Scientists and cartographers, having absorbed the revelation that the world is not flat, realized at some later point that the world is actually an ellipsoid. This as I understand it is due to the force exerted by the rotation of the earth, causing mass to accumulate at & near the equator.
In a similar but inverse process, due to human adaptation patterns and subsequent opportunism, wealth has thus far tended to accumulate in the more temperate areas north and south of the equator. Although the first imbalance is not so easily corrected, and doesn't cause us a lot of problems aside from occasional miscalculations and accidents on very precise cartography endeavours (and really, lots of people really like ellipses), the second is an enormous problem for the majority of the inhabitants of the planet, and due to the fact that we all live on the same chunk of dirt flying through space, threatens to pose more and more problems for those living in more affluent neighbourhoods. Here you'll find a synopsis of a study carried out by the Worldwatch Institute in cooperation with the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) that gives a few reasons why the health of developed areas depends on the health of developing areas.
--------"SPECIAL ADVERTISING SECTION"--------
If you feel motivated to make a contribution to help resolve this disparity and the problems it creates and may create in the future, you of course have many options. You could, for example, make a donation directly to one of the organizations linked to on the first post on this blog. As well there is a spectrum with more colours than a crayon box with a sharpener of organizations doing great work to help us all get along better. If you'd like to make a contribution to a specific domain, I would suggest entering the word NGO (for non-governmental organization) along with your topic of interest into a search engine. And although perhaps a bit dated, there is a list of UN-recognized NGOs here.
If, however, you're interested in doing something a bit more connected to your personal life, and you happen to be someone who knows me, you can contribute to my fundraising campaign. CUSO has explained the Netcorps fundraising system fairly succinctly on their web page. Of course funds that I raise will be contributed to Canadian Crossroads International. We've been given a goal of $2000 each, but CCI understands that, especially given that we're doing this on fairly short notice (I'll be leaving in early November), we may not be able to reach this amount. Such a contribution is classified as a donation to a non-profit organization, and thus can be used as a tax deduction. If you're interested in making a contribution, you can do so online at this address. For other methods, please send me an email, and I'll let you know how it works. Or perhaps you know someone or a company that might be interested, if so please send them a link to this blog. Donations can be any amount from $2 to $2000. Or even more, if you're so inclined.
--------"SPECIAL ADVERTISING SECTION" ENDS----------
"money
is a hit"
--Roger Waters
1 comment:
Hi, Ted - I randomly ran across some of your remarks on Linus Torvalds blog in which he was remarking on the 'God Squad' at Costco. I read so little that makes sense in this regard; I thought your musings about how the fundamental semantic furniture among mainstream believers and non-believers is not so different was pretty profound. And, funny, I've said the same thing myself: if I say 'he has some real demons in him', the statement functions the same way it does whether I'm an agnostic or atheist or Baptist. It's always intrigued me that Newton, Pascal, and a host of other very rational and innovative people didn't seem to have the same unnerving cleft between 'scientific' and 'religious' that we all struggle with today. Sure there are plenty of people in 'popular' religion who don't ever ask 'what does this really mean in literal terms', but maybe it's we 'rationals' who are blind to the metaphors and personifications in our own thinking who have the deficient (imaginative?) faculties.
Anyway, at 59, I have concluded that there are an awful lot of very healthy, intelligent people that somehow function at a very high level with this 'separate but equal' system of belief that includes spirits and what all. And so I have to be a little more humble about my own 'atoms and molecules only, please' arrogance.
Thanks again for your thoughtful note in an emotional area.
Post a Comment