual cycle. Experts suspect that pheromones - subtle scent signals that in animals play a key role in sexual attractiveness - may be involved.

In other words, fertile women smell more appealing to men.

Researchers at the University Of New Mexico compared the earnings of lap dancers who were menstruating naturally with others taking the contraceptive pill. During the non-fertile periods of their menstrual cycle, dancers not on the Pill earned much the same as those using the contraceptive. But when the naturally cycling dancers entered their fertile period, their tips became significantly more generous.

The evidence was the first to show that oestrus has a "real effect on women's earnings", Dr Geoffrey Miller told New Scientist magazine. However, even on non-fertile days, lap dancers with natural menstrual cycles earned quite well, demonstrating that fertility was not all that the men in their audience were interested in. "Previous research has shown that women's faces, scent and clothing become more attractive in oestrus," said Dr Miller.

Dr Randy Thornhill, another University Of New Mexico scientist, last month made the controversial claim that women can be "in heat" just like animals. He said: "We don't know the mechanism of attraction. Are the men detecting the scent of oestrus? Or does the women's behaviour change?"

"We found strong ovulatory cycle effects on tip earnings, moderated by whether the participants were normally cycling. All women made less money during their menstrual periods, whether they were on the pill or not. However, the normally cycling women made much more money during estrus ... By contrast, the pill users had no midcycle peak in tip earnings. As in other previous research, the pill eliminates peak fertility effects on the female body and behavior by putting the body in a state of hormonal pseudopregnancy ...

This is the first direct economic evidence for the existence of estrus in contemporary human females."


Geoffrey Miller at University of New Mexico.
Ovulatory cycle effects on tip earnings by lap dancers: economic evidence for human estrus?.
The Mating Mind: How Sexual Choice Shaped The Evolution Of Human Nature (precis).
A Mente Seletiva Como a escolha sexual influenciou a evolução da natureza humana.

(If any of these documents disappear, I have copies and will post them.)

Down.

és mais meu amigo

See just this Post & Comments / 0 Comments so far / Post a Comment /   Home
Up, Down.

Ó Deus, refresca e alegra meu espírito. Purifica meu coração. Ilumina meus poderes. Em Tuas mãos confio todos os meus interesses. És meu Guia e meu Refúgio. Não mais se apossarão de mim a tristeza e a ansiedade, e sim, o contentamento e a alegria. Ó Deus, jamais me entregarei à aflição, nem permitirei que os desgostos me atormentem ou as coisas desagradáveis da vida me inquietem. Ó Deus, és mais meu amigo do que eu o sou de mim mesmo. Dedico-me a Ti, ó Senhor. O God ! Refresh and gladden my spirit. Purify my heart. Illumine my powers. I lay all my affairs in Thy hand. Thou art my Guide and my Refuge. I will no longer be sorrowful and grieved; I will be a happy and joyful being. O God! I will no longer be full of anxiety, nor will I let trouble harass me. I will no longer dwell on the unpleasant things of life. O God! Thou art more friend to me than I am to myself. I dedicate myself to Thee ,O Lord.


I seem to remember posting this before - but I can't find it anywhere ... long story, oh well. Good prayer, Bahai, came to me in Portugues first ...

Down.

domingo, outubro 21, 2007

Compra Solidária

See just this Post & Comments / 0 Comments so far / Post a Comment /   Home
Up, Down.



CABO FRIO - Incentivo agrícola com perfil social - Leon Corrêa. CABO FRIO - Agricultural Incentive with a Social Dimension - Leon Corrêa.
Para estimular a agricultura familiar e incluir alimentos mais saudáveis à merenda escolar, a prefeitura de Cabo Frio desenvolve o programa Compra Solidária, que adquire a colheita feita por famílias da zona rural da cidade. To stimulate family farms and to include healthier food in the school lunch program, the Cabo Frio City Hall has developed the Solidarity Buying program which buys crops grown by families in the rural area of the city.
Compra Solidária ajuda pequenos produtores rurais e abastece escolas municipais - Programa valoriza o alimento bom da terra. Solidarity Buying helps small rural producers and supplies municipal schools - Program increases the value of good food from the Earth.
Mais conhecida pela beleza de suas praias, que atrai turistas de todo o Brasil e do exterior, Cabo Frio também tem uma extensa área rural, especialmente no 2º distrito, Tamoios, que concentra a produção agrícola no município. Para estimular a agricultura familiar e levar alimentos mais saudáveis à merenda escolar, a prefeitura de Cabo Frio desenvolve o programa Compra Solidária, que adquire a produção de famílias da zona rural da cidade. Better known for the beauty of its beaches, which attract visitors from all over Brazil and from outside Brazil, Cabo Frio also includes an extensive rural area, particularly District #2, Tamoios, where most of the agricultural production of the municipality is concentrated. To stimulate family farms and to include healthier food in the school lunch program, the Cabo Frio City Hall has developed the Solidarity Buying program which buys crops grown by families in the rural area of the city.
Os alimentos adquiridos são encaminhados a dezenas de escolas municipais cadastradas no programa. A produção está concentrada nas localidades de Angelim, Botafogo, Portugueses, Campos Novos, São Jacinto, Gargoá, Ilha da Boa Vista, Pacheco e Preto Forro. Os alimentos adquiridos são encaminhados a dezenas de escolas municipais cadastradas no programa. A produção está concentrada nas localidades de Angelim, Botafogo, Portugueses, Campos Novos, São Jacinto, Gargoá, Ilha da Boa Vista, Pacheco e Preto Forro.
- Com este programa estamos incentivando o pequeno agricultor, que já estava deixando de plantar. Geramos emprego e renda já que o trabalhador tem a certeza que a sua produção será escoada. Levamos aos nossos alunos alimentos da melhor qualidade, além de incluir no cardápio alimentos típicos da nossa região, como a mandioca, que antes não era usada na merenda - ressalta o prefeito Marquinho Mendes. - Com este programa estamos incentivando o pequeno agricultor, que já estava deixando de plantar. Geramos emprego e renda já que o trabalhador tem a certeza que a sua produção será escoada. Levamos aos nossos alunos alimentos da melhor qualidade, além de incluir no cardápio alimentos típicos da nossa região, como a mandioca, que antes não era usada na merenda - ressalta o prefeito Marquinho Mendes.
Além de garantir a venda dos produtos, a Secretaria de Agricultura faz todo o acompanhamento da produção, desde a preparação da terra, com a cessão do maquinário, até a distribuição das mudas, orientação de plantio e colheita. Além de garantir a venda dos produtos, a Secretaria de Agricultura faz todo o acompanhamento da produção, desde a preparação da terra, com a cessão do maquinário, até a distribuição das mudas, orientação de plantio e colheita.
- Orientamos os produtores para que a lavoura seja mais lucrativa e fazemos o acompanhamento da produção, sabemos o que eles plantaram, quando vão colher e a área plantada. Além disso, estimulamos o plantio de algumas espécies que já estavam abandonas pelos produtores, como o feijão, por exemplo. Os agricultores tinham dificuldades na colheita do feijão, para facilitar a vida deles a secretaria adquiriu uma máquina debulhadeira, que deixa o feijão praticamente limpo para ser ensacado - explica a bióloga Vera Câmara, diretora do Departamento de Assistência Técnica e Extensão Rural da Secretaria de Agricultura. - Orientamos os produtores para que a lavoura seja mais lucrativa e fazemos o acompanhamento da produção, sabemos o que eles plantaram, quando vão colher e a área plantada. Além disso, estimulamos o plantio de algumas espécies que já estavam abandonas pelos produtores, como o feijão, por exemplo. Os agricultores tinham dificuldades na colheita do feijão, para facilitar a vida deles a secretaria adquiriu uma máquina debulhadeira, que deixa o feijão praticamente limpo para ser ensacado - explica a bióloga Vera Câmara, diretora do Departamento de Assistência Técnica e Extensão Rural da Secretaria de Agricultura.
Os alimentos são produzidos por pequenos produtores rurais, adeptos de uma agricultura bem tradicional, dependente do período de chuvas, o que causa a sazonalidade de produtos. Os alimentos são produzidos por pequenos produtores rurais, adeptos de uma agricultura bem tradicional, dependente do período de chuvas, o que causa a sazonalidade de produtos.
- Incentivamos a diversificação da lavoura, para que o produtor tenha renda o ano todo. Agora, estamos introduzindo o plantio de cenoura e beterraba - destaca Vera. - Incentivamos a diversificação da lavoura, para que o produtor tenha renda o ano todo. Agora, estamos introduzindo o plantio de cenoura e beterraba - destaca Vera.
O agricultor Ronaldo Figueiredo, 56 anos, proprietário de um pequeno sítio ao lado da Fazenda Campos Novos, foi enfático ao ser questionado sobre a importância do Compra Solidária para os pequenos agricultores do município. O agricultor Ronaldo Figueiredo, 56 anos, proprietário de um pequeno sítio ao lado da Fazenda Campos Novos, foi enfático ao ser questionado sobre a importância do Compra Solidária para os pequenos agricultores do município.
- Se não existisse o programa, simplesmente não plantaria, pois seria difícil escoar a produção. Não teria como levar os produtos até os consumidores - alega. - Se não existisse o programa, simplesmente não plantaria, pois seria difícil escoar a produção. Não teria como levar os produtos até os consumidores - alega.
A professora Suzana Teixeira, diretora da Escola Manoel Mendes, no bairro Guarani, explica porque optou por comprar os alimentos através do Compra Solidária. A professora Suzana Teixeira, diretora da Escola Manoel Mendes, no bairro Guarani, explica porque optou por comprar os alimentos através do Compra Solidária.
- Recebemos um cardápio e montamos uma lista de compras. Os produtos são mais saudáveis e sabemos a sua procedência, além de valorizar os produtores rurais de nossa cidade. Ainda tem a questão do preço, que é muito convidativo - completa Suzana. - Recebemos um cardápio e montamos uma lista de compras. Os produtos são mais saudáveis e sabemos a sua procedência, além de valorizar os produtores rurais de nossa cidade. Ainda tem a questão do preço, que é muito convidativo - completa Suzana.



Kurt Vonnegut:

Okay, now let's have some fun. Let's talk about sex. Let's talk about women. Freud said he didn't know what women wanted. I know what women want: a whole lot of people to talk to. What do they want to talk about? They want to talk about everything.

What do men want? They want lots of pals, and they wish people wouldn't get so mad at them.

Why are so many people getting divorced today? It's because most of us don't have extended families anymore. It used to be that when a man and a woman got married, the bride got a lot more people to talk to about everything. The groom got a lot more pals to tell dumb jokes to.

A few Americans. but very few, still have extended families. The Navahos, The Kennedys.

But most of us, if we get married nowadays, are just one more person for the other person. The groom gets one more pal, but it's a woman. The woman gets one more person to talk to about everything, but it's a man.

When a couple has an argument nowadays, they may think it's about money or power or sex or how to raise the kids or whatever. What they're really saying to each other, though without realizing it, is this: "You are not enough people!"

A husband, a wife and some kids is not a family. It's a terribly vulnerable survival unit.

I met a man in Nigeria one time, an Ibo who had six hundred relatives he knew quite well. His wife had just had a baby, the best possible news in any extended family.

They were going to take it to meet all of its relatives, Ibos of all ages and sizes and shapes. Ot would even meet other babies, cousins not much older than it was. Everybody who was big enough and steady enough was going to get to hold it, cuddle eit, gurgle to it, and say how pretty or how handsome it was.

Wouldn't you have loved to be that baby?

I sure wish I could wave a wand, and give every one of you an extended family, make you an Ibo or a Navaho - or a Kennedy.

Now, you take George and Laura Bush, who imagine themselves as a brave, clean-cut little couple. They are surrounded by an enormous extended family, what we should all have - I mean judges, senators, newspaper editors, lawyers, bankers. They are not alone. That they are members of an extended family is one reason theya re so comfortable. And I would really, over the long run, hope America would find some way to provide all of our citizens with extended families - a large group of people they could call on for help.

A Man Without a Country - Chapter 5.

Down.

sábado, outubro 13, 2007

forgiveness

See just this Post & Comments / 0 Comments so far / Post a Comment /   Home
Up, Down.

The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit. O vento assopra onde quer, e ouves a sua voz, mas não sabes de onde vem, nem para onde vai; assim é todo aquele que é nascido do Espírito.

     John 3, 8.

"I'm believing that God will turn this around for good."

     Denise Sandy.



Wish to Forgive in Son's Death Will Be Tested, Michael Brick, New York Times, October 10, 2007.

The hallways of the State Supreme Court building in Brooklyn are crosscut passages of venom and condemnation: on one floor, police officers daily stare down a man charged with killing one of their own; on another, a man accused of strangling a college student recently received letters that called him "a no-good son of a bitch." Not even the judges are fully exempt. Justice Albert Tomei, taunted by a brutal rapist one day last year, sentenced him to "a place that is cold and heartless and not very humane, where you will spend the rest of your life thinking about what you did."

And yet here comes Denise Sandy: the forgiver. Against this backdrop, she seems profoundly out of place. Lost, maybe.

For the past month, Mrs. Sandy has been watching the trial of two men accused of killing her only son, Michael J. Sandy, 29. Last October, prosecutors say, Mr. Sandy was lured from his home in Williamsburg to a narrow beach near Dead Horse Inlet in Sheepshead Bay, a meeting place for gay sex. From there, Mr. Sandy was chased into traffic on the Belt Parkway and struck by a car. Five days later, after his brain shut down, his family removed a respirator and let him go. "It was an awful decision we had to make," Mrs. Sandy said.

Prosecutors charged four young men with hate crimes, a distinction that can affect sentencing, for selecting their robbery target by sexual orientation. One of the men, Gary Timmins, pleaded guilty to attempted robbery as a hate crime and testified for the state. A second, John Fox, 20, was convicted of manslaughter as a hate crime. A jury is deliberating on murder charges against Anthony Fortunato, 21, who was tried with Mr. Fox. And Ilya Shurov, 21, is set for trial next.

Through a year of pretrial hearings and through three weeks of trial, Mrs. Sandy has ridden from her home in Bellport, on Long Island, to take her seat in the courtroom pews. At 54, she is a small woman, frail-looking even, all lambent curls and narrow bones tucked into modest black suits. Her eyes are downcast and she seems to almost shake, but she never flinches from the testimony describing her terrified son's last moments.

All along, her attendance has been singularly consistent. At times she has been accompanied by her husband, Zeke Sandy, grief counselors and campaigners for gay causes. And when she has spoken, she has spoken of forgiveness. After a pretrial hearing in February, Mrs. Sandy joined her son's friends outside the courtroom to answer questions from reporters. The friends spoke of retribution and punishment, common sentiments along these corridors.

"Our friend can't come back," said one of the men, Christopher
Wilkins. "They shouldn't be let out." But Mrs. Sandy took a different tone that day. "I'm believing," she said, "that God will turn this around for good."

Two months later, in April, after videotapes of confessions were played in the courtroom, Mrs. Sandy said of the defendants collectively, "I don't think he meant harm. It just got out of hand, probably got out of control." She continued: "We've got to be forgiving. I believe so."

Then came the trial of Mr. Fox and Mr. Fortunato. Mrs. Sandy heard witnesses describe her son running across three lanes of traffic, screaming, waving his cellphone. She heard them say he was chased and punched. She heard them say his pockets were rifled. She heard them say the defendants laughed it all off. On Sept. 19, she gave her own testimony. She stood and waited to take her oath, hands folded, then answered questions from a prosecutor.

In the present tense, the prosecutor asked: "Who is your child?" Mrs. Sandy said: "It was Michael Sandy." Speaking slowly and clearly, she gave the bare facts of her son's occupation and sexual orientation. She described seeing him the day before he was struck on the parkway, then seeing him later in the hospital. "He was hooked up to all kinds of machines," Mrs. Sandy said. "So he was very bad."

Then she watched as a court officer marked a photograph of her son as Exhibit 19. She handed the picture to the judge, wiping tears from under her glasses. And when the first verdict was returned, the jurors gave Mrs. Sandy a new hard decision. They acquitted Mr. Fox of murder charges, sparing him a sentence of life in prison. But they convicted him of manslaughter, a crime for which the judge has broad discretion in sentencing.

So at a hearing on Oct. 24, Justice Jill Konviser-Levine will for have to decide what term Mr. Fox gets — anywhere from 5 to 25 years in prison. Her decision will determine whether Mr. Fox walks out of prison to start life as a relatively young man or as a 45-year-old. Before the judge passes sentence, Mrs. Sandy will have her own chance to speak. Most people use this ritual opportunity, known as the victim impact statement, to berate those who have done them harm, to lament the lack of a working state death penalty or to wish the offender a long and miserable life.

Outside the courtroom last week, Mr. Fox's father said he hoped that Mrs. Sandy would choose a different path. Seeking her forgiveness, he said that if he could, he would give up his own life for her son's. Mrs. Sandy has made no commitments. As her husband also spoke of the good that might one day come of all this, she spoke only of the jury's verdict. "I can't say if I was satisfied," she said, "or dissatisfied."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm thinking that, of course, the media love this story. A black woman forgiving the white men involved in her son's death. But really, what she will say finally has not yet been said - that will come later this month, maybe. And meanwhile there are spins upon spins.

I'm remembering an evening, back in 1970 or so, when I arrived in Winnipeg (or maybe it was Calgary, it was a long time ago), and I came into a friend's house and the television was broadcasting the news. It was of a youong girl, Cristal or Kristal, who had been recently raped and murdered; and there on the screen were her parents, a couple of young blonde Mennonites (as I remember) pleading publicly with the murderer to give himself up - because he must be suffering the torments of Hell; and more, that they had forgiven him and would try to help him.

This memory is old but it comes to me often. I have tried googl-ing to find some details but I have never discovered a trace of the story - maybe it is all in my imagination now.

It sticks because the urge to forgive is there in human hearts when you would least expect it - 'like shining from shook foil.'

I have not been successful at it though I have tried. I still wake in the night with the desire to smash ancient enemies. But there it is again - the urge that is, just the urge, and for this I thank God.

God’s Grandeur, Gerard Manley Hopkins

The world is charged with the grandeur of God.
It will flame out, like shining from shook foil;
It gathers to a greatness, like the ooze of oil
Crushed. Why do men then now not reck his rod?
Generations have trod, have trod, have trod;
And all is seared with trade; bleared, smeared with toil;
And wears man’s smudge and shares man’s smell: the soil
Is bare now, nor can foot feel, being shod.

And for all this, nature is never spent;
There lives the dearest freshness deep down things;
And though the last lights off the black West went
Oh, morning, at the brown brink eastward, springs—
Because the Holy Ghost over the bent
World broods with warm breast and with ah! bright wings.




What comes to mind is Wolfram von Eschenbach's Parzifal, which is half-assed on-line by Google, and Ibsen's Peer Gynt, which is; here and here.

Down.

domingo, outubro 07, 2007

Small Is Beautiful (continued)

See just this Post & Comments / 0 Comments so far / Post a Comment /   Home
Up, Down, Thread Ahead: None, Thread Back: Total sales, in BILLIONS.
Also: two versions of Jonah and the whale, Pedras Portuguêsas.

"No degree of prosperity could justify the accumulation of large amounts of highly toxic substances which nobody knows how to make 'safe' and which remain an incalculable danger to the whole of creation for historical or even geological ages. To do such a thing is a transgression against life itself, a transgression infinitely more serious than any crime ever perpetrated by man. The idea that a civilisation could sustain itself on the basis of such a transgression is an ethical,spiritual, and metaphysical monstrosity. It means conducting the economic affairs of man as if people really did not matter at all."

"Nenhum grau de prosperidade justificaria o acúmulo de vastas quantidades de substâncias acentuadamente tóxicas que ninguém sabe como tornar "seguras" e que permanecerão como um perigo incalculável para a criação inteira por eras históricas ou mesmo geológicas. Tal cometimento é uma transgressão contra a própria vida, infinitamente mais séria do que qualquer crime jamais perpetrado pelo homem. A idéia de que uma civilização possa manter-se apoiada em tal transgressão é uma monstruosidade ética, espiritual e metafísica. Significa conduzir os assuntos econômicos do homem como se as pessoas, realmente, para nada contassem."

Small Is Beautiful
Nuclear Energy
Salvation or Damnation
 O negócio é ser pequeno
Energia Nuclear
Salvação ou Danação?
The main cause of the complacency - now gradually diminishing - about future energy supplies was undoubtedly the emergence of nuclear energy, which, people felt, had arrived just in time. Little did they bother to inquire precisely what it was that had arrived. It was new,it was astonishing, it was progress, and promises were freely given that it would be cheap. Since a new source of energy would be needed sooner or later, why not have it at once? A causa principal da complacência - agora diminuindo gradativamente - quanto aos futuros suprimentos de energia foi, sem dúvida, o surgimento da energia nuclear, a qual, as pessoas achavam, chegara na hora exata. Pouco se incomodaram em investigar exatamente o que chegara. Era nova, era espantosa, era progresso, e livremente se faziam promessas de que seria barata. Já que mais cedo ou mais tarde seria necessária uma nova fonte de energia, porque não a ter imediatamente?
The following statement was made six years ago. At the time, it seemed highly unorthodox: A declaração seguinte foi pronunciada seis anos atrás. Na época, pareceu altamente heterodoxa:
"The religion of economics promotes an idolatry of rapid change unaffected by the elementary truism that a change which is not an unquestionable improvement is a doubtful blessing. The burden of proof is placed on those who take the "ecological viewpoint": unless they can produce evidence of marked injury to man, the change will proceed. Common sense, on the contrary, would suggest that the burden of proof should lie on the man who wants to introduce a change; he has to demonstrate that there cannot be any damaging consequences. But this would take too much time, and would therefore be uneconomic. Ecology, indeed, ought to be a compulsory subject for all economists, whether professionals or laymen, as this might serve to restore at least a modicum of balance. For ecology holds "that an environmental setting developed over millions of years must be considered to have some merit. Anything so complicated as a planet, inhabited by more than a million and a half species of plants and animals, all of them living together in a more or less balanced equilibrium in which they continuously use and re-use the same molecules of the soil and air, cannot be improved by aimless and uninformed tinkering. All changes in a complex mechanism involve some risk and should be undertaken only after careful study of all the facts available. Changes should be made on a small scale first so as to provide a test before they are widely applied. When information is incomplete, changes should stay close to the natural processes which have in their favour the indisputable evidence of having supported life for a very long time." "A religião da Economia promove a idolatria de mudança rápida, inalterada pelo truismo elementar de que uma mudança que não seja um progresso indiscutível é uma bênção duvidosa. O ônus da prova recai sobre os que adotam o "ponto de vista ecológico": a menos que eles possam apresentar elementos de prova de acentuado dano ao homem, a mudança continuará. O bom senso, pelo contrário, alvitraria caber o ónus da prova ao homem que deseje introduzir uma modificação; ele tem de demonstrar que não pode haver conseqüências nocivas. Mas isso tomaria muito tempo e, portanto, seria anti-econômico. De fato, a Ecologia deveria ser matéria obrigatória para todos os economistas, já que isto poderia servir, pelo menos, para restaurar um certo equilíbrio. A Ecologia sustenta "que um cenário ambiental criado durante milhões de anos deve ser considerado possuidor de algum mento. Algo tão complicado como um planeta, habitado por mais de um milhão e meio de espécies vegetais e animais, todas vivendo juntas em um equilíbrio mais ou menos estável em que continuamente usam e reusam as mesmas moléculas do solo e do ar, não pode ser aperfeiçoado por tentativas canhestras e desinformadas. Todas as alterações em um mecanismo complexo envolvem algum risco e só devem ser empreendidas após cauteloso estudo de todos os fatos disponíveis. As mudanças devem ser primeiramente realizadas em escala reduzida, de modo a proporcionar um testé antes da aplicação generalizada. Quando as informações são incompletas, essas mudanças devem ficar o mais próximo possível dos processos naturais que têm a seu favor a indiscutível prova de terem sustentado a vida por bem longo tempo."
The argument, six years ago, proceeded as follows: O raciocínio, seis anos atrás, foi o seguinte:
Of all the changes introduced by man into the household of nature, large-scale nuclear fission is undoubtedly the most dangerous and profound. As a result, ionising radiation has become the most serious agent of pollution of the environment and the greatest threat to man's survival on earth. The attention of the layman, not surprisingly, has been captured by the atom bomb, although there is at least a chance that it may never be used again. The danger to humanity created by the so-called peaceful uses of atomic energy may be much greater. There could indeed be no clearer example of the prevailing dictatorship of economics. Whether to build conventional power stations, based on coal or oil, or nuclear stations, is being decided on economic grounds, with perhaps a small element of regard for the 'social consequences' that might arise from an over-speedy curtailment of the coal industry. But that nuclear fission represents an incredible, incomparable, and unique hazard for human life does not enter any calculation and is never mentioned. People whose business it is to judge hazards, the insurance companies, are reluctant to insure nuclear power stations anywhere in the world for third party risk, with the result that special legislation has had to be passed whereby the State accepts big liabilities. Yet insured or not, the hazard remains, and such is the thraldom of the religion of economics that the only question that appears to interest either governments or the public is whether 'it pays'. De todas as mudanças introduzidas pelo homem na domesticação da natureza, a fissão nuclear em grande escala é, fora de dúvida, a mais profunda e perigosa. Por conseguinte, a radiação ionizante passou a ser o mais sério agente poluidor do meio­amhiente e a maior ameaça à própria sobrevivência do homem na Terra. A atenção do leigo, o que não surpreende ninguém, foi cativada pela bomha-A, conquanto exista, pelo menos, uma probabilidade de que ela não volte a ser utilizada. Talvez seja bem maior o perigo criado para a humanidade pelos chamados "usos pacíficos da energia atômica". Não poderia haver, de fato, um mais claro exemplo da ditatura vigente da Economia. A alternativa de construir centrais geradoras convencionais, alimentadas a carvão ou petróleo, ou se instalar centrais nucleares, está sendo decidida em termos exclusivamente econômicos, talvez com um tênue elemento de atenção pelas "conseqüências sociais" que possam advir de um corte ultra-rápido na indústria carbonífera. Mas o fato de a fissão nuclear representar um risco incrível, incomparável e sem precedentes para a vida humana,. não entrou em qualquer cálculo nem sequer é mencionado. Pessoas cuja função consiste em avaliar riscos, as responsáveis por companhias de seguros, estão relutantes em segurar centrais nucleares em qualquer parte do mundo por riscos contra terceiros, daí resultando ter sido necessário promulgar legislação especial pela qual o Estado aceita grandes obrigações. Entretanto, coherto ou não por uma apólice de seguro, o perigo mantém-se, e é tal a subserviência à religião da Economia que a única questão de interesse para governos ou para o púhlico é se "a coisa compensa".
It is not as if there were any lack of authoritative voices to warn us. The effects of alpha, beta, and gamma rays on living tissues are perfectly well known: the radiation particles are like bullets tearing into an organism, and the damage they do depends primarily on the dosage and the type of cells they hit. As long ago as 1927, the American biologist, H. J. Muller, published his famous paper on genetic mutations produced by X-ray bombardment, and since the early 1930s the genetic hazard of exposure has been recognised also by non­geneticists. It is clear that here is a hazard with a hitherto unexperienced 'dimension', endangering not only those who might be directly affected by this radiation but their offspring as well. Não é por falta de vozes autorizadas a alertar-nos. Os efeitos dos raios alfa, beta e gama sobre os tecidos vivos são perfeitamente conhecidos: as partículas de radiação são como balas que penetram e dilaceram o organismo, e os danos que causam dependem da dosagem e do tipo de células atingidas. Já em 1927 o biólogo americano H. J. Muller publicava seu famoso estudo sobre mutações genéticas produzidas pelo bombardeio com raios X, e desde o começo da década de 30 que o risco genético da exposição foi também reconhecido por não-geneticistas. É claro que existe um risco com uma "dimensão" até agora ignorada pela experiência, pondo em perigo não só os que possam ser diretamente afetados por sua radiação mas também os seus descendentes.
A new 'dimension' is given also by the fact that while man now can - and does - create radioactive elements, there is nothing he can do to reduce their radioactivity once he has created them. No chemical reaction, no physical interference, only the passage of time reduces the intensity of radiation once it has been set going. Carbon-14 has a half-life of 5,900 years, which means that it takes nearly 6,000 years for its radioactivity to decline to one-half of what it was before. The half­life of strontium-90 is twenty-eight years. But whatever the length of the half-life, some radiation continues almost indefinitely, and there is nothing that can be done about it, except to try and put the radioactive substance into a safe place. Uma nova "dimensão" é também dada pelo fato de que, enquanto o homem pode agora criar - e cria - elementos radioativos, ele nada pode fazer para reduzir a sua radioatividade, depois de criados. Nenhuma reação química, nenhuma interferência física, somente a passagem do tempo reduz a intensidade da radiação, uma vez desencadeada. O carbono-14 tem uma meia­vida de 5.900 anos, o que significa serem precisos quase 6.000 anos para a sua radioatividade declinar para metade do que era antes. A meia-vida do estrôncio-90 é de 28 anos. Mas seja qual for a extensão da meia-vida, alguma radiação perdura quase indefinidamente e nada pode ser feito contra isso, salvo tentar colocar a substância radioativa em local seguro.
But what is a safe place, let us say, for the enormous amounts of radioactive waste products created by nuclear reactors? No place on earth can be shown to be safe. It was thought at one time that these wastes could safely be dumped into the deepest parts of the oceans, on the assumption that no life could subsist at such depths. But this has since been disproved by Soviet deep-sea exploration. Wherever there is life, radioactive substances are absorbed into the biological cycle. Within hours of depositing these materials in water, the great-bulk of them can be found in living organisms. Plankton, algae, and many sea animals have the power of concentrating these substances by a factor of 1,000 and in some cases even a million. As one organism feeds on another, the radioactive materials climb up the ladder of life and find their way back to man. Mas qual é o lugar seguro para as enormes quantidades de lixo radioativo produzido pelos reatores nucleares? Nenhum lugar da Terra é comprovadamente seguro. A certa altura, pensou-se que esse lixo poderia ser lançado com segurança nas zonas mais profundas dos oceanos, na suposição de que nenhuma vida poderia subsistir em tais profundidades. Mas isso foi posteriormente refutado pela exploração soviética do fundo do mar. Onde quer que haja vida, as substâncias radioativas são absorvidas e integradas ao ciclo biológico. Horas depois de se depositar esses materiais na água, a sua maior parte pode ser detectada em organismos vivos. Plancton, algas e muitos animais marinhos têm o poder de concentrar essas substâncias por um fator de 1.000 e, em alguns casos, até um milhão. Na medida em que um organismo alimenta outro, os materiais radioativos vão subindo na escala da vida e encontram seu caminho de volta ao homem.
No international agreement has yet been reached on waste disposal. The conference of the International Atomic Energy Organisation at Monaco, in November 1959, ended in disagreement, mainly on account of the violent objections raised by the majority of countries against the American and British practice of disposal into the oceans. 'High level' wastes continue to be dumped into the sea, while quantities of so­called 'intermediate' and 'low-level' wastes are discharged into rivers or directly into the ground. An AEC report observes laconically that the liquid wastes 'work their way slowly into the ground water, leaving all or part (sic!) of their radioactivity held either chemically or physically in the soil.' Nenhum acordo internacional foi ainda obtido sobre o destino a dar ao lixo nuclear. A conferência da Organização Internacional de Energia Atômica realizada em Mônaco, em novembro de 1959, terminou em desacordo, principalmente em virtude das violentas objeções levantadas pela maioria dos países contra a prática americana e britânica de lançamento nos oceanos. Os lixos de "alto teor" continuam a ser jogados ao mar, ao passo que quantidades de lixo dos chamados "teor intermédio" e "baixo teor" continuam a ser despejadas em rios ou diretamente no solo. Um relatório da A.E.C. observa laconicamente que os detritos líquidos "abrem caminho lentamente até à água do solo, deixando toda ou parte (sic!) de sua radioatividade retida química ou fisicamente no solo."
The most massive wastes are, of course, the nuclear reactors themselves after they have become unserviceable. There is a lot of discussion on the trivial economic question of whether they will last for twenty, twenty-five, or thirty years. No-one discusses the humanly vital point that they cannot be dismantled and cannot be shifted but have to be left standing where they are, probably for centuries, perhaps for thousands of years, an active menace to all life, silently leaking radioactivity into air, water and soil. No-one has considered the number and location of these satanic mills which will relentlessly accumulate. Earthquakes, of course, are not supposed to happen, nor wars, nor civil disturbances, nor riots like those that infested American cities. Disused nuclear power stations will stand as unsightly monuments to unquiet man's assumption that nothing but tranquillity, from now on, stretches before him, or else - that the future counts as nothing compared with the slightest economic gain now. O lixo mais maciço é formado, evidentemente, pelos próprios reatores nucleares, depois de se tornarem obsoletos e imprestáveis. Discute-se muito em torno da questão econômica trivial de saber se eles durarão 20, 25 ou 30 anos. Ninguém discute o ponto humanamente vital de tais máquinas não poderem ser desmanteladas nem mudadas de lugar mas terem de permanecer onde foram instaladas, provavelmente por séculos, talvez por milhares de anos, numa ameaça ativa a toda a forma de vida, gotejando silenciosamente radioatividade para a atmosfera, a água, o solo. Ninguém pensou na quantidade e localização dessas usinas satânicas, que se acumularão sobre a face da Terra com implacável fatalismo. Não se supõe, é claro, que aconteçam terremotos, ou guerras, ou distúrbios civis e tumultos como os que flagelaram muitas cidades americanas. As centrais nucleares permanecerão de pé como monumentos disformes para perturbar o pressuposto do homem de que, doravante, apenas a tranquilidade se desenrola à sua frente - ou então que o futuro nada vale, comparado com o menor ganho econômico que se obtenha agora.
Meanwhile, a number of authorities are engaged in defining 'maximum permissible concentrations' (MPCs) and 'maximum permissible levels' (MPLs) for various radioactive elements. The MPC purports to define the quantity of a given radioactive substance that the human body can be allowed to accumulate. But it is known that any accumulation produces biological damage. 'Since we don't know that these effects can be completely recovered from,' observes the US Naval Radiological Laboratory, 'we have to fall back on an arbitrary decision about how much we will put up with; i.e. what is "acceptable" or "permissible" - not a scientific finding, but an administrative decision.' We can hardly be surprised when men of outstanding intelligence and integrity, such as Albert Schweitzer, refuse to accept such administrative decisions with equanimity: 'Who has given them the riyht to do this? Who is even entitled to give such a permission?' The history of these decisions is, to say the least, disquieting. The British Medical Research Council noted some twelve years ago that: Nesse ínterim, numerosas autoridades estão empenhadas em definir as "concentrações máximas permissíveis" (MPC ) e os "níveis máximos permissíveis" (MPL) para diversos elementos radioativos. O MPC propõe-se definir a quantidade de uma dada substância radioativa que se pode permitir ser acumulada pelo corpo humano. Mas sabe-se que qualquer acumulação produz danos biológicos. "Como ignoramos se é possível a completa recuperação desses efeitos," observa o Laboratório Radiológico Naval dos Estados Unidos, "temos de apoiar-nos numa decisão arbitrária sobre quanto poderemos absorver; ou seja, o que é "aceitável" ou "permissível" - não como uma conclusão científica mas como uma decisão administrativa." Dificilmente nos surpreenderá quando homens de invulgar inteligência e integridade como Albert Schweitzer, se recusam a aceitar com serenidade tais decisões administrativas: "Quem lhes deu o direito de fazerem isso? Quem está autorizado a dar tal permissão?" A história dessas decisões é, para dizer o mínimo, inquietante. O British Medical Research Genter assinalou há uns doze anos que:
'The maximum permissible level of strontium-90 in the human skeleton, accepted by the International Commission on Radiological Protection, corresponds to 1,000 micro­microcuries per gramme of calcium (= 1,000 SU). But this is the maximum permissible level for adults in special occupations and is not suitable for application to the population as a whole or to the children with their greater sensitivity to radiation.' "O nível máximo permissível de estrôncio-90 no esqueleto humano, aceito pela Comissão Internacional de Proteção Radiológica, corresponde a 1.000 micro­micro-curies por grama de cálcio (= 1.000 unida­des-padrão). Mas esse é o teor máximo permissível para adultos em ocupações especiais e não é adequado para aplicação a toda a população ou às crianças, co­mo sua maior sensibilidade à radiação."
A little later, the MPC for strontium-90, as far as the general population was concerned, was reduced by ninety per cent, and then by another third, to sixty-seven SU. Meanwhile, the MPC for workers in nuclear plants was raised to 2,000 SU. Pouco depois, o MPC para estroncio-90, no atinente à população geral, foi reduzido em 90%, e depois em mais um terço, para fixar-se em 67 unidades-padrão. Entrementes, o MPC para operários em usinas nucleares foi elevado para 2.000 unidades­ padrão.
We must be careful, however, not to get lost in the jungle of controversy that has grown up in this field. The point is that very serious hazards have already been created by the 'peaceful uses of atomic energy', affecting not merely the people alive today but all future generations, although so far nuclear energy is being used only on a statistically insignificant scale. The real development is yet to come, on a scale which few people are capable of imagining. If this is really going to happen, there will be a continuous traffic in radioactive substances from the 'hot' chemical plants to the nuclear stations and back again; from the stations to waste-processing plants; and from there to disposal sites. A serious accident whether during transport or production, can cause a major catastrophe; and the radiation levels throughout the world will rise relentlessly from generation to generation. Unless all living geneticists are in error, there will be an equally relentless, though no doubt somewhat delayed, increase in the number of harmful mutations. K. Z. Morgan, of the Oak Ridge Laboratory, emphasises that the damage can be very subtle, a deterioration of of all kinds of organic qualities, such as mobility, fertility, and the efficiency of sensory organs. 'If a small dose has any effect at all at any stage of the life cycle of an organism, then chronic radiation at this level can be more damaging than a single massive dose ... Finally, stress and changes in mutation rates may be produced even when there is no immediately obvious effect on survival of irradiated individuals.' É preciso ter cuidado, porém, em não nos perdermos na selva da controvérsia que se desenvolveu nessa área. A questão é que riscos muito sérios já foram criados pelos "usos pacíficos da energia atômica", afetando não só as pessoas hoje vivas como todas as gerações futuras, embora até aqui a energia nuclear esteja sendo usada apenas em uma escala estatisticamente insignificante. O desenvolvimento real ainda está por surgir, numa escala que poucas pessoas são capazes de imaginar. Se isto realmente acontecer, haverá um tráfego contínuo de substâncias radioativas das usinas químicas "quentes" para as centrais nucleares e vice-versa; das centrais para as usinas de tratamento dos detritos; e destas para os locais de depósito do "lixo". Um acidente sério, quer durante o transporte ou a produção, pode causar uma grande catástrofe; e os níveis de radiação no mundo inteiro se elevarão inexoravelmente de uma geração para outra. A menos que todos os geneticistas vivos estejam errados, haverá um aumento igualmente inexorável, embora sem dúvida um tanto retardado, do número de mutações prejudiciais. K. Z. Morgan, do Laboratório de Oak Ridge, salienta que os danos podem ser bem sutis, uma deterioração de todas as espécies de qualidades orgânicas, como mobilidade, fertilidade e a eficiência dos órgãos sensoriais. "Se uma dose pequena tem algum efeito em qualquer etapa do ciclo vital de um organismo, então a radiação crônica nesse nível pode ser mais nociva do que uma única dose maciça ... Finalmente, a tensão e mudanças nos índices de radiação podem ser produzidas ainda quando não haja efeito óbvio imediatamente na sobrevivência de indivíduos irradiados."
Leading geneticists have given their warnings that every­thing possible should be done to avoid any increases in mutation rates; leading medical men have insisted that the future of nuclear energy must depend primarily on researches into radiation biology which are as yet still totally incomplete; leading physicists have suggested that 'measures much less heroic than building ... nuclear reactors' should be tried to solve the problem of future energy supplies - a problem which is in no way acute at present; and leading students of strategic and political problems, at the same time, have warned us that there is really no hope of preventing the proliferation of the atom bomb, if there is a spread of plutonium capacity, such as was 'spectacularly launched by President Eisenhower in his "atoms for peace proposals" of 8 December 1953'. Famosos geneticistas advertiram que todo o possível deveria ser feito para evitar quaisquer aumentos nos índices de mutação; famosos médicos insistiram em que o futuro da energia nuclear deve depender primordialmente de pesquisas sobre a biologia das radiações, as quais ainda são totalmente incompletas; famosos físicos sugeriram que "medidas muito menos heróicas do que ... construir reatores nucleares" deveriam ser tentadas para solucionar o problema do futuro abastecimento de energia - problema que não é de forma alguma agudo no presente; e famosos estudiosos de problemas estratégicos e políticos preveniram-nos ao mesmo tempo de que não há realmente esperança de impedir a proliferação da bomba atômica se houver uma expansão da capacidade de plutônio, tal como foi "espetacularmente lançada pelo Presidente Eisenhower em suas "propostas de átomos para a paz" a 8 de dezembro de 1953."
Yet all these weighty opinions play no part in the debate on whether we should go immediately for a large 'second nuclear programme' or-stick a bit longer to the conventional fuels which, whatever may be said for or against them, do not involve us in entirely novel and admittedly incalculable risks. None of them are even mentioned: the whole argument, which may vitally affect the very future of the human race, is conducted exclusively in terms of immediate advantage, as if two rag and bone merchants were trying to agree on a quantity discount. No entanto, todas estas convincentes opiniões não representam papel algum no debate se partirmos imediatamente para um grande "segundo programa nuclear" ou nos apegarmos um pouco mais aos combustíveis convencionais que, não importa o que se diga pró ou contra eles, não nos envolvem em riscos inteiramente novos e admitidamente incalculáveis. Nenhum deles é sequer mencionado: a discussão toda, que pode afetar vitalmente o próprio futuro da raça humana, é conduzida exclusivamente em termos de vantagem imediata, como se dois trapeiros estivessem tentando chegar a acordo sobre um desconto para quantidade.
What, after all, is the fouling of air with smoke compared with the pollution of air, water, and soil with ionising radiation? Not that I wish in any way to belittle the evils of conventional air and water pollution; but we must recognise 'dimensional differences' when we encounter them: radioactive pollution is an evil of an incomparably greater 'dimension' than anything mankind has known before. One might even ask: what is the point of insisting on clean air, if the air is laden with radioactive particles? And even if the air could be protected, what is the point of it, if soil and water are being poisoned? Afinal de contas, o que é sujar o ar com fumaça comparado com a poluição do ar, água e solo pela radiação ionizante? Não que eu deseje diminuir os males da poluição convencional do ar e da água; mas temos de reconhecer "diferenças dimensionais" quando nos deparamos com elas: a poluição radioativa é um mal "dimensão" incomparavelmente maior do que tudo o que a humanidade conheceu até agora. Pode-se até indagar: qual é a vantagem de insistir em ar limpo, se ele está .carregado de partículas radioativas? E mesmo se o ar pudesse ser limpo, de que adiantana se a água e o solo estão sendo envenenados?
Even an economist might well ask: what is the point of economic progress, a so-called higher standard of living, when the earth, the only earth we have, is being contaminated by substances which may cause malformations in our children or grandchildren? Have we learned nothing from the thalidomide tragedy? Can we deal with matters of such a basic character by means of bland assurances or official admonitions that 'in the absence of proof that (this or that innovation) is in any way deleterious, it would be the height of irresponsibility to raise a public alarm?' Can we deal with them simply on the basis of a short-term profitability calculation? Até um economista poderia perguntar: qual é a vantagem de progresso econômico, de um mais elevado padrão-de-vida, quando a Terra, a única Terra que temos, esta sendo contaminada por substâncias que podem causar deformações em nossos filhos e netos? Nada aprendemos com a tragédia da talidomida? Podemos lidar com assuntos de caráter tão básico por meio de garantias tranqüilizadoras ou admoestações oficiais de que "na ausência de prova de que (esta ou aquela novidade) é de qualquer maneira deletéria, seria o cúmulo da irresponsabibdade dar origem a um alarma público?" Podemos lidar com eles simplesmente na base do cálculo de lucratividade a curto prazo?
'It might be thought,' wrote Leonard Beaton, 'that all the resources of those who fear the spread of nuclear weapons would have been devoted to heading off these developments for as long as possible. The United States, the Soviet Union and Britain might be expected to have spent large sums of money trying to prove that conventional fuels, for example, had been underrated as a source of power ... In fact ... the efforts which have followed must stand as one of the most inexplicable political fantasies in history. Only a social psychologist could hope to explain why the possessors of the most terrible weapons in history have sought to spread the necessary industry to produce them ... Fortunately, ... power reactors are still fairly scarce.' "Seria lícito pensar," escreveu Leonard Reaton, "que todos os recursos dos que temem a proliferação das armas nucleares fossem dedicados a protelar essa expansão o mais possível. Poder-se-ia esperar que os Estados Unidos, a União Soviética e a Grã-Bretanha gastassem grandes somas tentando provar que os combustíveis convencionais, por exemplo, haviam sido subestimados como fonte de força ... De fato ... os esforços que se seguiram devem figurar como uma das mais inexplicáveis fantasias políticas da História. Só um psicólogo social poderia esperar explicar por que os detentores das mais terríveis armas da História esforçaram-se por difundir a indústria necessária para produzi-las ... Felizmente, os reatores são ainda razoavelmente escassos."
In fact, a prominent American nuclear physicist, A. W. Weinberg, has given some sort of explanation: 'There is,' he says, 'an understandable drive on the part of men of good will to build up the positive aspects of nuclear energy simply because the negative aspects are so distressing.' But he also adds the warning that 'there are very compelling personal reasons why atomic scientists sound optimistic when writing about their impact on world affairs. Each of us must justify to himself his preoccupation with instruments of nuclear destruction (and even we reactor people are only slightly less beset with such guilt than are our weaponeering colleagues).' Com efeito, um proeminente físico nuclear americano, A. W. Weinberg, deu uma espécie de explicação. Disse ele: "Existe um impulso compreensível por parte dos homens de boa vontade em enaltecer os aspectos positivos da energia nuclear, simplesmente porque os seus aspectos negativos são por demais angustiantes." Mas acrescenta depois a advertência: "Há razões pessoais muito imperiosas para os cientistas atômicos darem a impressão de otimismo quando escrevem sobre o seu impacto nas questões mundiais. Cada um de nós tem de justificar para si mesmo a sua preocupação com os instrumentos de destruição nuclear (e até mesmo nós, os que trabalhamos com reatores, sentimo-nos apenas um pouco menos afligidos por esse sentimento de culpa que os nossos colegas do ramo de armamentos)."
Our instinct of self-preservation, one should have thought, would make us immune to the blandishments of guilt-ridden scientific optimism or the unproved promises of pecuniary advantages. 'It is not too late at this point for us to reconsider old decisions and make new ones,' says a recent American commentator. 'For the moment at least, the choice is available.' Once many more centres of radioactivity have been created, there will be no more choice, whether we can cope with the hazards or not. Poder-se-ia imaginar que o nosso instinto de autoconservação nos deixaria imunes aos afagos de um otimismo científico eivado de culpa ou às promessas infundadas de vantagens pecuniárias. "Não é tarde demais, a esta altura dos acontecimentos, para re­examinar decisões antigas e tomar outras novas," disse há pouco um comentarista norte-americano. "Por enquanto, existe pelo menos a faculdade de escolha." Uma vez criado um número muito maior de centros de radioatividade, acabou-se a possibilidade de opção, quer possamos ou não enfrentar os riscos.
It is clear that certain scientific and technological advances of the last thirty years have produced, and are continuing to produce, hazards of an altogether intolerable kind. At the Fourth National Cancer Conference in America in September 1960, Lester Breslow of the California State Department of Public Health reported that tens of thousands of trout in western hatcheries suddenly acquired liver cancers, and continued thus: É claro que certos progressos cientificos e tecnológicos dos últimos 30 anos produziram e continuam a produzir perigos de um gênero de todo intolerável. No 4.° Congresso Nacional sobre o Câncer, nos Estados Unidos, em setembro de 1960, Lester Breslow, do Departamento de Saúde Pública da Califórnia, informou que dezenas de milhares de trutas em viveiros da Costa Oeste contraíram de repente câncer no fígado. E disse:
'Technological changes affecting man's environment are being introduced at such a rapid rate and with so little control that it is a wonder man has thus far escaped the type of cancer epidemic occurring this year among the trout.' "Mudanças tecnológicas que afetam o meio ambiente do homem estão sendo introduzidas a tamanha velocidade e com tão pouco controle que é de admirar o homem ter até agora escapado ao tipo de epidemia de câncer ocorrido este ano com as trutas."
To mention these things, no doubt, means laying oneself open to the charge of being against science, technology, and progress. Let me therefore, in conclusion, add a few words about future scientific research. Man cannot live without science and technology any more than he can live against nature. What needs the most careful consideration, however, is the direction of scientific research. We cannot leave this to the scientists alone. As Einstein himself said, 'almost all scientists are economically completely dependent' and 'the number of scientists who possess a sense of social responsibility is so small' that they cannot determine the direction of research. The latter dictum applies, no doubt, to all specialists, and the task therefore falls to the intelligent layman, to people like those who form the National Society for Clean Air and other, similar societies concerned with conservation. They must work on public opinion, so that the politicians, depending on public opinion, will free themselves from the thraldom of economism and attend to the things that really matter. What matters, as I said, is the direction of research, that the direction should be towards non-violence rather than violence; towards an harmonious co-operation with nature rather than a warfare against nature; towards the noiseless, low-energy, elegant, and economical solutions normally applied in nature rather than the noisy, high-energy, brutal, wasteful, and clumsy solutions of our present-day sciences. Mencionar estas coisas significa, sem dúvida, ficar exposto à acusação de ser contra a Ciência, a Tecnologia e o Progresso. Permitam-me pois, em conclusão, acrescentar algumas palavras sobre a futura pesquisa científica. O homem não pode viver sem Ciência nem Tecnologia, tal -como não pode viver contra a natureza. O que, entretanto, precisa de mais cuidadoso exame é a díreção da pesquisa científica. Não se pode deixar isso apenas aos cientistas. Como disse o próprio Einstein, "quase todos os cientistas são de todo econômicamente dependentes," e "o número de cientistas que possuem um sentimento de responsabilidade social é tão reduzido" que não podem determinar a direção da pesquisa. A última sentença aplica-se, sem dúvida, a todos os especialistas, e a incumbência, portanto, recai no leigo inteligente, em pessoas como as que integram a Sociedade Nacional pelo Ar Limpo e outras sociedades análogas preocupadas com a conservação ambiental. Elas devem agir sobre a opinião pública, de sorte que os políticos, dependendo desta, libertem-se da servidão diante do economismo e atendam a coisas que realmente importam. O que interessa, conforme eu disse, é a díreção da pesquisa, e esta deve ser para a não-violência em vez da violência; para uma cooperação harmoniosa com a natureza em vez de uma guerra contra a natureza; para as soluções silenciosas de baixa energia, elegantes e econômicas aplicadas à natureza em vez das soluções das ciências atuais, ruidosas, de alta energia, brutais, perdulárias e disformes.
The continuation of scientific advance in the direction of ever-increasing violence, culminating in nuclear fission and moving on to nuclear fusion, is a prospect of terror threatening the abolition of man. Yet it is not written in the stars that this must be the direction.. There is also a life-giving and life­enhancing possibility, the conscious exploration and cultivation of all relatively non-violent, harmonious, organic methods of co-operating with that enormous, wonderful, incomprehensible system of God-given nature, of which we are a part and which we certainly have not made ourselves. A continuação do progresso científico no sentido de uma violência sempre crescente, que culminou na fissão nuclear e avança agora para a fusão nuclear, é uma perspectiva de terror que ameaça com a abolição do homem. No entanto, não está escrito nos astros que tenha de ser essa a direção. Há igualmente uma possibilidade vivificante e exaltadora da vida, a exploração e cultivo consciente de todos os métodos relativamente não-violentos, harmoniosos e orgânicos de cooperar com esse enorme, maravilhoso e incompreensível sistema da natureza doado por Deus, do quàl fazemos parte e que certamente não foi feito por nós.
This statement, which was part of a lecture given before the National Society for Clean Air in October 1967, was received with thoughtful applause by a highly responsible audience, but was subsequently ferociously attacked by the authorities as 'the height of irresponsibility'. The most priceless remark was reportedly made by Richard Marsh, then Her Majesty's Minister of Power, who felt it necessary to 'rebuke' the author. The lecture, he said, was one of the more extraordinary and least profitable contributions to the current debate on nuclear and coal cost. (Daily Telegraph, 21 October 1967. Esta afirmação, que faz parte duma conferência proferida perante a Sociedade Nacional pelo Ar Limpo em outubro de 1967, foi recebida com aplausos corteses por uma audiência altamente responsável, mas foi subseqüentemente atacada com ferocidade pelas autoridades como "o auge da irresponsabilidade". O mais inestimável comentário foi feito, segundo se anunciou, por Richard Marsh, então Ministro da Energia de Sua Majestade, que julgou necessário "verberar" o autor. A conferência, disse ele, foi uma das mais extraordinárias e menos proveitosas contribuições ao debate em curso sobre custos nucleares e carboníferos (Daily Telegraph, 21 de outubro de 1967).
However, times change. A report on the Control of Pollution, presented in February 1972, to the Secretary of State for the Environment by an officially appointed Working Party, published by Her Majesty's Stationery Office.and entitled Pollution: Nuisance or Nemesis?, has this to say: Entretanto, os tempos mudam. Um relatório sobre o Controle da Poluição, apresentado em fevereiro de 1972 ao Secretário de Estado para o Meio Amhiente por um Grupo de Trabalho, oficialmente nomeado, depois publicado pela Imprensa de Sua Majestade e intitulado Poluição: Amolação ou Ameaça? disse o seguinte:
'The main worry is about the future, and in the international context. The economic prosperity of the world seems to be linked with nuclear energy. At the moment, nuclear energy provides only one per cent of the total electricity generated in the world. By the year 2000, if present plans go ahead, this will have increased to well over fifty per cent and the equivalent of two new 500 MWe reactors - each the size of the one at Trawsfynydd in Snowdonia - will be opened every day.' "A principal preocupação é com o futuro e no contexto internacional. A prosperidade econômica do mundo parece estar vinculada à energia nuclear. De momento, a energia nuclear fornece apenas 1% de eletricidade total gerada no mundo. Se os atuais planos prosseguirem, ter-se-á registrado no ano 2000 um crescimento superior a 50% e o equivalente a dois novos reatores de 500 MWe - cada um deles de tamanho idêntico ao instalado em Trawsfynnyd, na Snowdonia - será inaugurado diariamente."
On radioactive wastes of nuclear reactors: A respeito do lixo radioativo dos reatores nucleares:
'The biggest cause of worry for the future is the storage of the long-lived radioactive wastes ... Unlike other pollutants, there is no way of destroying radioactivity ... So there is no alternative to permanent storage ... "A maior causa de preocupação para o futuro é a armazenagem dos detritos radioativos de vida longa. Ao contrário de outros poluentes, não há meios de destruir a radioatividade ... Assim, não há alternativa para a armazenagem permanente ...
'In the United Kingdom, strontium-90 is at the present time stored as a liquid in huge stainless steel tanks at Windscale in Cumberland. They have to be continually cooled with water, since the heat given off by the radiation would otherwise raise the temperature to above boiling point. We shall have to go on cooling these tanks for many years, even if we build no more nuclear reactors. But with the vast increase of strontium-90 expected in the future, the problem may prove far more difficult. Moreover, the expected switch to fast breeder reactors will aggravate the situation even further, for they produce large quantities of radioactive substances with very long half-lives. No Reino Unido, o estrôncio-90 é atualmente armazenado como líquido em imensos tanques de aço inoxidável em Windscale, na Cumherlândia. Têm de ser continuamente resfriados com água, pois o calor desprendido pela radiação poderia, caso contrário, elevar a temperatura acima do ponto de ebulição. Teremos de continuar refrigerando esses tanques por muitos anos, mesmo se não construirmos mais reatores nucleares. Mas com o vasto aumento de estrôncio­90 esperado para o futuro, o problema poder-se-á tornar bem mais difícil. Outrossim, a esperada mudança para reatores reprodutores rápidos agravará a situação ainda mais, pois eles produzem grandes quantidades de substâncias radioativas com meias-vidas muito prolongadas.
'In effect, we are consciously and deliberately accumulating a toxic substance on the off-chance that it may be possible to get rid of it at a later date. We are committing future generations to tackle a problem which we do not know how to handle.' Com efeito, estamos consciente e deliberadamente acumulando uma substância tóxica contando com a probabilidade remota de podermos mais tarde descartar-nos dela. Estamos obrigando as gerações futuras a enfrentar um problema com o qual não sabemos lidar."
Finally, the report issues a very clear warning: Finalmente, o relatório emite um alerta bem claro :
'The evident danger is that man may have put all his eggs in the nuclear basket before he discovers that a solution cannot be found. There would then be powerful political pressures to ignore the radiation hazards and continue using the reactors which had been built. It would be only prudent to slow down the nuclear power programme until we have solved the waste disposal problem ... Many responsible people would go further. They feel that no more nuclear reactors should be built until we know how to control their wastes.' "O perigo evidente é que o homem talvez tenha posto todos os ovos no cesto nuclear antes de descobrir que não se pode achar uma solução. Haveria, então, pressões políticas poderosas para ignorar os riscos da radiação e continuar a usar os reatores que foram construídos. Seria apenas prudente retardar o programa de força nuclear até solucionarmos o problema do destino a dar aos detritos ... Muitas pessoas responsáveis iriam adiante. Elas acham que não se deve construir mais reatores até sabermos como controlar seu lixo."
And how is the ever-increasing demand for energy to be satisfied? E como será satisfeita a sempre crescente demanda de energia?
'Since planned demand for electricity cannot be satisfied without nuclear power, they consider mankind must develop societies which are less extravagant in their use of electricity and other forms of energy. Moreover, they see the need for this change of direction as immediate and urgent.' "Como a demanda planejada de eletricidade não pode ser atendida sem força nuclear, eles acham que a humanidade deve formar sociedades menos extravagantes em sua utilização da eletricidade e de outras formas de energia. Além disso, vêem a necessidade dessa mudança de direção como imediata e urgente."
No degree of prosperity could justify the accumulation of large amounts of highly toxic substances which nobody knows how to make 'safe' and which remain an incalculable danger to the whole of creation for historical or even geological ages. To do such a thing is a transgression against life itself, a transgression infinitely more serious than any crime ever perpetrated by man. The idea that a civilisation could sustain itself on the basis of such a transgression is an ethical, spiritual, and metaphysical monstrosity. It means conducting the economic affairs of man as if people really did not matter at all. Nenhum grau de prosperidade justificaria o acúmulo de vastas quantidades de substâncias acentuadamente tóxicas que ninguém sabe como tornar "seguras" e que permanecerão como um perigo incalculável para a criação inteira por eras históricas ou mesmo geológicas. Tal cometimento é uma transgressão contra a própria vida, infinitamente mais séria do que qualquer crime jamais perpetrado pelo homem. A idéia de que uma civilização possa manter-se apoiada em tal transgressão é uma monstruosidade ética, espiritual e metafísica. Significa conduzir os assuntos econômicos do homem como se as pessoas, realmente, para nada contassem.


Down.