Nature is Not All Warm and Fuzzy

By Rich Kozlovich

First let's try and get this right.  Nature doesn't love us!  There really is no such thing as Mother Nature, all warm and fuzzy loving us.   Nature is a bio mechanical physical reality that is in point of fact in an unending quest to kill us.   Not consciously, as nature has no intellectual awareness, or a conscience.   Nature is what it is, dangerous.

What it does have are Earthquakes, lightening, pestilence, tornadoes, hurricanes, floods, extreme temperatures, diseases, drought, famine, and wild animals which are all part of that an unending quest to kill us, and we've been in the battle for all of human existence, thus the need for development that can change our environment.

The information below was originally published in 2014, but it's been hit lately, and I'm of the opinion even when this stuff isn't in the headlines, it needs to be thrust into the arena to remind people about reality. 

Let's start by disabusing ourselves of the idea that wild animals are Disney characters.  They're violent and.....let's get this right......they will kill people, they will kill livestock, they will kill children, and they will kill pets. In short - settlers killed them when they moved into an area because they weren’t safe to have around. Why is that so hard to understand? 

While jogging in a with her military husband a woman was attacked by a mother bear that had cubs with her.  The assumption is the bear attacked in fear for her cubs.  Maybe, maybe not, I don't know, and neither does anyone else know for that matter as to why the bear reacted as it did.  Bears can't talk, and they can't explain their actions.   But this is what we absolutely know; bears are wild animals, and there's a reason they're called wild animals.  They're dangerous!  Really....they really are dangerous!   So don't let the leftist nuts who want to reintroduce these animals in and around communities fool you.  There are consequences for that, negative consequences. 

A number of years ago there was a “nature is warm and fuzzy” nut by the name of Timothy Treadwell  who proclaimed grizzly bears were all misunderstood and needed be embraced…because he did “research” that demonstrated “he could get close to bears with his gentle and non-threatening personality and communicate with them. Treadwell boasted that he could understand their communication and they could understand him. He claimed that he knew 21 bear vocalizations and various different body languages. He wanted to see if he could be accepted by 1,000 pound wild coastal brown bears.”  

(Editor's Note:  The link to that article no longer works. RK)

He was hyped by the leftist celebrity crowd and gained a substantial amount of notoriety. But it was like every other phony philosophical flavor of the day perpetrated on an unsuspecting public. His name wasn’t even Treadwell, it was Dexter, and everything he said, and everything he said he did was a phony as his name. Well, reality finally caught up to Dexter. 

 

Dexter and his girlfriend both died practicing his theories on real wild bears, in a truly wild environment, not with semi-tame bears in a national park where he did "his research".  It appears this wild brown bear (a really big nasty wild brown bear) didn't speak the same language as Dexter.  Imagine that!  Reality stuck as this bear didn't understand, or care about a thing he said.  So, guess what?  It resorted to character and killed Dexter, along with his girlfriend....and ate them.

There are two benefits to this story.

• First, he truly qualified for the Darwin Award. What's the criteria for nomination? The Darwin Award is presented - posthumously - to those who contributed to human evolution by self-selecting themselves out of humanities gene pool in the most sublime fashion, i.e., in the most idiotic manner.  
• Secondly we can now dismiss all the misleading and dangerous horsepucky he promoted about bears.   Once again, wild animals are called wild because they're dangerous, and they kill, and that’s why they’re called “wild”.  

Do I really have to emphasize that? 

First Yellowstone-area grizzly hunt in 40 years blocked by federal judge

By Laura Zuckerman, Reuters August 30, 2018

 

A federal judge in Montana on Thursday issued a court order temporarily blocking the first trophy hunts of Yellowstone-area grizzly bears in more than 40 years, siding with native American groups and environmentalists seeking to restore the animals' protected status.

 

The 14-day restraining order by U.S. District Judge Dana Christensen in Missoula, Montana, came two days before Wyoming and Idaho were scheduled to open licensed grizzly hunts allowing as many as 23 bears in the two states to be shot and killed for sport.

 

Groups opposing the hunts had sought a restraining order while waiting for the judge to rule on the larger question of whether the federal government should return Endangered Species Act safeguards to grizzlies in the greater Yellowstone region......To Read More....

 

My Take  - Another good reason for eliminating the Endangered Species Act. 

Observations From the Back Row: 7-9-11

...

Everything we are told should bear some resemblance to what we see going on in reality!

What could be bad about 'sustainability'?
To ordinary people, the word sustainable is an adjective that means the activity the word describes can continue forever. For example, since biblical days, farmers practiced sustainable agriculture by leaving their fields fallow every seventh year. In early America, farmers knew that for agriculture to be sustainable, the same crop could not be planted in the same field year after year. Sustainable agriculture has always been practiced by successful farmers. Farmers who didn't practice sustainable agriculture inevitably failed.

The United Nations has given the word sustainable a new definition. Introduced to the world in "Our Common Future," the report of the 1987 U.N. Commission on Environment and Development, and further defined in the U.N.'s "Agenda 21" at the U.N. Conference on Environment and Development, the term "sustainable" was married to the term "development," and a brand new concept entered the world. The term "sustainable development" means any activity that has economic impact, and is equitable, and has no negative environmental impact. All three elements are required to qualify as "sustainable development." ……... Proponents of sustainable development, inside and outside the government, downplay this fundamental element of sustainable development. Instead, they tout the benefits to the environment of sustainable programs that promote recycling, renewable energy, conservation and the like. And an unknowing public drinks the progressive Kool-Aid.

My Take - I don't know who originated these five sentences, but I would like to thank Gerry for sending this to me, and after you have read the above article please take these five sentences into consideration. This is what green is really about....imposed socialism.

"These are possibly the 5 best sentences you'll ever read:

1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.
2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!
5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation

Can you think of a reason for not sharing this? Neither could I......"

Bill would let federal health researchers ban certain chemicals
A new bill could alter the landscape of chemical regulation in the United States by empowering researchers to take swift action against the most potentially harmful chemicals in use today. The bill, to be introduced later this month, would give the director of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, and a panel of experts selected by the director, the power to ban up to 10 chemicals from commerce each year by categorizing them as being of high concern. Those chemicals would become unlawful to use 24 months after receiving that designation.

..Grizzly bear kills Yellowstone hiker
A female grizzly bear attacked and killed a man who encountered the bruin and her cubs while he was hiking with his wife on Wednesday in Yellowstone National Park, park officials said.  The fatal mauling occurred about a mile and a half from the start of the Wapiti Lake trail, and another group of hikers nearby heard the victim's wife crying out for help and used a cell phone to call park rangers for assistance.  A National Park Service statement said the couple had inadvertently surprised the mother grizzly and her cubs, and in "an attempt to defend a perceived threat to her cubs, the bear attacked and fatally wounded the man.

Environmental Activism
Despite all the talk about energy independence emanating from Washington DC, this government and its allies in the environmental movement do whatever they can to thwart this goal. Based on reliable discoveries in Utah, Arizona and Colorado there may be enough fossil fuel from shale and natural gas to avoid any reliance on foreign oil. Why then is nothing happening to mine these resources and bring them to market?
The answer very simply is that extremist elements in the environmental movement have supplied sufficient pressure to make any drilling and mining impossible in these areas. Using an array of tactics to challenge companies and impose their agenda,......

Activists realize that if you can get government agencies and corporate leaders on your side using propaganda and intimidation as tactics, an effective alliance for environmental positions can be created.
For those who are scientific realists, this propaganda effort is discouraging. Not only does it place the United States in a disadvantageous economic position, not only does it force our government to expend blood and treasure defending foreign oil fields, but it challenges scientific verities and destroys corporate integrity.

Obama plan: 'Spike' energy costs, kill 1.4 million jobs
Industry group blasts White House decision to raise electricity bills now - Even before he was elected president, Barack Obama warned he would "bankrupt" the coal industry if necessary and purposefully spike Americans' utility bills in order to force the nation into using less and cleaner forms of energy. Now, industry partners warn, the White House is making good on that promise by issuing a new rule that will raise some Midwesterners' electricity bills over 23 percent by 2016 and cost an estimated 1.44 million jobs by 2020.


###