drpriyaprabhakar-blog

[drpriyaprabhakar-blog]

CLIMATE CHANGE & ITS SOLUTION

Is climate change new to earth? No, in its evolution, earth has been through serious and drastic climate changes. Earth (nature) survived through both the hottest and coldest climate in this process, it survived through expansion and contraction of areas, and it also survived through several extinctions through this process. Meanwhile, it is to be noted that, it was life forms that got extinct and it is not the earth as we all imagine.

Same way, even in future, if there would occur an extinction, the loss would be to the life forms and not to the earth.

Is extinction possible? When the trend of earth's evolution is analysed, yes, extinction is possible. Scientist have predicted that at present, the world is in its verge of sixth massive extinction - "Holocene Extinction"

Why is there a possibility of extinction? The possibility is because of the need for the nature to restores its serenity back to its form. How did it loose its serenity? Because of the excessive and rapid human activities that was paced and patterned unprogressive. So it is clearly eventual to understand as in who would face the loss of its resilience, its us, the humanity as a whole.

Would that be an end to all life forms on earth? No, definitely not, with the species that survives, life forms may evolve to new form. The life forms on earth may take a second shift from scratch as it originated and evolved in this phase.

Is there a possibility to prevent this Holocene extinction predicted to occur? Certainly, Yes. How? Preventing extinction needs reformation of human activities.

What we need to do? We need to shift our approach from the principles of sustainability to progressive principles.

Why not sustainability? Its because, we have already caused negatives and damages through our activities, sustaining our activities would not treat the negatives of damages instead it would just slow down the speed of our travel towards extinction. On the other hand, when we think, is sustainability really possible? Practically, the answer would be no. We would be advocating the principles of sustainability but practically we cannot sustain because it indirectly it demands us to take ourselves back to the age of primitives leaving behind the all advancements that were enabled to us through our development.

Really? Yes, for example, let us take the same issue of climate change, we have predicted that climate change is due to the carbon footprints left by the activities of human beings. With the principles of sustainability what we do is we say we should stop using the advancements that were enabled to us through development, which means we are indirectly taken back to the age of primitives. Developing new technologies that would match the sophistication of the present is sure to take time and the assurance of it being 100% eco-friendly is not possible. Because, when it comes to sophistication atleast to some extent compromises would be demanded. When it is completely eco-friendly, we need to compromise sophistications, like speed, duration of access, etc.

So, isn't there an alternative? We do have an alternative - "PROGRESSIVE PRINCIPLES". Travel or transportation  that is said to constitute the largest contributor of carbon foot prints can be confined to activities that demands physical presence, rest of all activities can be reformed to online platform. The advancement we accomplished in technology has enabled us the opportunity to perform task being at our very own place, be it shopping; watching movie; visiting friends; access to education; professional activities; and so, everything can be done through internet in a single touch. The facility is available all that is needed is just the facilitation and recognition. Government and the facilitating organisation needs to reform its functioning and pattern of facilitation that includes and recognises the use of this advancement in its activities and functioning. The scope for this inclusion and facilitation is very well supported strongly by the fundamentals of the governance, be it the Universal Declaration of Human Rights or the Constitution of Nations. Wouldn't this reduce and cut off further deposition of carbon footprint?

Now coming to the foot prints that we have already deposited. The footprints that has been deposited has formed a layer of heat in-between the surface and the bottom layer of atmosphere which hinders the transfer of hot and cold temperature between the layers of atmosphere that is needed to balance the climate. On the other hand, this has also hindered the transfer of land and ocean currents which is again essential for the free flow of climate that has mounted hot temperatures in the surface region that has given rise to this concept of climate change. Analysing this, it is clear that treating this impeding hot layer would solve the problem of climate change enabling the native transfer mechanism of nature that would bring back its serenity.

We have a mechanism called "THERMOELECTRICITY" which has the ability to convert heat into electricity. Now this is a 2 in 1 solution.This serves as a solution for both the problems of climate change and energy scarcity. As like solar electricity which converts sunlight to electricity, thermoelectricity would convert the atmospheric heat into electricity. Look, now isn't the problem solved? Haven't we helped the nature to restore its serenity back without any loss? Now, wouldn't it possible for the nature to evolve or expand without creating extinction as a we have supported its balance through our technological advancement? Would there be any deprivations ever if we are to take up progressive principles that would enables us regulated development or regulated travel?

It is important that we pause and take up the needed reforms because, to nature there can be no influence, if there is an massive disaster, it is to all, irrespective of the status or power. When progressive principles are adopted, prosperity and opportunity will be to all equally for their individual capacity.

Now,it is time for the government to think on the pattern of their facilitation and it is time for the citizens to think on the pattern they need to get facilitated with. It is not to ignored that, citizens are a part of government and in all facilitations and activities of government, every single citizen hold due and equal responsibility.

[drpriyaprabhakar-blog]

#CSocD53 - MDGs to post 2015 development

Settlement of Indigenous population means that area or region is rich in natural resources and has an potential scope for development based on natural resources. Mexico, again as like all regions. is influenced by the illusions that development is about industries, technologies, infrastructure and scientific sophistications. Social and economic discriminations in the rural areas are because of this stereotype we have towards development. It is important for the world to be heterogenetic for a holistic or wholesome growth. Heterogeneity of the nation still reflects the inequality because of the nation considering development to be one-sided and homogenetic. As like the growth accomplished by the northern region of Mexico, south and south-eastern region can accomplish growth if developmental approach here is towards enabling growth and social prosperity inline with the living pattern of Indigenous people. Indigenous people are not to be considered as historic or deprived, even before the existence of advancements they explored world and found an environment that could naturally support living and it was they who designed a region that has holistic and equitable facilities and opportunities for life. If discussed with inclusion we can get mind-blowing and eye-opening ideas for general facilitation and development from them who are aware of their roots and evolution. Even though we cannot descend their environment or life as such, we will be able to get a core that can be shaped to the current societal structures and living advancements. The hunger campaign can be successful if development and facilitation in the rural and municipal areas of indigenous population are inline with their pattern of living with due inclusion to them without imposing or restricting their activity or functioning in the name of standards and under the concept of modernity or urbanisation. Reducing poverty is not about funding or providing threshold, by doing so we are invisibly elongating the factors and tension of inequality. Reducing poverty is about enabling opportunities to employment that will keep both the individual families and the nation out of poverty. Poverty eradication is simple when the human rights is facilitated individual specific, a component of government was formed to facilitate and regulate the needs of the commons and not to have authority or ownership over the facilitation and the facilities respectively. There is an misinterpretation in this regard, world-wide, the world at large is forced to adapt to what is facilitated as routine, standards and common. And it is only because of this we have unequal development. Sectoral approach in facilitation and analysis will not enable to assess the reality but it will always represent illusion because we bring the region to an average or mean which is not a reality but the consideration factor of analysis, as like what we study in term of theorems in schools, “consider a closed factor”, what in this world is a closed factor? How to apply those theorems naturally for factual research? No clues. So development is about considering all individuals of the world, individually, along with the structures and components of the world as a whole with its qualities of heterogeneity.

[drpriyaprabhakar-blog]

Education is not just the science and numbers taught through school, it is majorly the experience and exposure taught through life

[drpriyaprabhakar-blog]

TRANSITION OF MDGs TO SDGs

Millennium Developmental goals are to be taken to Progressive Developmental goals and not to sustainable developmental goals. 

Now, What does “sustainable” in SDGs mean? Is it about sustaining the development or sustaining the factors or components of development? 

In both the ways it is only regression that we will be able to reach at the end, because, there is a factor called "NATURE" in this world which is something very foundational and native component to any form. This "NATURE" has some mystery in it, it somehow has its own evolution and even in this era of greatest technical and scientific advancements, it is only the this “nature “that is neither predictable nor been able to get engineered. Natural evolution or changes is highly inevitable and as nature is not in our control we cannot sustain its growth as we are trying to do with our living. Unfortunately, this nature has become the locus and the principal component of all life forms. Sustaining development in an evolving environment is like trying to use an gadget with an outdate version of software. Its functioning can never be effective or purposeful. So, we needn’t sustain, we need to progress. I would like to share the difference between the progressive development and sustainable development,

“Progressive development is about adapting the changes and evolution in the course of development.” “Sustainable development is about sustaining the growth at a fixed standard irrespective of the environmental or natural evolution, which eventually will lead to regression.”

For example, we have Right to Education and Education for all, as a goal in our agenda of development for a long time. With internet (technical advancement) and globalization (Social advancement) it is easy to accomplish this goal without much difficulties, complexities and efforts. Both enables access to world wide expertise, without limiting the number of specialities, the depth of knowledge and other such factors of restriction prevailing in the one-to many teaching pattern facilitated in a instituted environment. Why should schools be the only medium for education? Why can't the world be the medium for education? Can't we accomplish the goals of EFA and Right to Education to its purpose with world being the foundation for education? Why can't we recognize the cognizance, knowledge and wisdom of individuals gained by the them their life experience? Is it not the best education one could get? Is education only the emprics, hypothesis and theories of science and numbers? When the opportunities and facilities for education is facilitated only through school there are circumstantial factors like tradition and accessibility hindering the access of education; quality, environment, patterns and stereotypes hindering the purpose of education. In this situation, why cant we liberate the medium or foundation?

Don't we have laws to support such facilitation of education? We do have, indeed the UN declaration of human rights, Constitution of UNESCO and Charter of UNU all supports this but we are not able to see this option because we are blind-folded by the principles and illusions of sustainability. Our approach is to sustain what is prevailing and not to progress and grow with change or adaptation. 

Now, it is for us to decide and choose between the two as in which will truly facilitate the world with development.