Joseph Romm leapfrogs over most of the current academic discussions of climate change. He takes us by the hand and leads us to the consequences, perhaps with the hope of leading us from discussion to action.

Discussion of a carbon cap-and-trade system is conspicuously missing from Romm's article. I suspect this is a very deliberate omission. When we frame the discussion in the economic terms of a cap-and-trade system, we avoid facing the reality of the sacrifices we'll have to make. Instead, we get stuck discussing how to make a cap-and-trade system fair, where to set the total amount of carbon credits, and how to distribute them.

This discussion about the system prolongs inaction.

Romm skips the abstract (and easily abused) economics of cap-and-trade. Instead, he presents the realities of farmland becoming dust bowls, coastal habitat becoming flooded, glacial water sources drying up... in the United States... where we (and his displaced brother) live. Through this discussion we are led to the reality of our present situation: triage.

Fellow Salon readers, are you ready to accept the reality that Joseph Romm presents? What are you willing to do... no, what are you going to do about it (besides buying some carbon credits)?

Last Sunday, an Earth Day Festival was held in San Diego's Balboa Park. The surrounding streets and freeways were in gridlock due to the people driving to the festival. The pro-life zealots were out in force with their pictures of aborted babies and when it concluded, there was trash all over the park from the items people consumed while there. Some Earth Day celebration! Consume, have many children because we told you to, and consume some more.

Viva la homosapiens!

The difference between Republican scenarios of Islamic "doom" and fundamentalist Christian scenarios of Armaggedon on the one hand, and environmental / peak oil / water shortage / starvation scenarios on the other, is that the first two are based on politics and religion, which are non-scientific, and the third is based on science for the most part.

The degree varies as to how much effect climate change, leading to water and food shortages, and peak oil will have, but the basis of the argument is essentially scientific, no matter where you are on the scale.

In other words, if there really was a meteor headed towards the earth (which I doubt...) than we would treat that situation differently than if someone is telling us we are going to be invaded by little green men ... which we have never seen.

Now, does ANYONE want to hear bad news? No. No one does. When Hitler was striding acrosss Europe, I'm sure plenty of Americans were busy listening to the baseball game. There are still plenty of Americans listening, perhaps now, to Britney Spears' latest folly. So how do you break it to people? Very carefully ...!

If you have noticed, due to over development, peak oil and ethanol, food prices are going sky high, and now people all over the world are rioting. Still think this whole thing is a joke? Buy a plane ticket to Haiti, if you still afford one, and find out.

As to whether animals mean anything to human existence, except as 'food' for carnivores, think about the bees. I am not a biologist, and a biologist would be the best poster here. But if we have bee colony collapse (which we have already, partially), what is going to pollinate the plants? I have pollinated plants with a tooth pick, but that is somewhat laborious. As you can see, probably not possible globally to pollinate without the little fucking ... bees.

If the oceans continue to warm, many cold water fish are history. You eat fish, right? 1000s of species going extinct constantly is going to break the 'food' chain for humans eventually. So, as an animal, which depends on other animals, we are screwed if that happens.

Of course, if you are a Christian fundie and believe your soul is not 'animal' then you certainly have the right to lord it over the rest of the animals, kill them, ignore them ... until your turn comes. Because basically you are just another upright hominid biped, no matter the illusions as to your superiority over the animals.

Peak oil is self-explanatory. Oil is the most useful, powerful thing every discovered, and it is running out. Oil is now at $118 a barrell? Who here thinks this is just a temporary blip, and its' going to go back down? If you do, go buy some airline stock.

The problem is most environmentalists see into the future, using science, and most people's horizon is now... that is a failing of the human race, and nothing is going to change that. But even 'now' gives you clues as to what is going to happen ... then.

Why not a tax rebate for those who choose self sterilization...and the ability to sell our rights to have children, much like the carbon tax in discussion?

Its about time somebody with influence spoke up for giving priority to the welfare of the human race, without whom the planet would not even have a name.

Regarding the question of choosing priorities for collective human action in the matter of natural resource conservation, one is well advised to stay sober. There is insufficient evidence of an impending threat of catastrophic climate change, even less that humans can have a role in it one way or another. Environmental protection has come down to digging a hole deeper and deeper. This hole is shaping up to be the grave for humanity. Who appointed the environmental movement as undertaker for the race? Tell them to stop digging. The race is just beginning.

They are both diseases of affluence. When we can afford gourmet food for our dogs and $17 vinegar at Whole Foods, we have a broader horizon of other remote broken things to fix. But I for one will never be the person to deny a newly lower middle class Indian family their opportunity to own a car no matter how much it pollutes.

Regarding the polar bears feeding habitat: You know why that's their feeding habitat? Because they eat seals, not because they love ice for any particular reason. Where will the seals go when the ice is gone? Well they'll go onto shores and shoals. Why don't they go there now? Because then it's too easy for the polar bears eat them. Without the ice cover there will be a huge increas of solar energy onto the surface of the cold nutrient rich arctic sea water which will create an explosion of phytoplankton which will fuel a population burst of plankton-eating fish which will translate as a profusion of seals which will now be hauling out onto rocky shoals and shorelines and islands which will be where the polar bears will find them in greater numbers than ever before and why there will be even more polar bears. It is this kind of feedback loop that has been ignored by those who fail to see the kind of robustness that is built into complex systems as exemplified by our terrestrial climate. Happy Earth Day...it is a very robust earth, though I don't have all than much hope for us stupid humans unless we recognize the weakest link...our un-opened minds which gives such little credit to nature's ability to absorb an assault such as it's experiencing right now within our little bubble of earth's history.