Chris Jepson: The burden of knowing

“He who increases his knowledge only increases his sorrow.” – Unattributed

Ain’t that the damnedest. The more you know, the more you grieve. What’s that all about? On the surface, it seems that it would be counterintuitive; rather, that the less one knows would correlate – obviously – into more sorrow. And, at some level that is accurate. The lower your skill set (see: employment options) for example, the more “challenges” in one’s life directly associated with a “reduced” standard of living (nutritional choices/healthcare/marriage options). But I am not thinking along those lines.

I have a theory that beginning in the 1960s and 70s, an awareness overtook many of us on exactly how lethal we humans are to the planet. I believe that previous generations of human beings did not have this consciousness. Several factors contribute to this perspective. In the West, Christianity and Islam place an unfortunate emphasis on the next “life.” Earth is merely a temporary or transitional experience. And prior to the Industrial Revolution, the planet seemed too vast and imperishable to be affected by human activity – if one thought of such things at all.

Contrary to what you might know about history, there were environmental catastrophes that led to whole population extinctions. Theories suggest humans would reproduce at such levels that the land (and water) was unable to sustain the growth or activity (deforestation, development, etc.). Easter Island comes to mind, as does the Mayan collapse. I remember in grade school listening to a teacher discuss the idea of over-forestation and used the Cedars of ancient Lebanon as an example.

Ten thousand years ago Earth’s population is estimated to have been 5 million. Over 8,000 years (to the birth of Christ) it grew to 200 million. We are now adding one billion people every 14 years. Every 14 years.

According to the World Wildlife Fund, we (you, me and all humanity) are contributing to a loss of species 1,000 to 10,000 times higher than the natural extinction rate (the rate of species extinctions occurring if humans were not around).

An international team of scientists and oceanographers led by Boris Worm of Dalhousie University in Halifax, Nova Scotia, are predicting that by the year 2048 “the world’s oceans will be empty of fish. The cause: the disappearance of species due to overfishing, pollution, habitat loss, and climate change.”

Matthew Huelsenbeck, a top marine scientist, announced in a study released by the National Academy of Sciences Journal, “that climate change could cause large reef-building corals—such as Australia’s Great Barrier Reef—to be extinct within this generation.” Huelsenbeck said, “Healthy coral reefs may be something we can only see in photographs pretty soon. It’s up in the air about what’s going to be the nail on the coffin, but we can pretty much predict the coffin is coming.”

I absolutely marvel that anyone advocates increasing immigration and/or the population of North America. How in the name of environmental sanity and national health is adding another 180 million consumers good for the ecology of the United States? Every additional mouth is the equivalent of an additional nail in the planetary coffin that Huelsenbeck references.

Is that how we should now consider Earth, as our glorious coffin? Indeed. We are unable or unwilling to put our population (and our thinking) in line with Mother Earth’s ability to sustain us as a species. That is our condition. We know it is, sorrowfully so.