Bare Bones Biology 295 – The Hub

Last week, on the back of the bulletin in the Episcopal church, we read the following:


“God is the hub of the wheel of life. The closer we come to God, the closer we come to each other. The basis of community is not primarily our ideas, feelings, and emotions about each other, but our common search for God. When we keep our minds and hearts directed toward God, we will come more fully ‘together.’”       Henri J. M. Nouwen.


imagesIf you have followed Bare Bones Biology for a while, you have heard me say from time to time that that I believe The Creation consists of one reality that is factually true, and searching for that factual reality is one of the more direct routes toward truth — from wherever we begin our path.


“More specifically, when one looks at things from the perspective of the rim, then the spokes connecting the rim with the center seem very separate from one another . . . as do the various religious traditions when viewed  through the glasses of their respective theologies, rituals, and so on. However, when one reaches the  center of the wheel where all of the spokes come together, then one appreciates the principles of unity which govern the function of the wheel despite the apparent disparities of the individual spokes and, similarly, when one is opened to the mysteries of Self-realization, then, one experiences, in direct fashion, the unity which underlies and glues together the apparently disparate aspects of life …”   Shayk Tariq Knecht.


But certainly we can’t get there exclusively on the back of measurable facts and the scientific method. The Creation is very much more than that, and contains many kinds of reality.  facts are facts, but they are not sufficient because truths cannot be comprehended by humans at the level of literalism. The Creation is very much more than facts, especially reductionist facts, because, for one example that is or can be purely physical, The Creation is a system composed of systems.  And there are not many kinds of measurable facts.   Nevertheless, real facts, and the road toward our understanding of real facts and our responsible use of them, do indeed carry us closer to the hub of truth. Similarly, our other modes of truth-seeking, if they are valid and if we make the honest effort, must meet at the hub of reality, mingled among the facts of science.


Our culture is nowhere near that hub, and of course we will not get there, to the center, if we can’t tell the difference between real facts, our own world views, the nuggets of truth that lie at the heart of our myths and metaphors, and our opinions that are never omniscient. There are many things that humans cannot understand:


“One of the striking peculiarities of common man is that, while he now has abundant scientific evidence to the contrary, he finds it intensely difficult to   understand that his beliefs are by no means always linked with his intelligence, his culture, or his values.” Indries Shah.


And we cannot draw near to any truth until we learn to discuss the issues that divide us and connect us, because:


“Discussion, like an army, serves no human master, but harnesses the force of argument and the power of personality to the common goal of growing understanding.” Paul Woodruff.


And our culture is unwilling to discuss he critical issues. So I defer to His Holiness The Dalai Lama, who has accepted, with incredibly compassionate wisdom, the enormous “cross” of the golden wheel (that wheel in the picture is supposed to be golden) that represents the eightfold path of his heritage, and has expanded that responsibility to encompass the world of all science, all religion, and all sentient beings. He quotes Shantideva:


“May the fearful become fearless;

May those oppressed by grief find joy;

May those who are anxious

Be rid of their anxiety and feel secure.


“May health come to the sick;

May they be free from every bondage;

May those who are weak find strength,

Their minds tender toward each other.


“As long as space remains,

As long as sentient beings remain,

Until then, may I too remain

And help dispel the miseries of the world.”

(sound familiar?)


In our corposystem culture, we have replaced that golden wheel, and its eightfold path that reaches toward the hub of Life, replaced it with the grimy threefold cycle of co-dependence that generates and re-generates the fairy-tale of human supremacy uber alles.


I do not wish in any way to demean the “parts” of the system of human aspirations in favor of the whole. No more than Shantideva demeans the parts in the above quote. In any case that would not work, because the whole is clearly an emergent reality that is dependant for its very existence upon its parts. (Donella H. Meadows. Thinking in Systems, 2008, Chelsea Green; Huston Smith, Why Religion Matters, 2001, Harper One).


But for myself, I do not wish to spend my own short personal time in reverence for the parts over the whole emergent miracle of the ongoing creation of Life of Earth.


This is Bare Bones Biology, a production of A copy of the podcast may be found at:

The Blog address is:


Henri J. M. Nouwen. The Genesis Diary.

Shayk Tariq Knecht. 2010. Journal of a Sufi Odyssey.

Indries Shah. 1968. The Way of the Sufi, Penguin Books.

Paul Woodruff. 2001. Reverence, Oxford University Press.

Shantideva. 2008. A translation of the Bodhicharyavatara, Revised Edition, translated from the Tibetan by the Padmakara Translation Group, Shambala.

His Holiness The Dalai Lama. 2010. Toward a True Kinship of Faiths, Doubleday.   Probably with help of his primary English translator Thupten Jinpa

Donella H. Meadows. 2008. Thinking in Systems, Chelsea Green.

Huston Smith. 2001. Why Religion Matters, Harper One.

Photo by

Bare Bones Biology 254 – But my Friends Won’t Like Me

The most common question people ask me as an activist is: “what should we do?” So, of course, I’ve been thinking about that question for about 15 years, and I have an answer, and I tell them. So what happens? Nothing. If they don’t like my answer they just ask again next time. Perhaps that means they’re asking the wrong question. Maybe it was not a question in the first place, just a way to manipulate someone who is genuinely seeking answers. But I answered the question anyhow. The answer is:

Ask good questions and answer the questions other people ask you. What would happen then? A discussion. Until we can find a way to begin a factual discussion of the dilemma we humans are now facing on earth – until we can discuss the reality – there will be no viable answers.

It’s not me preventing the discussion, and we all are doing a lot of jawing, but mostly I hear bad excuses for not discussing the factual reality. One of which is asking me how to solve all the problems and then not listening to the answer. I do not hear good questions, or very rarely, and almost never do I hear anyone answering good questions. What happens is – well you know what happens. It’s all over facebook and every conversation.

We have a vast number of ways to avoid the useful discussion. Why? Probably because we are afraid that our friends and colleagues won’t like us. Not really a good excuse to avoid doing the one thing that is most likely to bring about good solutions. To evaluate information rather than evaluating people to get what we want personally.

And the way to do that is just forget about our preferences about how questions should be asked – within the bounds of human decency — and ignore the little angst that seems in our culture to come in response to every question – and consider the question itself.
If we can’t do that, then we either: 1) are allowing ourselves to be manipulated by questions ; or 2) are afraid of questions.

140920-ClimateMarc-ASC_1731RLRLSsThe next question is — why are we afraid of questions? That fear in our culture is a knee-jerk reaction that is very deep, and I think it is what prevents us from solving our problems with discussion, even though we all know if we don’t at least try the discussion method of solving our problems, then the next step is abuse, hatred, war and discrimination on the basis of whatever is handy, all those dark deeds we blame on someone else.

My personal opinion is that our fear of questions may be the “down side” of “nonviolence” upbringing. We are taught that violence, hatred, war and the like are wrong, but telling people they are wrong does not make our feelings go away. Claiming the glass is half full does not make it any less empty. Refusing to talk about what is and what isn’t doesn’t change what is and what isn’t. The people don’t get less violent, they just hide it better by becoming more manipulative, and then we have to try to figure out what they mean by everything they say (which I personally cannot do). And there you are — one upped and one down. So we become afraid of questions.

Or in abusive families children may be shouted at: “Why did you do that?” which is not a question, but we nevertheless become afraid of questions. I also think this is why the deniers and the controllers are so successful that we will probably crash ourselves into oblivion. All because we are afraid to ask and answer good questions.

In fact, really good questions are almost always clumsy because we don’t quite know what we are trying to understand, and we really want to figure it out. In a professional situation clumsy questions can cause harm (have caused me harm), which I suppose is another reason we are afraid of questions. In this culture, asking good questions will almost always be misunderstood.

So then the question is: Which is more important? Always being right? Or always being understood? Or always understanding everything perfectly? Or finding good solutions to important problems?

This is Bare Bones Biology, a production of and KEOS radio, 89.1 in Bryan, TX.

A copy of the podcast can be downloaded here:

Bare Bones Biology 212 – Thinking From Both Ends

“Some people (cling) to angst as if it were a virtue. I let it go with relief. Optimism (is) a gift at birth. Bottles (are) half full, not half empty.” (Dick Francis, “To the Hilt”)

140624-snake-ASC_9468RSss copyIn fact, any bottle or glass that is half full is also half empty, and if, for example, you live out-of-doors in rattlesnake country, as I do, you would be wise to look first to the rattlesnake’s fangs, and then to its beauty. (This picture is not a rattlesnake. Upside? We are keeping it to eat mice. The mice are very cute. Downside? Hanta virus, and there was a very serious recent case of someone who did not KNOW about Hanta virus.)

Here’s a small example of withholding the half-empty information in order to influence decision making and sell stuff. Take a look at the hybrid sunflower seeds I bought last week in Santa Fe. Pretty picture on the front of the package. Writing on the back explains that these sunflowers are better than most, because they “do not drip pollen on your beautiful tabletop.” OK, that’s the good news. Now tell us the rest. No such luck. The package does not mention the downside. Everything has a downside.

I assume the downside of these hybrid sunflowers is that they cannot make viable seeds. At least that is a common result of hybridization. Like a mule, which is also a hybrid organism. Mules are very useful animals with special talents, but unfortunately they are sterile and so cannot make more mules. These seeds, I assume, are also sterile. That’s why they don’t make pollen and that’s also why they probably don’t make fertile seeds.

I’m not saying we should mope about in “angst” because we don’t know how to make wise decisions. But we do need to take responsibility for both ends of each problem. The good and bad, the yin and yang, the half-full and half-empty. Find ALL the information you need to make wise decisions, which is all the good and all the bad – fact check the information – discuss it with people who have genuine expertise and with people who will be affected by your decisions — and make a plan.

We cannot grow a healthy community when some people are not willing to look at the downside; other people are getting rich by withholding the information we need to make wise decisions; and everyone else is confused because they don’t see the connection between the upside and the downside. Or they choose to ignore the fact that everything has a downside. And that’s the kind of human interactions we are promoting today.

So what are we doing instead? We are fighting it out, which is the same as not deciding. When we choose to not research the downside and the upside, or in other ways avoid our responsibility to make wise decisions – we are deciding to not decide. Not making decisions is a choice; that’s why I say there are always more than two choices attached to any problem. When you choose to not choose wisely, you are in fact choosing to let someone else choose for you. You are choosing to be the victim of other people’s choices.

Here’s a really big and very important example.
First I’ll give a glass-half-full opinion:

“We should encourage growth of the human population because population growth maintains economic growth.”

Here is a half empty opinion:

“We should try to avoid human overpopulation because in the long run the economy will crash from not having enough resources to feed the growth AND because human over-growth kills off other parts of the Biosystem that create the resources.”

There are data to support both answers, but if you are fighting on the side of either answer by claiming the other is not true — rather than studying and discussing the problem from both ends – then we all are losing forever our precious opportunity to make wise choices now.

This is Bare Bones Biology, a production of FactFictionFanc and KEOS radio, 89.1 FM, in Bryan, Texas.

A copy of this podcast can be downloaded at:

Bare Bones Biology 175 – The End is in Sight

So here we are sitting inside of a human body, a system that sits inside the corposystem that sits inside the Biosystem, and we said last time that the function of a system is to perpetuate itself.   And of course the more systems we must perpetuate (and there are more, for example our digestive system – etc.) — the more complicated it becomes.  The function of a system is to perpetuate itself (…he-real-answer/).

The corposystem is a failed system, or at least it is unless it changes its bottom line goal, which is growth.  Growth has hit the wall because we are using up, every year, more resources than can be produced, at least of the important ones, like food, healthy air and water and soil.

131030-snow-ASC_6978RLSsThe more we struggle to perpetuate the corposystem as it is, the longer it continues to use gimmicks and technologies to extract the last little bit of life from the Biosystem to further its own toxic growth, the bigger will be he crash of the corposystem in its ending and the more human suffering will result.  So people rush around crying “What can we do?”  or “Buy my solution ,” when the answer is totally obvious to everyone.  STOP GROWING.  If we do that, we will (eventually) have enough resources.  But the function of the corposystem is to perpetuate itself, and itself is based on growth.  So, what to do about that?

Of course, we must recognize how the corposystem is controlling us – teaching us, frightening us, conning us, bribing us, and lying to us — to perpetuate itself — and we must simply stop doing those things that tend to prevent us from straight-out discussion of the subject of saving ourselves by saving the Biosystem that gives us food and healthy air, water and soil.  I have referred to teaching, frightening, conning, bribing and lying as corposystem games (for example Bare Bones Biology 072 – More Corposystem Games  All these games, and more that you can think of, control us by encouraging our normal human denial games that are more fun than facing facts.  Examples abound:

a) We prefer to believe there are no facts and therefore all decisions revolve around our own human  opinions rather than hard-to-face facts.

b) We would rather be important than effective.  The biggest reason that ANY so-called solutions don’t work is that the leaders’ world view will not let them accept their ignorance, so they go for short-term easy, flashy fixes that make things worse in the long run, rather than study the system relative to the goal.

c) The commonest excuse is,  “there is nothing we can do.”  Second, “the glass is half full;”

d) We are committed to being a winner, rather than resolving the problems (this is basically the same as b), except it includes a great many people who simply want to win a war — to conquer the Biosystem, cancer, drugs, whatever — some of whom are willing to say so, and it s usually a corporate top-down “mission;”

e) We don’t care about the future as long as we can get what we want now;

f) We have so much hatred in our lives that we can’t think about anything else ;

g) We are into “blame-placing” past events rather than trying to figure out what is more likely to work in the future based on current behaviors;

h) Irrelevant speculation is more fun than facing facts.  The last one I heard was: “what population would we need to get down to restore what we had?”  Irrelevant because we can’t make anyone “get down to a population” AND it is impossible to get back what we had.  Time does not go backward.  Better to set a possible goal;

i)  It’s more fun to get mad at me and blame me for something, rather than try to understand my perspective.  Blame-placing is the current most promoted corposystem-trained behavior to avoid facing problems.  Time does not go backward – blame-placing changes nothing.  It should be used to perpetuate the rule of law, but we aren’t doing that;

j) Actually probably the most common denial behavior is to concentration on details without regard to overall results.  That’s the “scientific” reductionist approach and is now taken almost universally as valid, so causes a great deal of trouble.  All systems have emergent properties (see…he-real-answer, quite a ways down, that was a really long one, under definition of emergent properties.) If that fact is not considered, then it’s not possible to anticipate the results of reductionist tinkering with any system..

This is Bare Bones Biology, a production of and KEOS FM, 89.1 in Bryan, Texas.  A podcast of this program is available at:

Tar Sands Aerial

Bare Bones Biology 156 – Nice Speak

The story of my life: Chapter One, I grew up; Chapter Two, I majored in Biology/Genetics/Evolution; Chapter Three, I had a great teacher, Dr. Salt, at UC Davis, who caused me to realize the relationship between human overpopulation and war, starvation, and all the other ills that are now converging upon us; Chapter four I quit science after agonizing for months, trying to decide whether or not it is unkind to tell people these facts of real life. I decided it was. It never occurred to me, until I saw it happening, that my fellow Americans would permit a bunch of crooks to take control of the world food supply and expand the world population so they could take over our governments. Chapters five, six and seven, I returned to science, was successful, and eventually realized why democracy does not work unless the people understand the facts of life and discuss them together. Isn’t that what the “greatest generation” was fighting for?

130623-Fire-ASC_3883RLS+sAnd now I must repeat myself, what I’ve been saying on this program for three years, because the shortest distance between here and there is to start listening to each other, studying, and discussing the issues that face us today as a result of human overpopulation ( Nothing will resolve itself if we continue the modern nice-speak (or any of the many other techniques when they are used to prevent discussion), and then continue each person doing her own thing, on the theory that everyone has a right to her own uninformed opinion.

Nobody has a right to cause harm to the community of Life, regardless of what they believe themselves to be doing. The only way to change a human cycle of behavior – or any biological cycle — is to cut the cycle. That’s why good discussion is essential. First we must see the cycle and then we must modify our behaviors. Nobody sees everything; the cycle cannot be cut by each individual person trying to prove that he personally knows all about the cycle. That turns human control over to evolutionary control and the wheel turns round once again to repeat the past interminably. The only way to change the cycle is by pooling our knowledge of it. Otherwise we doom ourselves to repeat the cycle by focusing all our own energies either on promoting or fighting against the little bit of it that we understand and so pushing it around one more turn of the wheel of divide and conquer.

So this is what happens instead of discussion. If I say to you that I believe population control is the only viable solution to our root problem (the actual cause of the illness without which we cannot cure the disease). What do you say to me? Usually it is one of these things: a) “I disagree;” b) “Let George do it,” which means, “I’m doing something more important than you are, and I don’t want to stop doing that to engage in population control, which is not nice and about which I am not concerned and know very little”; c) ”How would you control the problem without also doing something so appalling that I won’t even think or talk about it?” (I’ll answer that one because of course it is the problem — but it’s not a reason to not talk about it. We are communally already doing something even more appalling by not taking appropriate action; d) “Nobody would give us money if we talk about population control;” e) (well, that’s a partial list, and that’s only the people who do agree that we need to stop the growth. The other side has even more vigorous replies.)

130622-canyon-ASC_3624sTHOSE ANSWERS ARE NOT DISCUSSION, they are attempts to avoid discussion. Of course everyone has said or thought those things, but unless you actually state your reasoning and then are willing to carry forward the discussion, those answers are not discussion; they are attempts to avoid discussion. And there is no point trying to discuss a real communal issue with someone who only cares about his own.

None of those are even a right answer if we seriously want to resolve the problem. The answer is WHY? Or if you already know why, the answer is HOW? The answer is NOT “Everyone has a right to his own opinion.” And the answer is not to complain about how a thing is said — so long as it is focused on the problem and is not abusive (meaning that people are actually listening to the other and trying to understand and respond) — but to complain if discussion is not permitted, usually because some believe themselves to have the only answer and are not interested in the fact that there are many implications of ANY problem, and nobody knows all of them. Either we pool our knowledge or it’s divide and conquer time again and the cycle repeats itself as it has done for a couple of millennia at least.

I am saying the glass is equally as much half empty as it is half full, and that is how Life stays alive. By delicately balancing itself just on the edge of death, between full and empty, and if we continue to unbalance it, we, and possibly it, will crash in this generation or the next, because we have pushed the wheel as far as it physically can support us. If we believe only in the nice things (or for that matter only in the nasty things, or only in one thing, whether or not it is true), then we are easily manipulated, and we have very little long-term power to help balance the scales of our own lives, or of Life itself, no matter what we believe ourselves to be doing.

This is Bare Bones Biology, a production of and KEOS radio, 89.1, Bryan, Texas. For a podcast of this week’s program, go to

Bare Bones Biology 134 – Community and Ego

I had a dream last night about human ego, whatever that is, I will not try to define. In the dream, some guy was driving the bus and I was picking up the pieces. Literally, I mean, I was picking the pieces of newspaper and trash, old egg shells, gum and plastic wrappings — out from under the gas pedal — as they kept rolling back in there — while two other people sat behind, telling me what I was doing wrong, and the trash kept piling higher and deeper.

You will never guess what this dream was trying to tell me, because I didn’t until I started to write it down, and immediately came to mind my persistent question: “Why did The Creator give us our ego in the first place?” The thing causes so much pain and suffering to us and our communities, convincing us that our own belief system, our own need to be more right, is more real than reality. It isn’t, you know. Nobody is “right,” because nobody understands everything. And if we believe that our mind, emotions, intellect (reference), or our world view (reference), are more powerful than the biological reality. Well, that’s a pretty good definition of pain and suffering, now or later.

Pain is life enhancing. It guides our choice of behaviors so that we avoid drowning in the river when its currents are swirling in flood, or burning our little hands on the stove. Because we were formed within the biological community – our response to pain is biologically life enhancing.

To understand why we were given an ego is more difficult. What good is the blasted thing, if the use of it causes us emotional pain and suffering, but it doesn’t tell us what the danger is? Well, of course, that’s one function of community – to help us avoid emotional suffering by passing down the wisdom teachings of the ages. The harm caused by our ego-trips is well and often explained in all the wisdom teachings, and better behaviors described.

Maybe that’s what the ego is meant to do. Maybe our ego suffering is meant to enhance the welfare of the community by passing on some wisdom from now to benefit the future. I hope so, because our age is growing new problems faster than any before, and with these new problems, we must learn new lessons (or apply the old ones) about what not to do if we don’t want to suffer.

Our origins designed us genetically and behaviorally to live in a biosystem that functions to support life, but our human culture now has grown an artificial corposystem that functions to make money. And the power of this corposystem seems to lie mostly in our human ego needs.

So many people so filled with the fear of not being better than other people. Is that our ego? Why do we feel that we must be better than someone else? We can’t discuss the important issues, because someone might go into a one-up or one-down tizzy, or just turn their backs and walk away for fear that we might know something they don’t know. But isn’t that the point of discussion, that everyone knows more than only one? Don’t we WANT to deal with the problems? We keep saying that we do, and then the next thing you know we are debating irrelevant questions for no better reason than to satisfy our never-ending need to win. Even though the floods of climate change (climate change series Bare Bones Biology 092 through 100) are already tickling our toes – even though everyone really does know the end result of these ego trips, in our modern times, will be disaster.

So now my question is: how can we be aware of our ego, and all the negative, painful behaviors that it generates — how can we use that knowledge to grow a more positive, life-supporting human community?

Lynn Lamoreux
Photos by Lynn

This blog is an expanded version of Bare Bones Biology radio program that will play next week on KEOS Radio, 98.1 FM, Bryan, Texas. Bare Bones Biology is a completely nonprofit project. The podcast can be downloaded at

Recommended Action/Question for Discussion: I’m tempted to suggest that you start an argument and consider what methods you use to win. And what are the results. But in fact I doubt that you need to know more about how to argue. So instead I suggest you find a person with whom to discuss an issue and see how long you can keep it going without either of you having an obvious emotional reaction (because this will be a serious subject.) Maybe you could try this one –
“In the United States, especially this year, any occasion when contraceptives and public policy overlap seems to be an excuse to fight about other issues.”

Bare Bones Biology 126 – The Bottom Line

How should we proceed to solve the overpopulation/overproduction problem that we humans have created within this earth biosystem? I have heard three rather different viewpoints on this questioning the past few weeks. Last week I talked about technologies. Technologies are not innately bad, but they will not help if we continue to use them to try to change the world, instead of using them to help change our own behaviors.

And you have already heard my opinion of what is needed – that is, that we should individually take the responsibility to educate ourselves about how and why overpopulation is so harmful to the biosystem, and then we should crank up our courage and discuss this issue with others. I am confident if we fulfill this level of responsibility, answers will emerge from the discussions. In the meantime we should make family planning technologies and information available to everyone on earth who needs it.

My colleague, who trains medical doctors at the university level, believes that a more pro-active approach is needed, especially in the more “advanced” societies. She says:

“I think I already wrote back about this issue of where to focus re overpopulation. Obviously I agree we should definitely be tackling the issue of couples/women who want contraception but can’t get it – and it is wonderful that Melinda Gates is now on the case. But another big part of the problem is those who CAN get contraception but still have large or medium families of high-consuming babies in rich countries and don’t realize that these babies will be part of the problem, as well as the victims of it.

“Even if we haven’t noticed any ills, the USA is one of the few countries in the world where you can still fail to notice the effects of overpopulation. Even here in Britain most people say there are too many people. The answer for those who have sacrificed some of their pleasures to help the overpopulation is that they have been right in principle, positively noble. And now the need is more like stopping at one child per couple, to get where we need to be (somewhere around 3 billion, if we want a lifestyle with a few luxuries like refrigerators). Isn’t it? You know this. And this needs to happen in all countries. Birth rate of 1-1.5 per couple, for the next 2 generations. Seven billion is not sustainable unless we all become largely vegetarians and take on a resource usage per person of – not sure, maybe about 20% of the current US average. And stop using fossil fuels.

“One or the other of those, or the Great Dieback where the fall in numbers happens through the death rate instead of the birth rate. I think you have given up believing that there are any alternatives to this. Yes, getting the world birth rate down to 1.5 is a huge “ask”; but if everyone knew what we know, maybe they might try…?” That’s the end of her opinion. She believes more good will result from reducing birth rate in the rich countries than in the poor countries.

And then there are people who believe that God will provide. To this I say that God already provided us with a miraculous biosystem that is sustainable in perpetuity if we take care of it – that is, if we do not take away or destroy what it needs to stay healthy — and then God put us in charge of doing just that that, taking care of it, and gave us our unique brain to do it with. Read the Bible. Or the Koran. Or the many Buddhist writings. We have responsibilities. We are not babies, most of us who can read this; surely we do not expect God to pinch hit whenever we fail in our responsibilities. We can be forgiven, but all the religions, including the Catholic church, recognize that the effects of our behaviors cannot be reversed. Whether or not we are forgiven, we and our generations must live with and in the results of our behaviors.

And here we are, having too much fun living the good life — or trying to be happy or spiritual — to worry about anyone else’s problems. Too much fun even to realize that their problem is our problem inside the biosphere. Like it or not, whoever created the living earth — created it to function the way it does function – not the way we wish it did. And it will not change for our convenience or our happiness.

This blog is an expanded version of Bare Bones Biology radio program that is playing this week on KEOS Radio, 98.1 FM, Bryan, Texas. The podcast can be downloaded later this week at

Recommended References

Bare Bones Biology Energy Handbook – freely downloadable, no strings

(First blog in this series)
(Second blog in this series)
(Third blog in this series)
(Fourth blog in this series)