THE GENE TRASMISSION

That is: what should we expect in the near future

 

DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) is the genome, the molecule that contains genetic information.

It is written in DNA if an organism will be a human being, a tree or a microorganism. In the DNA of all organisms, tens of thousands of segments called genes have been identified. They are genes, or groups of genes, that determine the color of the skin, the number of fingers on one hand, and so on. Each gene is made up of a few hundred base triplets. Every living organism always transmits its genetic heritage to descendants and this transmission is called vertical. Often in the descendants the hereditary heritage undergoes mutations, that is, a base is replaced by another base changing the meaning of the triplet that now codifies for another amino acid. If this substitution is neutral or gives the new organism an advantage over the other organisms, it remains and is passed on to the offspring. On the other hand, if the mutation is disadvantageous, it is likely that the organism dies and that evolutionary line dies out. The study of the arrangement of bases in genes and the arrangement of amino acids in proteins is called sequencing. The comparative analysis then compares the DNA or proteins of the various organisms and from this comparison we can trace the common ancestor. With the help of Paleontology, it can often be traced back to the period in which this separation occurred. So we know, that humans and chimpanzees have 99% of their DNA in common and that their progenitor must have lived about 5-6 million years ago, that mammals and reptiles had a common progenitor around 150 million years old does. Ultimately, gene and protein sequencing only confirms Darwin's theory of evolution at the molecular level. Since genes are transmitted from an organism to their descendants by establishing a kinship bond, Darwin's genealogical tree which concerned higher organisms has been extended back in time, even to micro organisms.

It all seemed quite clear when, in the 80s of the last century, lateral transmission, also known as horizontal transmission, was discovered in the bacterial world and among single-cell eukaryotes: genes are not only transmitted from an organism to their descendants but also between cells that do not have no kinship ties.

At a bacterial level, therefore, it is not always clear whether a given gene belongs to the evolutionary line of such an organism, or if it has been transmitted by other bacteria belonging to different evolutionary lines.

When it comes down to the bacterial level, the construction of a phylogenetic tree becomes very complicated. However, the genealogical tree still remained valid for higher organisms and the horizontal transmission could affect these organisms was strongly excluded.

At the beginning of the 90s of the last century a friend of mine was called by an acquaintance who tells him that during the cleaning of the garden he noticed the presence of a snake that he immediately killed and not knowing where to throw it buried him.

After a few weeks, after cleaning the garden, he transplanted some cauliflower seedlings. Reached the maturation period in a plant, the cauliflower, to his surprise, was not the same as the others. Jokes of nature? But the owner of the garden, after taking photos, dug under the seedling. To his surprise, he found the snake's skin, that was where he buried it.

 

                          

  

 

 

The photos were sent to two science publication magazines. One magazine did not store, the other sent them back with the reason "we don't deal with these things". Now, it is true that at that time such an event found no scientific explanation and could be catalogued as a simple oddity of nature. But, without wanting to make controversy, anyone involved in science should also always be aware that taking the conclusions of science as definitive means raising facts and theories to dogma.

Around 2010, after almost twenty years, it was discovered that horizontal gene transfer also involves higher organisms. Those responsible for this transfer are viruses and bacteria that infect plant and animal cells and transfer segments of their genes to them. In addition, bacterial pathogens that enter plant and animal cells can pick up foreign genetic material, transport it to their cells and then serve as vectors for horizontal gene transfer. Until a few years ago, it was believed that viruses and bacteria were the only carriers for horizontal gene transfer between plants and animals. In short, there could be no direct transmission for plant cells, which generally have a protective cell wall. In recent years, it has been discovered that insects, with their hard and sharp parts, can also transfer foreign genetic material to both plants and animals.

Today it is believed that there are no barriers that prevent the entry of foreign genetic material into the cells of any species on earth.

And then we can perhaps explain what happened to the cauliflower seedling. While the roots slowly sank into the ground to anchor the plant on the ground, the root apex, already considered by Darwin to be the brain of the plants, must have touched the skin of the snake. The scales of the skin are made up of external cells with no nucleus but rich in keratin, a very hard protein material, and internal cells that retain the nucleus, where the genetic material resides. The very hard protein material must have injured the root apex and allowed the underlying cells to transmit the genes of a new morphogenesis to the root that replaced or added to the original morphogenesis.

Now, one wonders: what will happen in the future when gene addition or replacement, in higher organisms, becomes a laboratory technique.

Meanwhile, we are talking about the morphology of a flower. Whether the shape of the flower is round, elongated or spiral is about aesthetics, but the metabolic system as a whole has not been affected. When this technique is available, we can give flowers and fruits extravagant shapes.

Perhaps some bizarre biologist will be able to perform some bizarre experiment by giving a monkey the shape of a snake or a dog. But in such a case the form is not independent of the metabolic system of the whole organism, such a creature would probably not live long, the metabolic system would not allow it.

We will see what the future holds for us, in any case it is always advisable to be vigilant. Meanwhile, remaining within the sphere of flowers, there are several that are classified as oddities of nature.

 Da: Meteoweb.eu

 

 

 

 

 Da: facebook.com

 

 

 

But are they really oddities of nature?

                                                                                Giovanni Occhipinti

LA TRASMISSIONE GENICA

    Post n. 35

Il DNA (acido desossiribonucleico) è il genoma, la molecola che contiene l’informazione genetica. È scritto nel DNA se un organismo sarà un essere umano, un albero o un microorganismo. Nel DNA di tutti gli organismi, sono stati individuati decine di migliaia di segmenti chiamati geni. Sono geni, o gruppi di geni, che stabiliscono il colore della pelle, il numero della dita di una mano e così via. Ogni gene è costituito da alcune centinaia di triplette di basi. Ogni organismo vivente trasmette sempre il proprio patrimonio genetico ai discendenti e tale trasmissione viene chiamata verticale. Spesso nei discendenti il patrimonio ereditario subisce delle mutazioni, cioè una base viene sostituita da un’altra base cambiando il significato della tripletta che adesso codifica per un altro amminoacido. Se tale sostituzione è neutra o dà al nuovo organismo un vantaggio rispetto agli altri organismi, essa si mantiene e viene trasmessa alla prole. Se invece la mutazione è svantaggiosa è probabile che l’organismo muore e quella linea evolutiva si estingue. Lo studio della disposizione delle basi nei geni e della disposizione degli amminoacidi nelle proteine viene chiamato sequenziamento. L’analisi comparata mette poi a confronto i DNA o le proteine dei vari organismi e da tale confronto si può risalire al progenitore comune. Con l’aiuto della Paleontologia si può risalire spesso al periodo in cui tale separazione si è verificata. Sappiamo così, che l’uomo e lo scimpanzé hanno in comune il 99% del loro DNA e che il loro progenitore deve aver vissuto circa 5-6 milioni di anni fa, che mammiferi e rettili ebbero un progenitore comune intorno a 150 milioni di anni fa. In definitiva il sequenziamento genico e delle proteine non fa che confermare a livello molecolare la teoria dell’evoluzione di Darwin. Poiché i geni si trasmettono da un organismo ai propri discendenti stabilendo un legame di parentela, l’albero genealogico di Darwin che riguardava gli organismi superiori, è stato esteso indietro nel tempo, anche ai micro organismi.

Sembrava tutto abbastanza chiaro quando, negli anni 80 del secolo scorso, venne scoperta, nel mondo batterico e fra eucarioti monocellulari, la trasmissione laterale detta anche trasmissione orizzontale: i geni non si trasmettono soltanto da un organismo ai propri discendenti ma anche tra cellule che non presentano alcun legame di parentela. A livello batterico, quindi, non è sempre chiaro se un determinato gene appartiene alla linea evolutiva di un tale organismo, o se esso sia stato trasmesso da altri batteri appartenenti a linee evolutive diverse. Quando si scende a livello batterico la costruzione di un albero filogenetico diventa molto complicato. L’albero genealogico rimaneva però ancora valido per gli organismi superiori e si escludeva con forza la trasmissione orizzontale potesse interessare questi organismi.  

Agli inizi degli anni ‘90 del secolo scorso un mio amico è stato chiamato da un conoscente il quale gli racconta che durante la pulizia dell’orto si è accorto della presenza di un serpente che ha immediatamente ucciso e non sapendo dove buttarlo lo ha sepolto. Dopo qualche settimana, finita la pulizia dell’orto ha trapiantato delle piantine di cavolfiore. Raggiunto il periodo di maturazione in una pianta il cavolfiore, con sua grande sorpresa, non era uguale agli altri. Scherzi della natura? Ma il proprietario dell’orto, dopo aver scattato delle foto, ha scavato sotto la piantina. Con sua grande sorpresa ha trovato la pelle del serpente, quello era il luogo dove lo aveva seppellito.

  

                                     

Le foto sono state inviate a due riviste di divulgazioni di scientifiche. Una rivista non ha riposto, l’altra le ha rimandate indietro con la causale “non ci occupiamo di queste cose”. Ora, è vero che a quell’epoca un simile evento non trovava nessuna spiegazione scientifica e poteva essere catalogato come semplice stranezza della natura. Ma, senza voler fare polemiche, chiunque si occupa di scienza dovrebbe anche avere sempre presente che prendere le conclusioni della scienza come definitive vuol dire elevare a dogma fatti e teorie.

E infatti, dopo quasi un ventennio, intorno al 2010, si è scoperto che il trasferimento genico orizzontale coinvolge anche gli organismi superiori. I responsabili di tale trasferimento sono virus e batteri che infettano le cellule di piante e animali e vi trasferiscono segmenti dei loro geni. Inoltre, i patogeni batterici che entrano nelle cellule vegetali e animali possono prelevare materiale genetico estraneo, trasportalo nelle loro cellule e quindi servire da vettori per il trasferimento genico orizzontale. Fino ad alcuni anni fa si riteneva che virus e batteri fossero gli unici vettori per il trasferimenti genico orizzontale tra piante e animali. Insomma non poteva esserci una trasmissione diretta per le cellule vegetali, che generalmente hanno una parete cellulare protettiva. Negli ultimi anni è stato scoperto che anche gli insetti, con le loro parti dure e affilate, possono trasferire materiale genetico estraneo sia a piante che animali.

Oggi si ritiene che non ci siano ormai barriere che impediscano l'ingresso di materiale genetico estraneo nelle cellule di qualsiasi specie sulla terra.

E allora possiamo forse spiegarci cosa è successo alla piantina di cavolfiore. Mentre le radici affondavano lentamente nel terreno per ancorare la pianta al suolo, l’apice radicale, già considerato da Darwin il cervello delle piante, deve aver toccato la pelle del serpente. Le squame della pelle sono costituite da cellule esterne prive di nucleo ma ricche di cheratina, un materiale proteico molto duro, e cellule interne che conservano il nucleo. Il materiale proteico molto duro che deve aver ferito l’apice radicale e trasmesso alla radice i geni di una nuova morfogenesi che hanno sostituito o si sono aggiunti alla morfogenesi originaria.

Ora, viene spontaneo chiedersi: cosa accadrà in futuro quando l’aggiunta o la sostituzione genica di questo livello diventerà una tecnica di laboratorio.

Intanto stiamo parlando della morfologia di un fiore. Che la forma del fiore sia rotondo, allungato o a spirale riguarda l’estetica, ma il sistema metabolico nel suo complesso non è stato intaccato. Quando questa tecnica sarà disponibile, potremo dare a fiori e frutti forme stravaganti.

Forse qualche bizzarro biologo riuscirà a compiere qualche bizzarro esperimento dando a una scimmia la forma di un serpente o di un cane. Ma in un caso di questo tipo la forma non è indipendente dal sistema metabolico di tutto l’organismo, una simile creatura probabilmente non vivrebbe a lungo, il sistema metabolico non le consentirebbe.

Vedremo cosa ci riserverà il futuro, in ogni caso è sempre opportuno vigilare. Intanto, rimanendo nell’ambito dei fiori ne esistono parecchi che vengono classificate come stranezze della natura.

Da: Meteoweb.eu

Da: facebook.com

Ma sono veramente stranezze della natura?

                                                                                                                 Giovanni Occhipinti

GRETA, OTHERS AND US: SURVIVAL IN THE 21st CENTURY

Post n. 36 (English) 

THE AGE

Cenozoic era

Quaternary period

Holocene era

 

The Holocene includes the last 11,700 years, with a pleasantly mild climate encompasses all of human history.

 

THE ANTHROPOCENE

 

According to Paul Crutzen, Holocene would end at the end of the eighteenth century with the beginning of the use of fossil fuels and the consequent colossal environmental changes, and the Anthropocene era would begin.

 

THE GREAT ACCELERATION

 

As Mcneill and Engelke point out, the Anthropocene has undergone a strong acceleration since 1945

 

ENERGY FOR MAN BEFORE 1800

 

Farm animals

Windmills

Watermills

Wood

Virtually zero impact on the environment

 

FROM 1800 TO TODAY

 

Fossil fuels

Hydroelectric energy

Atomic energy

FOSSIL FUELS:

Solar energy frozen over the past 500 million years. Until 1965 it is considered that the amount of energy consumed was still quite limited and of little impact on the environment. In 1965, the annual energy consumption was 3813 million tons of oil equivalent; in 2013, it went to 12.730 million tons of oil equivalent.

 

FOSSIL FUELS AND THE ENVIRONMENT

 

THE COAL

 

Coalmines have made significant changes to the land, air and waters with irreparable damage.

THE SUBSIDENCE

 

 SUBSIDENCE IN BUGGERRU, SARDINIA

 IN CHINA ONLY (DATA 2005), WITH ABOUT 100,000 SMALL MINES, THE SUBSIDENCE HAS CONCERNED A LARGE AREA HOW MUCH SWITZERLAND. (SHANXI CHINA)

Debris and sterile materials discharged in the neighbouring areas release into the environment Sulfuric acid and heavy metals, which destroyed the aquatic life of several courses of water. In China alone, sterile minerals covered an area as large as Israel. In general, the consequences were: destruction of the landscape, of the forests, of the Wildlife habitats, soil erosion and vast farmland reduction areas of the planet.

POLAND

 

 

Methane, a powerful greenhouse gas, comes out of the coalmines. Inside the mines methane with oxygen gives rise to an explosive mixture that triggers "Coal fires", underground fires that can burn for centuries.

 

PENNSYLVANIA: MINE IN FLAME FROM HALF A CENTURY, BUT THERE ARE OVER 200 FIRE OF THIS KIND IN THE USA AND THOUSANDS IN THE WORLD

 

 

Fires saturate the atmosphere of fumes with very high concentrations of CO, CO2, CH4, SO2, NOX and other gases, and harmful ash that emerge from the openings of the ground.

JHARIA INDIA, THE MINE THAT HAS BURNED FOR 100 YEARS

   

Since 1945 coal has also been extracted from open pit mines resulting in it defacing the landscape. Sterile rock left in the valleys transported by rain has buried forests and streams.

RUSSIA

 

BARALABA AUSTRALIA

 

 CHINA

 

 

MOUNTAINTOP REMOVAL

It is a variant to the excavation of mines when the coal is found at the depth of a few hundred meters under a mountain. The most economical solution: raze the mountain.

APPALACHIA USA

 

APPALACHIA

 

APPALACHIA AERIAL VISION

 

For the population the consequences have been devastating and forced to abandon those areas where their ancestors had lived for millennia. In some cases they are strong opposition occurred, as in Appalachia but in the end the big industries mines got the better by waging a war between the poor: opponents against workers involved in extraction.

WHO BENEFITS FROM THE EXTRACTION OF THE COAL?

MINERAL COMPANIES, RICH COUNTRIES AND POOR COUNTRIES BECAUSE IT IS ENERGY GOOD MARKET. TO PAY THE CONSEQUENCES, THE ENVIRONMENT AND LOCAL POPULATIONS.

 

FOSSIL FUELS AND THE ENVIRONMENT

 OIL

DRILLS ON THE LAND AND AT SEA

DISASTERS ON THE EARTH:

SAHARA

 

TEXAS

DELTA OF NIGER

   PERU

 

 DISASTERS AT SEA, HAVEN: ARENZANO

 

  SINKING OF THE EXXON VALDEZ

 

2010 DEEPWATER HORIZON FIRE

 

2010 UNDERWATER DISASTER, BREAKAGE OF THE CONDUCT: DEEPWATER HORIZON

 

 

IMPACT

    

Destruction of mangrove swamps resulting in an end to aquatic life. Acid rain and pollution have destroyed crops, an undefined number of people forced to abandon their places of origin.

WHO HAS BENEFITED?

THE PETROLEUM COMPANIES, MAINLY THE RICH COUNTRIES IN THE FORM OF CHEAP OIL, THE COUNTRIES OF EXTRACTION, IN THE FORM OF CHEAP OIL AND OF ROYALTIES. TO PAY THE CONSEQUENCES, THE ENVIRONMENT AND LOCAL POPULATIONS.

 ITALY: RAVENNA

ADRIATIC MAP

 

CROATIAN SITES: BLOCKED FOR THE MOMENT

 

SICILY CHANNEL

 

CLOSE: WHAT TO DO?

  

GLOBAL POLLUTION

An oil power plant releases an average of:

Millions of tons of CO2

Thousands of tons of SO2 (acid rain)

Tens of kilograms of mercury and arsenic lead.

CONSEQUENCES

 

London 1952 in total 12,000 deaths

Mexico City today is estimated to be between 6000 and 12000 deaths a year.

Worldwide in 2002, deaths were calculated at 800,000 each year.

Furthermore, CO2 and acid rain, as you can imagine, are upsetting ecosystems and beyond. Acid rains in Poland were comparable to vinegar and began to attack train rails.

FIGHT TO POLLUTION

With alternating phases and delays between the various locations of the world today it can be said that, through public policies, acid rain and heavy metals have been reduced in a healthy way in the rich world. Public policies regarding the unstoppable increase in CO2, the main greenhouse gas, have proven ineffective. It is possible that CO2 is not the only cause of global warming, something perhaps still eludes us. However, science has ascertained that CO2 makes a considerable contribution to climate change and not taking this into account is irresponsible, as is irresponsible that in about a century we are burning what the planet has accumulated over 500 million years.

Furthermore, the deadly fine dust and ozone (O3, from NOX and solar rays) produced by the use of fossil fuels are a serious health hazard not only in large cities but also in all areas with high intensity of traffic.

 

ATOMIC ENERGY

The story begins in 1956 with radiant and inexhaustible prospects. Between 1965 and 1980, the global electricity supplied by nuclear power plants passes from 1 to 10 percent, but the enthusiasm died out in 1986

CHERNOBYL

 

IMPACT

The radioactive cloud contaminated an area of over 200 thousand square kilometres (equal to about two thirds of Italy) inhabited by 5 million people. In the end including the "liquidators”, the death toll is calculated in thousands. 130,000 people have been moved elsewhere leaving an uninhabitable area for at least 2 centuries.

AND THEN FUKUSHIMA

 

FUKUSHIMA 5 YEARS LATER

 

 Detailed data on the victims of the disaster are lacking. In Fukushima 350,000 inhabitants had to leave their homes. Unfortunately nuclear technology does not currently guarantee the standards of security needed and all industrialized countries have blocked the construction of new nuclear power plants and are preparing to shut down existing ones.

 HYDROELECTRIC ENERGY

 

 ADVANTAGES

It supplies energy at any time, supplies water for irrigation and fish farming, does not release greenhouse gases.

THE OPPOSITION OF ENVIRONMENTALISTS IS WEAK

DISADVANTAGES

Accidents cause real disasters, some examples:

Vajont: 2018 the inhabitants who died in the disaster and thousands of inhabitants displaced.

The collapse of the Henan dam in China caused 26,000 deaths due to the flood and another 145,000 deaths in the following days from epidemics and famine

VAJONT

 

AND MANY SUFFERINGS

The reservoirs require a lot of space, currently the covered area all over the world is equal to twice the surface of Italy. Worldwide, it is estimated that between 40 and 80 million people have had to abandon their places of origin usually in a forced way.

WHO HAS BENEFITED? THE HYDROELECTRIC COMPANIES AND ALL IN THE WORLD, RICH AND POOR. TO PAY THE CONSEQUENCES, THE ENVIRONMENT AND LOCAL POPULATIONS

BUT WHY ALL THIS?

THE DEMOGRAPHIC BOMB

 

In 1800, the inhabitants of the earth were about 800,000

In 1930, there were already 2 billion inhabitants

In 1960 3 billion

In 2015 7 billion. At this rate in a century the earth would be covered by a giant ball of human flesh

 

POPULATION AND ENVIRONMENT

 

There is no denying: more people more human activity and human activity harms

the environment

1) More energy

2) More food and therefore felling of forests to be transformed into agricultural land

3) Surge in the use of fresh water also for megacities and irrigation

4) Intensive exploitation of the seas with advanced technological methods and bottom trawling.

5) Pollution of air and ambient water,

 

WEALTH AND POVERTY

 BUT WE ALL LIVE THE SAME WAY

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE CITIES IN NUMBERS

In 2008, there were:

• 500 cities with over 1 million inhabitants

• 74 with at least 3 million inhabitants

• 12 with over 20 million

Cities produce a huge amount of municipal waste dumped in rivers or at sea or in huge landfills, even in rich countries. Landfills that pollute land, groundwater aquifers and plague the air. But while poor countries have no resources for solutions alternatives, in some rich countries the opposition to the is absolutely incomprehensible construction of waste-to-energy plants with zero impact on the environment, which produce energy and therefore allow you to save huge quantities of fossil fuels.

WASTE TO ENERGY IN NORWAY

 

AT THE HOUSE OF GRETA

 

 IN SWITZERLAND

 

IN MANY PARTS IN ITALY

 

In developing countries, many inhabitants live in abusive and dilapidated camps.

Data 1990

9 million in Mexico City

3 million in San Paulo

Around 1 million slept on the street in Mumbai 

   

AND WALLS TO KEEP THEM AWAY

 

IS IT FULL OF THE DEMOGRAPHIC BOMB?

• It has been calculated (at least as regards air pollution) that only 37% it would be caused by the need for food. Probably the same percentage applies to the others forms of pollution.

• And the remaining 63%?

• Consumerism of rich countries

•Tourism

• Wars

EVERYTHING HIS FAILURE OF FOOD NEED?

BUT DOES CIVIL NORWAY NEED FOOD?

 

WHALE MEAT DISH. NORWEGIAN SPECIALTY

CONSEQUENCES

Whaling conducted with fleets of giant ships with advanced technologies (sonar, gps, on-board computer) from: Norway, Iceland, Japan and Russia brought the blue whale, the humpback whale and the grey whale to the edge of extinction. And certainly not from hunger.

WHO HAS PROTESTED? GREENPEACE ONLY

 

POLLUTION OF LAKE KARACHAI, RUSSIA, WHY? COST REDUCTION, INCOMPETENCE AND NEGLIGENCE

 

MORE THAN FOOD, DEATH: AGENT ORANGE VIETNAM

 

 

STILL NEED FOOD? SHIP FOR MEGA-CRUISES

 

MASS TOURISM IN THAILAND

 

LIGURIA ITALY

 

IN THE ITALIAN ISLANDS

 

AND TOURISM IN BARRACCOPOLI

 

WE ARE ALL INVOLVED. ENVIRONMENT, WEALTH AND POVERTY ARE LINKED BY A SINGLE THREAD.

 

1.5 billion People have well-being.

5.5 billion People live in poverty or extreme poverty.

WHAT TO DO?

Helping the poor to progressively achieve the well-being of rich countries ...

the planet would not hold up.

                

Or to defend the environment and reduce poverty, are we willing to share our well-being with the rest of the world by halving or reducing our lifestyles and consumption patterns by one third?

AND THEN, WHAT ARE WE WILLING TO GIVE UP?

NORWEGIAN HOUSES

 

STOCKHOLM

 

AND IN ITALY AT THE SEA

 

AND LIVE LIKE ONCE UPON A TIME?

AT HOME?

 

AT THE SEA?

 

ON A VESPA?

 

WEDDING TRIP BY BIKE?

 

For all living organisms, the imperative is: to survive.

When a group, within a species, occupies a niche rich in food, it defends it with nails and teeth. For the human species, especially in rich countries, this niche contains not only food but also well-being.

For us, survival in the 21st century also means the well-being that we have achieved. It is from this fact that we must start. We have to be intellectually honest, there are not many people in rich countries who want to go back. Despite a greater environmental sensitivity, which is positive, we promise to decrease or be more careful in consumption, decrease waste and engage more in recycling. But all this is not enough and our survival is at risk.

 

AND THEN, HOW TO SAVE THE PLANET AND REDUCE POVERTY AT THE SAME TIME?

The sustainable development proposal reads: "a development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs"

But how can we translate it into practice?

First of all, the environmental movement cannot be monothematic, it cannot take care of your own garden. If in a locality there is a source of pollution and only people fight for that, outside that locality, they do not feel involved. On the other hand, if in a locality a landfill plagues the air and pollutes the aquifers, the people of that locality are of little interest if global warming will suffocate us in 10 or 20 years. They are already suffocating today.

The environmental movement must first of all concern all the problems of the environment, it must be universal.

Second, massive demonstrations around the world under generic slogans of the like "No to global warming" or "Let's save the planet" damage to the rulers of world an alibi, and so from world conferences all come out as victims, “We wanted but the others have not allowed us to. “We must nail the rulers of the world to their responsibilities. Finally, science must say what is most useful to the environment, otherwise we will fall into the same quarrel ... vaccines, not vaccines, no.

AND THEN

1) If it is true that a substantial part of environmental disasters is caused by wars in the world, the world environmental movement must vigorously protest all over the world against all wars, not for someone or against someone, but against everyone and put the rulers of face their responsibilities.

In addition to reviving the famous Challenge, Barletta promotes the Challenge of the 21st century among the greats of the earth who want to solve problems with weapons. Wars are an instrument of death, suffering and poverty and are the cause of environmental pollution.

ENOUGH WARS. WARS POLLUTE AND GENERATE POVERTY

 

2) We cannot ask developing countries or poor countries to reduce their consumption, they are already on the bone, and we cannot ask to use less polluting fossil fuels because they cannot buy them.

It is we, the rich countries that must eliminate highly polluting low-cost fuel. Reduce emissions by accelerating on energy saving and the use and research on alternative energy, solar, geothermal, wind etc. and provide this technology to poor countries, for free, yes for free.

Otherwise what does it mean to help them in their home.

But do we have to pay? Yes, we have to pay, but be assured that this will not reduce our well-being.

 

RICH COUNTRIES MUST ACCELERATE ON ENERGY SAVINGS AND USE AND RESEARCH ON ALTERNATIVE ENERGIES AND MUST PROVIDE IT TO POOR COUNTRIES.

 

3) Landfills are the poison of the earth. Pollution seas, rivers, lakes aquifers and in the end the waste, ironically, we find them in our tables. Separate waste and recycling are fine, but this does not eliminate landfills.

Landfills need to be eliminated by exploiting technology and providing it to poor countries. And the use of waste-to-energy plants is for the moment the best technology that certainly eliminates landfill disasters and provides us with energy.

ELIMINATE LANDFILLS THROUGH WASTE-TO-ENERGY PLANTS AND PROVIDE THIS TECHNOLOGY TO POOR COUNTRIES

 

4) Protest vigorously against the intensive exploitation of the seas. It is not acceptable that to have delicious dishes they lead to the extinction of the species.

And it is not acceptable that local populations are left alone when their forests are destroyed.

NO THE DESTRUCTION OF THE FORESTS AND THE IMPOVERISHMENT OF THE SEAS.

The latest estimates indicate the world's population at 7.8 billion and increase at the rate of 50 million. Science does not tell us if this rate of growth leads to frustrating efforts to limit global pollution. Science speak.

However, the pollution is reaching the point of no return. Our survival is at risk. We help the poor to their home or they will come to our home. Even the poor of the earth want to survive and do not want to stay in places of poverty by letting natural selection run its course.

The poor will set out on their way to rich countries and nobody will be able to stop their exodus: neither walls, nor naval blocks.

 

                                                                             Giovanni Occhipinti

 

P.S. The data of this article were taken from essay John R. McNeil and Peter Engelke: "The great acceleration". The considerations belong to various commentators who have dealt with the problem. The images were taken, logically from the Internet. Since this Blog is not for profit, I hope that no one will ask me for copyright rights.

My job was to make a collage and take your insults for having resurrected removed truths.