Climate and Paul Ryan

In selecting Rep. Ryan as his running mate, Gov. Romney is said to have transformed the presidential campaign into an ideological debate. This might refer to Ryan's ideas about the budget deficit, Medicare and Social Security, tax codes, gay rights, or women's concerns, but today I am not interested in these. What I want to know is: what are Mr. Ryan's ideas about climate change?

Ryan's Web page on environment asserts that he wants to "develop legislation that is based on sound science and will continue our efforts to maintain and strengthen our environment." He goes on to list budget increases for the National Park Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the Bureau of Reclamation, the Fish and Wildlife Agency, and conservation orientated agencies within the USDA, Department of Commerce, Corps of Engineers, and EPA. This all sounds great.

The first clue that my interpretation may be different from his is the sentence, "Bigger government has not equated to better government, and it has only led to duplication, waste, and mismanagement." This is code-speak for the need to cut funding for these programs.

The second clue is his endorsement of the American Energy Initiative, which is designed to remove government barriers to energy production and stop policies that drive up gas prices. This means he wants to "remove government roadblocks and bureaucratic red tape that hinder and delay American energy production", code-speak for let the fossil fuel industry do whatever they want without regulation or controls.

The fourth clue is that half of the page is devoted to the spread of Asian Carp of the Mississippi River. I do not mean to belittle the importance of this issue, but to make this the centerpiece of his environmental policy seems out of balance, shall we say?

The fifth clue is that there is no mention of "climate change" or "global warming", none whatsoever. Nor is there any mention of "climate" or "warming" on his energy page. The energy page talks about "reforming outdated fuel regulations". He pays lip service to "investing in alternative energy sources", but seeks to remove any "discriminatory distortions" for such projects while saying nothing about tax breaks for the highly profitable fossil fuel industry.

Though Ryan says nothing on his website about global warming, he wrote an editorial during the 2009 international climate talks in which he laughs that "fighting global warming has been a tough sell in our communities, where much of the state is buried under snow," and accused climatologists of a "perversion of the scientific method, where data were manipulated to support a predetermined conclusion," in order to "intentionally mislead the public on the issue of climate change." His record in Congress has been to oppose every measure to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In 2010 he wrote that "there is growing disagreement among scientists about climate change and its causes", which was not true then, nor now. Overall his environmental voting record for 2011 was only 3%. Not all of these votes were related to climate change, of course, but I think the message is clear.

Now, in all fairness, Mr. Ryan is not the head of the ticket, which would be Gov. Romney. What does Mr. Romney think about climate change? That can be difficult to pin down. In 2004, as governor of Massachusetts, his administration unveiled a detailed plan to curtail the state’s carbon pollution. In 2011, he told voters in New Hampshire:

"I don't speak for the scientific community, of course, but I believe the world's getting warmer. I can't prove that, but I believe based on what I read that the world is getting warmer. And number two, I believe that humans contribute to that. I don't know how much our contribution is to that, because I know that there have been periods of greater heat and warmth in the past but I believe we contribute to that. And so I think it's important for us to reduce our emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases that may well be significant contributors to the climate change and the global warming that you're seeing."

Yes, he does hedge a little, but mostly he seems quite clear. Climate change due to human activity is real. Since then, however, he has backed off considerably without being specific or definitive. Frankly, I don't actually know what Mr. Romney's views on climate change are.

By contrast, President Obama has established the Climate Change Adaptation Task Force. Wow! He acknowledges the findings of science. I'd say this is an ideological debate!

Be the Change

This week I have been reading Cultivating Peace by James O'Dea. I highly recommend it. One of its central themes is that freeing the societies we live in is closely interconnected with freeing our own inner lives. Becoming a peacemaker requires as much inner work as skillful work in the world around us.

Last week I also listened to Scilla Elworthy's TED talk, "Fighting with non-violence". She too emphasizes that the change that has to take place has to take place here inside me first. It is my response, my attitude to oppression that I've got control over, that I can do something about. And to do that what I need to develop is self-knowledge.

Third, I explored the Website of Andrew Beath, founder of EarthWays, who states that personal transformation is the first step to global change. Quoting a Kate Wolf song, "We are crying for a vision that all living things can share", he goes on to say that from this inward crying comes personal awareness that gives direction to our desire to take action.

Mahatma Gandhi's admonition to "Be the change you want to see in the world" makes a lot of sense, but it also used to confuse me. I want to see the world become peaceful and I am a peaceful person. So why isn't it working? I'm slowly realizing, however, how quick I am to tell people why they are wrong before I seek to truly understand them. I now see that my ire is often directed toward people, not what I perceive as their flawed thinking. When I give up the need to be right, I find that a true conversation can take place. This seems true on many levels.

Quoting O'Dea, "When we truly engage with each other, a mystery unfolds: we enter a safe ground of being where we can share our differences and come to know each other. So often we live with a fiction of who the other is. When we come to know them in a peacebuilding context, it is not that we have to agree with them but that we can appreciate them for who they are. This alone is what humanizes the world and brings peace."

Touch the Earth

I'll be honest. Protecting the environment has not always grasped me emotionally in the same way responding to the plight of people with inadequate water, sanitation, food, and shelter has. Although I know that safeguarding the environment is essential and biodiversity is vital for the survival of our planet, my heart has simply responded more quickly and more deeply to people in need. I don't think I am unusual in this regard.

So I have been slightly surprised at my new calling, as announced Thursday, and for much the same reason I worry that some of my friends may not feel as honored by 'their gift' this year as they have been in the past year.

Of course helping people is still my main focus. The project I will be supporting is building a much needed high school in a remote area of Ecuador. What is different is that the project will not only improve the lives of the youth and adults of this community, it will help them preserve the rainforest and protect its wildlife. We are not only touching people's lives, we are touching the Earth. This feels right to me.

"Touch the Earth" is a Native American expression expressing the concept that by touching the earth, the soil, we can touch the soul of our planet and be at peace within the universe. I'm not quite that literal, but not far from it either. The human predicament is intricately tied to the plight of our planet. It's impossible to separate them. The sense I have is that by making it possible for the young people of this small region in Ecuador to gain an education, we can help empower them to continue their stewardship of the rainforest and the wildlife it sustains. It is all interconnected.

This is all I am going to say today. This is my calling for now, and I do not necessarily expect it to become yours, at least in the same way. For those who do develop a deeper interest, though, I will be posting more details in the coming weeks.

Blessings.

Birthdays

A year has passed. By now each of you on my friends list (except the very most recent) should have been honored on your birthday with a donation to a good cause. Since birthdays come around once a year, it is time to reassess what began as an experiment and has since become a weekly/daily spiritual practice.

And it was an experiment at first. (Experiment in Giving) My goal was to raise awareness of issues that have captured my interest, and see how others would respond. My friends (and often their friends) responded with graciousness, gratitude, and heightened interest. What I did not count on is the affect it would have on me. I found myself becoming more generous in all areas of my life, not just financial, but with my time and energy, and even with my smiles. Dare I say it, I am happier.

So giving in this way (beyond my family's 'regular' donations to our church and other charities) has become a transformative practice. But now that it has been a year and each friend has been honored once, should I continue or should I do something different?

Both seem right. I want to go on, and yet it seems like a good time to make a change. It has occurred to me that perhaps I should become more focused in the coming year. I still have high regard for the causes to which I have been giving for the past year (listed under "Facebook Birthday Experiment" on my webpage, donnal.net), and I intend to continue supporting them in some manner. But even though these organizations have a sound reputation for involving local communities, I never know exactly where my donations are going. This is not a criticism; it is just a feeling that I am not as closely involved as I would like to be. Could I do something more specific?

It turns out that I have friends with close ties in Haiti, Burma, Ethiopia, and possibly dozens of other locations around the world. I thought about continuing my Birthday Experiment by giving to one of these more 'local' causes, someplace where each donation would be more tangible.

And then, quite recently, I was made aware of a location on our planet so remote that maps are hard to come by, a region with fewer than 0.000003% of the earth's population (200 out of 7 billion), a society among the poorest in the world, fighting bravely against some of the world's most powerful economic interests not to mention a corrupt government. These are a people living in harmony with their environment, and what they require most as a community to continue their stewardship and improve their lives is a high school.

Will building a school save the world? Of course not, and I understand this. But it is not MY job to save the world. I can only respond to what I am called, and this project seems to be my calling at present. This project may HELP save the world.

So at least for the coming few months, I will make a $5 donation on YOUR birthday in YOUR name toward the building of this school. What I plan to do a bit differently this year is make it easier for others among your friends to match this gift if they wish, and you may do so yourself, but only as you (or they) feel led.

More to come.

Implosion?

"Something has gone terribly wrong with the American experiment. Our families are imploding. Our national debt is exploding. Experts on the left and the right warn we are on an unsustainable trajectory and urgently need to change course. Yet too many in Washington, academia, the media and even the church are in a 'business as usual' mode. As result, millions of America [sic] fear the ice is cracking under our feet." ~Joel Rosenberg

I agree. I really do. In the next few days I will be critical of this quote and many of its implications, but up front I want to go on record as agreeing with the statement as such. I agree that America is on an unsustainable trajectory, and in particular I agree that the escalating national debt is a contributing factor.

It may not be possible on Facebook, but I'd like to think we could carry on a civil discussion about the American experiment, the national debt, and other aspects of our economy. To do so we will have to look for principles on which we can agree, and then agree to respectfully disagree about the rest. That is why I started by agreeing that the national debt is a serious problem for our nation. We will disagree plenty on how and within what timeframe to bring the debt under control, but we can surely all agree that this needs to be done.

It will be tempting to bring up the presumptive presidential candidates and their political records and/or promises. Though I may succumb on occasion, I see little to be gained by this because it is little more than a quick way of eliciting antagonism, which is not what I want. Although much could also be said about comparing the current and previous administrations and their policies, it probably won't be possible to avoid such discussions entirely. For example, the Rosenberg quote was originally brought to my attention accompanied by a graphic implying that the present administration is to blame for the national debt. Eventually I will want to investigate this claim.

Where I want to start, however, is with the widening gap between the very rich and the poor. Inequality is now far higher than just 30 years ago. The top 1 percent today gets around 20 percent of the nation's income – twice what it did two decades ago. The top 0.1 percent's share has almost tripled. Disparities in wealth are even greater. The causes of these disparities and their remedies are open for discussion, but does anyone not think this is a serious issue? Click Like if you agree and please comment if you do not.

To forestall an argument I anticipate, I will not be suggesting that the answer to this inequality is to "steal from the rich and give to the poor." Some of my interlocutors may claim that this is my recommendation, but I will try to phrase my thoughts more clearly than that. I should also state that much of my thinking on this topic is based on the writings of economist Joseph E. Stiglitz, most recently in Politico. Here are the bullet points:

• If the economy is growing for everyone, inequality per se is not a problem. But in fact inequality is bad for growth.
• Those at the top aren't the true innovators – people who provided the intellectual foundations of the computer, for example, or the Internet.
• Much of the top-most wealth comes from successful "rent seeking" (income derived from owning an asset, rather than from effort).
• "Rent seeking" attempts to garner a larger share of the economic pie, rather than making the pie larger.
• The U.S. has more inequality than any of the other advanced industrial countries in which similar market forces are at play.
• Laws and regulations in the U.S. shape markets in ways that enrich the top – but don't necessarily enhance growth and efficiency.

If any of my friends disagree with one or more of these points, I would love to hear from you.

Invitation and Warning

At present I'm still up to my neck (my eyeballs, actually) with an EMR project at work, so I don't have much extra time to devote to blogging or to Facebook. But today is Sunday. My grandson, Ian, spent the night with me last night, and my daughter, Rachel, and I took him to church with us this morning (Debby being out of town). This afternoon is a time for relaxation and reflecting on things that are important.

It happens that I have been reading The Inquisition of Climate Science by James Lawrence Powell. In a way I am learning nothing new, because I have been convinced that global warming is real and that human activity (specifically the burning of fossil fuels) is by far the predominant cause since long before I put together the list of links about the Science of Global Warming in August, 2011. In other words, Powell did not need to persuade me of the truth of climate change (because I was already persuaded), but what Powell's book has done is help me better understand the forces arrayed against us, forces that are doing everything they can to muddy the waters and convince the populace that there is nothing to this threat. This, my friends, makes it a moral issue.

Then this morning I read a column, On Climate Change, Money Trumps Common Sense, by Bill Moyers, a journalist whom I have long admired. In this article Moyers quotes a publication of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration publication (via the Washington Post) revealing that the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere of Barrow, Alaska, reached 400 parts per million (ppm) this spring. This may not be all that surprising, but it is alarming nonetheless.

It is time to wake up, friends, long past time. So here is an invitation and a warning. The invitation is this. Please engage me in discussion. I will be forthright, but I will not attack you personally, nor will I belittle you. In fact, if you think I am overlooking important information, I am happy to read and study anything you bring to my attention. But please engage me. This is too important not to discuss civilly and intelligently. Engage me here on this blog; engage me on Facebook; engage me by email.

The warning is this. From here forward, I no longer view discussions of climate change and global warming as political (and therefore to be avoided as far as possible). I now view this topic as one with moral and spiritual implications to be discussed openly and often. If this makes you uncomfortable, please feel free to "un-friend" me or at least "unsubscribe". (I won't be not be offended and probably won't even know.)

The Gayatri Mantra: A Paraphrase

Strictly speaking "Gaytri mantra" refers to a class of mantras in Vedic metre having three Padas of 8 syllables each, but this particular mantra is the best known so it is called The Gayatri Mantra. Also strictly speaking, therefore, this mantra consists of just three lines, but it is universally preceded by "The Great Utterance" making four lines in all.

Devanagari

ॐ भूर भुवः स्वः ।
तत् सवितुर्वरेण्यं ।
भर्गो देवस्य धीमहि ।
धियो यो नः प्रचोदयात् ॥

The Great Utterance

Om ( ॐ ) ( औम् औँ )

Whole books have been written about this word/syllable/symbol, and the entire Mundakopanisad Upanisad is devoted to its explanation and importance in Hindu (or vedic) thought. It has been referred to as "the name of God, the sound of the Universe, the primordial sound," and it is also known as the Seed Mantra because it contains the seed for all other mantras within itself. When taken letter by letter, A-U-M represents the divine energy (Shakti) united in its three elementary aspects: Bhrahma Shakti (creation), Vishnu Shakti (preservation) and Shiva Shakti (liberation). Aum corresponds to the crown chakra

Looking at the symbol itself, start with the dot in the upper right. What is that? Well, that is "That!" The dot stands for Ultimate Reality, the Essence of All, The Ground of Being. It also represents a state of consciousness in which all comes to rest, all is silent. It is the state of bliss, the state to which we aspire, the aim of all spiritual activity. Immediately below the dot is a semi-circle that represents illusion, distractions, selfishness, sin. It is such illusion that prevents us from reaching the state of bliss.

The lower curve on the left represents the philosophical notion of Truth, or objective experience, what we can smell, taste, touch, hear, and see. This is the Physical Dimension of experience. The top curve under the illusion semi-circle (also at left) represents the philosophical notion of Beauty, or subjective experience, what we experience on the inside. This is the Spiritual Dimension of experience. To the right of these intersecting curves is a more tortuous curve representing the philosophical notion of Goodness. This is sometimes called the inter-subjective experience. It may also be called the Emotional (or mental) Dimension of experience. Each curve has two ends, outer and inner. Taken together we choose to call these Mystery. Since Mystery is the source of all creation, the life force of procreative energy, and the creative spark within each of us, we further use the term Fountain of Mystery.

These three curves also represent three aspects of prayer. The top curve signifies Praise, the lower curve, Petition, and the right, Meditation. In terms of sensuality, these curves could also indicate pleasure, desire, and awareness respectively.

bhur भूर   bhuvah भुवः   svah स्वः

These three words in the Great Utterance must be considered together. They represent three dimensions of experience in much the same way as the three curves of the Om symbol.

bhur भूर	bhuvah भुवः	svah स्वः
earth	sky	heavens
coming	going	balance of life
past	present	future
physical	emotional	spiritual
biological	mental	mystical
objective	inter-subjective	subjective
horizontal	depth	vertical
Ahh	Uoo	Mmm
Bhrahma	Vishnu	Shiva
gross	subtle	causal
waking	dreaming	sleeping
creation	preservation	liberation
desire	awareness	bliss
truth	goodness	beauty

 

Om. In truth, goodness, and beauty

Praise Line

tat ( तत् s.1)

This is a name for the divine, with emphasis on Ultimate Reality, Mystery. Literally it means "that One." We may think of this word as referring to the dot in the Om symbol.

savitur ( सवितुर् s.2-4)

This is a name for the divine, with emphasis on "source" or "creation." The literal meaning is "sunlight." Savitur is the creative source of the universe, the procreative source of evolutionary advance (the life-force), and it is the source of the creative spark in each of us. Because it is an ongoing continuous source, we call it the Fountain of Mystery. The Praise Line itself is represented by the upper curve in the symbol, but Savitar (the Fountain of Mystery) is represented by all three curves taken together.

varenyam ( वरेण्यं s.5-8)

This word means "worthy of adoration, praise, or worship". The literal meaning may be "desirable" or "excellent," "the best".

The Fountain of Mystery invites our praise.

Meditation Line

bhargo ( भर्गो s.1-2)

Literally means "radiant light", but also means "purifying radiance" or "pure light." It is also translated "destroyer of sins." This illumination evaporates the thick fog of illusion, trivializes distractions into disappearance, and purifies us of sin.

devasya ( देवस्य s.3-5)

This is another name for the divine, with emphasis on qualities or attributes of the divine. Thus it refers to the multi-faceted nature of our experience of Mystery. Weaving these facets or threads together is Tantra.

dhimahi ( धीमहि s.6-8)

This is a verb meaning to meditate or to focus the mind. Here it means to focus on Mystery or some aspect of Mystery. Tantric meditations weave together the many facets of Mystery. They also use Mantra to reveal Tattva.

Purify us through these Tantric meditations.

Petition Line

dhiyo ( धियो s.1-2)

"The intellect" or the "mind," thoughts.

yo ( यो s.3)

This is a pronoun, most likely referring back to Mystery as its antecedent.

nah ( नः s.4)

This word is an enclitic personal pronoun meaning "our" and possibly emphasizing our oneness.

Also, note that( योनी ) is yoni – "our source."

prachodayat ( प्रचोदयात् s.5-8)

Literally "let it push" or "let it inspire," this word can also mean "to enlighten".

And inspire our minds (to know) that we are One.

Fall Festival Translation

Om — In truth, goodness, and beauty
The Fountain of Mystery invites our praise.
Purify us through these Tantric meditations
And inspire our minds that we are One.

Extended Paraphrase

When there was nothing,
Mystery said, "AUM."
By this, Mystery became manifest;
Then there was something rather than nothing.

The vibration of "A·U·M" represents the divine energy of Mystery
In creation, in preservation, and in liberation,
As described by the divine attributes of
Truth, Goodness, and Beauty.
And that was 'That' ( तत् ).

'That' One,
Or the Fountain of Mystery,
Is the Creative Source of everything:
Mystery is the source of the created Universe.
Mystery is the procreative source of Life.
Mystery is the source of our own creativity.

The Fountain of Mystery, this Source of All,
Invites our praise and worship.
Therefore, this is our petition:
Purify our thoughts and rid us of distractions;
Inspire us through these meditations;
Enlighten us to the reality that in Mystery we are One.

Tantra — Tattva and Mantra

तत्त्व	tattva	त	त ्त्	व	essence (thatness)
तन्त्र	tantra	त	न्त्	र	woven, continuum
मन्त्र	mantra	म	न्त्	र	prayer or hymn