设万维读者为首页 万维读者网 -- 全球华人的精神家园 广告服务 联系我们 关于万维
 
首  页 新  闻 视  频 博  客 论  坛 分类广告 购  物
搜索>> 发表日志 控制面板 个人相册 给我留言
帮助 退出
 
Pascal的博客  
“朝廷不是让我隐蔽吗?”“你也不看看,这是什么时候了?!”  
网络日志正文
令人敬仰伟大的自然博物学家爱登堡演讲全文 2017-03-26 20:01:32

令世界人民敬仰、为全人类工作(卡尔·马克思语)、伟大的自然

物学家、与BBC制作团队一起、实地探索过地球上已知所有生态

环境、勇敢无畏卓越的探险家、旅行家、“世界自然纪录片之父”

戴维·阿滕伯格(1926年5月8日-)2011年3月10日演讲全文


1954-1964 Zoo Quest(动物园探奇)

1969 The Miracle Of Bali(巴厘岛奇观)

1973 Eastward With Attenborough(与艾登堡向东进)

1975 The Explorers

1976 The Tribal Eye(部落之眼)

1977 Wildlife on One

1979 Life on Earth(生命的进化/地球上的生命)

1984 The Living Planet(活力星球)

1987 The First Eden(最初的伊甸园)

1989 Lost Worlds,Vanished Lives(消逝的生物/迷失的世界,消失的生命)

1990 The Trials of Life(生命之源/生命的考验)

1993 Life in the Freezer(冰雪的童话)

1995 The Private Life of Plants(植物私生活)

1996 Attenborough in Paradise(大卫·艾登堡漫游天堂)

1997 Wildlife Specials(野生动物特辑)

1998 The Life of Birds(飞禽传/鸟的生活)

2000 State of the Planet(大地的声音/地球命运在你手)

2001 The Blue Planet(蓝色星球)

2002 The Life of Mammals(哺乳类全传)

2005 Life In The Undergrowth(灌丛下的生命)

2006 Planet Earth(行星地球/地球脉动)

2008 Life In Cold Blood(冷血生命)

2009 Nature's Most Amazing Events(自然界大事件)

2009 life(生命)

2011 Madagascar(马达加斯加)

2011 Frozen Planet(冰冻星球)

2012 Kingdom of Plants(植物王国)

2013 Africa(地球系列:非洲)


Image result for david attenborough young

Related image

Image result for david attenborough young

Image result for david attenborough and the queen

David Attenborough:人口与地球


亲王陛下,女士们先生们:


首先我要感谢您邀请我进行这次报告。也请允许我为您的九十大寿道喜。(掌声)


今年还有另一个意义非凡的生日,是一家组织的五十周年诞辰,想必亲王陛下您记得很清楚。五十年前的4月29日,一群英国有识之士聚集在一起,警告全世界一场灾难正在降临。他们当中包括杰出的科学家Julian Huxley,热爱鸟类的画家Peter Scott,资深广告制作人Guy Mountfort,还有一位执掌重权且能力杰出的公务员Max Nicholson。虽说术业有专攻,但他们都是热诚的自然主义者,不仅醉心于英国本土的自然环境,也很关注世界各地的自然状况。


他们注意到了当时极少有人注意到的事实:在世界各地,充满魅力且一度数量众多的动物种群正在消失。曾经漫步于阿拉伯半岛的阿拉伯大羚羊只剩下了几百头;西班牙的白肩雕数量只剩下了九十只;加州秃鹰只剩下了六十只;曾经在夏威夷火山的熔岩平原上集群栖息的野鹅只剩下了五十只;在面积不断缩水的爪哇森林里栖息的犀牛只剩下了四十来只。这些都是最极端的案例,但是无论自然主义者们将目光投向何处,都会发现各种野生生物的数量正在减少,这个星球极有可能失去相当一部分动植物种群。必须采取行动,于是他们就采取了行动。


首先,他们需要科学建议来解释步步逼近的灾难的根源,并且找到延缓以至阻止这一势头的方法。其次,他们需要提升全世界对于自然问题的认识与理解。最后,要将这样一项事业投入实践自然需要大量金钱支持。他们决定成立一家组织,同时着手解决这三个问题。由于自然环境问题是国际性的问题,他们并没有将组织总部设立在英国,而是设立在了欧洲的中心瑞士,并且将这个组织称作WWF,即世界自然基金会。就像一切国际委员会一样,这个组织也需要若干个负责具体国家事务的行动组。因此在组织于瑞士召开成立大会之后过了几个月,英国也成立了自己的世界自然基金会分会,成为了全世界首个加入世界自然基金会的国家,亲王陛下您担任了第一任英国分会主席,二十年后又成为了国际总会主席。


WWF拯救各种濒危物种的方法并不相同。夏威夷野鹅与阿拉伯大羚羊遭到了圈养,在动物园里培养种群数量,然后再放生到原本栖息地。在非洲,大片偏远地区被规划成为国家公园,使得动物们能够免受偷猎者与人类定居区的侵扰。在加拉帕戈斯群岛以及山地大猩猩的家乡卢旺达,与动物居住在同一片土地上的人类居民通过生态旅游吸引游客,从而使得环境保护产生了惠及当地民众的经济效益。这场运动的声势越来越大,24个国家都建立了WWF分会。在WWF成立之前就存在的环保组织——它们分布在世界各地,不过一直都在各自为战——建立了国际化的工作联系。关注特定地区或者特定物种的新组织也纷纷成立。全世界都意识到了环境保护的重要性,数百亿计的美元投入了这项事业。五十年后的今天,当年那些远见卓识且奋力拼搏的环保先行者们完全可以因为自己在这项挑战面前的卓越表现而感到问心无愧。


但是在今天,尽管有着许多成功个案,环境问题却似乎比以往更严重了。诚然,多亏了环保主义者们的竭诚付出,狮虎犀象之类的主要物种都还没有灭绝。许多物种还在悬崖边缘徘徊,但是一时间还没有大碍。但是今天濒临灭绝的物种正在增多而不是减少。为什么呢?五十年前,当WWF刚刚成立的时候,全世界人口总共三十亿左右,如今已经达到了将近七十亿,几乎翻了一番。每一个人都需要生存空间。居住空间,自行种植食物或者让他人代为种植食物的空间,修建学校、公路与飞机场的空间。这些空间要从哪里来呢?一小部分空间可以来自别人占据的土地,但是绝大部分都来自亿万年来一直被野生动植物占据的自然世界。但是多出来的这几十亿人口所造成的影响并不只局限于他们自身所占据的空间,工业化进程改变了大气的化学成分,覆盖地球表面大部分的海洋遭到了污染与酸化,地球正在变暖。我们逐渐意识到所有这些正在侵袭自然环境的灾难背后有一项共同因素,也就是这颗星球上史无前例的人口增长。


确实有先知警告我们这一灾难即将降临,其中最早的一位就是托马斯.马尔萨斯。“马尔萨斯”听上去很有欧陆风格,兴许是个德国哲学家的名字,但他其实是我们的英国同胞,在十八世纪中期生在萨里的吉尔福德。他最重要的著作《人口论》初版于两百多年以前的1798年。他在书中主张,人口将不可阻挡地增长,直到被他所谓的“悲惨灾祸”遏制住为止。他的预言如今基本已经被人们忽视或者无视了。诚然,他没有预见到绿色革命的出现,没有预见到单位耕地粮食产量的增加,也许未来还会出现我们现在预料不到的粮食增产手段。但是这些手段充其量只能推迟最终结局的到来而不能将其彻底化解。马尔萨斯所主张的事实在基本面上依然是事实:地球能够哺育的人口数量具有上限。


有些人对此不以为然。他们相信自说自话的“可持续增长”理念。


四十五年前,肯尼迪总统的环境顾问Kenneth Boulding曾经说过,

‘Anyone who believes in indefinite growth in anything physical, 

on a physically finite planet,’ he said,’ is either mad – or an 

economist.’


“任何人如果相信可以在一颗有限的实体行星上实现无限的物质增长,那他

要么是疯子,要么是经济学家。”(笑声)目前全世界的人口每年会增长八

千万,每周一百五十万,每天二十五万,每小时一万还多。英国预计未来二

十二年将会增长一千万人,相当于新增了十个伯明翰。所有这些新增人口

——无论在英国还是其他国家,无论出身富有还是贫困——都会需要粮食、

饮水、能源以及生存空间。他们能得到所有这些资源吗?我不知道。我希望

他们能得到。但是政府当中的首席科学家与上一任皇家科学院主席都提到

了“完美风暴”的到来:当人口增长、气候变化与石油产量达到峰值凑到一

起的时候,粮食、淡水以及能源的供应肯定会越发难以为继。


先来考虑一下粮食吧。我想在座的各位都没有挨过饿。对于动物来说,忍

饥挨饿并不是什么稀罕事。猎豹母亲只要一连三四次狩猎失败,幼崽就有饿

死的危险。苦苦忍耐饥饿的猎豹幼崽是自然界最令人心碎的场景之一。但

是这种事同样也会发生在人类身上。如果你曾经出访穷国,那就肯定见过经常食不果腹的人们。如今全世界共有十亿人生活在饥荒当中,两千年前耶稣在世的时候全世界的人口也只有这个数字的四分之一而已。


也许有人看过了英国政府刚刚公布的《粮食生产未来展望报告》,这份报告展示了想要喂饱七十亿人多么不容易。我们手头的困难已经非常多了:土地流失、盐碱化、地下水枯竭、过度放牧、全球化导致的疫病蔓延以及将粮食转化成生物质燃料驱动汽车的可笑做法。按照报告的说法,就算到了2050年世界人口能够维持在八十亿到一百亿的区间内,想要喂饱这些人也已经非常不容易了,需要所有学科群策群力。报告当中还提出了非常合理的建议,比如进行第二次绿色革命。但奇怪的是,有一件事情报告却没有提:报告并没有提到喂饱八十亿人要比喂饱一百亿人容易得多,并没有提到要将计划生育以及女性教育与赋权当成控制人口的核心手段从而确保粮食供应,也并没有提到四十年前第一次绿色革命的发起人、诺贝尔奖获得者诺曼.博洛格的警世名言。博洛格培育了新品种短杆抗病小麦,在印度、巴基斯坦、非洲与墨西哥救活了千百万人。但是他却警告我们,他的工作无非是为我们“争取了一点喘息之机,从而抓紧时间稳定人口。”报告认为粮食价格会同油价一起上涨,并且明确指出这一趋势对于最贫困人口影响最大,还列举了若干帮助他们的方法。但是报告却没有提到任何一位每天只能依靠一美元菜金勉强度日的母亲们早就知道的事实:如果她只有四个孩子而不是十个,那么每个孩子都能吃得更饱。忽视掉这些信息实在是太奇怪了。


此外我们怎么能够忽视关于可耕地的骇人数据呢?在二十世纪六十年代,全世界每人都能分摊到半公顷可耕地,足以维持欧洲人的一般饮食标准。如今每人只能分到0.2公顷。

In China, it is only 0.1 of a hectare, because of their dramatic 

problems of soil degradation.


中国的情况更糟,每人只能分到0.1公顷,因为中国的

土壤退化问题特别严重。


今年还有另一份值得关注的政府工作报告,主题是生态多样性。这份《在变化的世界里为自然环境争取空间》也有类似的问题。报告讨论了英国野生生物所面临的各种压力,唯独没有谈到人口增长,实在也太奇怪了。想一想吧,英格兰已经是欧洲人口密度最高的国家了。当然最奇怪的还是最近由皇家专门调查委员会提供的《英国人口结构变化的环境影响》这份报告,其中完全否认了人口规模会对环境造成任何影响,就好像这个国家增加两千万人口也无所谓一样。当然,人口并不是导致环境问题的唯一因素,甚至都不能算是主要因素,但是人口的确能加剧其他各种因素的影响力,否认这一点是非常愚蠢的。如果你去多读几份国际组织开列出来的环境报告,就会发现人口问题显然是影响环境的基本因素,但是所有这些报告对此却全都避而不谈。


目前环保问题的主要议题是气候变化。我们知道每个人都要消耗碳并且制造出更多的二氧化碳,哪怕只是烧柴火做饭也是一样。当然,富人个体产生的二氧化碳远比穷人多得多。同样我们也可以将每一名额外人口都视为气候变化的受害者,而穷人无疑也会比富人承受更多的伤害。但是哥本哈根气候峰会的文件当中对这一点却只字未提。为什么缄口不言呢?所有人在私下里都承认人口问题需要解决,所有人都承认地球是有限的。我们只要看一看阿波罗登月任务拍摄的美丽地球照片就会意识到这个无情的事实。那么为什么没有人公开发言呢?某种古怪的禁忌正围绕着这个问题,这个问题似乎不太友善,不太政治正确,甚至还有些种族主义的意味。这项禁忌不仅限制了参会政客的言行,还影响了各种致力于环保与社会发展的非营利组织以及那些在镜头面前侃侃而谈的活动家们。后者主张要为子孙后代营造更可持续且更繁荣的未来,然而他们在人口问题上的沉默却表明他们认为无论这世界上或者英国国内有多少人,他们的崇高目标都一定能够实现,尽管他们心里都清楚并非如此。


如今局势的严重程度已经容不得此类惺惺作态了。不能不面对的事实是,在

一颗有限的星球上,人类数量的增长早晚有停止的一天,而且具体的停止方

式只有两种。可以通过避孕来控制新生儿数量,这是人道的方式。如果我们

共同选择了这条道路,我们每个人都能为此尽一份力量。另一种方式就是死

亡率的提升。自然界的所有其他物种都不能例外。饥荒、疾病或者天敌捕杀

会控制它们的数量。对人类来说也就是饥荒、疾病与战争。战争的起因可以

是石油、淡水、粮食、矿产、放牧权利或者居住空间。除此之外并不存在通

向无限增长的第三条道路。我们控制人口的时期越早,电梯触底的时间也就

越晚。人口控制得越早,所有人获得体面生活机会的可能性也越大。


要做到这一点需要实现以下几个条件。首先需要更多的人们理解这个问题。目前对于这个问题的讨论依然是可笑的禁忌,许多有识之士都受其钳制。如果不改变这一局面,那么这一点是不可能实现的。其次,我们的文化也需要改变,好让每一个人在保有生育权利的同时也能够意识到,生育过多子女会加剧自己以及他人子女未来将要面临的问题。要做到这一点就需要政府采取行动。在我看来每一个国家都应当制定符合国情的人口政策。目前世界上已经有七十多个国家制定了这样或者那样的人口政策。关键在于计划生育,免费提供生殖健康服务,以及在自愿非强迫的前提下鼓

励并督促人们使用避孕节育手段。根据全球脚印网络的报告,目前世界上

已经有一百多个国家的人口数量超过了可持续增长的极限,几乎所有的发达

国家都位于这一区域,英国的情况尤其严重。我们的目标是削减每人消耗的

自然资源以及减少人口数量,同时借助科技进步来维持并提高生活标准。可

悲的是目前各个发达国家只有一项扭曲的人口政策,也就是鼓励生育,好让

更多的年轻人来照顾老年人。越来越多的老年人会需要更多的年轻人来照

顾,这些年轻人变老之后又会需要更多的年轻人来照顾,这显然是生态层面

上的庞氏骗局。(笑声)


我不是经济学家,不是社会学家,也不是政客。我们所需要的答案必须来自于他们的从业领域。不过我确实是一名自然主义者,我知道哪些关键因

素能够将物种数量控制在合理区间内,以及突破合理区间的后果。比方说

我知道我家花园里的每一对蓝山雀每年都能够——请注意“能够”二字——

生产二十枚鸟蛋,但是由于天敌捕杀以及食物匮乏,至多只有两枚鸟蛋能够

长大成鸟。


Image result for 牛羚幼崽   狮子

                        母鹿看到狮子来了,抛下幼崽自己跑了。


我曾经在非洲平原上千百次亲眼目睹牛羚幼崽死在狮子

的爪牙之下


Image result for 牛羚幼崽

        狮子追捕小牛羚, 牛羚居然撒娇认妈妈,母狮一脸懵逼。

https://www.google.ca/search?q=tupian&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwjUw-eFx_XSAhXL7YMKHQMjAj8QsAQIIA&biw=853&bih=395#tbm=isch&q=%E7%89%9B%E7%BE%9A%E5%B9%BC%E5%B4%BD+++&*&imgrc=t--EYM0PDMzzTM:


我还见过数量过多的大象如何摧残它们的栖息环境,

以至于只要某一年的雨季来得稍微晚了一些,没能及时

灌溉早已被过度啃食的草地,大象就会成百上千地死去。


但我们是人类,多亏人类的智力以及越发精妙的科技,我们可以避免如此惨烈的结果。我们用药物来避免儿童死于疾病,我们用各种方法提升了粮食产量,我们移除了自然界控制动物种群数量的各种限制,因此我们的命运如今掌握在我们自己手中。


我们确实还有一点希望。凡是在女性有权投票的地区,凡是在女性识字的地区,凡是在女性可以依靠医疗设施控制子女生育数量的地区,生育率都会下降。所有这些文明条件都存在于印度南部的喀拉拉邦。印度的总体生育率是每名女性2.8人,而喀拉拉邦则是每名女性生育1.7人。泰国去年每名女性的生育率也是1.7人,与喀拉拉邦相近。泰国的近邻天主教菲律宾则是3.3人。世界许多地区都出现了人们正在意识到人口问题重要性的迹象。例如拯救儿童基金会就在总是这方面的工作。皇家科学院也组织了一大批各个学科的科学家们共同研究人口问题。那么你我能做什么呢?我只想对你们提出一项请求:要在私密与公开场合积极打破这一禁忌。除非打破这层禁忌,否则根本没有希望采取必需措施。每当我们谈论环境问题的时候,都要顺便谈一下人口问题,如果你是非营利组织成员,就要提醒你的同事不要忘记这一点。如果你是教会成员,尤其是天主教会成员——因为天主教关于避孕的教义是影响人口问题的主要因素之一——就要建议你的教友考虑一下人口过度增长的伦理问题。澳大利亚圣公会主教已经这样做了。假如你与政府部门有联系,问问他们为什么影响到所有部门政策的人口增长居然不是任何一个部门的责任。人少地多的澳大利亚最近刚刚任命了一位可持续人口增长部长,为什么人多地少的英国就不能效仿呢?


五十年前拉响了环境保护警报的夏威夷野鹅、阿拉伯大羚羊与西班牙白肩雕就相当于煤矿矿井里的金丝雀,它们的死亡预示着更可怕的灾难正在逼近。让我们开列一张正在侵扰我们以及这颗饱受打击的星球的环保问题清单吧:温室气体增多以及随之而来的全球变暖,海洋酸化与鱼群绝迹,雨林面积减少,沙漠面积增加,耕地短缺,极端天气加剧,饥荒,大规模流亡……这份清单可以一直开列下去。但是所有这些条目都有同一个根源。假如人口继续增长下去,所有的全球问题,无论是社会问题还是环境问题,都会变得越发难以解决,以至于完全失去解决的指望。谢谢大家。(热烈掌声)


David Attenborough’s speech to the RSA: 


            People and Planet


By Sir David Attenborough | 10 March 2011

Broadcaster and naturalist Sir David Attenborough presents the 2011 RSA President’s Lecture.

The dangers facing the earth’s ecosystems are well known and the subject of great concern at all levels. Climate change is high on the list. But there is an underlying and associated cause – population growth.

Indeed, in Sir David Attenborough’s view, there is no major problem facing our planet that would not be easier to solve if there were fewer people and no problem that does not become harder – and ultimately impossible to solve – with ever more. And yet there seems to be a taboo on bringing the subject into the open.

Chaired by His Royal Highness The Duke of Edinburgh KG KT

RSA President’s Lecture 2011: People and Planet

Your Royal Highness, President, Ladies and Gentlemen

May I first, sir, thank you for inviting me to give this, the last lecture in your Presidential series. And may I also congratulate you, Sir, on your coming 90th birthday. This year is a rich one, when to comes to anniversaries. April 29th is the fiftieth birthday of an organisation without which our planet would be in much worse condition than it is today.

Fifty years ago, a group of far-sighted people in this country got together to warn the world of an impending disaster. Among them were a distinguished scientist, Sir Julian Huxley; a bird-loving painter, Peter Scott; an advertising executive, Guy Mountford; and a powerful and astonishingly effective civil servant, Max Nicholson. They were all, in addition to their individual professions, dedicated naturalists, fascinated by the natural world not just in this country but internationally. And they noticed what few others had done – that all over the world, charismatic animals that were once numerous were beginning to disappear. The Arabian oryx, which once had been widespread all over the peninsula  had now been reduced to a few hundred. In Spain, there were less than a hundred imperial eagles. The Californian condor was down to about sixty. In Hawaii, a goose that had lived in flocks on the lava fields around the great volcanoes were reduced to fifty. The strange little rhinoceros that lived in the dwindling forests of Java – to about forty.  Wherever you looked there were examples of animals whose populations were falling rapidly. This planet was in danger of losing a significant number of its inhabitants – both animals and plants.

Something had to be done. And that group determined to do it. They would need scientific advice to discover the causes of these impending disasters and to devise ways of slowing them and hopefully, stopping them. They would have to raise the awareness of the threat to get the support of people everywhere;  and – like all such enterprises – they would need money to take practical action. They set about raising all three. Since the problem was an international one, they based themselves, not here, but in the heart of Europe in Switzerland. And they called the organisation they created the World Wildlife Fund.

As well as the international committee, separate action groups would be needed in individual countries. A few months after that inaugural meeting in Switzerland, this country established one  – and was the first country to do so. And you, Sir, became its first president. Then, after x years, you became President of the entire organisation which is known today as the Worldwide Fund for Nature.

The methods WWF used to save these endangered species were several. Some, like the Hawaiian goose and the oryx, were taken into captivity in zoos, bred up into a significant population and then taken back to their original home and released. Elsewhere, in Africa for example, great areas of unspoilt country were set aside as National Parks where the animals could be protected from poachers and encroaching human settlement. In the Galapagos Islands and in the home of the mountain gorillas in Rwanda, ways were found of ensuring that local people who also had claims on the land where such animals lived, were able to benefit financially from the creatures they were protecting by attracting visitors. Eco-tourism was born. The movement as a whole went from strength to strength. Existing conservation bodies – of which there were a number in many parts of the world but which had been working largely in isolation – acquired new zest and international links.  New ones, focussing on particular areas or particular species were founded. Twenty four countries established their own national appeals. The world awoke to conservation. Millions – billions of dollars were raised. And now fifty years on, conservationists who have worked so hard and with such foresight can justifiably congratulate themselves on having responded magnificently to the challenge.

Yet now, in spite of a great number of individual successes, the problem remains. True, thanks to the vigour and wisdom of conservationists, no major charismatic species has yet disappeared. Many are still trembling on the brink, but are still hanging on. But overall, today there are more problems not less, more species at risk of disappearance than ever before. Why?

Fifty years ago, when the WWF was founded there were about three billion people on earth. Now there are almost seven billion. Over twice as many – and every one of them needing space. Space for their homes, space to grow their food (or to get others to grow it for them), space to build schools and roads and airfields. A little of that space might be taken from land occupied by other people but most of it could only come from the land which, for millions of years, animals and plants have to themselves.

The impact of these extra millions of people has spread even beyond the space they physically occupy. Their industries have changed the chemical constituency of the atmosphere. The oceans that cover most of the surface of the planet have been polluted and increasingly acidified. We now realise that the disasters that continue increasingly to afflict the natural world have one element that connects them all  – the unprecedented increase in the number of human beings on the planet.

There have been prophets who have warned us of this impending disaster, of course. One of the first was Thomas Malthus. His surname – Malthus – leads some to think that he was some continental European savant, a German perhaps. But he was not. He was an Englishman, born in Guildford in Surrey in the middle of the eighteenth century. His most important book, An Essay on the Principle of Population was published over two hundred years ago in 1798. In it, he argued that the human population would increase inexorably until it was halted by what he termed ‘misery and vice’. Today, for some reason, that prophecy seems to be largely ignored – or at any rate, disregarded. It is true that he did not foresee the so-called Green Revolution which greatly increased the amount of food that could be produced in any given area of arable land. But that great advance only delayed things. And there may be other advances in our food producing skills that we ourselves still cannot foresee. But the fundamental truth that Malthus proclaimed remains the truth. There cannot be more people on this earth than can be fed.

Many people would like to deny this. They would like to believe in that oxymoron  ‘sustainable growth.’  Kenneth Boulding, President Kennedy’s environmental advisor forty five years ago said something about this.  ‘Anyone who believes in indefinite growth in anything physical, on a physically finite planet,’ he said,’ is either mad – or an economist.’

The population of the world is now growing by nearly 80 million a year. One and a half million a week. A quarter of a million a day. Ten thousand an hour.

In this country it is projected to grow by ten million in the next twenty two years. That is equivalent to ten more Birminghams. Not only that, but every one of us in this country consumes far more of the earth’s resources than an average African.

All these people, in this country and worldwide, rich or poor, need and deserve food, water, energy and space. Will they be able to get it? I don’t know. I hope so. But the Government’s Chief Scientist and the last President of the Royal Society have both referred to the approaching ‘perfect storm’ of population growth, climate change and peak oil production, leading inexorably to more and more insecurity in the supply of food, water and energy.

Consider food. Very few of us here, I suspect have ever experienced real hunger. For animals, of course, it is a regular feature of their lives. The stoical desperation of the cheetah cubs whose mother failed in her last few attempts to kill prey for them and who consequently face starvation is very touching. But that happens to human beings too. All of us who have travelled in poor countries have met people for whom hunger is a daily background ache in their lives. There are about a billion such people today – that is four times as many as the entire human population of this planet a mere two thousand years ago at the time of Christ.

You may have seen the Government’s “Foresight Report on the Future of Food and Farming”. It shows how hard it is to feed the seven billion of us who are alive today. It lists the many obstacles that are already making this harder to achieve – soil erosion, salinisation, the depletion of aquifers, over grazing, the spread of plant diseases as a result of globalisation, the absurd growing of food crops to turn into biofuels to feed motor cars instead of people – and so on. So it underlines how desperately difficult it is going to be to feed a population that is projected to stabilise in the range of eight to ten billion people by the year 2050. It recommends the widest possible range of measures across all disciplines to tackle this. And it makes a number of eminently sensible recommendations, including a second ‘green revolution’.

But surprisingly there are some things that the report does not say. It doesn’t state the obvious fact that it would be much easier to feed eight billion people than ten. Nor does it suggest that the measures to achieve such a number – such as family planning and the education and empowerment of women – should be a central part of any programme of active food security. It doesn’t refer to the prescient statement forty years ago by Norman Borlaug, the Nobel  Laureate and father of the first Green Revolution, that all he had done was to give us a ‘breathing space’ in which to stabilise our numbers. It anticipates that food prices may rise with oil prices and so on and makes it clear that this will affect poorest people worst and discusses various way to help them. But it doesn’t mention what every mother subsisting on the equivalent of a dollar a day already knows – that her children would be better fed if there were four of them around the table instead of ten. These are strange omissions.

And how can we ignore the chilling statistics on arable land? In 1960 there was half an hectare of good cropland per person in the world – enough to sustain a reasonable European diet. Today, there is only 0.2 of a hectare each. In China, it is only 0.1 of a hectare, because of their dramatic problems of soil degradation.

Another impressive Government report on biodiversity published this year “Making Space for Nature in a Changing World” is rather similar. It discusses all the rising pressure on wildlife in the United Kingdom, but it doesn’t mention our growing population as being one of them – which is particularly odd when you consider that England is already the most densely populated country in Europe.

Most bizarre of all was a recent report by a Royal Commission on the environmental impact of demographic change in this country which denied that population size was a problem at all – as though twenty million extra people more or less would have no real impact. Of course it is not our only or even our main environmental problem; but it is absurd to deny that, as a multiplier of all the others, it is a problem.

I suspect that you could read a score of reports by bodies concerned with global problems – and see that population is clearly one of the drivers that underlies all of them – and yet find no reference to this obvious fact in any of them.

Climate change tops the environmental agenda at present. We all know that every additional person will need to use some carbon energy, if only firewood for cooking and will therefore create more carbon dioxide – though of course a rich person will produce vastly more than a poor one. Similarly, we can all see that every extra person is – or will be – an extra victim of climate change – though the poor will undoubtedly suffer more than the rich. Yet not a word of it appeared in the voluminous documents emerging from the Copenhagen and Cancun Climate Summits.

Why this strange silence? I meet no one who privately disagrees that population growth is a problem. No one – except flat-earthers – can deny that the planet is finite.  We can all see it in that beautiful picture of our earth taken from the Apollo mission. So why does hardly anyone say so publicly? There seems to be some bizarre taboo around the subject. “It’s not quite nice, not PC, possibly even racist to mention it.”  And this taboo doesn’t just inhibit politicians and civil servants who attend the big conferences. It even affects the people who claim to care most passionately about a sustainable and prosperous future for our children, the environmental and developmental Non Government Organisations. Yet their silence implies that their admirable goals can be achieved regardless of how many people there are in the world or the UK, even though they all know that it can’t.

I simply don’t understand it. It is all getting too serious for such fastidious niceties. It remains an obvious and brutal fact that on a finite planet human population will quite definitely stop at some point. And that can only happen in one of two ways. It can happen sooner, by fewer human births – in a word by contraception. This is the humane way, the powerful option which allows all of us to deal with the problem, if we collectively choose to do so. The alternative is an increased death rate – the way which all other creatures must suffer, through famine or disease or predation. That translated into human terms means famine or disease or war – over oil or water or food or minerals or grazing rights or just living space. There is, alas, no third alternative of indefinite growth.

The sooner we stabilise our numbers, the sooner we stop running up the  ‘down’ escalator. Stop population increase – stop the escalator – and we have some chance of reaching the top – that is to say a decent life for all.

To do that requires several things. First and foremost it needs a much wider understanding of the problem and that will not happen while the absurd taboo on discussing it retains such a powerful grip on the minds of so many worthy and intelligent people. Then it needs a change in our culture so that while everyone retains the right to have as many children as they like, they understand that having large families means compounding the problems their children and everyone else’s children will face in the future.

It needs action by Governments. In my view all countries should develop a population policy – some 70 countries already have them in one form or another – and give it priority. The essential common factor is to make family planning and other reproductive health services freely available to every one and empower and encourage them to use it – though of course without any kind of coercion.

According to the Global Footprint Network there are already over a hundred countries whose combination of numbers and affluence have already pushed them past the sustainable level. They include almost all developed countries. The UK is one of the worst. There the aim should be to the aim to reduce over time both the consumption of natural resources per person and the number of people while, needless to say, using the best technology to help maintain living standards. It is tragic that the only current population policies in developed countries are, perversely, attempting to increase their birth-rate in order to look after the growing number of old people. The notion of ever more old people needing ever more young people, who will in turn grow old and need ever more young people and so on ad infinitum, is an obvious ecological Ponzi scheme.

I am not an economist, nor a sociologist nor a politician. I am a naturalist. But being one means that I do know something of the factors that keep populations of different species of animals within bounds. I am aware that every pair of blue tits nesting in my garden is able to lay over twenty eggs a year but as a result of predation or lack of food, only one or two will, at best, survive. I have seen how lions ravage the hundreds of wildebeeste fawns that are born each year on the plains of Africa. I have seen how increasing populations of elephants can devastate their environment until, one year when the rains fail on the already over-grazed land, they die in hundreds.

But we are human beings. We have ways of escaping such brutalities. We have medicines that prevent our children from dying of disease. We have developed ways of growing increasing amounts of food. That has been a huge and continuing advance that started several thousand years ago, a consequence of our intelligence, our increasing skills and our ability to look ahead. But none of these great achievements will be of any avail if we do not control our numbers.

And we can do so. Wherever women have the vote, wherever they are literate, and have the medical facilities to control the number of children they bear, the birth rate falls. All those civilised conditions exist in the southern Indian state of Kerala. The total fertility rate there in 2007 was 1.7 births per woman. In India as a whole it is 2.8 per woman. In Thailand in 2010, it was 1.8  per woman, similar to that in Kerala. But compare that with the Catholic Philippines where it is 3.3.

Here and there, at last, there are signs of a recognition of the problem. The Save the Children Fund mentioned it in their last report. The Royal Society has assembled a working party of scientists across a wide range of disciplines who are examining the problem.

But what can each of us do – you and I? Well, there is just one thing that I would ask. Break the taboo, in private and in public – as best you can, as you judge right. Until it is broken there is no hope of the action we need. Wherever and whenever we speak of the environment  – add a few words to ensure that the population element is not ignored. If you are a member of a relevant NGO, invite them to acknowledge it. If you belong to a Church – and especially if you are a Catholic because its doctrine on contraception is a major factor in this problem – suggest they consider the ethical issues involved. I see the Anglican bishops in Australia have dared to do so. If you have contacts in Government, ask why the growth of our population, which affects every Department, is yet no one’s responsibility. Big empty Australia has appointed a Sustainable Population Minister so why can’t small crowded Britain?

Make a list of all the environmental and social problems that today afflict us and our poor battered planet –  not just the extinction of species and animals and plants, that fifty years ago was the first signs of impending global disaster, but  traffic congestion,  oil prices,  pressure on the health service, the growth of mega-cities, migration patterns, immigration policies, unemployment, the loss of arable land, desertification, famine, increasingly violent weather, the acidification of the oceans, the collapse of fish stocks, rising sea temperatures, the loss of rain forest. The list goes on and on. But they all share an underlying cause. Every one of these global problems, environmental as well as social  becomes more difficult – and ultimately impossible – to solve with ever more people.

Image result for david attenborough and panda cubs

Image result for david attenborough quotes on nature world

在我看来,自然世界是澎湃激情最大的源泉,是视觉之美最大的

源泉,是智慧兴趣最大的源泉。她是一切丰富壮丽的生命之源,

正因如此,她让我们的生命值得体验,不枉此生。 

                                

                                        ———— 戴维·阿滕伯格

David Attenborough Origin of Life, Arrival HD BBC Documentary Animals & Nature 


David Attenborough befriends a Cheetah

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8hMvP76w-8

Related image

Image result for david attenborough with animals

Image result for david attenborough with animals

Image result for david attenborough with animals

Image result for david attenborough with animals

Image result for david attenborough with animals

Image result for david attenborough with animals

These animals are SO cute!  It's no wonder little kids like to pretend to be them.

Photo Credit  CC Denali National Park


浏览(1208) (1) 评论(0)
发表评论
我的名片
Pascal
注册日期: 2014-10-22
访问总量: 9,170,648 次
点击查看我的个人资料
Calendar
最新发布
· 党安插特工我坐镇万维任务.传达
· 认知决定国运人命.我志愿加入俄
· 举国不劳动人民翘首切盼今夜纽约
· 再看死不改嘴石油生成于生物遗骸
· 同学们不要挤.让领导同志先走.美
· 就社会心态而言.1964年10月赫鲁
· 前线大捷.胡赛不负组织厚望击中
分类目录
【他山之石】
· 党安插特工我坐镇万维任务.传达
· 认知决定国运人命.我志愿加入俄
· 举国不劳动人民翘首切盼今夜纽约
· 再看死不改嘴石油生成于生物遗骸
· 同学们不要挤.让领导同志先走.美
· 就社会心态而言.1964年10月赫鲁
· 前线大捷.胡赛不负组织厚望击中
· 再看你喜大普奔通告正义伊朗导弹
· 党安插特工我卧底万维任务.紧急
· 巴坦人民热烈欢庆伊导弹袭以.王
存档目录
2024-10-01 - 2024-10-09
2024-09-01 - 2024-09-30
2024-08-01 - 2024-08-31
2024-07-01 - 2024-07-31
2024-06-01 - 2024-06-30
2024-05-01 - 2024-05-31
2024-04-01 - 2024-04-30
2024-03-01 - 2024-03-31
2024-02-01 - 2024-02-29
2024-01-01 - 2024-01-31
2023-12-01 - 2023-12-31
2023-11-01 - 2023-11-30
2023-10-01 - 2023-10-31
2023-09-01 - 2023-09-30
2023-08-01 - 2023-08-31
2023-07-01 - 2023-07-31
2023-06-01 - 2023-06-30
2023-05-01 - 2023-05-31
2023-04-01 - 2023-04-30
2023-03-01 - 2023-03-31
2023-02-01 - 2023-02-28
2023-01-01 - 2023-01-31
2022-12-01 - 2022-12-31
2022-11-01 - 2022-11-30
2022-10-01 - 2022-10-31
2022-09-01 - 2022-09-29
2022-08-01 - 2022-08-31
2022-07-01 - 2022-07-31
2022-06-01 - 2022-06-30
2022-05-01 - 2022-05-31
2022-04-02 - 2022-04-29
2022-03-01 - 2022-03-31
2022-02-01 - 2022-02-28
2022-01-01 - 2022-01-31
2021-12-01 - 2021-12-31
2021-11-01 - 2021-11-30
2021-10-01 - 2021-10-31
2021-09-01 - 2021-09-30
2021-08-01 - 2021-08-31
2021-07-01 - 2021-07-31
2021-06-01 - 2021-06-30
2021-05-01 - 2021-05-31
2021-04-01 - 2021-04-30
2021-03-01 - 2021-03-31
2021-02-01 - 2021-02-28
2021-01-01 - 2021-01-31
2020-12-01 - 2020-12-31
2020-11-01 - 2020-11-30
2020-10-01 - 2020-10-31
2020-09-01 - 2020-09-30
2020-08-01 - 2020-08-31
2020-07-01 - 2020-07-31
2020-06-01 - 2020-06-30
2020-05-01 - 2020-05-31
2020-04-01 - 2020-04-30
2020-03-02 - 2020-03-31
2020-02-01 - 2020-02-29
2020-01-01 - 2020-01-31
2019-12-01 - 2019-12-31
2019-11-01 - 2019-11-30
2019-10-01 - 2019-10-31
2019-09-01 - 2019-09-30
2019-08-01 - 2019-08-31
2019-07-01 - 2019-07-31
2019-06-01 - 2019-06-30
2019-05-01 - 2019-05-30
2019-04-01 - 2019-04-30
2019-03-01 - 2019-03-31
2019-02-01 - 2019-02-28
2019-01-02 - 2019-01-31
2018-12-01 - 2018-12-31
2018-11-01 - 2018-11-30
2018-10-01 - 2018-10-31
2018-09-02 - 2018-09-24
2018-08-01 - 2018-08-31
2018-07-04 - 2018-07-31
2018-06-01 - 2018-06-30
2018-05-01 - 2018-05-31
2018-04-01 - 2018-04-30
2018-03-02 - 2018-03-31
2018-02-01 - 2018-02-28
2018-01-10 - 2018-01-30
2017-11-01 - 2017-11-30
2017-10-01 - 2017-10-30
2017-09-22 - 2017-09-29
2017-08-02 - 2017-08-30
2017-07-01 - 2017-07-31
2017-06-02 - 2017-06-30
2017-05-02 - 2017-05-30
2017-04-01 - 2017-04-29
2017-03-01 - 2017-03-31
2017-02-02 - 2017-02-28
2017-01-02 - 2017-01-31
2016-12-03 - 2016-12-30
2016-11-05 - 2016-11-28
2016-10-01 - 2016-10-29
2016-09-01 - 2016-09-29
2016-08-01 - 2016-08-30
2016-07-01 - 2016-07-31
2016-06-02 - 2016-06-30
2016-05-01 - 2016-05-27
2016-04-01 - 2016-04-30
2016-03-01 - 2016-03-31
2016-02-04 - 2016-02-28
2016-01-01 - 2016-01-28
2015-12-03 - 2015-12-31
2015-11-03 - 2015-11-29
2015-10-02 - 2015-10-30
2015-09-10 - 2015-09-28
2015-08-02 - 2015-08-31
2015-07-01 - 2015-07-28
2015-06-02 - 2015-06-30
2015-05-01 - 2015-05-31
2015-04-02 - 2015-04-29
2015-03-02 - 2015-03-31
2015-02-02 - 2015-02-27
2015-01-03 - 2015-01-31
2014-12-01 - 2014-12-31
2014-11-01 - 2014-11-30
2014-10-26 - 2014-10-31
 
关于本站 | 广告服务 | 联系我们 | 招聘信息 | 网站导航 | 隐私保护
Copyright (C) 1998-2024. Creaders.NET. All Rights Reserved.