Kensington Gardens - you can see forever when the trees are naked in the winter 
I went for a walk in Kensington and Hyde Park on both Saturday and Sunday afternoon. Both days were beautiful - cool and more blue than grey sky! The round pond in Kensington Garden is always buzzling with activities as there are more varieties of fowl life gathered there than on the Serpentine Pond in Hyde Park. There were two groups of people feeding the birds, so you can imagine the fluttering that was going on. 
As Californians, we take the great weather we have for granted and rarely think about it. But out here in London, I noticed people take advantage of even minimally good weather to be out and about at the parks. Back home, we move from our cars to shopping malls and supermarkets - when people are out and about, it is generally to run errands, eat or shop. So, I especially love seeing people enjoying the parks in London doing leisurely stuff like playing hockey on roller skates, zigzagging with their roller skates, kite flying, groups playing football, frisbies, little children cycling (for the first time, I noticed their tiny little bikes have no pedal - how strange???!!), families enjoying a nice stroll, joggers, horseriders, and my favorite sight is always the birds gathering around the bird feeders.
Hockey on roller skates
Kensington Garden is also directly opposite the Royal Albert Hall. It is a beautiful circular concert hall and holds some of the most spectacular musical events in the summer. Two Christmases ago, my H and I attended a Christmas Carol evening there - it was one of the most beautiful Christmas carol I have ever seen. I highly recommend going there at least on Christmas, just to experience the mesmerizing performance and the vision of a silhouette of the organ player above the performance area.
Diana memorial in Hyde Park
Over at Hyde Park, there is the Diana Memorial. It is very serene and calm - simple circular lines and water flowing in the circular form. It is a fitting memorial for a lady who was moving towards some semblance of calm after several very turbulent and trying years due partly to her youth and inexperience and partly due to her poor judgment. She was obviously ill-prepared for the royal traditions and her youthful idealism about marriage to a man who was emotionally bound to another didn't help either. I feel very sad that her life ended so abruptly at a time when she appeared to have found her compass in life and was on the path to a healthy and more wholesome path particularly with her charity efforts and goodwill missions under the banner of the UN. I remember my disbelief at the news - I was in Newport Beach and when my H brought me the news, I told him there must be a mistake. The accident must involve someone associated with her, not her!
Kensington Palace
Princess Diana used to live in Kensington Palace and I was told she sometimes roller skates through Kensington Gardens in the early hours of the morning when the park was relatively quiet. I remember the incredible amount of flowers that were left in front of the gate months after her death during one of my trips to London.
Talk about turbulence, I am glad Israel has unilaterally declared a ceasefire after some three weeks of bombing and fighting and the Palestinians are following suit. It is an absolutely sensless loss of life on both sides. What possess the Palestinians to lop missiles over to Israel? Why is that the Palestinians and other extremists were never, ever required to apologize for the loss of innocent lives that they inflict on others and yet countries forced to defend themselves against extremists and rebels have to apologize for loss of life that is part of the fog of war. Who knows, maybe there were in fact gunfire from the rebels who hid amongst the refugees who took refuge in the UN compound - only those present can attest to what actually occurred. The media is always quick to defend the rebels and extremist and just as quick to condemn those forced to defend their country against rebels and extremists.
The UK news coverage upset me somewhat - I saw a snippet of some expert or government personnel (I was not paying attention to the name of the person being interviewed). He said that we need to figure out a way for the Palestinians to channel their grievances. There are channels - civilized channels available either directly or through a third country. For years, several countries including UK and US have tried to bring them to some accord - to what result?
Firstly, it is important to remember that the Palestinians and extremists have only one grievance - the existence of Israel. Suppose the world agrees with them and dismantle Israel and relocate the Jews to various parts of Europe. What will Europe do when the Palestinians and their extremists brethrens decide that they have a grievance against the existence of the western civilization because it does not conform with Islamic teachings and they want to all Europe to embrace Islam and Islamic ways. What will the European Council do - dismantle Europe???
Secondly, remember years ago when the world poured huge amounts of money to Palestine to help them rebuild - what happened? The money were funneled away by their corrupt leaders for personal gain and the people were left high and dry and had to depend on religious and fringe organizations to provide them with basics. The leaders did not exhibit honest intent to develop and grow Palestine. They have their own agenda. They could have thrived as a nation by now if they were serious about building their own nation and improving their life circumstances.
Back in the UK, over the last several days there was much talk about the need for a third runway at London Heathrow. I watched part of the panel discussion on this issue this morning. Greenpeace was adamant that it would adversely impact the climate and quality of life. What quality of life will people have if they are left behind 20 years from now as the rest of the world continue to grow and build air travel capacity to cope with the growth in air traffic?
London is the financial and business center of Europe. Air travel will increase naturally due to the increase in population and growth of businesses. Failure to look forward and ensure there is sufficient capacity for the future is irresponsible. It will result in more planes being placed on holding pattern for longer periods thus increasing pollution or other European countries may take London's position as the financial and business center which will have a huge negative impact on the economy - and many people will lose their jobs.
Greenpeace will argue there will be new sectors in the green movement that will replace the jobs lost but that is assuming new industries will be created which probably may not be necessary as existing industries will integrate green ideas into their manufacturing systems so it is unlikely there will be sufficient new industries to absorb job losses as a consequence of green movement limiting a country's economic policy for continued growth.
What quality of life does one have when you can't afford to put food on the table and a roof over your head because job opportunities have shrank or disappeared. We need to work with industry to make the transition, not stop industry from growing and expanding. Noise and air pollution can be solved by technological advances - engineers can design quieter planes and researchers can discover ways to minimize pollution from aircraft fuel.
Besides shouldn't quality of life be about ensuring that children grow up in a stable and loving two parent home with the parents being focussed on their children, preferably with a stay-at-home mum taking care of children and husband. Shouldn't quality of life be about improving the quality of education, health care and security of the world against threats from terrorists and countries that are bent on creating chaos in the world. Shouldn't quality of life be about taking care of the old and sick, being there for friends in need. Noise and pollution is everywhere, it is not confined to villages and towns around the airport and airplanes are not the only culprit.
It is obvious that I am not a big fan of the new fad of civic consciousness group such as the environmentalist or animal rights. I agree that years of industrialization and technology may have some negative impact on the environment but we caught it in time and for several years now, manufacturers have continuously come up with environmentally friendly products.
Now that we understand our environment better, we should be attentive to ways to minimize environmental impact but to put environmental impact over progress or animal rights over researches that could provide cure for diseases is a big step backwards and not responsible citizenship. We have to concentrate our effort on research to make products that are "biodegradeable" and products that minimize pollution of all kinds. I'd appreciate Greenpeace using their vast financial resources on researching ways to build biodegradable car tires. I was horrified to see the cemetery of car tires at the bottom of the ocean in a documentary.
As for some villages and towns having to be sacrificed, that is part of the cost of progress. We keep as much of the old as we can and we have to give up some to make way for progress no matter how painful. True there is sentimental value that cannot be replaced. Sometimes, the choice is not pleasant - nobody guarantees we get to keep what we have forever. Life is finite, not infinite. We have to sometimes be selfless and do what is right for the future. There are other places that are just as lovely if not lovelier to settle down and new roots will develop naturally as they always do.
Almost every flight I was on over the past several years were placed on holding pattern for up to 30 minutes because of Heathrow's inability to handle the flights going through the airport. How much additional pollution are spewed into the air by the numerous planes placed on holding pattern? They also ignore the fact that nature spews more pollution into the air through volcano eruptions, forest fires etc than those contributed by mankind since the age of industrialization - according to the opponents of Greenpeace. Each side produce information to support their point of view. To date, there is no definitive answer as to which side is correct.
I believe in the the power of nature and its ability to take care of itself. From past records, we know the world heated up and cool down and that was way before man and industrialization had any major role in the world. How do they explain the extreme cold we are getting in some parts of the world now when they claim the world is overheating. If the weatherman cannot accurately forecast the daily weather, what makes Greenpeace believe they can predict the weather of the world years from now?
While I am enjoying the peace and quiet here, my thoughts are with the very fortunate passengers on US Airways A320 and their very experienced and cool headed pilot, Sully Sullenberger who managed to maneuver (glide) the plane without engines over New York city, landing it safely onto the Hudson River and the many boats plying the river that came immediately to its rescue - it is truly a miracle on the Hudson!
It happened last Thursay, a day after I arrived which was the day my H arrived, so we were busy and did not watch the television at all. We only learned about the incident when his nephew called and told us about it. Unlike television in the US where every cable network would cover the event round the clock, with the limited channels I have access to here - it was difficult to get the news on the spot. I had assumed the worst, so imagine how happy and relieved I was to learn the next day from the Yahoo main page that everyone survived. Miracle of miracles!
US Airways A320 on the Hudson River
A miracle on the Hudson is a great way to end the Year of the Rat as we prepare to welcome the Year of the Ox! The Year of the Ox will hopefully turn out to be better than expected for one and all!
2 comments:
What a lot of thoughts in a single blog entry! I feel I should come to the defence of both the weatherman and the people modelling the long-term climate changes though... I think the general consensus of the scientific community is that the greenhouse effect is real (and not just those sponsored by Greenpeace or other environmental campaigners). What the outcome of it will be is a matter of some debate - yes it's hard to model but you can certainly do best and worst case scenarios. And a general increase in the Earth's average temperature does not necessarily mean everywhere gets hotter; for example, if the Gulf Stream were to be re-directed due to changing weather patterns, north-western europe could freeze, at least in the short term.
My feeling is that it's best to be on the safe side; wherever possible we should cut greenhouse gas emissions and research ways of removing or reducing the impact of what's already up there. Of course this is easier said than done and in particular it is difficult for developing countries.
And those bikes without pedals - apparently they're the new craze, supposed to make it easier for kids to learn to ride since they have to balance on 2 wheels rather than relying on stabilisers.
Thank you for giving us such a thought-provoking blog Bluebells!
Hi Pootle, you are the science person so I will defer to your knowledge on the subject : ) : ).
I think we both agree that we all recognize that industrialization has negatively impact the environment. Industries have also over the years develop more environmentally friendly products, processes etc. I simply feel it should not drive governmental policies on ways to grow the economy and policies on construction of infrastructure to meet future needs.
I have no problem with it guiding industries and getting industries to be more attentive to environment impact. I have to say industries have been reasonably responsive to environmental issues but it cannot be at a cost that would drive the industry out of business - it must be based on a balanced approach - the importance of ensuring profitability vs good corporate citizenship.
The current culprits are indeed mostly the less developed countries because the developed countries have had a head start dealing with environmental issues. It is all part of the development process of economies (economic development), when they get to the appropriate stage of development they will be able to afford the luxury of taking on environmental issues and they will be able to get on board much faster because they can hitch on to systems and processes that the developed economies have already developed.
Thanks for the update about the most recent fad on children bike. I thought my eyes were playing tricks at first so I looked over to another child with a bike and viola! - no pedals too! : ) : )
Post a Comment