What really matters in all this?
Is climate change “real”, or just a natural climatic cycle so vast that it defies human study?
And if it is real, is it caused by human behavior, or is the anthropogenic argument all just a ruse designed to deny us our right to keep on having more of what we want?
After literally years of poring over the research, the short answer is… none of this matters.
The time-wasting debate, the dueling banjos of data-competition, the discrediting of each side's science by the opposition. The outright paranoia that someone, somewhere, is falsifying data to serve their own end. None of that matters. At least, it shouldn’t.
It shouldn’t matter because we shouldn’t need it to matter. It shouldn’t take an ominous threat to our continued existence in order for us to start being better stewards of our habitat.
The idea that the average individual might require fear-based empirical evidence to prove to them that certain actions we take are beneficial and regenerative, while others are destructive, defies logic. And yet, here we are, faced with the assertion that certain changes are already “locked-in”, despite all the warnings and debating back and forth.
Any reasonable person, if he were being honest, would agree that conserving natural resources and replenishing what we consume is preferable to the short-sighted depletion of the landscape and disruption of the eco-system. And, it would be hard to argue with the idea that reducing our dependence on a finite supply of fossil-based fuels, and instead powering our amazing, technologically-advanced civilization on alternative means is a good idea. I mean, we’re reasonable people, aren’t we? And there is that whole technologically-advanced thing, so we've got that going for us.
'The Regenerative Home' promotes doing the right thing, for the right reasons; specifically, setting ambitious goals for energy-use reductions and striving to meet them, reducing potable water-consumption,