world is in danger.

Now and then , I hear and read that world is in danger. Now a days, most vocal warning is about Global Warming (The fact is if earth had not warmed earlier, we would not have come in to existence). Thirty year back it is was Ozone hole in sky or before that danger of nuclear war. We must take note that causes of dooms are changing, it means we are progressing ( To jump from one problem to next is progress).

Another thing these warning etc presume /procalims that humans has become more powerfull then mother nature or natural laws.This I strongly dispute. Inspite of all progress human beings have made, we are stiil struggling to protect ourselves from nature only. This nature has billions of years history and our known history is merely 5000-6000 year old. What ever changes we are recording are just 200-300 year's study or record. Many of these observations are merely 40-50 year old. We do not know for sure, whether there are changes , and if changes are there, they are due to human activity or nature's cyclic change.

It is our only ego to say that we are causing change.

However, I do not belittle the sincerity of the people who care about this country or planet. Nor I do underestimate the message for improvement given by all stakeholders, be it, parents, schools, newspaper, TV, Govt, NGO and so on to save earth.

But taking them seriously can harm your own life and can take away joy out of your life. First thing we should remember, whatever prophets of doom are saying, they are saying for so many centuries and always do not prove correct. In fact no body can predict future of a country or society beyond 5 years. For example, my generation took population explosion seriously and limited family to one child, depriving the child of natural company. And down 30 years, we are hearing population dividend for India.

In fact all predictions assume / have fault logic in 2 way. One , if such and such thing continue, this or that will happen and second their mind comprehends presently available solutions only. Rememebr, nature is always changing and human mind is not able to understand/ imagine what has not happened yet or mind has not experienced it. The best example of this is, when we search life beyond earth, always we link it with availability of water and oxygen. Is it not possible that there may be other life system which may be surviving and growing on any other natural element. Another, just 50 year back who would have thought that intrenet will change the way we communicate or socialise.

So, what is happening today will change tomorrow, and new things will come in to being, not only because of science but because of changing perceptions, laws, religion, politics and economics etc.

To give one small example, take the so called perishable nature of petro products, and the so called shortage of alternative energy sources. It is not that, they are not available. They are readily available, but presently at higher price then petro products. As per economic law, if supply of petro products goes down, prices will go up, and alternate sources will come in to use.

Further, 100 years back also, Mumbaikar must have been crying about heavy population influx, life becoming miserable and so on, but high rise apartments, fly overs etc (not thought over 100 years back) have been built, to accommodate ever increasing population pressure. Fact is that, the day Mumbai will have more problem as compared to opportunity, people will move and settle to any other city.

There is tendency to oppose new development by raising false alarems, which some time seems ridiculous after a gap of generation. That is why when X -ray was dicivered, people thought, it will encroach on privacy of people and encourage porn/ nudity. Similary, when Hydroelectic power came in to existence, media spread/ people believed that after passing through turbines, energy / potency of water is passed / changed to electric power, and such water is useless/ dangerous.

The fact is that continents and kingdoms might have prospered and perished but the history of human being is a smooth history of progress, starting from discovery of fire and wheel to present day space missions. Every generation has faced problems and solved them in their own way. Today, we may complain about shortage of food but copmare it with famines of ninteenth century. Further we may see enequality among different groups but, slave system is no more. Such examples of progress in every walk of life is many many.

Lastly, and most important , as compared to life of nation and society, our own life is very-very short,(and every phase of life comes only once) and for world's imagined problem/ danger or real problems, for which solutions will emerge in course of time , do not waste your life or destroy joy.

Be Happy, Live your life, Act responsibly but do not worry.

Development v/s Nature.

All present day debate about development v/c nature is non- sense and pure noise only. When some one says world is changing for the worst, it only mean, it is changing in such a way that it is adversely affecting his vested interest (in status quo situation). If you are benefitted by change, the development is progress, if you are aversly affected it is destroying nature.

Some one says development should not be against nature. I ask, can development and nature go together. Nature means, things available to all, development means the man made things which can be used for a price (even for free road we have to pay tax to govt.).

Some one says development should not destroy/ change culture. Is it possible ?. In absence of economic activity in rainy season (not connected with town and alternate economic activity), a village does have culture and tradition of religious functions. Or when milk / perishable vegetable can not be sent to market, there is tradition or culture of free distribution. If a road is made and village is connected to town and round the year economic activity is possible, will it be possible to continue old tradition with same faith ? Definitely no. Same is true about, man and woman relations. With education, economic independence and control over birth process being available to woman now, is it possible to continue traditional power equilibrium between male and female.

The fact is that every system be it political, social, ethics, economics, science and so on, affects and get affected by other system. Development in any one system afects other.For example, Social system affects political system, science affects ethics and so on. No system is independent.

Further what is being changed, may not be correct or good in first place. What we call History, is just narration of victorious party, it need not be and generally not true. The present laws, are compromise between different groups at point of making law (highest one being constitution of country), it need not be ethical or just (Parliament / Assemblies have passed laws for reservation for woman in local bodies but not able to implement for themselves). Same can be said of other branches of knowledge. Further every system develops side effects which generates alternate process/ system and destroys old one.

Just think, in a debate over nature against development, had man not destroyed forest and developed the agriculture. If some one had banned paper manufacturing to save forest. Some one might not have cleared forest and made road (Grand Trunk Road, built by Sher Shah Suri, what feeling it evokes, pride of development or shame of nature's destruction ?). Had our forefathers chosen nature against development, what would have been our life today ?.

In this debate some one talks about sustainable development. Limit no one knows ?. Simple yardstick is, What development took place, up to my generation is sustainable but what my next generation is doing/ developing is not sustainable. That is why , Petrol wells are OK but mining at Poles is not.

This all, we decide purely on adhoc basis to suit our own convenience. There is law to punish, even if you cut one green tree of your back yard. But enviromental clearence is possible for building Roads in Himalaya. Logic is , it is defence needs. China has built Air port at the base of Himalaya. Can you now stop other development that will follow.

What is effect of our development activity over nature (negative) and conserving activity for nature (positive) ?. We measure air and water quality of city and interpolate it for whole earth, and say whole nature is being polluted or destroyed. We clean some ponds and say we saved nature. Compare it with the devasting nature of nature in form of Tsunami, Earth Quack and Volcano etc, (latest being eruption of Volacano in Iceland , distrupting Air Traffic in Europe). Similarly, if we just calculate the cleaning power of Solar Energy (This is the mother of all energy sources), through regeneration of biosphere, vaporisation of water and raining ,I wonder whether any day man can pollute the earth that much or his cleaning effort will ever match with nature's cleaning power.

If our effort is to have so little effect either way, why so much noise ?. Remember, every communication has purpose, but it may not be true. Same may be said about communications for and against development. There is marketing efforts of companies that are benefitted by the fear generated through destruction of nature. Developed world says, we have polluted world but developing world should not pollute the world. Developing world says enough of your pollution, now you stop and it is our turn now. Both exegarate damage being done by development, just to stop other party and debate and negotiations goes on just to protect or improve own positions.

To be philosophical and believe Geeta " What we are able to create ?. What we are able to destroy?. Absolutely nothing. We, at the most changing the form of things.Today we are not able to use some changed material but it does not mean it has lost its intrinsic value or utility. Remember, to days coal was nothing but compressed/ destroyed forest, deep buried millions of years back. Just like that, to days waste will also be used in some form in future.

To conclude, nature is too powerful to be destroyed by our development. Development will only bring changes in our different systems.

So, Do not worry and be happy.

It does not mean that we should behave irresponsibly, and stop cleaning rivers, planting trees etc. These are essential to protect or improve our local environment and reduce cost of living for ourselves, but to link it with big concepts like saving of earth etc. is ego of man only.