Skip to main content

Public Letter to the Wisconsin Board of Commissioners of Public Land

Terms and use of text: Text can be used to email the Wisconsin Board of Comissioners of Public Land. It must be kept in entirety or taken by paragraph. It must keep the same tone and if not, it must be quoted. Hate speech of any kind cannot be incorporated into this text.
 As a resident I want to express that I am disappointed that the Board of Commissioners of Public Land has decided to ban work and discussion on climate change.

First and foremost, I am disappointed that the board is justifying it's actions as banning 'political' activity. Which rests on the assumption that the topic of climate change is political. The topic of climate change is no more political than the theory of relativity, or gravity. It should be delegated to the realm of fact, and current phenomena. It would be insidious to ban the discussion of upcoming major storms or wildfires, or worse yet, the farmers almanac for crop plantings, and yet climate change rests in the same field; a scientific understanding of weather patterns based on meteorology, sediment layers, and atmospheric concentrations of gases. To me it is absurd that such discussion should be banned.

The government should not censor discussion or work because of some skirmish between co-workers and their intellectual leanings. And Matt Adamcyzk, I am most disappointed in you that you would involve government in such affairs. It is one thing to talk privately about these matters, it is another to make it an utter political and governmental affair. To add an unnecessary layer of bureaucracy to say that Nelson and all other employees must "forward' all emails concerning climate change "so we can all look at it" is unnecessarily burdensome and wasteful. The fact that Nelson had to justify going to a timber conference that had a discussion about climate change shows a severe breach of the role of government in scientific affairs.

The fact is, banning discussion and work about climate change is  detrimental, not only to the Board of Commissioners of Public Land, but of the state and nation more broadly. It is not the first time that political feelings about climate change have attempted to trump the 97 percent scientific consensus on the matter. Climate change is a fact, whether your gut feeling supports it or not. Banning discussion about climate change, as the legislature tried to do earlier last year, is detrimental to our ability to cope and adapt to changing realities. For god sakes, our seed planting regions have shifted, is it so unforeseeable to you that the changing ecologies of timber and harvest will inevitably be affected as well? We know climate change will affect wildfire and drought, because precipitation will become more variable (meaning less of the consistent light rain, and more extreme rain followed by long drought). This means more propensity for wildfire, tree infestation by invasive beetles and pests, and lowered water tables. This will no doubt affect the Board of Commissioners of Public Land. As an Alumni and resident of this state, I think it is fickle and immature to handle our state's future investments based on outright obstinance in the face of scientific consensus on the matter. Climate change will affect our public lands, and it will affect the Board of Commissioners of Public Land. It is not a political matter but a somber reality. A reality the Board of Commissioners of Public Land would be privy to read up on, and even actively engage in learning about changing timber ecologies and climate change at conferences like Nelson tried to do. I am sorely disappointed that our Board of Commissioners has valued political obstinance over mature realism in handling our state's investments.

The Board of Commissioners with this vote is making a precedent that everyday discussion topics or scientific understandings can be censured in work environments because they are 'political'. This sets a precedent that we do not want to follow. I ask the Board of Commissioners to overturn the most recent vote against work or discussion of climate change. It is not the governments affair to micro-manage the intellectual leanings of it's employees, and it never should be.


Popular posts from this blog

An Argument Against Sociology Being a Bullshit Study

So, as a Sociology major I have (perhaps inevitably) come across people who have voiced their opinions on why sociology is a crock, convoluted, an unacceptable method for conducting science, and not a valid (impractical) study. I hope to address these issues and give a thorough defense of my field, for (obviously) if I had no defense, I should not be a sociology major. I do completely welcome criticism and comments to what I write, and in fact I would love some. I thoroughly believe that the best analysis is derived from discussion and (logical) argumentation. I have put in  bold  the main points since I realize many of you probably do not want to read my god-knows-how-long argument.  SO on with it. I guess I will address the different arguments I have come across one by one Sociology is not credible because it borrows from so many other fields .  Indeed, Sociology is extremely interdisciplinary, but I think the complexity is what makes it so grand. We could limit Sociology b

My problems with the strong is the new skinny campaign

When the 'strong is the new skinny' campaign first started, I was pretty excited about it. The first article I saw was a woman who used to be what she considered anorexic. She said she was weak, and barely ate. She fell in love with weight lifting, and said it gave her confidence, strength and courage. She explained how before lifting she was taught to deprive herself, to lack confidence in her body, and be weak. After lifting she felt proud of her new strength, could eat (and was supposed to eat) more, and felt a sense of progress towards muscle, versus progress towards being smaller. She posted new photos of herself showing she didn't look much different (she didn't 'get huge'). Her photos though were fairly normal looking. She probably had a healthy 10-20% body fat, and you could tell she had some solid muscle. Her muscle, however, wasn't rippling out of her skin, and it isn't supposed to be. There are two main types of weight training I want to tal

A 15 minute exercise for anxiety or depression.

As your hands fumble across countless sites of self-help and coping, this post might have come up. I know the feeling. The feeling of your head being a electric sarcophagus. Of so many negative thoughts and feelings ripping through you like a tornado. You can't concentrate. You can't eat. Living is surviving. First, I want you to know that it gets better. It always gets better. Nothing can stay the same. Next I want you to know that everything takes time, but this method will change your relationship with your feelings instantly. The problem with anxiety and depression is often the pink elephant syndrome. Right now I want you to NOT think about pink elephants . Don't do it. If you do something terrible will happen. What are you thinking about? Pink Elephants? Really? Stop doing it. Just stop. Jesus get a hold of yourself. It's an easy task, just stop thinking about pink elephants! Not very effective huh? But this is the tactic us people