Leaderboard

Kind of how I see it. Maintaining a livable planet isn't political it's survival.

Earlier this year I worked through Ansestery.com to research my family linage. I was able to find family members in the USA back in the 1600s. For the most part it was interesting and in some cases I was able to find a lot of interesting details. Unfortunately, I found a couple who had records of owning slaves (my 9th great grandfather/mother and a 10th great grandfather). That started a discussion with my coworkers ... what horrible thing are we doing now that our 9th great grandchildren will look back in horror (as they comb through Facebook, Twitter and Scouter.com archives). Nearly u

Dec 19, 2023 from NBC news: I wish they had reused the name Civilian Conservation Corps and had a bipartisan Congressional committee propose it. I fear this will become another political football. "After facing setbacks in Congress, the Biden administration has unlocked funding to launch its American Climate Corps, a new federal program that looks to employ thousands of young Americans in the clean energy, conservation and climate resilience sectors.... The new corps will be led across a partnership of federal agencies: the departments of Commerce, Interior, Agriculture, Labor and E

When I'm discussing this issue I prefer to frame it as habitat loss. Climate change can be endlessly debatable. What is a much more concrete and obvious threat is that with 8 billion of us on the planet and at least three billion more to come before things supposedly level out, we are not facing a survivable future without behavioral changes. Even if climate change didn't exist, our destruction of livable habitat around the globe is turning many species into token fringe survival groups. People crow success when there are 30,000 of a species that used to number in the hundreds of thousands, if

One could argue that reducing CO2 is very much in line with leave no trace and the outdoor code.

In my experience they are the worst; especially people who end up as a committee chair for too long. God complex is an understatement.

I see what both of you are saying here. What I would like to point out is that my council absorbed several other councils and as it turns out we had a substantial liability during the settlement; however, as the story goes, of all the councils merged to make this current council, one of them had almost no issues because they were following the rules and enforcing the standards. What I would like to see is this summary really broken down to the council that existed in that time. So for example if the "modern council" has 100 claims, I would like to see a sub section that shows "Old council

This concept being a major piece of the Scouts BSA program is, or should be, a given. BSA was integral from the start of the the Conservation awareness in the early teens. Its primary U.S. founders were all outdoor and nature supporters, though some had odd ideas in relation to today. Seton particularly was a proponent of much of the modern leanings, and I suspect if he were alive today would be on the more radical side of the movements. And even Roosevelt, it seems to me, had a direction change in his approach to nature and the natural resources. Burroughs and Hornaday also supported BSA

With this, I am in complete agreement. Thanks for finding some good common ground.

The fundamental problem is what is observable to whom. The global temperature maps show that New England and New York have heretofore experienced the least warming. So a very influential voting block of the wealthiest country on the planet — if not in sheer resources, in media moguls — does not experience the problem the way others do (and maybe will). Other Americans see extended growing cycles as a boon for agriculture. Americans are simply not going to perceive anthropogenic climate change the same way as others. Not for a long while. Not unless their youth gather on a blistering spit

I am more concerned about a manmade Carrington Event, which is more likely in my opinion. Read "One Second After" by William Forstchen. Scouting skills may indeed beccome a matter of life and death.

Your assessment as a whole is correct, but your specific example is not a national issue. It is either council, or state, driven. The wet signature and double COR approval isn’t required by national.

Kind of how I see it. Maintaining a livable planet isn't political it's survival. This is exactly how I see it. Can't Build a Better World without maintaining the status quo close enough to pre-industrial levels for most people to continue their locales and lifestyles with modifications. Continuing to emit CO2 like we have been is the opposite of being conservation-minded. Doing the good turn of all good turns is cutting CO2 emissions. Some would indeed say the wrathful earth-protecting forest fairies have awakened, and it is precisely the upsetting of the global bal

I think parents are less interested in volunteering for any activity; however, scouting takes more time than most. In K5, if you make the mistake of signing up to be a den leader, you are looking at 9 months x 6 years (54 months of volunteer work). If you sign up to coach a kids soccer team, that may be 3 months of work and absolutely no expectations you would do that every year going forward. In addition, the number of adults required to run a good pack is excessive (12 den leaders, Cub Master, ACM, CC, COR and a few other committee members). If you have a pack of 80-90 kids this is

Well, not technically, I suppose. The BSA could become a breakaway group, in theory. But the sense in which it then would be part of a movement is debatable, and breaking a lineage comes with a lot of risk. WAGGS and WOSM are de facto our unified face outward. They are whom for example the UN contacts when they want to consult the scouting movement. In at least some countries it's not considered real scouting, merely scout-like, if it's not the WOSM/WAGGS organisation. I certainly feel that way, even if it isn't 100% true in every circumstance, because I've never lived in a country with a

What is the right amount of global heat? What is the goal of this effort? Is it to create some kind of climate stasis? What is an "acceptable amount" of climate change? (Because, it has changed across the eons...) Whom are we to believe? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6GS2HjCg-M&ab_channel=MallenBaker https://www.lobservateur.com/2023/08/20/experts-say-climate-change-is-a-hoax/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/markhendrickson/2012/09/16/climate-change-hoax-or-crime-of-the-century/?sh=4e2a06df76d3 https://www.prageru.com/video/is-there-really-a-climate-eme