Victor Restrepo: Natural Law Based Precautionary Principle vs Short Term Greed/Profit Approach - What Works For 7 Future Generations Without Causing Harm? The Pressure Is Growing To Adopt The Principle Of Debating Effect On 7 Future Generations, Or Suffer Severe Consequences
Anything that is not sustainable is TERMINAL, by definition.
Anything that violates Natural Law is TERMINAL, by definition.
Why support or prop up non sustainable practices or organizations with taxpayer or investment money, when they are TERMINAL by definition?
What does it mean to operate or make decisions in a way that does no harm to seven future generations?
Why are all schools, universities and colleges not teaching this Natural Law principle, as part of the art and science of sustainable health, plus success?
Anything that is not sustainable is TERMINAL, by definition.
Anything that violates Natural Law is TERMINAL, by definition.
Why support or prop up non sustainable practices or organizations with taxpayer or investment money, when they are TERMINAL by definition?
What does it mean to operate or make decisions in a way that does no harm to seven future generations?
Why are all schools, universities and colleges not teaching this Natural Law principle, as part of the art and science of sustainable health, plus success?
INTRODUCTION TO THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE
The Precautionary Principle is a strategy to cope with possible risks where scientific understanding is yet incomplete, such as the risks of nano technology, genetically modified organisms and systemic insecticides, 5G technology, fossil fuels, as well as nuclear technology, just to name a few.
VIDEO: https://youtu.be/F_8DiJ5ZkiM 4 min
Why is the Precautionary Principle NOT POLITICAL OR PARTISAN?
What are Conservatives conserving, if not pure air, clean water and pure food, free of pollutants, contaminants and poisons?
Liberals may promote war and destructive technologies, but to what end? If our children's children cannot live on the planet due to these things, why promote them and/or support them?
If Libertarians truly want to be free to do whatever they want to do, when does it not make sense to follow the Golden Rule, which states that one only does what one wants to be done onto oneself?
Why is the Precautionary Principle NOT POLITICAL OR PARTISAN?
What are Conservatives conserving, if not pure air, clean water and pure food, free of pollutants, contaminants and poisons?
Liberals may promote war and destructive technologies, but to what end? If our children's children cannot live on the planet due to these things, why promote them and/or support them?
If Libertarians truly want to be free to do whatever they want to do, when does it not make sense to follow the Golden Rule, which states that one only does what one wants to be done onto oneself?
Wouldn't true scientists also be interested in anything that does not destroy the planet which we might call Spaceship Earth, which the human species is traveling around on?
DEFINITION OF PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE
When human activities may lead to morally unacceptable harm that is scientifically plausible but uncertain, actions shall be taken to avoid or diminish that harm. Morally unacceptable harm refers to harm to humans or the environment that is....
- threatening to human life or health, or
- serious and effectively irreversible, or
- inequitable to present or future generations, or
- imposed without adequate consideration of the human rights of those affected.
The judgement of plausibility should be grounded in scientific analysis. Analysis should be ongoing so that chosen actions are subject to review. Uncertainty may apply to, but need not be limited to, causality or the bounds of the possible harm.
Actions are interventions that are undertaken before harm occurs that seek to avoid or diminish the harm. Actions should be chosen that are proportional to the seriousness of the potential harm, with consideration of their positive and negative consequences, and with an assessment of the moral implications of both action and inaction. The choice of action should be the result of a participatory process.
Source: UNESCO COMEST report The Precautionary Principle
What is this rule?
Dr Martin Luther King Jr. Speech About The Three Evils of White American Society; Racism, Militarism And Capitalism - "Scientific Power Has Outrun Our Spiritual Power. We Have Guided Missiles And Misguided Men"
HUMANISTS BELIEVE IN THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE AS WELL AS ATHEISTS AND THOSE WHO BELIEVE IN RELIGION
PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IN ALL RELIGIONS
What is the primary teaching of all major religions, no matter what they are?
The Golden Rule.
What is this rule?
Predatory Capitalism is all about greed, which is not sustainable. Racism is about fear/hatred, and that is also not sustainable. Militarism is all about mass murder, genocide, destruction and assassinations, which is not sustainable.
JESUS SAID: "IT IS EASIER FOR A CAMEL TO PASS THROUGH THE EYE OF A NEEDLE THAN FOR A RICH MAN TO ENTER INTO HEAVEN"
Teach and practice forgiveness, empathy plus compassion.
The 12 Principles And Power Of Forgiveness, Definition, Research, Religious Views In Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Baha'i, Buddhism, Hinduism, Jainism, Hoʻoponopono, Humanist, Relationship
PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IN THE FIELD OF MEDICINE AND MENTAL HEALTH
1. The ideal and most sustainable medicine and healthcare system focuses on prevention 98% of the time and treatment via the remaining 2% of the time. Right now, the medical industrial monopoly is the exact reverse of this, with 98% of all attention and money plus energy focused on treatment, and only 2% or less on prevention. In other words, the current Allopathic system is upside down, backwards and is not sustainable, so it meets the definition of a TERMINAL dis-ease.
2. All medicine and care in a sustainable global health caring system is free of profit motivation, money, or greed based motivations.
3. All medical care is free of discrimination or bias, based on 'financial means', insurance type, class, sex, skin color or religion.
4. All treatments authorized to be used have zero negative side effects and enjoy a 99% to 100% cure rate, while causing no harm to this or seven future generations, genetically, physically, mentally, emotionally, financially, or spiritually.
5. All medications should be free of patents, and open to free market competition, including free or no cost solutions.
6. All patent medications should be tested and compared to their 'natural' origins in plants as well as Homeopathics, Nutrition, Naturopathy or other health systems such as Acupuncture, Flower Remedies, Ayurveda, etc;, side to side, for effectiveness, safety, and harm or lack of harm. Labels on patent medications should indicate results of these studies. Studies should be performed by experts in these various modalities, and be paid for by government, not by a private, for profit corporation, nor by doctors being paid by those same corporations.
7. All treatments and medications, including chemo, radiation, vaccines and patent drugs, should be required by law to mandate informed consent, with required forms such as vaccine or drug inserts handed to patients. Patients should be given at least 3 days at home to read that information, before the drug or vaccine or treatment is provided. The drug, vaccine or treatment should be provided only after a signature is obtained stating that patient has fully read and understands contents and risks of treatment via chemo, radiation, vaccines and/or patent drugs. All of these things have a risk, but it is often well hidden, suppressed and covered up.
Why are all of these ingredients required?
Much of the world's population cannot afford expensive patented chemical drugs, as they make only $2 per day. Any sustainable health caring system has to be free, and not rely on doctors, who are also very expensive and unaffordable for most of the world's population. As late as the 1950's, even in the US, it was not uncommon for medical doctors to make house calls and to take chickens in trade for their expertise.
Before profit motivations took over the US disease symptom management industry, most cures for dis-eases were based on natural medicines that came from Nature, in the form of herbs, and other natural holistic modalities.
The US pharmacopia used to be filled with FREE medicinal herbs that were used as medicines and could be grown for FREE in the backyard garden. But that same medical doctors Pharmacopia is now filled only with patented chemical pills and has no herbs left in it. Why is that? Herbs and other natural health modalities still work just as well as they ever did, but doctors never use them anymore.
The profit motivation and greed are two big reasons for the massive changes that have happened. Doctors and hospitals were going broke trying to make a PROFIT via herbs and natural remedies. They decided that patent medications, chemo and radiation plus vaccines were the things that would 'save' the FOR PROFIT, GREED based medical industrial system, and it did just that. But there are consequences to a system that is not sustainable.
Is it any wonder that very expensive patented drugs, vaccines, surgery and radiation are the only things 'allowed' to be used by medical doctors in hospitals, in a monopolistic system? What do these things all have in common? They are all based on GREED. They are all VERY EXPENSIVE AND PROFITABLE.
If it were not for insurance, no one except for very rich people could afford what happens in hospitals, and they would all be empty. One million dollar medical bills are not uncommon.
The free and natural answers for all dis-eases are all there, for those people brave enough to think and act for themselves, and not get trapped in the Matrix of a for profit corporate think disease management system.
BURDEN OF PROOF UNDER PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE FALLS ON THOSE TAKING AN ACTION, BOTH IN CORPORATIONS AND ALL OTHER ORGANIZATIONS
The principle is used by policy makers to justify discretionary decisions in situations where there is the possibility of harm from making a certain decision (e.g. taking a particular course of action) when extensive scientific knowledge on the matter is lacking. The principle implies that there is a social responsibility to protect the public from exposure to harm, when scientific investigation has found a plausible risk. These protections can be relaxed only if further scientific findings emerge that provide sound evidence that no harm will result.
LAW OF EUROPEAN UNION HAS BEEN MADE A STATUTORY REQUIREMENT IN SOME AREAS
In some legal systems, as in the law of the European Union, the application of the precautionary principle has been made a statutory requirement in some areas of law.
Regarding international conduct, the first endorsement of the principle was in 1982 when the World Charter for Nature was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly, while its first international implementation was in 1987 through the Montreal Protocol. Soon after, the principle integrated with many other legally binding international treaties such as the Rio Declaration and Kyoto Protocol.
ORIGINS AND THEORY
The term "precautionary principle" is generally considered to have arisen in English from a translation of the German termVorsorgeprinzip in the 1980s.[1]:31
The concepts underpinning the precautionary principle pre-date the term's inception. For example, the essence of the principle is captured in a number of cautionary aphorisms such as "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure", "better safe than sorry", and "look before you leap". The precautionary principle may also be interpreted as the evolution of the ancient medical principle of "first, do no harm" to apply to institutions and institutional decision-making processes rather than individuals.
In economics, the precautionary principle has been analysed in terms of the effect on rational decision-making of the interaction of irreversibility and uncertainty. Authors such as Epstein (1980)[2] and Arrow and Fischer (1974)[3] show that irreversibility of possible future consequences creates a quasi-option effect which should induce a "risk-neutral" society to favor current decisions that allow for more flexibility in the future.
Gollier et al. (2000)[4] conclude that "more scientific uncertainty as to the distribution of a future risk – that is, a larger variability of beliefs – should induce Society to take stronger prevention measures today."
Gollier et al. (2000)[4] conclude that "more scientific uncertainty as to the distribution of a future risk – that is, a larger variability of beliefs – should induce Society to take stronger prevention measures today."
FORMULATIONS
Many definitions of the precautionary principle exist. Precaution may be defined as "caution in advance," "caution practised in the context of uncertainty," or informed prudence. Two ideas lie at the core of the principle:[5]:
an expression of a need by decision-makers to anticipate harm before it occurs. Within this element lies an implicit reversal of the onus of proof: under the precautionary principle it is the responsibility of an activity proponent to establish that the proposed activity will not (or is very unlikely to) result in significant harm.
EARTH SUMMIT INCLUDED PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE
One of the primary foundations of the precautionary principle, and globally accepted definitions, results from the work of the Rio Conference, or "Earth Summit" in 1992. Principle #15 of the Rio Declaration notes: "In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by States according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation."[6]
WINGSPREAD CONFERENCE ADOPTED PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE
The 1998 Wingspread Statement on the Precautionary Principle summarizes the principle this way: "When an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the environment, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically."[7] The Wingspread Conference on the Precautionary Principle was convened by the Science and Environmental Health Network.[7]
The February 2, 2000 Commission of the European Communities, Communication from the Commission on the Precautionary Principle, noted that, "The precautionary principle is not defined in the Treaty, which prescribes it only once - to protect the environment. But in practice, its scope is much wider, and specifically where preliminary objective scientific evaluation indicates that there are reasonable grounds for concern that the potentially dangerous effects on the environment, human, animal or plant health may be inconsistent with the high level of protection chosen for the Community." [8]:10
The January 29, 2000 Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety says, in regard to controversies over GMOs: "Lack of scientific certainty due to insufficient relevant scientific information . . . shall not prevent the Party of import, in order to avoid or minimize such potential adverse effects, from taking a decision, as appropriate, with regard to the import of the living modified organism in question."[9]
APPLICATION
The application of the precautionary principle is hampered by both lack of political will, as well as the wide range of interpretations placed on it. One study identified 14 different formulations of the principle in treaties and nontreaty declarations.[10] R.B. Stewart (2002)[11] reduced the precautionary principle to four basic versions:
Scientific uncertainty should not automatically preclude regulation of activities that pose a potential risk of significant harm (Non-Preclusion PP).
Regulatory controls should incorporate a margin of safety; activities should be limited below the level at which no adverse effect has been observed or predicted (Margin of Safety PP).
Activities that present an uncertain potential for significant harm should be subject to best technology available requirements to minimize the risk of harm unless the proponent of the activity shows that they present no appreciable risk of harm (BAT PP).
Activities that present an uncertain potential for significant harm should be prohibited unless the proponent of the activity shows that it presents no appreciable risk of harm (Prohibitory PP).
In deciding how to apply the principle, analysis may use a cost-benefit analysis that factors in both the opportunity cost of not acting, and the option value of waiting for further information before acting. One of the difficulties of the application of the principle in modern policy-making is that there is often an irreducible conflict between different interests, so that the debate necessarily involves politics.
STRONG PRECAUTION IS REQUIRED WHEN THERE IS A POSSIBLE RISK TO HEALTH SAFETY OR ENVIRONMENT
Strong precaution holds that regulation is required whenever there is a possible risk to health, safety, or the environment, even if the supporting evidence is speculative and even if the economic costs of regulation are high.[12]:1295–96 In 1982, the United Nations World Charter for Nature gave the first international recognition to the strong version of the principle, suggesting that when "potential adverse effects are not fully understood, the activities should not proceed."
The widely publicized Wingspread Declaration, from a meeting of environmentalists in 1998, is another example of the strong version.[13] 'Strong precaution' can also be termed as a "no-regrets" principle, where costs are not considered in preventative action.
RESPONSIBLE PARTIES ARE LIABLE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL OR OTHER HARM
Strong versions justify or require precautionary measures and some also establish liability for environmental harm, which is effectively a strong form of “polluter pays”. For example, the Earth Charter states: “When knowledge is limited apply a precautionary approach ... Place the burden of proof on those who argue that a proposed activity will not cause significant harm, and make the responsible parties liable for environmental harm.”
Reversal of proof requires those proposing an activity to prove that the product, process or technology is sufficiently “safe” before approval is granted. Requiring proof of “no environmental harm” before any action proceeds implies the public is not prepared to accept any environmental risk, no matter what economic or social benefits may arise (Peterson, 2006).
At the extreme, such a requirement could involve bans and prohibitions on entire classes of potentially threatening activities or substances (Cooney, 2005). Over time, there has been a gradual transformation of the precautionary principle from what appears in the Rio Declaration to a stronger form that arguably acts as restraint on development in the absence of firm evidence that it will do no harm.[15]
INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS AND DECLARATIONS
The World Charter for Nature, which was adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1982, was the first international endorsement of the precautionary principle. The principle was implemented in an international treaty as early as the 1987 Montreal Protocol, and among other international treaties and declarations[16] is reflected in the 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development (signed at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development).
PRECAUTIONARY APPROACH SOFTENS PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE, TAKES ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COSTS INTO ACCOUNT
No introduction to the precautionary principle would be complete without brief reference to the difference between the precautionary principle and the precautionary approach. Principle 15 of the Rio Declaration 1992 states that: “in order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by States according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall be not used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.”
As Garcia (1995) pointed out, “the wording, largely similar to that of the principle, is subtly different in that: (1) it recognizes that there may be differences in local capabilities to apply the approach, and (2) it calls for cost-effectiveness in applying the approach, e.g., taking economic and social costs into account.” The ‘approach’ is generally considered a softening of the ‘principle’.
"As Recuerda has noted, the distinction between the ´precautionary principle` and a ´precautionary approach` is diffuse and, in some contexts, controversial. In the negotiations of international declarations, the United States has opposed the use of the term ´principle` because this term has special connotations in legal language, due to the fact that a ´principle of law` is a source of law.
This means that it is compulsory, so a court can quash or confirm a decision through the application of the precautionary principle. In this sense, the precautionary principle is not a simple idea or a desideratum but a source of law. This is the legal status of the precautionary principle in the European Union. On the other hand, an ´approach` usually does not have the same meaning, although in some particular cases an approach could be binding. A precautionary approach is a particular ´lens` used to identify risk that every prudent person possesses (Recuerda, 2008)[17]
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
On 2 February 2000, the European Commission issued a Communication on the precautionary principle,[8] in which it adopted a procedure for the application of this concept, but without giving a detailed definition of it. Paragraph 2 of article 191 of the Lisbon Treaty states that "Union policy on the environment shall aim at a high level of protection taking into account the diversity of situations in the various regions of the Union. It shall be based on the precautionary principle and on the principles that preventive action should be taken, that environmental damage should as a priority be rectified at source and that the polluter should pay."[18]
After the adoption of the European Commission's Communication on the precautionary principle, the principle has come to inform much EU policy, including areas beyond environmental policy. As of 2006 it had been integrated into EU laws "in matters such as general product safety, the use of additives for use in animal nutrition, the incineration of waste, and the regulation of genetically modified organisms."[19]:282–83 Through its application in case law, it has become a "general principle of EU law."[19]:283
USA
On July 18, 2005, the City of San Francisco passed a Precautionary Principle Purchasing ordinance, which requires the city to weigh the environmental and health costs of its $600 million in annual purchases – for everything from cleaning supplies to computers. Members of the Bay Area Working Group on the Precautionary Principle including the Breast Cancer Fund, helped bring this to fruition.
JAPAN
In 1997, Japan tried to use the consideration of the precautionary principle in a WTO SPS Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures case, as Japan’s requirement to test each variety of agricultural products (apples, cherries, peaches, walnuts, apricots, pears, plums and quinces) for the efficacy of treatment against codling moths was challenged.
This moth is a pest that does not occur in Japan, and whose introduction has the potential to cause serious damage. The United States claimed that it was not necessary to test each variety of a fruit for the efficacy of the treatment, and that this varietal testing requirement was unnecessarily burdensome.
AUSTRALIA
The most important Australian court case so far, due to its exceptionally detailed consideration of the precautionary principle, is Telstra Corporation Limited v Hornsby Shire Council. The case was heard in the New South Wales Land and Environment Court under Justice CJ Preston (24 April 2006). The Principle was summarised by reference to the NSW Protection of the Environment Administration Act 1991, which itself provides a good definition of the principle:
"If there are threats of serious or irreversible environmental damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reasoning for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation. In the application of the principle… decisions should be guided by: (i) careful evaluation to avoid, wherever practicable, serious or irreversible damage to the environment; and (ii) an assessment of risk-weighted consequence of various options".
The most significant points of Justice Preston's decision are the following findings:
The principle and accompanying need to take precautionary measures is "triggered" when two prior conditions exist: a threat of serious or irreversible damage, and scientific uncertainty as to the extent of possible damage.
Once both are satisfied, "a proportionate precautionary measure may be taken to avert the anticipated threat of environmental damage, but it should be proportionate."
The threat of serious or irreversible damage should invoke consideration of five factors: the scale of threat (local, regional etc.); the perceived value of the threatened environment; whether the possible impacts are manageable; the level of public concern, and whether there is a rational or scientific basis for the concern.
The consideration of the level of scientific uncertainty should involve factors which may include: what would constitute sufficient evidence; the level and kind of uncertainty; and the potential to reduce uncertainty.
The principle shifts the burden of proof. If the principle applies, the burden shifts: "a decision maker must assume the threat of serious or irreversible environmental damage is… a reality [and] the burden of showing this threat… is negligible reverts to the proponent…"
The precautionary principle invokes preventative action: "the principle permits the taking of preventative measures without having to wait until the reality and seriousness of the threat become fully known".
“The precautionary principle should not be used to try to avoid all risks."
The precautionary measures appropriate will depend on the combined effect of "the degree of seriousness and irreversibility of the threat and the degree of uncertainty… the more significant and uncertain the threat, the greater…the precaution required". “…measures should be adopted… proportionate to the potential threats".
CORPORATIONS ADOPTING PRINCIPLE
The Body Shop International, a UK-based cosmetics company, recently included the Precautionary Principle in their 2006 Chemicals Strategy.
(What is your organization doing around the Precautionary Principle?)
(What is your organization doing around the Precautionary Principle?)
ENVIRONMENT AND HEALTH
Fields typically concerned by the precautionary principle are the possibility of:
Global warming or abrupt climate change in general
Extinction of species
Introduction of new and potentially harmful products into the environment, threatening biodiversity (e.g., genetically modified organisms)
Threats to public health, due to new diseases and techniques (e.g., AIDS transmitted through blood transfusion)
Long-term effects of new technologies (e.g. health concerns regarding radiation from cell phones and other electronics communications devices)
Persistent or acute pollution (asbestos, endocrine disruptors...)
Food safety (e.g., Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease)
The precautionary principle is often applied to biological fields because changes cannot be easily contained and have the potential of being global. The principle has less relevance to contained fields such as aeronautics, where the few people undergoing risk have given informed consent (e.g., a test pilot). In the case of technological innovation, containment of impact tends to be more difficult if that technology can self-replicate.
Bill Joy emphasized the dangers of replicating genetic technology, nanotechnology, and robotic technology in his article in Wired Magazine, "Why the future doesn't need us", though he does not specifically cite the precautionary principle. The application of the principle can be seen in the public policy of requiring pharmaceutical companies to carry out clinical trials to show that new medications are safe.
Oxford based philosopher Nick Bostrom discusses the idea of a future powerful superintelligence, and the risks that we/it face should it attempt to gain atomic level control of matter.[20]
Application of the principle modifies the status of innovation and risk assessment: it is not the risk that must be avoided or amended, but a potential risk that must be prevented. Thus, in the case of regulation of scientific research, there is a third party beyond the scientist and the regulator: the consumer.
In an analysis concerning application of the precautionary principle to nanotechnology, Chris Phoenix and Mike Treder posit that there are two forms of the principle, which they call the "strict form" and the "active form". The former "requires inaction when action might pose a risk", while the latter means "choosing less risky alternatives when they are available, and [...] taking responsibility for potential risks." Thomas Alured Faunce has argued for stronger application of the precautionary principle by chemical and health technology regulators particularly in relation to Ti02 and ZnO nanoparticles in sunscreens, biocidal nanosilver in waterways and products whose manufacture, handling or recycling exposes humans to the risk of inhaling multi-walled carbon nanotubes.[21]
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
The Traffic Light colour convention, showing the concept of Harvest Control Rule (HCR), specifying when a rebuilding plan is mandatory in terms of precautionary and limit reference points for spawning biomass and fishing mortality rate.
Several natural resources like fish stocks are now managed by precautionary approach, through Harvest Control Rules (HCR) based upon the precautionary principle. The figure indicates how the principle is implemented in the cod fisheries management proposed by theInternational Council for the Exploration of the Sea.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precautionary_principle
SUMMARY
It is very obvious to anyone with common sense that the carbon and nuclear fuel industries cause harm. The chemical industry is also causing harm, as is the military industrial complex, GMO and medical industry. Under this definition, they would all have to be banned and not be allowed to operate until they could PROVE that they cause no harm to the environment or to the living web of life.
What would civilization look like if everything harmful disappeared today? Certainly, there would be huge changes and life would look much different. Maybe it is time to start talking and debating issues such as this and see where this Precautionary Principle would lead humanity if it were applied as fast as possible in all areas. Change is the only constant we can count on, after all.
Why not discuss what works for seven future generations without causing harm before taking any actions, before passing any laws, before committing huge amounts of money to any endeavor? The American Indian Congress did this and had great success with it for tens of thousands of years.
What would have happened if the 'settlers' had learned from those inhabitants and lived like them, as friends?
Go deeper
Go deeper
TEDX; A Sustainable, Innovative, Multi Dimensional Creative Success Model That Does No Harm, Requires Thinking About Impact Of All Decisions On Seven Future Generations; Let's Create 100 Percent Literacy, Carbon Free, Nuclear Free, Chemical Free, Peaceful Future
19 To 100 Million Native American' Indians Exterminated By Illegal Immigrant 'Settlers'
WHAT DID PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE LOOK LIKE HISTORICALLY?
Native Americans Have Inhabited The US Continent 15K to 200K Years In A Sustainable Fashion, How Can Our Modern 'Civilization' Do What Works For 7 Future Generations Without Causing Harm? Either Unite Spiritually, Or Suffer Chaos, Disasters, Diseases, Extinction
https://www.agreenroadjournal.com/2014/01/american-indians-have-inhabited-us.htmlTHE PRESSURE IS GROWING GLOBALLY TO LIVE IN A WAY THAT IS IN LINE WITH THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE, WHICH IS A POSITIVE TIPPING POINT
Go deeper
What Is #Social #Engineering? What Is #Root #Cause #Analysis? #Entropy, Negative #SocialEngineering, Defining Positive Social Engineering, Introduction To #Art And #Science Of #Sustainable #Health, #Success, via #AGreenRoad
https://www.agreenroadjournal.com/2016/09/what-is-social-engineering-diving-into.html
PHASING OUT FOSSIL AND NUCLEAR FUELS IS REQUIRED IF HUMANITY IS TO SURVIVE AND THRIVE
Scotland to ‘phase out’ new petrol and diesel cars by 2032 | The Independent
The Scottish government has pledged to phase out new petrol and diesel cars and vans across Scotland by 2032, eight years ahead of the UK Government target.
In July, Britain said it would halt the production of new petrol and diesel cars from 2040 to cut pollution.
The SNP leader also said there were plans to make the A9 Scotland’s first fully electric-enabled road and that an innovation fund would be set up to encourage climate-change solutions such as charging vehicles in areas with a high concentration of tenements.
The pressure to adopt and make the changes needed to create a sustainable civilization is growing by leaps and bounds in all kinds of directions. Many negative tipping points are creating the motivation for humanity to take action in this direction, and not just talk about it, or do greenwashing.
BOTTOMS UP CONSENSUS BASED DECISION MAKING IS REQUIRED, NOT TOP DOWN 1 PERCENT LED GREED AND SELFISHNESS
If precautionary principle types of changes are not made, the destruction and fall of this modern global civilization is assured, through multiple negative feedback mechanisms and tipping points.
Interfaith Elder Sacred Circle Wisdom Council; What Is It? How Does It Work? Making Decisions Based On What Is Sacred And Works For 7 Future Generations Without Causing Harm, Leaderless Community Conversations, Consensus Process
AVOID GREENWASHING, HALF TRUTHS, AND MISLEADING PUBLIC MANIPULATIONS
Fake Greenwashing; Fake 'Green' Products, Fake News, Fake Services And Industries; Misleading Half Truths, Public Manipulations, Corporate Deceptions, Mass Media Fakery And Propaganda, Monopoly Spin Machinations Via 1 Percent Monopolies
How Pro Nuclear And Anti 99% Corporations Control Eco Environmental Organizations Like Greenpeace, Sierra Club, 350.org, Ceres, Blue Green Alliance
Huge Factory Farms And Animals Cause Global Warming, Subsidies Have Degraded 14 Billion Acres of Pastureland And Grassland, Chemical Agribusiness Kills Soil, Drains Nutrients Out Of Soil
List of 45+ Negative Global Tipping Points
AVOID SUPPORTING, INVESTING IN OR FOLLOWING ANY SOCIOPATHS, PSYCHOPATHIC INDIVIDUALS AND/OR ORGANIZATIONS
https://www.agreenroadjournal.com/2012/04/psychopathy-of-corporations.html
How To Spot A Sociopath Or Psychopath - 10 red flags that could save you from being swept under the influence of a charismatic nut job; via A Green Road
Sociopathic Nuclear Industry; Ex Fukushima Engineer Confesses; No Cold Shutdown, Warned of Tsunami 20 Yrs Ago, All GE Mark I Nuclear Reactors Have Fatal Flaw, Melt Down
CIA Used To Assassinate Foreign Democratically Elected Leaders And Install US Friendly Dictators
https://www.agreenroadjournal.com/2014/07/cia-in-usa-used-to-assassinate-foreign.htmlBECOME A PERSON WITH SUSTAINABLE VALUES, NOT JUST FINANCIAL SUCCESS AND POWER; EXPLORE THE DEFINITION PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IN YOUR ORGANIZATION, GOVERNMENT AGENCY, CHURCH, OR BUSINESS
What works for seven future generations without causing harm?
Explore this question in depth around any decision you or your company, organization, community or non profit make.
Be the change you want to see.
Explore this question in depth around any decision you or your company, organization, community or non profit make.
What Is the Best Investment? What is The Best Use Of Money? What Works For Seven Future Generations Without Causing Harm? What Is More Important Than Teaching The Science Of Sustainable Health? Where Can Money Best Be Donated?
WHAT YOU CAN DO
Be the change you want to see.
Al Gore: The Case For Optimism on Global Warming And Climate Change (TED Talk 2016), 40 Plus Reasons For Hope And Every Person Making A Positive Difference; Be The Change You Want To See
https://www.agreenroadjournal.com/2016/03/al-gore-case-for-optimism-on-global.html
https://www.agreenroadjournal.com/2016/03/al-gore-case-for-optimism-on-global.html
ADOPT A SYMBOL AND FLY THE FLAG THAT POINTS AT THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE
WHAT CAN YOU DO PERSONALLY?
Do a carbon footprint analysis
Calculate Your Carbon FOOD Based Footprint; Eating Animal Products Is Largest Source Of Carbon Pollution In The World
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2015/10/calculate-your-carbon-food-based.html
Carbon Footprint; How To Calculate It For Home, Farm, Business; Zero Carbon, Zero Nuclear Future Required
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2015/02/carbon-footprint-how-to-calculate-it.html
WHAT YOU CAN DO; GET ACTIVE, GET INVOLVED, MAKE A DIFFERENCE
Get active, make a difference in a positive way, which does not harm this or 7 future generations.
7 Generations Zero Harm Project; Environment, Carbon Footprint, Holistic Living, Zero Point, Renewable Energy, Energy Storage, Zero Nuclear, Zero Carbon, Zero Waste, Zero Chemicals
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/p/green-energy-green-living.html
March 26, 2019
Totality is the realization that you are actually the Whole, right now.
March 27, 2019
Our bodies are in time and space, but our Mind is not. Our Mind is time and space.
March 29, 2019
There is nothing you are not. You are the Absolute. You are Knowing, which includes the known.
What do you want? Every movement, every moment is yourself, what you want. It is all your will.
Honor the unlimited Creator, your Self, and the limited creation, which is a portion of your Self.
Who are you? You are the single Mind, with all its power of imagination and self delusion. You are the I AM.
We are constantly looking for things to say yes or no to, making it difficult for us to honor the perfection of all aspects of the Whole.
March 30, 2019
Our normal sense of our Self is incomplete. First, it includes only part of what we see and know. Second, it doesn’t include the Knower, which is essential.
Self-awareness is the process of beginning to notice the Knower, to identify with the Unlimited. When we are Unlimited, we are open and accepting, and begin to love everything. That is bliss.
The Truth is, we are not limited parts. Our ever-present Awareness is whole and is the Unlimited. We are the unlimited movement of the Whole. We are the formless, unlimited Presence in motion, the Self. We are the infinite Knower.
We are Infinity—boundless, imaginative Mind. Remember the Knower.
Via Daniel N. Clark
Might you be a Quaker?
You might be a Quaker and not even know it!
Quaker Finder
Everyone is always welcome at a Quaker worship.
In worship Friends gather into silent, expectant waiting. We hold ourselves open to the Light and reach for the divine center of our being. We know the center to be a place of peace, love, and balance, where we are at one with the universe and with each other.
Activist Teach In; Things Anyone Can Do To Make A Positive Difference
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2015/07/activist-teach-in-10-things-anyone-can.html
Find and invest time, energy and money into sustainable solutions, while dropping the opposite.
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2015/07/activist-teach-in-10-things-anyone-can.html
Find and invest time, energy and money into sustainable solutions, while dropping the opposite.
WHAT YOU CAN DO; LEARN MORE ABOUT THE ART AND SCIENCE OF SUSTAINABLE HEALTH PLUS SUCCESS
7 Generations Zero Harm Project; Environment, Carbon Footprint, Holistic Living, Zero Point, Renewable Energy, Energy Storage, Zero Nuclear, Zero Carbon, Zero Waste, Zero Chemicals
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/p/green-energy-green-living.html
SPIRITUAL NOTES
March 26, 2019
Totality is the realization that you are actually the Whole, right now.
March 27, 2019
Our bodies are in time and space, but our Mind is not. Our Mind is time and space.
March 29, 2019
There is nothing you are not. You are the Absolute. You are Knowing, which includes the known.
What do you want? Every movement, every moment is yourself, what you want. It is all your will.
Honor the unlimited Creator, your Self, and the limited creation, which is a portion of your Self.
Who are you? You are the single Mind, with all its power of imagination and self delusion. You are the I AM.
We are constantly looking for things to say yes or no to, making it difficult for us to honor the perfection of all aspects of the Whole.
March 30, 2019
Our normal sense of our Self is incomplete. First, it includes only part of what we see and know. Second, it doesn’t include the Knower, which is essential.
Self-awareness is the process of beginning to notice the Knower, to identify with the Unlimited. When we are Unlimited, we are open and accepting, and begin to love everything. That is bliss.
The Truth is, we are not limited parts. Our ever-present Awareness is whole and is the Unlimited. We are the unlimited movement of the Whole. We are the formless, unlimited Presence in motion, the Self. We are the infinite Knower.
We are Infinity—boundless, imaginative Mind. Remember the Knower.
Via Daniel N. Clark
WHAT YOU CAN DO
VIDEO: https://youtu.be/UWvkxMretAM?t=32 7 min
You might be a Quaker and not even know it!
WHAT YOU CAN DO; ATTEND AN UNPROGRAMMED QUAKER MEETING NEAR YOU
Quaker Finder
Everyone is always welcome at a Quaker worship.
In worship Friends gather into silent, expectant waiting. We hold ourselves open to the Light and reach for the divine center of our being. We know the center to be a place of peace, love, and balance, where we are at one with the universe and with each other.
WHAT YOU CAN DO; FIND A LOCAL QUAKER GROUP AND ATTEND A MEETING
Locate Quaker Meetings near you (many have websites and links to virtual meetings online)
Attend a virtual meeting online from anywhere in the world
https://www.fgcquaker.org/resources/online-worship-opportunitiesWHAT YOU CAN DO; ENDORSE, LEARN, TRANSFORM, DONATE, WHAT YOU CAN DO; ENDORSE, LEARN, TRANSFORM, DONATE, SHARE, SUPPORT, SPONSOR, CONNECT, COMMENT, AND/OR COLLABORATE
DONATE
Please help AGRP get this news out... thanks for your generous and very appreciated support! What you support grows and expands. What you withhold support from shrinks, shrivels and disappears. Even .50 cents per month is a great help. What is teaching the science of sustainable health worth?-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Donate To A Green Road Project; Help Dr. Goodheart Teach How To Make A Positive Difference For Seven Future Generations Of Children, Animals, Plants And The Planet
Please help AGRP get this news out... thanks for your generous and very appreciated support! What you support grows and expands. What you withhold support from shrinks, shrivels and disappears. Even .50 cents per month is a great help. What is teaching the science of sustainable health worth?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Donate To A Green Road Project; Help Dr. Goodheart Teach How To Make A Positive Difference For Seven Future Generations Of Children, Animals, Plants And The Planet
TRANSLATE
Click to Translate; 60 languages - German, French, Russian, Spanish
Click to Translate; 60 languages - German, French, Russian, Spanish
JOIN THE NETWORK OF OTHER ACTIVISTS; PLUG INTO AGRP
* Join the AGR Network. Forward this or any other article by clicking on the social media facebook, google plus and/or twitter buttons below any AGRP article. The first step for activists is to bring awareness of an issue to the public, by being informed yourself. Which news and information network do you prefer to plug into and network with?
Follow A Green Road Daily News on Wordpress
Email AGRP
Subscribe to; A Green Road Project Magazine, monthly issuesIt is easy to join the AGRP network, and your email will never be rented, sold or shared.
Subscribe/sign up, give feedback, or offer news tips or story ideas by sending an email to agreenroad@gmail.com . Subscribe by typing the word subscribe in the subject line.
* Join the AGR Network. Forward this or any other article by clicking on the social media facebook, google plus and/or twitter buttons below any AGRP article. The first step for activists is to bring awareness of an issue to the public, by being informed yourself. Which news and information network do you prefer to plug into and network with?
Follow A Green Road Daily News on Wordpress
Email AGRPSubscribe to; A Green Road Project Magazine, monthly issues
It is easy to join the AGRP network, and your email will never be rented, sold or shared.
Subscribe/sign up, give feedback, or offer news tips or story ideas by sending an email to agreenroad@gmail.com . Subscribe by typing the word subscribe in the subject line.
COPYRIGHT
Wayne Dyer - What You Think, You Become (Wayne Dyer Meditation)
Wayne Dyer - What You Think, You Become (Wayne Dyer Meditation)
"Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, "ALLOWANCES ARE MADE FOR FAIR USE" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute, that otherwise might be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use." For more info go to:www.lawcornel.edu/uscode.
Copyright protected material on this website is used in accordance with 'Fair Use', for the purpose of study, review or critical analysis, and will be removed at the request of the copyright owner(s). Please read Notice and Procedure for Making Claims of Copyright Infringement.
"Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, "ALLOWANCES ARE MADE FOR FAIR USE" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute, that otherwise might be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use." For more info go to:www.lawcornel.edu/uscode.
Copyright protected material on this website is used in accordance with 'Fair Use', for the purpose of study, review or critical analysis, and will be removed at the request of the copyright owner(s). Please read Notice and Procedure for Making Claims of Copyright Infringement.
WHAT YOU CAN DO: SHARE THIS ARTICLE
A Green Road; Teaching the Art And Science of Sustainable Health plus Success.
Keep asking - what works for 7 future generations without causing harm?
Support AGR and share this article via by copying and pasting title and url into;
A Green Road; Teaching the Art And Science of Sustainable Health plus Success.
Keep asking - what works for 7 future generations without causing harm?
Support AGR and share this article via by copying and pasting title and url into;
Website and contact page
End
Victor Restrepo: Natural Law Based Precautionary Principle vs Short Term Greed/Profit Approach - What Works For 7 Future Generations Without Causing Harm? The Pressure Is Growing To Adopt The Principle Of Debating Effect On 7 Future Generations, Or Suffer Severe Consequences