I would paraphrase Diamond by saying too few of populations past and present have a connection with sustainable thinking. Hence the failure of contemporary society to prevent climate change and less affordable energy. I'm not sure if arresting the deterioration of a natural system is quite the same as restoring it to a pristine state. For example I'd say the lower Murray is getting back to health when you can catch cod everywhere weighing over 50kg. That's also why wood chips from old growth forests are worth far more than $150 a tonne; if you wanted to restore that forest it would take centuries so there is no recognition of the replacement cost.

I would paraphrase Jared Diamond by saying he did no research into the environmental situation Australia then published a chapter about what we should and shouldn't be doing.

What a tosser.

The worrying thing though is the coverage he got when he was in Australia.

We can't really blame him though - look at the idiotic philosophy masquerading as science featured in Tim Flannery's new book. And he actually lives here.

What is happening to science?

t.u.s

Well said, Jennifer. The major problem is that so many apparently well-educated and hopefully well-intentioned people so readily respond in an ignorant and emotional way without regard to the facts and science of an issue. This is a far bigger threat to the well-being of ourselves and our planet than are many of the scare-mongering issues such as those promoted by Professor Extremelypressurisedcarbon.

There is a worrying element of intellectual laziness here. I first became concerned about global warming around 1989, when I was briefed by, among others, Sir Frederick Houghton, the leading IPCC scientist at the time. Houghton was a genuine scientist, unlike many of his colleagues he didn't exaggerate findings and concerns on the issue but was clear as to the limited extent of the IPCC's knowledge and understanding . There did seem to be grounds for concern, with a need for much better understanding and evidence before one could be definitive, and I've tried to stay well-informed since. The more I've learned, the more sceptical I've become that this an issue requiring drastic action.

If Jared Diamond had not recieved the gong then we'd know little about him.
I think its specious for Diamond to keep asking why did Europeans conquer other parts of the world instead of societies from some other part conquering Europe. The irony is that Diamond, while intending to transcend racialized explanations of difference and domination, actually descends into a geographical and biological determinism that comprises the bedrock of racism.

No wonder he's so attractive to so many.

See these if you are interested in more critique of this Mr Nobody.

William H. McNeill, "History Upside Down," NEW YORK REVIEW OF BOOKS, May 15,
1997 and his exchange with Diamond in the June 26, 1997 issues of the same
publication

James Blaunt's review in GEOGRAPHICAL REVIEW vol. 89, no. 3(July 1999), 391-408

Gale Stokes, "The Fates of Human Societies: A Review of Recent
Macrohistories," AMERICAN HISTORICAL REVIEW vol. 106 (April 2001), 508-25

Diamond's pitch is not restricted to Australia's degree-qualified suburban elite. His impropriety is far more insidious.

He has cast a far greater confidence in Australia's environmentalism, when robbed of instinctive fulfilment by urbanisation, in a manner which is not dissimilar to the Pauline Hanson phenomenon.

How readily the metroploitan masses jump onto the politcially-popular band-wagon.

Disenfranchised Australians, living on the periphery, won't argue land management ineptitude.

They will, however, contest their statutory entitlements to benfeit from environmental solutions to identified problems that maximise returns and minimise costs.

Fanning the flames of environmental tradegy sells books and rallies troops, just as surely as disarming the nation and reinstating traditional land rights elicits extreme right-winged Hansonims at the polls.

Thank you, Jennifer Marohasy, for keeping watch over our national integirty.

I live and work in the middle of a farming area, so perhaps am
more qualified to comment then Jared :)

Farming has changed dramatically in the last 25 years and that
will continue. Jennifer is correct, modern farming methods in
Australia are far more sustainable then they ever were. Our
original mistake was to copy Europe. Now we have developed our
our systems and methods, which IMHO are superior to theirs
in terms of sustainability.

One thing is for sure. I'd rather eat meat and other produce coming
from Australian farms, where alot of the animals still eat grass
and clover, then some of the output from American factory farming.