What are some implications of stereotypes like these? How might these early ideas about environmental determinism have influenced actions towards non-Europeans?
Updates from Brandon Davis Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts
-
Brandon Davis
-
Brandon Davis
Looking at this map of temperature change in western Canada, reflect on what these changes might mean for the people who live in the various bands of temperature change.
-
sophiale
I think it would certainly mean that areas where food is grown and harvested would be severely impacted by the increase in temperatures. Places like the Okanagan in BC heavily depend on their wine harvest, and with the progressing increases in temperature, it would surely impact their wine harvesting in drastic and detrimental ways as it will affect the quality of the wine produced. It would impact the economy in negative ways as the food that is grown locally are unable to grow because of the temperature increases. I also think that it would mean more drought periods which would have adverse effects for people in the prairies who rely on their crops and agriculture. I also know that more forest fires would be projected with an increase in temperatures which would put many lives at risk, for humans and wildlife.
-
roypat
Contrary to Sophia’s point, I think that heat would actually improve the annual harvest for Canada. In general, a warmer year (by a few degrees) would mean a longer growing season, where the spring/fall shoulder seasons may be warm enough to support agriculture in the prairies. Earlier in the module it is mentioned that there are winners and losers with global warming, and while someone in Sweden – or even Canada – would find a warmer climate appealing, those living in island nations at sea level will not be as enthused. However, I think that if the climate was significantly warmer and was accompanied by drought, this could cause far reaching problems. As seen periodically today (with rice and peanut butter as examples) price spikes can occur when one nation is typically relied on for a certain harvest and upsets the supply/demand & prices of the commodity worldwide.
-
sophiale
Oops, I apologize! I just thought that warmer temperatures in the prairies would mean more droughts which would be harder on the crops and the agriculture but after reading your explanation, I agree with you 🙂
-
-
msmith92
I do tend to agree with roy that warmer temperatures would generally mean longer growing seasons and thus, greater crop yields. However, certain species may be adapted to very specific climatic conditions and would maybe not adjust well to these temperature changes. Beyond agriculture, these temperature changes would likely result in lifestyle changes for many people in these regions. For instance, although it may seem relatively inconsequential, those of us who enjoy skiing and other winter sports would likely be impacted by these temperature changes. These temperature increases would likely impact weather patterns, decreasing snowfall and making the winter season shorter. Additionally, higher temperatures would probably result in faster melting of snow or ice in the spring. This could lead to flooding due to higher water levels, especially for communities close to lakes and rivers.
-
sharonshi
I read the above posts, and I agree with the lengthening of growing seasons, and greater crop yields. However to add, I think that the change in climate ( which as said by msmith92 ) will not only change lifestyles, but the business focuses in that particular location as well. For example, as the weather heats up, Canadians will be less likely to purchase extreme winter brands such as “Canada Goose”. Moreover, snowplows sales may plummet along with other winter items. Whether it be through agriculture, or just day to day activities,the impact of warmer temperatures would definitely be felt by all Canadians.
-
phoebe
I also agree with the above posts. I’ve noted that that winter seems to be coming later and later in Vancouver and that unless you go snowing in Whistler, there really is not a need for extreme winter gear. A warm winter coat and boats is enough to keep you warm.
-
-
youngblutt
As Roypat suggested, Canada could be an initial climate change “winner” with regards to agriculture. The warming effect might create longer grow seasons for established agricultural land as well as allowing for new agricultural land to be developed in the northern regions. However, there seems to be a considerable number of negative aspects to such warming, especially in a nation as environmentally and culturally diverse as Canada. Warming will almost certainly mean that flora and fauna migrations will increase, perhaps with unpredictable results on the receiving habitats. New plants and animals consequently means the loss of established plants and animals. This will cause cultural and dietary changes for the surrounding people, particularly those that have managed to avoid the industrially produced diet of urban societies. Also, warming can cause changes to and migration of microbiotic communities, potentially exposing various cultural groups to new diseases.
Global warming will also cause more unpredictable and intensive rainfall, wind and storms that will have devastating eroding effects on fragile land. This alone could offset any benefit of expanded agriculture. Furthermore, increased rainfall, early snow melt and decreased permafrost could mean substantial flooding of Canada’s many lakes and rivers. This obviously impacts people living close to these water sources.-
hannahepperson
The birds and the bees! But seriously – agriculture is entirely dependent on the intricate and incredibly complex colonies of bees who pollinate all the crops. It’s curious that bee communities don’t come up more in these conversations, no? Insect life – hugely underrated.
-
kimzzzy
I agree that as the climate get warmer it will increase the survival of insects and pest that are only able to survive in warmer climates. As a result, it will attract diseases causing more issues for people.
-
-
-
jenniefrench
I agree with most of what others have said. From the readings I have done, usually the short term prospects for harvest etc in Canada is good – with a warming climate increasing crop yields and extending the growing season. As youngblutt points out there will be other consequences as well, such as flooding. Melting permafrost will extend the space we have to grow in. However, with melting glaciers there will be more flooding but also, once the glaciers have been more depleted, more drought. There is a good chance that while the growing season will be longer, the middle of it may not have enough water to sustain the crops.
As evidence on the map, the higher altitudes, like the Rocky Mountains, will not be as effected as the lower regions. There will be shifts in the ecosystems, with the survival of flora dependent on how fast it can migrate or adapt. Trees like Red Alder will spread further into BC (i learned this in another class) and Red Alder is one of the trees many people get severe allergies to. So human health may be effected by the longer growing season and the flourishing of those trees and plants that cause allergies.
I think we have a good discussion going here of the positives (there are some!) and the negatives. Whatever happens, there will certainly be a shift in the ecosystems around us which will inevitably effect human daily life. -
jaydee
Considering we live in British Columbia, I’m surprised no one has mentioned the effects on the forestry industry. With these increases in temperature, it would be expected that forest fires would occur in greater frequency during the summers. This could have drastic economic effects considering how many people in this province rely on the logging industry.
This can also be extended to the prairies, where grass fires are becoming more and more of a problem. If these trends continue, they could have devastating effects on our agricultural industry, as well as posing a danger to residents who live in these areas. -
bgibson
There are a bunch of good comments on this thread already, and I think a lot of good points have been raised regarding how temperature variations can affect the flora and fauna of a region. I think the one region that has been somewhat ignored in our discussion so far is the most Northern parts of Canada. From this map it seems like the most drastic temperature change is occurring in the far North. This will have profound effects on the local environment. Already stories have been published lamenting the shrinking ice flows up north. This is driving arctic wildlife further south and into contact with more humans, and can also disrupt migratory patterns for marine mammals. If climate change becomes too extreme remote communities may encounter difficulties establishing contact with the rest of the nation as they often rely on the cold weather to allow for winter roads to be constructed. Additionally, melting ice caps threaten communities that reside at or below sea level.
-
hannahepperson
On the other hand, the Arctic is becoming one of the hottest topics in international debates. With melting glaciers, waterways, etc., the Arctic is becoming a new viable route for new economies of exchange. This has huge implications – politically, strategically, culturally, economically – for the communities that have lived in variable isolation in the remote reaches of norther Canada for a very long time.
-
katehaxt
Good point but it seems to me when an area becomes valuable to Big Buisness, local economies seldom profit and instead often suffer
-
kimzzzy
As the natural wonders of the North is slowly being depleted due to the cold climate, this will drive down the attraction for tourism. For example, the ice caps and wild life. This may cause a decrease in the business revenue of local residence that rely on tourism for income.
-
hannahepperson
I actually quite agree with you, Kate, that (aptly capitalized) Big Business has a tendency to derail – rather than profit – local economies. That is precisely why I think one of the most important issues in the context of climate changes affecting the north is: how can it be ensured that remote local communities, cultures and economies in the north aren’t subjugated, taken advantage of and duped out of what is rightfully theirs? It’s a complicated subject to be sure, and that is all the more reason that there should be an abundance of frank discussions about it.
-
-
-
-
paige
I definitely agree with what has been said here. The increased temperature will decrease native crop yield. It could change the crops that are able to be grown in the area which would involve a whole shift in farming. This will also shift the habitat for the animals native to the area. They will be moving further north or up to stay in their optimal temperature zone. The animals that live in the north will have no where to go and may be driven to extinction as we are seeing with polar bears at the moment. The animals will be able to migrate but plants cannot individually move and this could have detrimental effects on the ecosystems in which we live.
-
tsung18
Like what has been said, I agree with everyone about the increase temperature and longer growing season. As Paige has stated, the increased temperature will cause a shift in farming. Corn and soybeans which are high value crops will become more common in Canada. Although this temperature rise will benefit the farming community, other industries might suffer such as the logging industry. Drought will occur more frequently and as we have read in Module 1, the pine beetles will expand in range. Another major change that will occur is the migration of people. Large populations might begin to migrate inland as coastal erosion and flooding occurs on the west coast and in Northern parts of Canada. Inner BC and Albert could potentially see a rise in population.
-
emilym
I agree with the above posts that climate change could initially help Western Canada in terms of increasing the growing season in Canada. However, any change will effect other aspects of our natural environment, which can be extremely negative. For instance, animals and plants that depend on cold winters will be negatively affected. For example, the pine beetle will benefit from the absence of harsh winters which will in turn negatively effect the the pine trees in Western Canada that depend on the cold winters to limit beetle populations. Every change that occurs effects other aspects of our natural environment and though Canada is in a better position than many other nations with regards to negative changes associated with climate change, it is still a very serious issue that must be addressed.
-
lcoulthard
Like Jaydee, I believe one of the major problems that could be started from a temperature change would have to do with forestry in Canada, particularly in B.C. With increased winter temperatures the Pine Beetle population will decimate our unique forests. The forests in B.C. are different than those of the rest of Canada, and we also have very particular soils. There is the possibility of increased drought, which could have an effect on the dry soil and thirsty trees. A repeat of the Kelowna summer fires could happen again, and with the contributions of the pine beetle they would be made even worse (dried out dead trees burn easier than living, green ones). Also, the city of Vancouver has to manage its water supplies carefully in the summer. This could be a major problem for the outlying islands just off the coast who’s drinking supplies are governed by water-bodies located on-island. A global rise in temperature would also bring the ocean levels up, putting some of these islands in peril. Regarding further east in Canada, I can agree that growing seasons may be extended – but if the temperature continues to rise their thresholds will become exceeded. Not only that, but it opens up a whole trove of invasive species, both plant and animal, from all parts of the world who could thrive in such a climate. The invasive species could then out-compete local ones for resources and drive them into extinction, as well as cost farmers a fortune in keeping invasive species off of their land.
-
jonl
I know that the image is about warming but I think it can also be correlated to extreme weather, meaning the increase in temperature could mean harsher winters. I know in the news recently is a village in the northern territories that are facing a lack of fuel since the ship that carries it is stuck moving 5km/hr through ice.
On a note closer to home here in Vancouver we are definitely going to have summers where water control regulations are implemented. For companies/business and the agricultural industry will have an increase in costs. Those oppose to the idea of climate change would argue that we can grow more things, save energy since we don’t need greenhouses. I feel that many of the things we are losing far outweigh these new opportunities we get.
There’s something about not being able to grow certain things that tells me we are doing OK. How? Because that’s how nature intended it to be. When you live at a certain latitude, your suppose to have a certain climate that will only permit you certain things in nature.
-
yitailiu
An slight increase of temperature would expand the growing season in Canada, which generally benefits the crop production. A negative effect is that the sea level will rise due to the melting of glaciers and ice sheets, threatening the coastal regions. In arid regions, droughts would occur more frequently and more severe, while the heavy rainfall in other regions would cause flooding. Located at high altitudes, the Canadian landscape is greatly associated with permafrost. Due to temperature increase, the thawing of the permafrost layer would cause the subsidence of land, which will cause damage or collapse of structures built on such places.
-
midara
One thing for sure about the temperature change in western Canada is that the annual temperature is definitely rising, and people here are having hotter and hotter days. Here in Vancouver we are having lesser and lesser snow, and skiing business in places like Whistler is definitely impacted greatly due to the hotter climate; we already have got news about the lack of suitable snow for these winter sports during the winter Olympic in 2010.
Another group of people that will be stroked worse and worse is the people who work in wineries in Okanagan Valley (and other vineyards in BC). Wine producing and grapes harvesting have been an important industry for these areas; however, the growing for grapes is highly weather/climate dependent. BC is famous for its ice wine, which fertilizes grapes that are grown and collected under -8 degree Celsius (and the process of “freezing” has to be natural according to policies). If in western Canada they are having higher and higher temperature, grape harvest will be badly affected, and production of ice wine will be hopeless.
Although we may enjoy longer harvesting season in the summer and fall, in the same time we are affected by the consequences of hotter winter and water temperature that are both bad for winter businesses and fishery. Initially we may seem to gain from such warmer and nicer winter climate, the consequences will be devastating for western Canadians in the long run. -
Danni
The growth of population in the Great Vancouver and Toronto area induced high energy consumption might be one of the reason why these two area actually have a greater change of the temperature, That why I agreed with that the human-induced factors contribute the most to the climate change across Canada. There is a large temperature change as well in the northeast area on the map, I think it might due the increased ice melting in that area than before. Polar bear are trapped in Churchill before the winter, because our winter tends to be warmer and shorter through out the whole country.
-
nytsuen
Sorry for the late post. Hopefully it will still be accepted.
Climate change in Canada will not only affect humans but also, many animals. For example, in December, a black bear was found in downtown vancouver on a truck; however, a bear of his kind should be hibernating right now. This suggests a change in natural habitat possibly due to the change in climate during winter time and the length of it. Businesses will also be affected especially resorts up on mountains. Since snow isn’t abundant, less people are going up to the mountains and B.C.’s huge industry for mountain sports will be affected. Furthermore, global warming will cause water level to rise due to the melting of glaciers and that would affect B.C. significantly. I live in Richmond and we are already located below sea level. We have a dike that’s suppose to “protect” us from tides and whatnot, however, there was talk in the news a couple months ago that our dike is being washed away. That is definitely not comforting news and global warming will likely affect the residents of Richmond.
The weather is definitely getting hotter and therefore, no snow during the winter time. But for some reason, i feel like these couples weeks or even days have been extremely cold and I find that a little weird as well. -
katehaxt
I think communities in the north of canada are going to be the hardest hit by the projected temperature increases. It appears like they will see the biggest increase and I think that their environment is the most sensitive to these changes. The difference between snow and water is dramatic and only a few degrees apart. Also I assume that the lives and livelihoods of people in northern communities are very interwinned with their environment. City dwellers are much more buffered from environmental change, by easily imported food, air con, and access to a global jobs market. I think that those living closest to land will be the most affected across the board. Some farmers may benefit if they are able to adapt to climate change but I was under the impresion that one of the main characteristics of climate change is its erratic and unpredictable nature. On average the temperature may steadily rise but summer to summer the growing conditions might fluctuate wildly. This kind of chaotic climate change is very hard for farmers to cope with, let alone profit from.
-
Olga F
the interior of Canada, part which is already experiencing continental weather patterns (dry and hot in the summer and cold and snowy in the winter), the climate change will increase such conditions. I think that places on the leeward side of the mountains, like Alberta, would become drier in the summer, creating possible water shortages (and this is not a good news for the tar sands that require a lot of water for production). also i think for rainy places like vancouver it means more rain. Since climate change is about increasing temperature, there is also more evaporation that follows that. Since orographic precipitation is common in Vancouver, the water that is kept in the atmosphere will most likely be released in such places.
-
jlin
The temperature changes map reflects mostly a continental and maritime climate difference to me. Most of Western Canada sits within the band of 3-4 degrees change. I think that across the prairies, continental climate characteristics will be heightened, becoming more cold in the winter and water in the summer. For Vancouver this will affect the hydrologic cycle, increasing evaporation in the summer and maybe even expansion of warmer waters (unsure), the storage basin and runoff. We can see more landslides. It’s interesting to see that the places with the highest degrees of projected temperature changes lie in Canada’s most vulnerable communities. By vulnerable I mean they already struggle in many ways, especially in the north. This means that changes in their lifestyle will be even more difficult to realize, especially if their way of life involves getting resources directly from the natural environment (vs. communities closer along the southern border where the way of life is less directly involved due to the availability of shops and other resources).
-
congo96
The temperature rise in the northern territories will potentially affect the economies of those areas as ice melts and changes the landscape of those ecosystems. Species might migrate others may become more prominent and societies may have to move if certain areas flood. In the areas closer to the U.S. border the societies there may have to deal with heat waves during the summer months. Another consequence of climate warming is the prominence of mosquitoes which have been know to spread diseases such as the West Nile virus.
-
shalinb
The rise of temperature by mostly 3 to 4 degrees in the majority of the areas on the map, would definitely change the lifestyle of the people living in those areas. Snow and ice will melt faster and sooner, thus changing crop growing seasons, and where and how animals live in those areas. Flooding will then become more of an issue because of the increase of melting of snow. Also, there will be more rain because there will be more evaporation due to the increase of heat. Therefore, through the evaporation of the surrounding bodies of water, more rain will fall.
-
erikaw
As Canadians I find we are usually very conscience of our winter weather patterns as it usually greatly affects our winter days and recreational choices. The majority of our population indulges in at least one winter pastime whether it be snowshoeing, skiing, boarding, skating etc. and when the weather changes people are usually talking about it! I remember even as a child I used to be able to skate on a lake near my house, and that would never happen now! Another example I saw was when driving through the rockies and they had measured the receding glaciers. It was quite dramatic how much had been lost in the past 50 years! Because snow and ice are quite obvious (they are either there…. or they’re not!) I think this is the way that Canadians would notice climate change the most (although it may not be the most important in comparison to agricultural changes, species extinction etc etc.)
-
natashap
Some of these regions are very dependant on agriculture – for a few years, the temperature increases could be beneficial, maybe extending the growing season or allowing crops to ripen sooner. But after a while or once the temperature increased beyond a certain point, it would most likely negatively affect agriculture.
In the summers, BC’s interior often experiences forest fires; obviously an increase in temperature would cause the forest fire season to be longer, with more fires occurring. Forest fires are good as they clear out old dead trees and vegetation making room for new ones to grow, but once there are too many of them, these benefits would be negated.
Another negative effect (or positive depending on your perspective) of the temperature increase would be that the winters would be less intense and possibly shorter.
-
brenden
As many other students have mentioned, the most significant impact of these temperature changes will be on the agricultural industry. Some producers will indeed benefit from the increased temperatures. For example, wineries in the Okanagan will be able to produce higher quality wines due to the hot summer temperatures. Additionally other producers will likely benefit from the increased growing season. Not all the effects from increased temperatures would be positive however. There could be periods of drought which would hurt the agricultural industry. Also, as the post above mentions, there could be an increase forest fires which not only affect the environment but people and cities as well (ex. Slave Lake). Increased temperatures could also hurt the ski industry and decrease tourism which would hurt the economy. Overall, the negative effects associated with temperature increases in Canada outweigh the benefits in my opinion.
-
eddietastic
I believe that the changes in climate have already begun to be felt by farmers and those who rely on nature for work . intense dry seasons or random rainfalls when there are not supposed to be may have resulted in loss of crops which is a serious problem . In addition when there are minute temperature changes in the water fish and other marine animals will die which completely destroys an important part of British Columbia industry . Lastly the tourism industry may be hurt because snow may become less frequent as a result the many mountains of British Columbia may have less business
-
haduro
Looking at this map of temperature change in western Canada, reflect on what these changes might mean for the people who live in the various bands of temperature change.
I am unfamiliar with what the various regions of western Canada does. I am to assume the prairies have farms. As others have mentioned, it really depends on the increase and intensity of temperature to determine whether the farms will be affected. Of course certain products will no longer be able to survive at certain temperature, but I believe we may be able to grow different farm produce with the increased temperature.
Also, as recent years have shown and others have mentioned, forest fires in the summer are becoming an increasingly expensive and dangerous event. I am to assume those that live on an island or in the interiors that has summer forest fires would apt to move to somewhere safer, even though they may not be able to afford it because of the difference in real estate prices.
There has been studies that show that on the first day of summer, there is an increased amount of traffic collisions, which is attributed to increased heat leading to aggravated drivers. So, if we continue to live in an area with high traffic volumes and the temperature continues to rise, I will assume that more traffic collisions will happen until it reaches the point that I do not feel safe to drive anymore and I would have to move to a cooler place with less traffic.
-
-
Brandon Davis
On page 9 of the Rough Guide, you can see the IPCC’s change in wording between 1995 and 2007 on the certainty of human-induced global warming. Why this change? On what basis did the scientific community decide on stronger wording?
-
jenniefrench
The IPCC’s wording is noticeably stronger in 2007 than in 2001 and 1995. I believe that as more research was done and reviewed over time it became clearer that the change in climate, the trend towards warmer temperatures, could not be explained by climate models that did not include the anthropogenic causes of climate change. As well, between 1995 and 2007 more data was collected and analyzed, leading to a clearer understanding of the climate issue.
In one of my other courses we discussed this change too. This wording comes from what I believe is called the Policy Makers Summary, or Executive Summary – this is the small, but key section in the IPCC report that is directed at Policy Makers (ie politicians etc), and attempts to summarize the key points of their 1000s of pages of report. So the wording and phrasing in this section is very conscious. I believe the phrasing changed and became stronger because the scientific research and methods became clearer and more effective, and it was necessary for the IPCC to poignantly and clearly state the current findings of climate scientists, as it could effect policy and choices made that would effect the general public. -
roypat
The IPCC’s wording shows a marked change over time I think due to the progressive sureness that the current degree of climate change was not brought on by “natural” causes. What started off as more of a precautionary note in 1991 turned into a warning by 2007 likely because some of the measures of climate change available in 1991 had been monitored over time until 2007, where climate change from human-sources became even more evident.
-
sophiale
I agree with Roy that the IPCC changed their wording because of all of the research done surrounding the speculation of whether or not natural causes played a significant part in climate change. Once research was done, and they found that humans played an extremely significant role in climate change, they realized that they had to make their message extremely clear in saying that humans are the main reasons why climate change is happening. I also think that their 2007 message was very urgent and I think they wanted people to realize that not only are humans the cause for this rapid climate change, but that we must do something about it NOW before it proceeds to get any more worse.
-
msmith92
Like noted above, the IPCC began to use different terms in order to more accurately and urgently describe the climate change is occurring. Once it was determined that climate change was in fact occurring and that humans were influencing these changes, it became vital that the term used accurately reflected what was going on. Similarly, in order to grab peoples’ attention, it becomes important that the vocabulary indicates that we are at fault. That is why there is a notable switch the less specific and less intimidating, “climate change”, to the more specific but only slightly more intimidating, “global warming”. Lastly, although I don’t think this term is as widespread, “global heating” is the most intimidating as it directly links humans to climate change.
-
sharonshi
I agree with Jennie’s point about the research that could have sparked the change in wording. Once confirmed, the IPCC had to reword it’s statement in order to increase or maintain it’s validity. In addition, they changed it due to the fact that the human activities to which attributed global climate change was heightened. This caused a need for the IPCC to directly address the issue and ensure that the cause and effect relationship is ubiquitously known. If however, the statement was not re-worded, it would be vague enough to be overlooked or attributed to other causes. Moreover, the change of “stronger” wording can indeed induce a more significant effect. Just a quick read of the three statements show that. A simple change from “suggest” to “is” provides a different feeling. One, a feeling of dis concern and uncertainty, and the other a signal of importance.
-
youngblutt
Following it’s 1995 report, the ICPP had most of the scientific community either gazing at it with curious eyes or shrugging with only mild interest. Moreover, it continued to be greeted by the global political community with authoritarian disdain. “The Labcoats telling the Suits what is good for the people, Hogwash!” The passive, non-accusatory language of the 1995 report was an effort to tread lightly until more irrefutable, observed evidence could be collected, supported and shared.
By 2007, the IPCC and the scientific community had garnered enough colleague support and even some political, media and civilian support to plant it’s feet firmly in the ground (looking down at state leaders whose heads were still stuck in the sand). The evidence pointed to an immediate need for reformations in the way industrialized societies “progressed”. So devastating were the predictions of climate models at this time that the scientific community elected for an intensified discourse and a change in the strength and confidence of the language in their reports.
-
paige
Between 1995 and 2007 the IPCC became more certain of the factors contributing to climate change. With this increased knowledge they were able to release reports with more definitive wording about the causes for the public, more specifically highlighting the human factor. By being more serious and direct in their wording the public has to take more responsibility for climate change that affects all of as individuals and as a collective. They gathered information to back this wording through different studies. By comparing results of models with greenhouse gas causes and non-greenhouse gas causes to the actual data from our world greenhouse gases were able to be implicated. By considering the methods the natural world has for counteracting these gases, such as carbon sink rainforests, it is easy to see where the human influence has aided in global warming. Because of the increased interest in the topics and therefore further study, the IPCC was able to gather enough data to justify the stronger wording of their statements.
-
bgibson
It is clear that the IPCC uses progressively stronger and definitive statements as time progresses. I think the statement becomes more definitive as further scientific study provided increased evidence of human-induced global warming. Additionally, I believe the IPCC adopted stronger language to combat the increased amount of climate change denial rhetoric that was promoted in opposition to the “green movement.” I think it is important to note that “evidence” was removed from the statement between 2001 and 2007, which prevents naysayers from declaring that the science was not yet clear, or that scientists were unsure of the root causes for climate change.
-
brandond
In reading this question again, I kind of realize that it may not be as open-ended as I would like. Those that have responded to it have done a pretty thorough job detailing the different factors behind the shift in the IPCC’s language. Maybe I can throw out some additional questions for those who may be struggling to come up with something new to say about the question.
As I was browsing over the Henson readings again, I was struck by a reference to the movie “The Day After Tomorrow.” This made me wonder about what kind of impact such movies have on popular perceptions toward climate change. I remember talking to my twelve-year-old nephew about climate change awhile back and I sensed his understanding of it seemed to totally come from Day after Tomorrow. To him global warming meant that someday we may actually live out a Hollywood movie, it would be almost like meeting a real-life zombie. What do you guys think this sort of thing actually means? I’m pretty sure my nephew’s views are fairly common. Are there positive and/or negative consequences toward the influence such films have in shaping attitudes toward climate change?
-
emilym
I think the influence of pop-culture on our society has a huge effect on how we perceive the world. Hollywood movies, whether we realize it or not, factor into how we view the actual world and therefore have substantial power, both negative and positive, to shape the public’s attitudes towards an issue. “The Day After Tomorrow” certainly provides a startling, albeit unrealistic view of what could happen if climate change suddenly accelerated. Although the film romanticizes the whole affair, it still provides a kind of wake-up call to the general public that climate change is a serious concern and brought more awareness to the issue. Although the film is clearly not the most accurate description of what is happening with our natural environment, I think it can still provide a positive influence in terms of bringing awareness to the issue of global warming. However, one can also note the fact that many people do not explore the issue beyond what they see in Hollywood movies which distorts their view on the issue.
-
tsung18
I agree with emily in that pop-culture has a major influence on our society, especially with the younger generations. Hollywood asserts a very unrealistic view into our minds and some tend to fall into its fantasy world. Movies does not only serve the purpose of entertaining but like emily has said, it serves as a calling to remind us what is happening in the real world. Although many will miss this point and continue indulging into the unrealistic nature of cinema, it will still have an effect on each of us. “2012” is another movie that has people talking. The world ending this year seems very real to many people and just like “The Day After Tomorrow”, our thoughts and realizations are potentially based around these movies. Movies can offer positive insight and inspiration, however, it is important to realize that life is not a Hollywood movie and if we were to think realistically about global warming, “The Day After Tomorrow” and “2012” cannot be accounted for.
-
lcoulthard
I think that the consequences from these types of environmental films are largely negative in shaping attitudes towards climate change. The first and most obvious reason is that these films often show an inaccurate portrayal of what would actually happen if such events played out in the real world. The second reason that occurred to me came from what you said about your nephew, ” To him global warming meant that someday we may actually live out a Hollywood movie”. To me this shows that these factually false films may end up serving as a survival guidebook to uneducated audiences if a major environmental disaster were to strike. Somebody could easily be put in a situation similar to something they have seen in a film and then make decisions based upon that. they could do this either consciously (knowing a popular actor did the same) or subconsciously (split-second decision, brain makes choice based upon images left behind from films). On top of that, movies are filled with special-effects and main characters that are scripted to die, which gives an unrealistic impression of the actual events of a disaster unfolding.
On the other hand, despite these films having major inaccuracies they are still raising awareness about modern environmental issues. Somebody might watch “A Day After Tomorrow” who knew absolutely nothing about the issue at hand, then they might become inspired to raise their own awareness and of the other people in their lives.
-
jonl
I also believe that these films have a negative effect, similar to others who have posted here. I do understand that film makers are in a constraint to show a possible consequence, especially if it is one that is gradual. They don’t have years to show the change, so they do the dramatic extreme. Of course these film makers are also trying to create a strong emotional reaction.
Doing this may rub many people the wrong way. I think it can make someone disbelieve something even more. “That can’t happen” reaction is natural because I think that we as humans are programmed to avoid what makes us uncomfortable. So in a film like “The Day After Tomorrow”, people will choose to believe that it is not possible, not probable and say “it’s just a film.” Because of this, these films will actually have a negative affect on shaping the attitudes towards global warming.
-
congo96
On the one hand I think a film like “The Day After Tomorrow” is positive because it brings awareness to the issue of climate change. The movie shows catastrophic consequences and although they might not be real possibilities they create a strong enough emotion that most people do think that left unchecked the effects of climate change could be catastrophic.
On the other hand I agree with the aforementioned view that such dramatic Hollywood film will cause some viewers to think “that would never happen” but I still believe that for the most part those film leave a big enough impression on the lay person thus raising awareness to the issue of climate change. -
katehaxt
This conversation reminds me of something I was listening to on the radio about how to frame the issue of global warming in a way that best generates positive public response. They were saying that the more you describe global warming as very castastrophic and inevitable (ie The Day After), the more you risk creating denial/apathy in the public as the problem seems overwhelming. But also, they explained, if you minimize global warming then everyone thinks that turning off their appliances is all they need to do to contribute to the solution. I think we definately need strong statements from our scientists so that politicians can’t weasel out of facing the issue. As for “The Day After”.. all I can say is I’d rather Hollywood was making that movie than some kind of climate change conspiracy movie.
-
erikaw
There is no doubt that pop culture mis represents climate change, and also exaggerates it for entertainment purposes. The positives of this are that global warming is that the idea of global warming becomes more widespread, and reaches more groups of the population (say those that go watch movies instead of the news) or young people, like your nephew. If it wasn’t for movies your nephew may have never been introduced to the idea of climate change. The negative aspect of popular culture banking in on climate change is the over-exaggeration or dramatization of the subject. Due to this many people (including your nephew) may believe climate change is something scary and drastic (which it is!) but that the events may play out more like a natural disaster rather than a slow paced change in global temperature and environment. This train of thought about climate change may lead people to believe that they have no control over environmental change due to over consumption, transportation, poor food choices etc. when in reality they do!
-
-
hannahepperson
Two things:
Firstly, on the subject of pop culture – which I understand to be defined as/through popular movies, music, icons, etc. Pop culture can be an incredible tool for creating poignant analogies and metaphors for relevant and contemporary processes, trends, issues. Slavoj Zizek, an incredibly well-known contemporary political theorist and philosopher, relies heavily on references to pop culture to illustrate complex theoretical ideas. It makes those kinds of conversations more accessible to a wider demographic, a demographic that occupies all that space beyond the walls of our academic institution for example. Pop culture also has a knack for producing and effectively disseminating affective and emotional imagery – think of the image of the desperate polar bear whose glacial home is disappearing rapidly beneath its feet. While images like these romanticize, dramatize and misrepresent the reality, or true extent of what is happening, they seem to hit a chord with a lot of people. I wonder what people’s thoughts are on this? Helpful or hurtful? What alternatives are there to invoking concern, interest, empathy from the masses?
Secondly, I think it should be noted that between 1995 and 2007 report, there were considerable advances made to the technologies that enabled more complex detection and attribution models to be configured. This raises the question – where does the money come from to develop these technologies? Shouldn’t the government be allotting more resources towards developing these technologies? Again, these questions point to the importance of having conversations about the interconnections between economics, politics and environmental concerns. -
yitailiu
Over the recent years, the direction of scientific research tend to focus more and more on human contribution to climate change, which is largely due to the fact that the public concern on the issue increased. An increase of certainty is reflected in IPCC’s change of wording on stating human effects on climate change, from there “suggests” a human influence to there “is” human-induced warming, it clearly shows that the scientists have had consistent findings in their research. Even more, the choice of wording reflects the change of the general public’s acceptance of the conclusion that human-induced warming is present. This is due to, as previous said, there is an increase in the awareness and concerns on climate change.
-
Danni
Two aspects of scientific researches were reviewed for the significant effects on global warming by the human-induced factors. On one hand, the detection studies investigated the attribution of greenhouse gases causes comparing to the non-greenhouse gases causes. The pattern of the increased surface temperature of the Earth is consistent with the greenhouse gases studies, but less with other factors. On the other hand, the distribution studies suggested that five different factors, to a degree, contributed to the global warming. These factors included: the eruption of volcanoes, sulphate aerosol pollution, solar activity, greenhouse gases, and ozone depletion.
In regard to the consequence of effect of movies like “The day after tomorrow”, my personal thought was: it will eventually happen on the Earth, although it might not occur in my life. Although the way the movie presented was a dramatically disaster, the positive consequence was that the movie itself like an alarm us to directly face the problem we had or we will have in a near future. However, some people might be overwhelming by the movie, since the public actually was not professional enough to review the relevant scientific researches themselves. The media, in this case, should play a important role in carefully delivery the message about the global warming issue.
-
midara
Like the responses above have addressed, IPCC changed their wording to stronger ones concerning the certainty of human-induced global warming. In my opinion, this change is mainly due to the accelerating speed (and level) of global warming that is affected by human activities. As we have all known that human is playing an extremely important role in the global warming phenomenon, the researches may have sparked and forced IPCC to alert the public about such the already known event to a possible hazard in the not-so-far future.
While greenhouse effect is a normal and natural phenomenon to help in keeping our Earth warm and comfortable for human to live in, the increasing releases of greenhouse gases and rising temperatures in the last decade are definitely the consequences of human activities. The wordings of IPCC emphasis that this is human’s fault and responsibility for such climate changing in our planet; in saying so, I have a feeling that current news such as Canada’s withdrawal from Kyoto Protocol should have been more taken into notice concerning the global warming and greenhouse gases (in this case, CO2) releasing. Other than the research that makes the scientific community to decide on stronger wording, I think media (may not be pop culture like Hollywood films) should also reinforce the cause and consequences of human’s effect on worsening global warming. -
phoebe
On the influence of films such as Day After Tomorrow, while everyone has been noting the negative effects Hollywood has in depicting instant unrealistic situations and solutions for drama, at least its very existence in Hollywood proves that the environment has become enough of a concern for even the mainstream audience to be worried about.
Although Brandon’s nephew might not yet understand the full implications of climate change and global warming, it is nice that he already has some idea of the harsh consequences humans may accidentaly inflict upon the environment, if we are not careful. All Hollywood movies are usually overdramatic, however they present ideas in a medium that is entertaining to its audience and provides an easy place for discussion. Those that watch films such as Day After Tommorrow may become concerned and interrested enough to be drawn into more scientific and reality based research about enviromental climate change.
-
Olga F
The reason that IPCC changed the wording is because before there was an idea that climate change is real and that what we do (emission of GHG) are altering our environment, by changing temperatures. Later on, there were more scientists who believed and agreed that climate change is happening, and more proof also emerged, further proving its existence.
there were many simulations done by different scientists, who used different methods. moreover, there were simulations done showing the trends that would occur naturally, from the CO2 emission like volcanoes and forest fires. such graphs illustrated that the trends are different since the industrial revolution, when the concentration of CO2 started to become more unstable due to influx of human produced/released/ CO2 in the atmosphere. -
jlin
The IPCC changed the wording regarding climate change due to human intervention because the two types of work scientists did, detection and attribution studies, increasingly showed that it was impossible to eliminate the influence GHG (and therefore, human activity) has on climate change. This change was necessary because the IPCC advises different political parties and the solutions they propose. If anything, the IPCC is like the spokesperson for climate change and so they have the responsibility to present the situation fully and seriously.
-
natashap
From the reading, it seems that IPCC used the stronger language: firstly because growing scientific evidence meant climate change could be attributed to human activities and secondly to emphasis the seriousness of climate change.
As it discusses later on in the readings, various greenhouse gas emissions have been attributed to human activities. Using computer models and looking at the effects that nature has on greenhouse gases, it’s clear that human activities have led to rising greenhouse gases in the atmospheres and that in term has led to changes in earth’s climate.
The use of strong language may also be to draw attention to the seriousness and need for changes to mitigate it. The book discusses how the public finds terms such as climate change less threatening whereas global warming sounds more threatening.
-
shalinb
The IPCC changed its wording for human induced global warming between 1995 and 2007 for many reasons. The first, being the advances in technology and thus computer models became more accurate and advanced. This advancement resulted in a better understanding of what was happening to the climate of the world, and a better prediction of future projections of climate change. It also helped scientists discover that humans have a profound impact on the warming of the climate. Computer models were better able to detect greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, and the relationship between human activities, especially in regards to advances in technology, such as cars, and energy consuming devices have led to an increase of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.
The second feature that had IPCC use stronger language in regards to climate change and human activity was due to different types of works scientists took part in: detection and attribution. Detection was used in earlier models of evaluating climate change to see if an unusual change in climate was happening. On the other hand, attribution was used to see if humans were involved in climate change. Attribution deals more with human impact and greenhouse gases. This allowed scientists to not only study human activities in regards to greenhouse gases, but to also study and isolate other factors that could change climate, such as volcanoes, and non-greenhouse gases. As a result, computer models and scientists could better pinpoint what was effecting the climate, and by how much.
A third factor for the use of a more direct correlation between the climate warming and human activity was that before the use of stronger language seemed to scare off the public. Global warming seemed to be more of a terrifying concept for the public, whereas climate change is more widely accepted by the public. However, with the increase of knowledge of the warming of the climate in recent times, stronger wording is necessary to signify the importance of the warming of the climate. Also, a lot more people are aware and accepting of the warming of the climate, thus terms relating to global warming and human induced global climate change are not as threatening but more informative.
-
eddietastic
The IPCC has probably changed its wording for global warming probably because of the problems which have arose from the lack of change. As a result the IPCC needed to attract the public’s attention which results in stronger words being used. Furthermore, the differences between technology has allowed scientists to have more accurate readings which result in people knowing more about the world .
-
brenden
As many others mentioned, the IPCC’s wording did indeed become notably stronger in 2007 than it was 2001 or 1995. In my opinion, this was the result more extensive research being conducted which resulted in the understanding that that the change in climate, and increased average temperatures could not be explained by models that didn’t include human made causes of climate change. In addition to this, the twelve years between 1995 and 2007 allowed for more data to collected and interpreted which gave researchers a grater understanding of the factors affecting climate change.
-
sampethick
In agreement with what many of you have already said, the IPCC’s change in the wording between 1995 and 2007 on the certainty of human-induced global warming had much to do with new knowledge. Using the work of more than one thousand scientists the research on human-induced global warming was a growing body of knowledge (and still is). Also, new and more accurate technology which was being produced in order to measure the amount of greenhouse gases being emitted into the atmosphere by humans was a factor in the new reports coming out from the IPCC which were more and more certain of their conclusions each time. More complex computer models were coming out which were supporting these scientists ideas. The newer, more complex computer models were able to incorporate more components of climate than before, helping scientists to discover the ways in which individual processes were bringing on climate change. From this they were able to verify how much humans were helping climate change, and thus making clearer human induced global warming. In turn they were able to change and intensify their wording on the certainty of human-induced global warming. The scientific community based their use of stronger wording by detection and attribution studies. These two types of studies back up scientist’s claims about human-induced global warming by establishing that an unusual change has occurred; and finding the likelihood that humans are involved. Scientists also used methods to support their claims by looking at the signature of changes and comparing them to what you would see from non-greenhouse causes. This method shows the changes that can only have been made my humans.
-
haduro
Detection and attribution studies were used to study climate change. Specifically, attribution studies try to find the likelihood of human contributions to climate change. As mentioned on page 10
“As computer models have grown more complex, they’ve been able to incorporate more components of climate. This allows scientists to tease out the ways in which individual processes helped shape the course of the last century’s warm-up.”
Attribution studies and models have became more accurate and refined. This is why from 1995 to 2007, the IPCC has been able to use gradually stronger wording to state the possibility that climate change can be strongly determined and affected by human actions/contributions.
-
-
Brandon Davis
Introduce yourself to your fellow students and the instructor. What are your interests? How do they relate to environmental history and/or contemporary environmental issues? What environmental issue, if any, do you think about the most, and how do you think about it?
-
paige
Hey everybody! My name is Paige. I’m a fourth year animal biology student and I’m about to go into the world and try and do my part. I’m hoping to be able to get into some conservation work helping to prevent the extinction of species and knowledge from this course will help build a solid basis to move from. I’ve never taken a history course and I’m hoping that I will be able to keep up. I ride horses and I love to snowboard but with today’s climate it’s raining up on seymour. I would say that relates quite well to current environmental issues. Human impact and climate change are environmental issues that I think about most. It worries me how quickly we are able to produce visible changes on a planet that has been around for so long. I hate to think of all the organisms that were here before us that have been drastically reduced or driven to extinction because of over consumption of resources. I hope that one day the world will be able to come together and make effective changes to our current ways of life.
-
brandond
Hi Paige,
Your major sounds interesting. I imagine it could lead to some fun jobs. We do not deal too much with wildlife issues in the course, but I’m guessing you will still have some chances to bring in insights from your field into our discussions. Hopefully you will also have some chances to go boarding sometime this winter!
-
-
jenniefrench
Hey everyone! My name is Jennie and I am a 4th year English Lit Student with a passion for the environment. I have always loved English, but I was basically brought up outside. Through out my degree I have sought out environment courses to fill all my electives.I am also a yoga instructor and am passionate about yoga and the community it creates. The yoga community strongly encourages relationships that are mutually beneficial and non-harming. What I feel I often see around me in my daily life, is humans taking the Earth for granted. Through university I have sought to learn about the earth and the social context of climate change and the environment. It is my goal to bring awareness to what we do that could harm not only the earth but inevitably ourselves as well.
I also love to rock climb, hike, backpack, travel, and cross country ski.
I don’t think there is one issue i care most about – what interests me most is learning as much as I can, teasing out what truth I can from the plethora of scientific studies out there, and helping to teach people about climate change, and encouraging people to take action. If I can help just one friend appreciate this beautiful planet more, I am happy.-
brandond
Hi Jennie,
It sounds like you have a passion for both the outdoors and learning, which are two things that go together well in this course. Hopefully your enthusiasm towards environmental issues will rub off onto others in the course!
-
-
sophiale
Hi! My name is Sophia and unlike Paige and Jennie, I am a newbie in university as I am a first years arts student. I’m planning on majoring in history, because history has always been a topic that fascinated me even in high school. I will be the first person to admit that I am not exactly an outdoorsy type of person. I like cuddling up in my bed and reading a good novel with a nice cup of hot chocolate by my side. But with that said, I think that learning about environmental history is something that I – and I believe, the majority of people, can find useful because we all live on the same planet. Our environment and our surroundings directly affects how we live and behave. An environmental issue that I have been thinking about the most is overpopulation. Over the years, our population has been steadily increasing and I’ve been starting to grow a bit worried about what our future will look like 10, 20 years from now as our resources start to dry up and eventually, depleted. It’s hard to imagine a world with little food or water, and unfortunately, this scenario is likely going to happen unless we do something about it. I totally agree with what Jennie said, about taking our earth for granted for the many resources that we use in order to function and live normal lives. I think overpopulation is something that’s really difficult to stop or change, but what we can do is change the way we use our resources and prevent overconsumption of those resources, especially for those of us who live in a developed country.
-
brandond
Hi Sophie,
Thanks for you thoughtful response. We will be covering many of the issues you highlighted in more depth. I am looking forward to hearing some you insights on them!
-
-
Danni
My name is Danni, and I am a 4th year Medical Lab Science student in the Faculty of Medicine. Med Lab Science includes five disciplines: Clinical Chemistry, Hematology, Transfusion Medicine, Anatomic Pathology, and Microbiology. I am very interest in Clinical Chemistry, because chemistry and biochemistry more or less interrelate with all other disciplines. Global environment changes actually influence our life styles, as well as our health as well. I hope from this course I am going to have some ideas about how environmental alternations changes our health, and the pathology of diseases as well. In this case, the study of environmental history is essential for us to think about our global environmental issue critically, rather than to simply trust all from the media. I hope we all could be able to develop our ability to analyze the environmental contexts, and to place our own arguments.
-
brandond
Hi Danni,
I share some of you interest in disease pathology. There are a number of really interesting works on the environmental history of disease. While we will not be dealing too much with this topic in this course, I am guessing you will be able to figure out ways to incorporate your interests into some of the assignments and hopefully into some of the discussions as well.
-
-
brandond
Hello,
I guess it is time for me to post something here. My name is Brandon and I am the instructor of the course. Most of my interests tend to revolve in one or another around the outdoors. I grew up in Utah and a large portion of my youth was spent exploring the nearby mountains and red rock canyons with family and friends. After spending so much time in the outdoors, it was easy for me to develop an interest in environmental issues and natural history. As a teenager, I became active in a local movement for wilderness preservation and served as a volunteer to the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance. As a college student at Utah State University I explored a number of different fields and interests, but ended up with a degree in American Studies that emphasized “Nature and the Environment.” After graduating, I headed to the northwest where I worked in the service industry at Mt. Rainer National Park. When I was not working and exploring the northwest, I was able to travel and become familiar with the natural history of a number of different regions around the world. Eventually I decided to return to the university and pursue an advanced degree focusing on environmental history, a field that propitiously combines my interests in the humanities and the environment. My current dissertation project was inspired, in part, by how my family and I come from a region in Utah that was downwind of both the Nevada Nuclear Test Site, where nearly 1,000 nuclear detonations have occurred, and a secret chemical and biological weapons testing reserve called Dugway Proving Ground. I believe that the increased emphasis on national security in the decade after September 11 has made it increasingly necessary to remember the often hidden and unacknowledged consequences of protecting against threats to national security. With both my dissertation project and a newborn (my two babies), I rarely I have time to get out into the backcountry anymore. Although after living in Vancouver for a number of years, I do find myself coming to appreciate urban environments more and more.
-
hannahepperson
Brandon, I was born and raised in Utah as well. I moved to vancouver in 2002 from Salt Lake City, as a matter of fact, and still have a brother living and working there as an urban planner. I was just in Capitol Reef two weeks ago, where my brother and I started drafting up the preliminary sketches for a graphic novel set 300 years in the future in that very region … playing with ideas of politics, the resurgence of radical religious history and geographical/spatial reorganization … funny coincidence.
-
brandond
Trips to the southern Utah this time of the year are the best – I’m jealous! Glad to know there’s fellow Utahn in course. The graphic novel sounds interesting as well. I think a lot of interesting stories could be told about that region!
-
-
-
msmith92
Hi Everyone! My name is Martha and I am a second year student in the Faculty of Science, majoring in physiology. Like many people here, many of my interests and hobbies revolve around the outdoors and I never cease to be amazed by the diversity and beauty of nature. I love to ski and travel and I am also on the varsity rowing team. That being said, the environmental issue I think about most is global climate change. This is an issue that encompasses both my academic and personal interests as the environment impacts both human health and the lifestyle that the environment allows us to lead. With so much information out there on global climate change and human impact on the environment, I think that many people become desensitized to hearing about this important issue. I think that studying environmental history is a great way to combat this so that we are all better able to understand the complexities and further engage with this extremely relevant issue.
-
brandond
Hi Martha,
It sounds like you already have some strong views on some of the issues we will be covering. I’m looking forward to hearing more on views. I’m also sure you will have plenty of opportunities to further engage relevant issues like climate in this course.
-
-
sharonshi
Hi there! I am Sharon Shi and I am a first year student in the Faculty of Commerce. I hope to major in Finance in the future and I decided to take this course in order to broaden my understanding about the world and the events that impact it. I believe the most important indications of the future is the past, and I wanted to take this course in order to better understand how some significant events has impacted Earth. My hobbies include jogging, photography, and playing the guitar. I have very little knowledge of environmental history and current issues outside of the small topics touched upon in my Grade 12 World Issues class. This however, was another impetus for me to take the course. Hopefully, by the end of the semester, I will be able to generate specific views and detailed opinions regarding current issues and ones of the past.
-
brandond
Hi Sharon,
It sounds like you have an open mind that’s ready to learn more about environmental history. I also hope that by the end of the semester you’ll have informed opinions about a wide-range of environmental issues.
-
-
bgibson
Hello everyone, I am Brendan, a fourth year Chemistry student. I am particularly interested in analytical and physical chemistry. I am a very active person, and like many of you I enjoy a number of outdoor activities. I enjoy skiing in the winter, while in the summer I take advantage of the local landscape to cycle, hike, camp, rock climb amongst other activities. Certainly these hobbies keep me in the state of the natural environment. My academic interests in chemistry are also relevant since chemical analysis has and will continue to play a significant role with regards to environmental issues.
The environmental issue that I find myself thinking about the most is energy usage and development. While a shift away from fossil fuel is not currently imminent there is a tremendous amount of research being conducted in alternative energy sources. As materials and techniques improve these energy sources become more viable and financially attractive. It is an exciting and dynamic field that promises to grow in the near future.-
brandond
Hi Brendan,
Your major sounds interesting. I’ve recently been researching the environmental impact of chemical weapons, which has required to learn more about chemistry. I’m sure there is plenty more I need to learn! Energy use is something I have had a lot of interest in recently as well. This course has some good readings on issue. The Crosby book is one of my favorites.
-
-
roypat
HI Everyone, my name’s Roy and I’m a 5th year Finance student in the Faculty of Commerce, and I’m finishing up my degree this term. I just finished an 8 month Co-op at a commercial real estate investment firm and I worked closely with the Development group at some points – so I have some interest in how development and design have an impact on the environment. On another hand, staying true to my “Finance” roots, I have money invested into Canadian oil sands companies. As somewhat of a peak-oil theorist, some of my investment decisions have been driven by things I’ve read and/or learned. However, I’m not in this class as a way to make money, but because I want to learn more about current and new methods for producing/extracting energy and what their effects are. Despite being invested in the companies, the processes involved in extracting oil through the oil sands & gas through fracking do concern me, and I do wonder about their long-term viability unless more innovative practices are brought into the mix.
-
brandond
Hi Roy,
Our last unit on urban development should overlap quite a bit with some of your interests. I’m also sure your investment choices will stir up debate when we cover the tar sands later in the term. I’d say for the immediate future it’s probably a wise investment from a purely financial perspective.
-
-
katehaxt
Hello, my name is Kate and I live in a yurt in Cornwall in the UK. I love rock climbing and hiking in the alpine and desprately miss the big mountains of North America. What comes up for me all the time about environmental issues is how one resolves their day to day life with their ideals. For example, on one hand I am very conscious of trying to minimize my negative impact on the earth- we sourced sustainable wood for our yurt, get power from a windmill, eat local and organic, etc etc. Yet, my baby daughter was recently diagnosed with leukemia and I’m now using disposable diapers, buying packaged food and throwing out at least 5 plastic medicine plungers a day. My world has shrunken since my daughters illness. I don’t seem to care about anything but her right now and I know this is very normal and understandable. However, this “shrunken world” syndrome is what is preventing us from effectively addressing global climate change. In Cameron’s UK budget speech he said, effectively, that British economic health is more important right now. than the global environment- not so different than my reaction to my daughter. This inabilty to truly and consistently choose global concerns over our individual concerns is the crux of environmental issues for me.
-
brandond
Hi Kate,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I’m sure everyone in the course hopes your daughter recovers soon. I have a two-month old and couldn’t imagine dealing with such a problem. I’m guessing your experiences dealing with this illness as well as living in a yurt in England will allow you make some interesting contributions to our discussions.
-
-
youngblutt
Hello all. My name is Derek. I am a mature student, in my first year of undergrad studies at UBC. I currently live in Montreal, Quebec. My family and I have recently moved to Montreal while my wife pursues a phD in the Cultural Heritage Management of Angkor Wat, Cambodia. I am the proud father of three children, Miles (6), Rhodes (4) and Windemere (1). My family and I are fanatic travellers and had early last year lived in and travelled around Thailand, while my wife worked for UNESCO. I decided to go back to school because I have a great passion for humanity and I want to participate with skillful means in the forthcoming struggles that we will have to brave as a result of our collective, misinformed notions about progress and development. I have a particular interest in and concern for environmental migration due to climate change, which I believe will cause a substantial global reconsideration towards our understanding of resource and space, and an immediate need for immigration policy reforms around the world.
-
brandond
Hi Derek,
I can understand why this course might be attractive to you. It sounds like you’ve have already developed a pretty strong global environmental consciousness. I’m excited to hear some of the perspectives you’ll bring into our discussions!
-
-
midara
Hello everyone. I am Denise and I am in my fourth year of undergraduate studies at UBC. I am majoring in Asian area studies, which a lot of the courses have direct relations with History and Culture. I currently live in Richmond, BC, but I am an international student from Hong Kong. My background allows me to become very interested in Asian-related subjects, so I am taking some history courses. Although my interest may seem quite unrelated to environmental history, I think this area of study is a good example demonstrating about how science and technology changes human’s culture, history and development in a whole.
I am most concern with environmental pollutions and how globalization brings these environmental problems from local to broader scale, especially on pollution of water and other food resources.-
brandond
Hi Denise,
Some of the most consequential environmental developments are and will be occurring in East Asia. We cover some of these issues in this course.Hopefully you can offer some further insight into these developments.
-
-
jonl
Hi, my name is Jon and I am a fourth year student specializing in Human Resources Management. I really like history, both architectures (man-made) and natural. It would be a shame not to be able to pass to on to future generations all the beautiful things we often take for granted.
I think about consumerism a lot and how the population has grown so much so that we’ve converted our means of production just to feed the demand. There’s just something that doesn’t seem natural about it all.
A professor at UBC (Gateman) once said, and he probably still does say it: “There are too many people”. Is he right? Maybe.
-
brandond
Hi Jon,
Consumerism will be a topic that comes up again and again in this course. We also will have some readings and hopefully some debates on the question overpopulation. I’m looking forward to hearing your thoughts and these and other issues.
-
-
hoskinso
I’m Paul, a fourth year Chemical Engineering student. Although I’ve lived in cities most of my life, I derive profound enjoyment from escaping the urban jungle and spending a few days hiking in the backcountry. It makes me realize how little of the earth’s land surface has been left untouched by human development. I often think about how human civilization will meet its need for energy, land and raw materials in the face of increasing population, while preserving the remaining biodiversity of Earth’s biosphere.
-
brandond
Hi Paul,
The contrast between urban development and wilderness preservation is an interesting one, and something we will explore in more detail in this course. Sounds like you should have plenty of opinions on the issue.
-
-
yitailiu
Hello, my name is Yitai and I am a third year Civil Engineering Student. I’m interested in urban infrastructure planning and I think that environmental factors plays a very important role in how people make decisions to shape the cities. Sustainable development is one of the themes considered in my areas of study, such as in building designs, construction, project management., and transportation. I think most about the environmental issues concerning the relationship between human activities and climate change, and ways to minimize the negative effects caused by human activities.
-
brandond
Hi Yitai,
Our last unit on urbanization will overlap quite a bit with your interest. I’m looking forward to hearing more of you thoughts on sustainable development.
-
-
hannahepperson
Hello to you fine far-flung folk! I’m Hannah, a very nearly graduated human geography student at UBC. My interests have always been puzzlingly wide in range, and the interdisciplinary nature of the human geography department only made them more so. I am both a touring musician (violin and voice) and athlete (ultimate frisbee, yes actually), and so like Kate, find the dissonance of my day-to-day reality and my environmental-ethical orientation difficult to resolve. This conundrum – the endless contradictions of the (‘first world’) individual’s day-to-day reality and the omnipresence of environmental concerns and guilt – is perhaps what I toil over most often. l I hope eventually to work in the field of experiential education, and feel fiercely about the importance of cross-weaving disparate discourses and modes of ‘understanding’ the environments that we depend on, imagine and create. So naturally, the marriage of the terms “environment” and “history” in the course title drew my attention. I will also confess that I have a lot of difficulty interacting with people, content and ideas through the pixelated, computer screen environment … so this course brings with it a whole medley of interesting challenges.
-
gpippus
Hi All, I’m a little late to the party here and struggling a little bit with all of this technology. My name is Geoff Pippus, I am a second year arts student pondering a future in sports psychology. I grew up in Colorado Springs, Colorado, and much like Brandon spent a lot of my free time in the mountains hiking, fishing, camping, and enjoying the great outdoors. I can’t say I have any real background in history or environmental issues other than an elementary understanding of the major issues discussed in the media, but I look forward to gaining more perspective on both topics as the course progresses.
I’m fairly intrigued by Jon’s quotation of Professor Gateman, as I have wondered about overpopulation and it’s effect on the environment. The consumer based ideals of our society seem to ignore (for the most part) effects on the environment and although I think this way of thinking is gradually changing, it is apparent that more drastic measures need to be taken to avoid disastrous environmental consequences. I am curious about what the experts think about this growing conflict of interest.
It sounds like we have quite a diverse group, I’m looking forward to hearing your thoughts and ideas!-
brandond
It looks like the inter-mountain west is well-represented in this course. With online courses, it’s almost inevitable there will be some type of technological struggle at some point. Hopefully it wasn’t too big of a struggle. Glad to hear your enthusiastic about the course!
-
-
tsung18
Hi everyone, my name is Trevor and I am third year Sociology student. I was born and raised in Canada and grew up in a small town about 50 mins away from Vancouver. As a small town boy, I really enjoy the outdoors since mountains and rivers surround me. The environment has always been a big deal to me and to honest, I didn’t realize UBC offered environmental history otherwise I would have taken it sooner. As aforementioned, I enjoy the great outdoors, however, what I want to know more is how each of my actions may affect the environment. My area of study (Sociology) can closely relate to environmental history. Societies attitude towards the environment has also changed overtime and I hope to further develop a better understanding in this area. An increase in consumerism and population growth will begin to impact our environment, and in order to balance out this outcome and find solutions to minimize the negative effects I believe a deeper understanding is necessary.
-
brandond
Hi Trevor,
Maybe you’d have been a history major if you knew about environmental history earlier. I’m sure there’s some need to think about environmental issues in sociology, so hopefully you can bring some insights from this course to bear on your main area of study.
-
-
emilym
Hi everyone! My name is Emily Myers and I’m a 4th year International Relations major and am minoring in Spanish. I am from Albuquerque, New Mexico and grew up spending most weekends camping in the mountains and exploring the abundance of nature around the Southwest of the US. I have always loved nature and spend as much time as possible outdoors. I am an avid backpacker and snowboarder. Environmental history is fascinating to me and I plan to pursue a masters program in International Environmental Policy at some point after I graduate this May. Environmental issues are very important to me and I hope to one day contribute towards protecting our natural environment. I am especially interested in pollution and renewable/clean energy options, but hope to gain a broader understanding of the history of human interactions with our natural environment through this course.
-
brandond
Hi Emily,
Albuquerque is on the top of my list for places I want to live. It has the perfect mix of beautiful landscapes and rich, local cultures. Hopefully this course can give you a stronger background for your graduate program.
-
-
jlin
Hey guys!
This is Joyce here. I am a second year student, geography major and more specifically part of the environment and sustainability program. I came into university knowing exactly what I wanted to study, a passionate ambition influenced by my geography 11 and 12 teacher in high school. My social studies 9 teacher introduced me to An Inconvenient Truth and in the same year became the first sponsor of the school’s Green Team, I was part of the first online sustainability course offered in the Richmond School District, and my chem 12 teacher guided me through my “extended essay” on Environment and Society that I had to write in order to graduate from high school. So, academically, I guess I’ve always been interested in exploring the topics surrounding the environment and have been continually inspired to learn more and do more. Sounds rather cheesy in a sense…but point being that I do love what I study!
Both the natural sciences and social sciences amaze me and I am a big believer of finding the well being of humans and the planet in the balance of nature and society. This means I am mostly concerned about climate change, loss of biodiversity and quite simply how to live sustainably. I think about these subjects with optimism and I TRY not to think selfishly about it (i.e. I care about climate change, but do I only care about climate change because I am human and I believe climate change will affect the human way of living?) I also think about it with respect to better living conditions for other parts of the world where people struggle to survive because they cannot put the natural resources they have into use as most developed countries do (whether that may be they do not have those resources, they do not have the technology to maximize the consumption of those resources in a sustainable way, etc). As a geographer (or a growing geographer, I try!) I appreciate the holistic view of Earth and I don’t like taking things apart or in isolation; I study space in its physical form but also place with context. I believe this course will help me see more of that context! (When I picked geography in Gr.11, it meant I did not have the room to also take history…so, this will be my first history course! and I think it’ll be a good way in bringing the times I’m interested in together)-
brandond
Joyce,
It sounds like you have quite the passion for and background in environmentalism. The environment and sustainability program sounds perfect for you. Hopefully there will be some interesting jobs dealing with environmental sustainability waiting for you when you graduate!
-
-
congo96
Hi my name is Nathan Kanya I am 4th year Psychology Major. I’m from the Congo DRC and lived in France the U.S. and now Canada. Perhaps because of my upbringing I love to to travel, I came to UBC knowing nobody and never having been to Vancouver before. I plan on exploring as much of the world as possible throughout my lifetime. I have always have had an interest in history and have been taught history from different perspectives (African, European, American and Canadian) but this will be my first time taking an history course at the post secondary level. I am taking two other history courses this term that I believe will enhance my learning experience with this particular history class. The environmental issue I think about the most is sustainability as the world moves forward with technology and consumerism. Every year and every decade we learn more about the effects of human development on nature it would be foolish to think everyone is going to just stop cutting down forests and close down companies solely because of environmental issues but I hope to see technological advances that allow people to meet their economic interests all while addressing environmental issues that we believe we understand.
-
nytsuen
Hi everyone! My name is Natalie Suen and I am a second year student hoping for a Honours in History with International Relations. I have never taken any courses on environmentalism; however, that is not the case with history. I’ve taken numerous history courses in my 2 years at UBC and my love for the ‘stories’ have grown more and more. What encouraged me to take this course was from HIST 103 when we did a section on the environment. I focused specifically on India and the Ganges River and wrote a paper on how the religious practices of the people and their daily livelihoods by use of the river had polluted the environment. I also learnt about bodies of water and how their locations really affected the advancement and the industrialization of those places. Furthermore, we learnt about diseases that spread through bodies of water and to this day, it continues to happen in developing countries in Africa. Being a candidate for a honours history with international relations, my heart extends out to those living in unfortunate conditions. It occurred to me how interlinked the environment is to history. Not only do humans have a history but the environment has always been changing and therefore, has a history of its own. Inevitably, environmental changes also affect human history and this is what interests me!
-
phoebe
Hello! My name is Phoebe Yau and I am a fourth year Classical Studies major. Crossing my fingers, I hope to graduate this year. This is my first course in environmentalism, however as an arts student, I’ve taken more then my fair share of history courses. I love to learn about stories of the past and how they connect to the present day. I was born in Hong Kong and moved to Canada when I was young. The contrast in the amount of pollution and population between the two places is astounding. In comparison, Vancouver has much more free space, fresh air, and greenery. Having said that, I admit that I prefer the life and energy of Hong Kong with its endless urban comforts including street food and snacks on any corner, and shops that sell goods much cheaper than Canadian goods. I believe an ideal environment would centre in a moderate middle with people spread out over a greater amount of land, and more urban comforts being avaliable to all.
-
natashap
Hey all! I’m Natasha Palmer and I’m in my third year of Mechanical Engineering. Outside of classes, I’m involved in Club Mech, our departmental student club, as Vice President and I’m also trying to learn how to rollerskate. I’m also a total nerd and love playing boardgames.
One of the things I find fascinating about environmental history and issues is how seemingly minor things or issues specific to one part of the world can affect everything. Though not directly related to environmental history/issues, I also find it interesting how people’s attitudes/previous experiences affect new technology – for example electric cars have been slow to catch on because they don’t sound like “normal” cars.
I’ve always enjoyed history and looking at changes over time and I’m also interested in how technology/humans affects the Earth, so I think I’ll enjoy this course very much.
-
kimzzzy
Introduce yourself to your fellow students and the instructor. What are your interests? How do they relate to environmental history and/or contemporary environmental issues? What environmental issue, if any, do you think about the most, and how do you think about it?
Hi, my name is Kimmy Kwok, I am in my fourth year in Food Marketing Analysis. I have specifically chosen this course because I’d like to educate myself more on the contemporary environmental issues and the root causes of it. I think that in order to improve our current situation we must learn how and why human’s have chosen to do something at the cost of our environment.
These days I am much concerned about the luxurious lifestyle that the middle and upper class society has been accustomed to. It has lead to many wasteful practices and generating massive amounts of pollutants.
I hope that societies are moving towards finding enjoyment through connecting with nature and appreciating it. -
Olga F
Hello everyone! My name is Olga Fedianina and i`m in my fourth year in Geography: Environment and Sustainability Program. I love talking and learning a lot of new information about the environment. I needed an interesting elective and this sounded just great. I`m concerned about many environmental problems. Mainly, climate change, pollution and its effects on people — effects on serious diseases like cancer is increasing (wonder why), also effects on today`s techniques in agriculture and many more. Overall, everything we do every day has some kind of negative impact, it is even sad to think about it! Hope one day people will be choosing environment (since it effects us same way we effect it) than profits and other unnecessary stuff.
-
sampethick
Hi everyone! My name is Sam, I’m a fourth year Anthropology major, living in Vernon. My interests are skiing, hiking, summertime, and travelling. I love new information, and I took a special interest in the environment only last year when I did a study on how the environment is affecting the clean water supply in Haiti.
The issues here were things like how the earthquake had effected water supplies, the amount of rainfall and also this plant called the water hyacinth. This got me really interested in the things that occur within our ecosystems that are completely natural and out of our hands.
So I guess my biggest environmental interest would be the natural occurrences in our environment which we have no control over (the weather and natural disasters such as earthquakes) and what it is that we can do to clean up and provide clean drinking water after these things happen. History has given us a lot to work with and come up with many solutions to help with these problems, but obviously natural disasters aren’t going to stop happening and people still don’t have drinking water so there’s a long way to go on that front.
Also I read Jon’s post and realized I think about consumerism a lot too, it’s sad but I think that there is in fact too many people, and no solution in sight.-
brenden
Hi everybody! My name is Brenden and I am a fourth year student in the faculty of arts with a major in Political Science and a minor in Economics. I am originally from Toronto, ON. My interests are hockey, golf, snowboarding and traveling. I have taken Forestry 101 and a few EOSC courses and I found all of them to be extremely interesting and informative which is what led me to this course. I am passionate about the environment and am eager to learn more. The environmental concern I am interested in is fossil fuels. I find it very interesting to see how we as a civilization rely so heavily on a resource which we will likely see disappear in our lifetimes. A book / movie I would recommend everyone to read / see is “Collapse” by Michael Rupert. It’s a documentary which discusses the concept of ‘peak oil’ and is extremely interesting. Another issue I am interested in is sustainable development. I feel like in the next few years we are going to see substantial gains made in the marketplace by companies producing environmentally friendly products.
-
-
eddietastic
Hello my name is Edward and i am a second year student. I grew up in North Vancouver, for those of you who dont know north Van very well i grew up on the side of Grouse mountain as a result the environment and nature had a huge impact on my childhood. Due to house constructions and more and more of nature being taken up we always had animals around my house for example bears who would go into our garbage and deer who would live in my backyard. For an entire year we had a family of deer who lived in our backyard . I am interested in the issues of taking up space for residential and commercial needs as well as environmental disasters such as oil spills and things like that . I love tennis, hiking, and watching movies .
-
erikaw
Hello Everyone. My name is Erika and this is actually my last class before graduation! Exciting. I grew up on the Sunshine Coast (just a ferry ride north from Vancouver) and I suppose that’s where my appreciation for life and nature began. In University I’ve studied Food, Nutrition and Health in the Faculty of Land and Food. I especially liked being in the Faculty of Land and Food because they take a very ground roots approach to food and the environment and I’ve learned a lot about agriculture and food systems in their Agricultural Sciences classes. Continuing on in my degree I focussed on International Health and Development and I was always particularly interested in how our food choices are linked to the environment. In an ISL placement in Uganda this summer I was able to make a lot of the “global connections” I had learned about in school. Now I am studying at the Institute of Holistic Nutrition and working at Organic Lives – both places are committed to global change through eating the cleanest food available on the planet! So I guess you could say my main interest in this course is food/agriculture and to learn more about how our personal eating choices have huge influences on the environment.
-
alyumam
Hello. My name is Aldo and I am a 4th year student in the faculty of arts majoring in Social anthropology. I started studying anthropology in Mexico city, place where I am originally from, however I have lived in other places in Mexico, as also as in the U.S.A. and now in Canada. Currently I study Vancouver, place I cherish because its nature and healthy lifestyle.
The reason I have chosen this course, aside being interested on the description this course had, is because of the multidisciplinary characteristics I discovered first time I heard about this discipline.
I find and I relate myself to environmental history from the perspective of anthropology offers (specially social anthropology) . In my opinion I believe this is a great opportunity to know how new and contemporary disciplines are being conformed with the help of technology, as also with the increased scenarios and needs our planet and its population faces nowadays. -
haduro
Hi, my name is Ellen Banh. My interests are music and women studies. I am unsure how they relate to environmental history. The environmental issues that most intrigues me are over-consumerism and global warming. I believe over consumerism demanded by developed countries are taxing the living conditions and environments of the developing countries that are making the products for us.
-
Keaton Briscoe
This is a little late,but….
My name is Keaton Briscoe, this is my third year at UBC and I am an ARTS student. I play on the Varsity Baseball team. Once I earn my major at UBC, I want to go into Environmental design or architecture. I have always been interested in this topic and I am finally going to strive towards making a profession out out of. I think the issue that I think about most has to be global warming. Since I saw the Al Gore fil “An Inconvenient Truth” in grade 9, I have always been interested in it.
-
-
Brandon Davis
Record your impressions of Earthrise for the 106 Wall. What does this view of Earth make you think about the planet?
-
paige
It took me a minute to realize I was actually looking at the earth in the video. From this view it seems so foreign, not even like pictures we have all seen such as the one shown below the video. It’s hard for me to consider that we all live on that thing they are looking at, and certainly makes me take a step back and consider things from a broader perspective. Everyone, no mater what region or country, has to share the same global space.
-
brandond
Thanks for making the first posting on here Paige! I was starting to get worried:)
-
-
sophiale
Referring to the video, I completely agree with you, Paige in that the earth looks completely abstract and different from what we’re all so used to seeing. I think it’s also incredible to think that these were the first images seen by human eyes of our planet. Referring to the picture below the video, my first thought upon seeing the picture was that earth looks incredibly fragile and small. This view of the earth really makes you reevaluate what we’re doing to our planet with all of the pollution and greenhouse gas emissions that we are constantly exposing to our planet and how harmful it is to not only us, but to earth because it is so fragile.
-
jenniefrench
I agree with you both – the video image was interesting. It was a humbling experience. We have so much media now that creates these huge impressive images, sometimes it is important to step back and see how it was viewed for the first time. It must have been so different. The video made me realize how much has changed in the last 40 or so years. Our perspective of the Earth must be so different than the 3 astronauts. We now view the earth through a fairly secular lens, where they felt like they were witnessing creation. While they must have been so excited, I feel like many of us are more concerned, as we get sentimental about the Earth and our impact on it. This video was a great reminder for me of how much our perspective of the Earth must have changed over time.
-
danniz124
This video shown a very limited point of view on the Earth, and I agree that this view was abstract and unclear. It looks completely different from the picture shown below. If it is not shown with the audio background about the astronauts’ speech, I actually could not tell it is the Earth, where we are living on. From some of the ancient myths, the Earth was thought to be square shape with a circular shape heaven. Although those thoughts had been disapproved by the pictures took from the Space, Apollo’s mission achieved that human beings could look at our entire planet by our own eyes from the point of view on the Moon. It is really incredible impression of the Earth. Furthermore, the Earth looks tiny compare to background of the Space. Although human beings was sometimes thought to be very powerful in terms of controlling our own life, other species’ life, and even the nature, we are all sharing this tiny planet. Should we think more about protection of the Earth for both human beings and other species of life? What factors actually influence our life on the Earth, and alter the global environment?
-
msmith92
I agree with all of you that I would not have even recognized this image of the Earth had it not been for the commentary. I also agree that it is interesting to note how our view of the Earth has changed over time. For these astronauts, seeing the Earth as a whole for the first time must have been an extremely powerful experience. Being able to see the Earth from the outside makes one recognize, as many of you have said, that we all share this relatively small space. Earth is a culmination of all of the natural factors that make life possible, an extremely rare coincidence, and thus, it is something that we need to protect. This becomes especially powerful, especially when contrasted with the hostility and the vastness of space that surrounds our planet. Although we know that the Earth has limited resources and that is all we get, we seem to often be in denial of this. Perhaps keeping in mind this view of the Earth from space would reignite the realization how important it is to take care of this tiny and fragile planet that we all share.
-
sharonshi
Taking in all that has been said, I agree with the limited point of view and unrecognizable image of Earth from the video. However, something that I believe really stood out is the contrast between the two images when viewed consecutively. One, dull and plain, and the other full of vibrant colors. Another significant feeling I received from viewing Earthrise was the vast amount of space that encompassed us. Compared with the vastness of it’s surroundings, Earth seemed almost insignificant. However, it’s bright colors and portrayal of life made it stand out despite it’s size. Viewing these images really made me appreciate being on Earth, and the time period I am in to which holds information like this that helps me appreciate it.
-
bgibson
I had not seen the video before, it certainly offered an interesting and new perspective. The Earthrise image reminds me of another image, the “Pale Blue Dot” image taken by the Voyager 1 spacecraft as it exited the solar system. Both images show the Earth against the vast expanse of space, a composition that really puts our planet in perspective. It’s amazing to think that the entirety of recorded history, every great accomplishment and failure, has occurred on what can appear to be such a small and isolated place. I think of how people have been fighting and warring over tiny sections of this planet for ages, yet from the appropriate distance these events seem petty.
-
roypat
I didn’t think much of the video. Had I not read in an earlier comment that it was the earth in the small, low-res video, I wouldn’t have realized it. Because of the vantage point of the photo being from the moon, I would have assumed (due to the lack of colour) that it was the moon being orbited and filmed. The colour photo has more of an impact on me – as someone who has debated (for) the existence of life on other planets, seeing our own planet as such a small area compared to the vast expanses of the solar system, galaxy, and universe really makes me think (as bgibson) how petty our squabbles and events on the planet are, in the grand scheme of things.
-
tsung18
After watching the video and looking at the picture, I realized how small and insignificant we really are. Being a part of this vast universe, we truly are just a grain of sand on the beach. The video was not really clear and I didn’t really see the Earth. However, after looking at the photo, a lot came into my mind. At first, it seemed like an ordinary photo, however, I believe there is a deeper meaning behind it. Human beings face challenges everyday, however, we get so concerned with our own challenge that we seem to forget that the Earth itself also face its challenges. We need to remember that together, we share the planet and we are all citizens of the Earth, therefore, it is important to work together to rise out of the darkness or challenges that the Earth face. From afar, Earth looks fragile and the blue and white gives off a feeling of calm and peace. In comparison to the moon’s surface which is rough and grey, it seems to foreshadow what will become of the Earth if we were to continue damaging nature and ruining this blue and white sphere. Earth to us is very big, however, the photo offers an insight of how small we really are in-comparison to its surrounding therefore, I believe the photo is reminding us that everything is limited (resources etc.) and because we share such a small space, we all need to do our part to care for our surroundings.
-
youngblutt
It must have been an extraordinary experience for the crew of Apollo 18 to cast the first human gaze upon our planet. The ensuing excitement of the people receiving the images and message, back on Earth, probably made them feel like they were aboard the shuttle themselves, verifying for themselves, our species divine place in the universe upon the most glorious of planets. Finally, people had an abstraction of their home within the heavenly context of their lessons and dreams.
For you and I, the image is merely glorious and peaceful in abstract and necessarily, in potential. We know a bit more than our predecessors about the goings-on of the inhabitants of that peaceful planet. We know a bit more about the impacts of a “divine right” or anthropogenic mentality.
The Earthrise image holistically shows what we stand to lose should we continue to degrade our environment and our home.-
hannahepperson
I’m joining the conversation a bit late, I’m afraid; and so a lot has already been said. Not wanting to post something redundant, it occurred to me while watching this footage that, within the last month, facebook was flooded with dialogue about the discovery of a new planet roughly the size of earth, orbiting a star like our own sun. While some commented on how awe-some the discovery was, most responses were morosely sarcastic, riddled with irony and bitterness: ie “oh phew we’re saved” or “no wonder harper poo-poos the kyoto protocol. we’ve got a backup plan(et)!” It’s compelling, I think, that the discovery of a new earth-size planet orbiting a distant star triggered a new wave of commentary about our OWN planet. I may be taking the conversation on an unwanted tangent, but I’d be curious to hear people’s thoughts on this anyhow…
-
hannahepperson
Ooops – i apologize for posting this as a “reply,” which was not my intention … i’m clearly in the infancy stages of navigating through this technologic infrastructure…
-
-
-
midara
Like many others have said in their replies, I did not realize that the video is filming the Earth at my first glance. I guess the main reason is because that I am already very used to the photos or portraits of the blue planet we are living in and without thinking much about how and why do I even have a chance to take a look of these. Their “high-definition” photos and videos may seem very rough by this time, but for sure their contribution (that seems to be very abstract and small now) definitely brought incredible information to scientists and human in their studies and understanding of the place we are living in. I think the Earthrise video and image greatly reminds me of how these contributions accumulate to our study of environmental history of Earth.
-
jonl
That’s not really a perspective we get to see our planet. One reason why the astronauts probably read Genesis: a view that previously only God held(?) It reminded me that out of the trillions of planets out there, Earth has so far been the only one that sustains life. We definitely need to protect it.
-
hoskinso
The view of Earth from space really brings home the fact that Earth’s biosphere and everything living in it, including human civilization, is unique in the universe (as far as we know). Unfortunately biodiversity is not given a high monetary value in the global economic system. This results in species and habitats falling under the wheels as we push towards more population, more production and more resource use. It will take a major shift in sentiment and cooperation across national boundaries to preserve the treasure of our unique biosphere.
-
yitailiu
This perspective of viewing the earth gives a different impression of the planet. Standing on earth, we can only see limited parts of the earth at a glance, but to step away from the earth and look at the earth from far in the space allows for a rounded view of the earth, to see it as a complete object. The realization comes to people now do not think of the earth as merely a vast habitat, but also thinking that the earth is fragile and small as compared to the universe.
-
gpippus
As a few others have said, I found it difficult to decipher what exactly I was looking at due to the quality (or lack thereof) of the video. To me, it was more profound to look at the picture below the video while listening to the audio recording of the excerpt from Genesis. It is astounding how little we actually know of what could exist in the universe, and a little alarming to think that despite the massive expanses of the universe, the existence of our entire species depends on the little blue and green ball in the picture. It is amazing to compare the unlimited possibilities of both human imagination and the universe to the dependence on what, relatively speaking, is an inconsequential orb. What appears so unimportant on a universal scale IS our entire existence.
-
randolph
I have to admit the fact that I didn’t recognize the “white sphere” the astronaut is filming is actually the Earth at first. Our Planet Earth is very fragile. The Gulf Oil Spill disaster has affected our environment and ecosystems, in particular, the very oceans that all of our Marine Life live and thrive in (the Great Dolphins, Whales, Sharks, Stingrays, Fish and other creatures that emerge from the ocean). It has changed the Gulf of Mexico coast forever. Our oceans that were once clear and unpolluted before the intervention of man have oil dispersed in them for miles and miles along the coast. The very animals that we share this planet with have to suffer from the oil that covered them. How can we sit back and watch this happen. As in the book “A Society Gone Forever,” by Kimberly Day that reads: “We must wake up, we must wake up, before our fragile Planet is gone forever.”
-
emilym
This video broadcast is pretty spectacular. It is amazing to think that we all inhabit that sphere they are looking at. It really makes you think about the broader picture and makes life seem pretty incredible. Photos from space are fairly common now, but I would suppose that this video would have been even more astounding when it was first broadcasted. It really would have been astounding to see the Earth from that perspective and I cannot even begin to imagine what the crew was thinking seeing that for the first time. It is amazing to see the planet we live on from a different perspective than the one we get everyday while on the surface. Seeing this video reminds me how lucky we are to inhabit such a magnificent planet and that we really need to work to protect it
-
jlin
Earthrise makes me feel like I am so small and that the planet is beyond my comprehension. It also makes me feel arrogant and selfish as the form of the planet is gradually revealed, because I know, had I watch the broadcast on Christmas Day in 1968, I would have thought that this was a great accomplishment- nature is powerful, but humans are even greater…nothing can escape from the curiosity as well as the intelligence that aids to resolve our curiosity. In fact, I think this is the general mentality humans have about the planet, about the environment and nature. Somehow we are above it and nature doesn’t just exist, it can only be “created” through us. Without our existence and needs, nature is irrelevant. The astronauts’ voices reciting Genesis adds to this feeling.
But, how are we able to say that when knowing perfectly that even if humans were to disappear…our planet would still be here?
Earthrise has reminded me not to ever think we know everything and when we think we know something, there are still greater pieces yet to be seen surrounding that single puzzle piece we see. -
congo96
The video looks more like the current images of the moon than the earth. The image of the earth vibrant and blue is the one I am accustomed to. The blue colour of the earth being a beacon of life in a galaxy where all the other planet look red or brown and have no life. I wish there had been a video of the second image of the earth rising out of the shadows
-
nytsuen
I’ve seen photos of Earth since I was grade 2. I’ve drawn pictures of Earth with my green and blue pencil crayons and i’ve made foam models of Earth for science class many times. I am so familiar with the looks of Earth but when i watched Earthrise …it seems so foreign. I will never see Earth for what it really is. I will never see it in its own natural space surrounded by darkness. Sometimes when I walk around campus, or in Richmond, I wonder ‘where we are’ in the universe. This idea of ‘Earth’ being one planet of the galaxy is so foreign and so unreal.
The beauty of Earth in the photo especially, is just breath-taking! When you look around, you’re surrounded by buildings, cars, and concrete roads. Everything about us has been so industrialized that we forget about the beauty of nature that also surrounds us and that provides us with the ground we walk on, the waters we swim in and the great mountains we snowboard on. The planet is so big and it offers so many things but somehow, the idea of ‘earth’ just slips my mind. -
phoebe
I agree with everyone’s opinion that the video shown looks almost nothing like the clear, glossy images of Earth that we expect to see in scientific journals or in the National Geographic. It actually appears more realistic, and life-like, instead of the overly computer-generated flawless pictures that we are used to seeing.
-
natashap
Images of Earth from space always remind me of how small our scales are compared to the whole universe. From space, the Earth is just a little blue and green ball, but from our perspective on Earth, the actual size of the planet we live on can be hard to comprehend.
And in my opinion at least, images of the Earth from space are some of the most beautiful images that exist. It’s rather awe-inspiring seeing it just floating in space – a good reminder about how small we are and how much we don’t actually know.
-
eddietastic
It is pretty interesting to look at pictures of Earth from another perspective because i hardly ever see pictures of Earth where it is smaller then the planets or stars that we are looking at. It is interesting to think that Earth supports so many lives and is our world yet when compared to so many other worlds it is small and insignificant. It just goes to show how looking through perspectives changes the way we look at things
-
erikaw
This view and these words about our earth make it seem so young and so innocent. It’s important to remember the magnificence and wonder of the planet that we live on as the men on Apollo 8 did so many years ago. Our world is beautiful and this has made me appreciate it here and now. A good opening to the course – thanks!
-
alyumam
Like others, I had difficulties to put into my mind the full image of Earth . However, while looking this video after couple times and even fast forwarding it, the Earths’ round shape can be appreciated and consequently I was able to observe part of its magnificence.
For me, is interesting how the astronauts resorted to a fragment of the Genesis, and therefore the need for a belief. From my perspective, the bigger picture in here is the idea of feeling something unknown and consequently new. -
brenden
I agree with my classmates that it is difficult to tell that you’re looking at the earth in this video. It really does make you realize how big the earth is and how small we are. One can only imagine how these astronauts felt during this mission.
-
haduro
Like others, after viewing this video, I am at a greater appreciation for the beautiful planet we live in. I do not wish to comment on the belief aspect given by the astronauts; I am content enough to know and feel that our planet is special and we need to treat it appropriately with care and attention.
-
eddietastic, 
brenden, 
natashap, and 23 others are discussing. 
haduro, 
sampethick, 
jonl 1:18 pm on January 13, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
The first thought that comes to mind is the “white man’s burden”. I believe many of the colonizations that happened around that time had the idea that non-europeans are lost and need help. Ideas or point of views such as these really encourage this superiority mind set. At that time these ideas were coming out, there probably weren’t many ways to disprove them and stories and images exist that can be perceive to support the ideas.
emilym 4:05 pm on January 13, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Ideas such as those proposed by Montesquieu definitely had an influence on how Europeans perceived non-Europeans. Since most Europeans of the time had never travelled outside of Europe, the only knowledge they had of non-Europeans was based off of ideas like Montesquieu’s. These beliefs paved the way for the concept of European racial superiority and validated Imperialism and slavery. Environmental determinism definitely affected how Europeans perceived and acted towards non-Europeans for centuries to come.
sampethick 6:17 pm on January 18, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
This comment reminded me of something I read in another class about early Europeans discovering a new group of people somewhere and not even being about to classify them as human beings because of just how different they were. It’s amazing how superior the Europeans truly believed that they were and how these ideas were so firmly planted that they couldn’t fathom human beings being able to live some other way.
jaydee 6:55 pm on January 15, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
What I find interesting is the use of an empirical set of parameters, such as temperature and climate, to justify a clearly biased viewpoint. Considering that ideas such as the scientific method or “truth from empirical results” are developing around this time, I think that these stereotypes based on geographical properties reflect a naive understanding of science. When we consider our own time, there is a lot of importance placed on dismissing stereotypes based on logic and reason. Yet, during the time of these ideas, reason and logic are being used to enforce them.
sharonshi 6:57 pm on January 15, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Such ideas that Montesquieu proposed has implications such as the bringing up of debates and challenges to his claim. Such stereotypes from a man who is considered an “Enlightment Thinker” may be perceived as true and cause Europeans to view non-Europeans as superior to those that live elsewhere. What I find interesting is how this resembles how the Germans perceived the Jewish in the past. Much like the Germans, the Europeans may view non-Europeans as “inferior”, and the consequences left there may be be extremely pernicious.
bgibson 10:48 pm on January 15, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
The ideas and stereotypes put forward by Montesquieu play a role in establishing non-European peoples as second class citizens, or somehow inferior humans. I think the implications of such thinking can be seen through the practices of colonialism, slavery and oppression that followed Europeans to “new” lands. Environmental determinism provided a rationale that allowed Europeans to justify their prejudices towards other cultures.
paige 12:20 am on January 16, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Stereotypes like these close minds before even arriving on the same land as the other people. If you think that the physical world shapes every man that lives in it you do not need to take the time to get to know any one individual, you already know what they are all like by looking at a map. These ideas built a divide between early europeans and non-europeans.
jenniefrench 1:22 pm on January 16, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I agree with joni – the idea of the White Man’s Burden did come to mind. If other peoples are less “advanced” or “civilized” because of their climate, then it falls upon the “civilized” to “save” these others. That is a very dangerous and misguided idea. As we now are more familiar with, societies around the world were very advanced, even if they did not adhere to European expectations of “civil.”
I also think this kind of stereotyping is dangerous because it creates presuppositions before any real contact is made. Expectations are set in stone and then a lot of intolerance is created. This would have influenced how non-Europeans were treated by any Europeans. They would have been approached already judged and segregated as different and lesser. This would have made interaction and cooperation nearly impossible – especially as with these stereotypes in place the European intent was not to cooperate, but to coerce and conquer.
roypat 3:51 pm on January 16, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Although I’m echoing the comments of others in that many of these past stereotypes are misguided and have an impact on relationships between those of different cultures, I will also mention that there is evidence of climate and weather having an impact on someone’s demeanor, at least for a given day. i.e. People are generally more upbeat or cheerful on a nice, sunny day vs a wet, rainy day.
msmith92 4:06 pm on January 16, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I agree with the same general idea that many have mentioned that Montesquieu’s ideas on environmental determinism lead to a feeling of superiority among Europeans. Because there was likely little knowledge on cultures outside of Europe, these ideas would have lead to the assumption that all other peoples were inferior, especially because these ideas were coming form a place of authority within their society. These eurocentric ideas worked out conveniently for Montesquieu because it gave him justification for why the French were the most agreeable people
Keaton Briscoe 4:41 pm on January 16, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I agree with the other posts and Montesquieu’s view that people have different attitudes in different climatic environments. For myself, I sometimes find myself more upbeat and happy in general when the weather is nice, and more unmotivated and tired when it is raining and miserable outside. I have also read in a psychology book that people do suffer from Seasonal Depression.
katehaxt 8:57 am on January 18, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
The Europeans exploreres who first encountered Canada’s First Nations people were generally very impressed by how they navigated the Canadian environment. Most exploreres found the Canadian environment harsh and inhospitable. For a long time the First Nations had the upper hand in terms of power dynamics because, with their canoes, snowshoes and fur coats, they prospered in an environment the Europeans floundered in. So in the beginning, and by those closest to them, the First Nations close relationship to their environment was something that was seen as powerful and admirable. Later as the power dynamic shifted the First Nations relationship to their environment contributed to the “noble savage” stereotype. They were seen as wlld, like the environment, innocent, like animals but inherently inferior.
congo96 6:04 pm on January 18, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
These types of stereotypes reflect the attitude of the european colonizers and slave traders. These ideas helped formulate a discourse which made it easy to claim superiority and view people who did not share their values as inferior thus leading to racism as different cultures came into contact.
sampethick 6:09 pm on January 18, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
People in this time hadn’t yet been introduced to ideas that suggested that people from different places and cultures can be much different but not necessarily inferior. I think that this kind of ethnocentrism can also be applied to environmental differences being discovered back when Europeans were first introduced to ideas about environmental determinism. This lack of knowledge and understanding came hand in hand with stereotypes and therefore actions towards non-Europeans. With regards to environmental determinism, what first comes to mind is what early Europeans thought about the clothes of some of the people they discovered living in much warmer places. I think that one of the factors in deciding that these people were so much less civilized had something to do with the simpleness of a tiny loin cloth and no shoes and how “barbaric” it was to cover so little, when maybe they were wearing so little because if intense heat and that’s all they felt was necessary, and covering up their bodies was not important in their culture. Maybe this lead to a stereotype of promiscuity or un-holiness , I don’t really know that… just a thought!
jlin 9:39 pm on January 18, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Implications of racial stereotypes that developed out of early environmental determinism include the superiority of the peoples who created such discourse and therefore the backwards, uncivilized and barbarianism that must be of all others of another place. Because the ideas were formulated on the basis of the environment, it meant it was natural and therefore, could not be altered. They were governed by solid laws. These ideas obviously had an impact on the action taken to non-Europeans. The power of discourse justified the subordination of non-Europeans through the systems of slavery and colonialism. If you are from outside Europe, you are inferior but that’s okay because the Europeans can “help” you if you become their subjects. This ethnocentric belief can be traced to attitudes even in the contemporary world…
phoebe 1:20 am on January 19, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I agree also with the idea that Montesquieu’s stereotype is highly similar to the “white man’s burden” excuse of colonalism. I also find his comments to be based upon the same reasoning used by Hitler of the Jews. By placing his theory under the supposed unbiased and rational treatment of science, Montesquieu’s theory of environmental determinism gains a more professional sense of fact and plausibility. Reading his statement centuries later, instead of the the unbiased scientifc face that Montesquieu is attempting to portray, his statement appears instead silly and irrational.
youngblutt 8:22 am on January 19, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I think it is important to recognize that the attributions of Environmental Determinism to the subordination that occurred with European colonialism should not take away from the value of such an idea in the history of perceiving the world. Also, it should not be considered the only justification for ethnocentrism and colonialism in Europe. In fact, the notion is traced back as far as the 5th century “historian”, Herodotus and the 14th century historian, Ibn Khaldun. That European politicians reached deep into their bag of excuses to justify their exploitations shouldn’t condemn perspectives like environmental determinism as irrational in nature.
tsung18 10:34 am on January 19, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
This stereotype is significant in that it seems like it has become an excuse and justification for Europeans to dominate non-Europeans. As in the past, we have learned that Eurocentric norms are above all and this perspective of environmental determinism further perpetuates that attitude of Eurocentric domination. Additionally, this early idea of Montesquieu creates the core (usually northern countries) and the periphery (southern countries) states. By having such stereotype, non-Europeans will all be labeled “hot headed and short on logic” therefore need the need the people in the temperate climate to rule and provide them with logic they lack. As aforementioned, the notion of environmental determinism is simply an excuse to further promote Eurocentric norms and attitudes into areas where the norms are considered unacceptable.
lcoulthard 10:08 pm on January 19, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
This use of environmental determinism by Montesquieu reflects the development of the racial worldview that was going on as a precursor to the Industrial Revolution. This type of ideology helped Europeans justify things like the slave trade and colonialism. Early environmental determinism would classify groups of people according to things like temperature or rainfall, which cannot truly brand an entire population.
I believe that people do indeed become shaped by their environments, but things like temperature have a minimal effect. I think that a better example of how an environment shapes a person is in their culture – ex) their education, home upbringing, human interactions. If 18th and 19th century Europeans viewed environmental determinism in such a way, however, it could not have been used, at least in the same way, to justify racist actions. This form of environmental determinism may have been used to make poor environmental decisions also – ex) “This savanna is hot with not much rainfall, the trees seem to already have poor form as well so it won’t matter if we….”
midara 10:26 pm on January 19, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I think the ideas proposed by Montesqiue imply the stereotypical image of non-Europeans being barbarian-like, which is much represented as non-logical and non-scientifically educated. The implication shows Europeans feeling superior over population living in warm climates, and somewhat disagreeing with population living in cold zones. As Montesqiue being perceived as Enlightenment thinker and philosopher, I think his ideas are representing the overall attitude of Europeans placing non-Europeans into the inferior position of human being while concluding such ideas as the result of natural selection (in this case, climate and environment). I think these early ides about environmental determinism have influenced much invasions and colonialization actions towards non-Europeans.
nytsuen 12:29 pm on January 20, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Europeans have always thought they were superior because they were ‘civilized’ and because of their advancements in the world. They always thought that they were in the center of the world which reminds me of mappa mundi maps. These were medieval European maps of the world and they seemed to believe that only Europe matters. Everything else that fell outside of Europe was not included; therefore, you don’t see North America, Africa or Asia in these maps. This is solid evidence to their ignorance of non-Europeans. Automatically, they think they are unimportant and uncivilized and Europeans thought that the only way to ‘help’ them was to assimilate them into their own culture and take over their land. This meant colonialism and even slavery.
yitailiu 12:50 am on January 21, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Stereotypes like these divide the world into separate parts and Montesquieu particularly draws a line between the Europeans and non-Europeans. This early view of environmental determinism created a narrow and biased view of the world, which that the human characteristics were only defined by the climate and geographic differences. Montesquieu’s ideas of environmental determinism placed “superiority” on the Europeans and had much influence on the European expansion of territory into other continents through colonization.
shalinb 9:01 pm on January 21, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
In regards to Montesquieu’s quote on stereotypes based on one’s climate re-enforces the views that european had towards non-europeans, especially in terms of colonization. In history, the has been a common theme of europeans being more superior to non-europeans. With regards to climate, when the settlers came to north america, they had to endure harsh winters which the natives of the land had already coped to. However, settlers saw the natives as inferior, and did not ask for their help in surviving the colder climate that they were not used to. Instead, they were more prone to diseases and hunger. Montesquieu’s quote states that people who live in colder weather have little sense, whereas people in warmer climates have a great degree of sense. This stereotypes supports the european settlers views towards the natives when settlers first came to North America.
erikaw 12:28 am on January 25, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I wonder if bold stereotype comments like this shaped the development patterns of todays world? Because today, for the most part, tropical climates are vastly underdeveloped and poor in comparison to temperate climates. Again moving into the colder climates of today there is little population and less development than the rest of the world. Do these patterns relate to some early ideas about the environment? That I’m not sure, but because this statement was said at a time where people rarely travelled I’m sure it brought opinion and probably egocentrism into many of Europeans (or other temperate populations) at the time.
natashap 8:50 pm on January 25, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
The views that temperate climates were conducive to clear thinking and “good governance” no doubt furthered Europeans views that they had the right to control and rule over others. Environmental determinism could have also arisen as a way for Europeans to justify colonizing other regions – they “needed” the “help”.
brenden 3:51 pm on January 26, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
These type of stereotypes helped progress eurocentrism and created a very biased view of non-europeans. These stereotypes helped justify colonization, slavery and racism during this period of history. As others have mentioned, many europeans had not traveled outside of europe during this time and ideas like Montesquieu’s prevailed, shaping many citizens attitudes towards non-europeans.
eddietastic 7:45 pm on January 30, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
The belief by many Europeans was one of The West VS The Rest. As a result, these stereotypes have created problems because of the lack of respect which some may have to those who are not european. This may lead to anything from colonization to war , however if atrocities do happen they they are thought of as justified and not wrong