Book review for Pleasant Valley by Louis Bromfield

Book Review for Pleasant Valley by Louis Bromfield

Copyright 1945. Why, you may ask, am I reviewing a book from 1945? Because I think it may be more relevant now than when it was written.

I found this book in the gardening section of a very small country library because it is classified as a “farming memoir” and it is, but it is much more. It's about economics, architecture, the stability of France (at least up until the book was written), dogs, oddballs, self-sufficiency, sustainability, conservation, politics, dangers of raising the federal minimum wage, causes of poverty and its perpetuation, maple sugar, a love of nature, and, oh yeah, farming.

The reason I say it's as relevant today as when it was written or even more so, is because though we have made our farming practices more advanced, we are still “strip mining” most of the land which is being farmed and in many areas not much is being done to actively restore land which has been exhausted in the past. If Mr. Bromfield could catch a glimpse into today, at our wildfires in the West and the flooding in the Mid-West while at the same time having an alarmingly decreasing water-table, he would be very tempted to say, “I warned you, I told you so, and told you how to fix it.” Admittedly, he does share that the methods used on his farm may not succeed as well in other places because the glacial soil his farm is located above gives some advantages in soil restoration.

I think it is relevant because there was a start of a “food revolution” during the writing of Pleasant Valley which then largely died off but, I think, is having a recurrence in present day. Sadly, the government was, in part, behind the last one. They were the ones who were leading the way towards better land practices, they wisely sought to spread conservation and good land stewardship through example (in the form of “pilot farms” and land areas) and helping promote a largely self-supported organization called Friends of the Land, made up of concerned citizens who recognized our land as one of Americans greatest assets. I say sadly because, currently, I think such government support is lacking or at least I have not heard much of it.

Pleasant Valley is about being connected to the land and realizing every citizen, whether on a tractor or in a sky-rise, is tied to the fate of the land. That what the farmer does and, really, every landowner does effects not just them but the country as a whole. The health of the land, the health of our farms and the animals and fruits grown there are linked to our health, our intelligence, our sense of security, our future and when our land is poor, it perpetuates poverty because our health, the development of our intelligence, our sense of security, and our hope for the future suffers.

The overarching theme of Pleasant Valley is that our land is our most valuable asset as a country and having as many citizens as possible to own a little piece of land which they can care for and nurture and, in turn, be nurtured by it is the best way to have a strong and stable democracy. This is because these people, in being tied to the land, have a stake in our country and its well-being and in having the security that land can offer (in terms of producing much of what that person actually needs, if times get tough), they are free to vote for the best government, they are more free to vote because they are not dependent on a certain type of government and their hand-outs.

The above idea kind of goes back to my post about people “putting down roots” versus having a renter mentality in relation to the community in which they live. The same idea applies, if someone is tied to a piece of land, is clearly shown that their security is bound to that piece of land and the health of it (and they are taught how to care for it), then they will better treasure it. Bromfield says this is how France survived multiple invasions and revolutions, though citizens lost jobs, though their currency and economy were affected and disrupted, many countrymen had small farms that their families had cared for and cherished, so they tightened their belts a little and were still able to independently survive without putting much of a stress on a already overtaxed, unstable government.

Another prevailing theme which Bromfield shares is to work with nature instead of against her, to learn from her methods in soil restoration and merely speed them up by the help you, as a farmer, contribute. To plant in such a way that you help the land as it provides for you, to design your farm so as to harvest water and hold onto it, rather than letting it all run away with your topsoil. To organize your fields, orchards, and vegetable garden so nature helps to pollinate, control pests, and encourage game.

As I was telling my mother about this book she shared that she remembers some family friends when she was growing up that had an orchard and, beside the orchard, they grew a variety of berries for the birds. The family did not really harvest the berries, but left them for the birds and the birds, in turn, did most of the pest control in the orchard. This is the type of thing Bromfield advocates.

This is a book that I would like to own so I could underline and look back through. Not only to better know how to care for the land I will hopefully someday own but also so I can live a better, more “simple,” fuller life.

Now for some quotes:

(from page 10)

The permanence, the continuity of France was not born of weariness and economic defeat, but was a living thing, anchored to the soil, to the very earth itself. Any French peasant, any French workingman with his little plot of ground and his modest home and wages, which by American standards were small, had more permanence, more solidity, more security, than the American workingman or white-collar worker who received, according to French standards, fabulous wages, who rented the home he lived in and was perpetually in debt for his car, his radio, his washing machine.

Sitting there it occurred to me that the high standard of living in America was an illusion based upon credit and the installment plan, which threw a man and his family into the street and on public relief the moment his factory closed and he lost his job. It seemed to me that real continuity, real love of one's country, real permanence had to do with not with mechanical inventions and high wages but with the earth and man's love of the soil upon which he lived.

Some wisdom shared by Bromfield's neighbor:

(from page 144)

He looked down at his big hands and noticed, as I did, that some of the black damp loam of the fence row still clung to them. He brushed them awkwardly together. “I was just digging into the fence row to see what was going on there underground. A fellow can learn a lot by watching his own land and what go on in it and on it...Nellie always said a farm could teach you more than you could teach it if you just kept your eyes open...Nellie...that was my wife”

“Of course,” I said, “I remember.”

Before I share the next one, I should share, Bromfield was not in the “middle class,” he was a bestselling author, wrote scripts for Hollywood, etc.

(from 132)

The middle class is the backbone of democracy – in fact democracy cannot exist without a flourishing middle class. Perhaps the simplest definition of the middle class is that of a group of citizens who own something, who have some stake in individuality, in freedom, in good government, in the protection of civil rights and in the nation as a whole. Democracy is essentially a giant co-operative in which all the citizens have a stake...A man with a stake in the nation is independent. He resists being pushed about and regimented. A man without economic security, dependent upon the state to care for him whether it be to provide jobs or to pay him a dole when he is out of a job, is helpless. He can only continue to vote for the kind of government which provides him with a roof over his head, a miserable wage and food for the mouths of himself and his children. For him there is no security and no other way out.

(from 314)

We have set about to turn the wheel of fertility moving forward again...What we have been doing has been a relatively simple thing. We have sought merely to build as Nature builds, to plant and sow and reap as Nature meant us to do; we have sought to rebuild the earth as Nature built it in the beginning. With man's ingenuity we have been able to do it more rapidly than Nature herself, but only because we worked with the law and within the idiom of Nature. Man has never been able to impose his own law upon Nature nor to alter her laws, but he can, by working with her, accomplish much...

(from 316)

Each farm is a tiny world in itself, with each day its small play of tragedy, of comedy, of farce. Each day is in itself a cycle of the history of the earth.

(from 318)

For the children the rewards have been greater possibly then for the adults. There has been health and good food and fields and woods to roam over, animals to care for ,streams to fish and swim in, and all those contacts with air and earth and water which make for wisdom and understanding and judgment and for those resources later in life which are indestructible and far beyond either fame or riches in the long and trying span of life. They have learned, I think too, the great importance and solace of work, not the aimless, monotonous work of riveting and fitting together nuts and bolts, but of work which creates something, work which is richly its own reward, within the natural scheme of man's existence – the kind of work which contributes to the progress and welfare of mankind and the plenty of the earth upon which he lives.

There are other portions I would like to share, but some of them are pages long, so I will just once again encourage you to read the book.

The Product of an Overactive Imagination: Mother Nature is Sentient

The reason we haven't realized it is she is not some wise old Mother, she's like the 3-year-old who allows you to build a tower with blocks, only to knock them down delightedly and say “Do it again.” She is at this game endlessly with man and all our works, because she is so vast she waits more patiently than a 3-year-old, because her life is so long her tearing down can take generations, but it is no less deliberate; from her view it is no less a pleasure when she swipes her hand and it takes 2000 thousand years to complete the swipe. But sometimes, like a 3-year-old, she throws a tantrum when something isn't coming down fast enough, she employs not only her slow hand of erosion, rust, slowly shifting earth, and rains, but pulls out the baseball bat, the gun, and the missile. A 3-year-old holds these in her hands, fires at our works, smiles and says “Do it again.” And we, we do it again, we build it bigger, we build it stronger, we dare her to shake it, buffet it, and hit it with all she's worth and, because she's a 3-year-old, she'll gladly oblige.

Next time the wind howls and shakes your house, listen and hear if you don't agree. She's laughing at you, at us. To her it's all a game.

How Becoming A Mobile Society Has Damaged Our Communities

Last night I went to a folk music concert which was the launch of a new music venue, Music on Main. Who performed at this 160 people venue? The Kruger Brothers, the ones who have been on Letterman, performed with Steve Martin and Doc Watson, played around the world and, in the next few months will play shows from Alaska to Florida.

Why were they proud to be a part of this show? Why did they fill their concert with stories about the little community of Wilkesboro, North Carolina? Because they have adopted this place as their home, it is not the place of their roots (the brothers are from Switzerland and Joel Lansdberg is from New York) but they have put down roots here, they have dug in deep.

This is the place where the Isoms and others who are developing this venue have staked their claim that this is there home and they want to see it prosper, thrive, they want to bring new life to old traditions and old buildings.

Roots, they can not only benefit that which digs them deep, but in turn benefit that which they have dug deep into. Roots hold things together, help fill the soil with life, encourage other life to come as well, and so many other things. When your roots are dug in deep, you are invested in what is beneath your feet, the health of where your roots are determines your health, the improvement of the soil leads to improvement to yourself.

Recently I have been looking for a rental property to move into, while looking, I have learned of 3 places that have been damaged enough that the owners don't even want to show me the place until they can clean it up and fix the place. And in general that seems to be the renters mentality, “This place isn't really mine, so I don't need to take care of it.” There's no sense of ownership, there's less a sense of responsibility towards a place when you know you can just pick up and leave.

Well, I think this mentality has also developed in the minds of “mobile” people who move from place to place. They treat the communities they live in as a rental property. What do they care about the future of that community if they will be leaving before that future comes to pass? Why should they pay high taxes, invest themselves and their money in making improvements to a place that they will leave?

And so people live in places with the mindset of getting out, they don't dig their roots in. This is bad for the community but it is also, in turn, bad for the people who live like this. Because they don't dig in, don't invest themselves in getting to know their community, don't allow themselves to care for it, they get a shallower experience of that community, don't get to experience everything the community really has to offer, which leads to a worse experience overall and they think some other place will be better, so they move on.

Deep down I think most people still know that most things really worthwhile, of real value, take time and effort to develop and maintain. These things need nurturing to prosper and this applies to the community you live in as well. It is partly up to you to make the community you live in worthwhile and valuable; if you nurture it, it will in turn become a place which can nurture you.

Those behind Music on Main have committed to putting on 20 something shows in the course of the year. I believe the overall genre will be folk, because The Kruger Brothers and others have decided to make the claim that Wilkesboro is the “Heart of American Folk Music.” Some shows will be open mic, many will be local artists (which we have lot wonderful talent, so don't equate “local” with “not very good”), and some will be pretty big time folk groups (which we will get here with the help of the Kruger Brother's friendship).

As I said before, the idea behind these shows is to bring new life and breath to North Wilkesboro and Wilkesboro. To get our name more on the map and show the world what we have to offer.

Wherever you live, look in the nooks and crannies, up to the rooftops and in the basements, look on the sidewalk and find what it is you love about that place. Then nurture that love in yourself and put effort into making that thing or place more lovable and share it with others. Maybe you'll someday find your roots dug deep, your community more strong, and your head held more high because you are confident that what is beneath your feet will be there for you, because you have been there for it, have nurtured it and made it strong.

Asking Questions and Speculations About Heaven

I know some people aren't comfortable with speculating concerning religion, heaven, God, etc. (I'm thinking about some particular people at my church:), but I read C.S. Lewis as I grew up and probably 70% of his theological works are speculations based on logic and ponderings, struggles and faith. I grew up loving the Psalms, where questions abound and Psalmists aren't even opposed to yelling at God and they yell some pretty strong things, but you know what? God preserved those questions for us.

In things relating to salvation, yeah, it's dangerous territory to start speculating but in terms of relating to God, I honestly think, more than anything, he is amused by our speculations of him as a Father or Mother would be assumed at the speculations of their young children. I think if he didn't want us to ponder him and who he is, he would have only given us the Word and not also revealed so much of himself in the world around us and through our interactions with other human beings.

In terms of what heaven will be like, in the end I don't think it really matters, we will all be wrong, because what awaits us is beyond imagining, is beyond our comprehension. I take the Bible's physical descriptions of heaven "with a grain of salt" because, personally, I don't think jewels are very pretty and I am not impressed by gold. I think what was trying to be conveyed is that it is a place of beauty beyond compare, where there is no want or squalor...and so much more.

With that preface, on to more speculating.

I have often heard people say, "When I get to heaven I'm going to ask...," but it seems like the persons intent is to ask it right then, right when they get through the gate or even when they're standing in line at the door. If you read the Psalms, you God is comfortable with questions, he doesn't always answer them, but David asked a lot and he was called a man after God's own heart.

We are going to be an eternity in heaven, a "time" so long that it ceases to be measured. I think there will be time enough for every question and that we will hear every other persons questions and that we will be encouraged to ask more questions and have innumerable questions answered without even asking. Why? Because through our questions we will understand God more fully, through others questions we will understand him even more fully, and to understand God more fully is to better be able to praise him, because we will better understand why he is to be praised. I think heaven is partly going to be a show and tell of how God worked in your life (what you understand of his work before your questions and even more after your questions have been answered).

I think one of the experiences of heaven is going to be looking back at our life through the eyes, maybe not of God (because even our "indestructible" souls would probably explode or something), but through the eyes of heaven. I think we will see how everything effected everything and everyone else, how everything was connected together. I think at first we will be consumed with an almost overwhelming sadness, for we will see all the opportunities lost, all the good deeds prepared for us that were left undone. Now, before you tell me, "There's no tears in heaven," let me finish. I think we will then be be shown the picture more fully, that things will be pointed out that we didn't notice at first glace. I think we will be shown how God "has caused all things to work for the good of those who love him," how God managed to take our feeble attempts when we tried our best and caused everything to work out beautifully, to realize he made our individual imperfections into a whole that is perfection.

So keep on saving up your questions and, when we get there, don't be scared to ask...but maybe wait awhile, merely gazing at the face of God will probably answer thousands of questions we never knew to ask.

Also, try to look at your life and the lives of those around you through the eyes of heaven. Try to think, "How is God going to use that in the picture?" "How is God going to use that aspect of that persons life for the ultimate good?"

Maybe sometime soon I'll make everyone nervous by devoting a post to trying to describe God, but I think this is enough speculating for now. :)

P.S. I think if I do have a "crown" it's going to be made of something living with leaves and flowers incorporated in...and maybe have a hummingbird nest on it as well. Whatever it is, it will match me better than I could ever match it myself and yours will match you.

The Loss of Unstructured Play and the Fading Shared Human Experience

As I have said of other of my blog posts, I didn't do research about this, it is merely my opinion which formed while I was tying my shoes, or taking a shower, or, in this case, as I was getting dressed on Sunday.

My thoughts started out thinking about writing a post concerning how "children are children the world over, no matter where you go"...but then I realized this will soon not be the case. At the last church I went to, every week at my church small group the toddler age daughter of our hosts would play with people's phones, my nieces (one of whom is 4 and a half) play with my sister's phone, and many people are starting to buy phones or tablets for children who are that age or younger.

I've heard kids have computer classes in preschool and, if not then, then very soon after. Recess, free time, etc. seem to be in ever shorter supply in our country (and perhaps other developed countries). Not only is kindergarten actually highly structured but so are many preschools. Not only is school time structured, but "play time" now largely consists of myriads of structured activities.

Kids thrive on a sense of structure, of knowing what to expect but spontaneity has to be a part of life, you have to experience spontaneity and learn how to respond to it at an early age or life is going to be really tough.
 
So very increasing structure and becoming deeply involved with technology at ever younger ages, what does this have to do with the "shared human experience?" When telling others why I like working with kids in different cultures (and I have experienced quite a few) one of the things I say is, "Kids are kids, wherever you go." You may have no clue about the language, you may know nothing pertaining to the proper customs when interacting with adults, but you can play tag, hide-and-seek, climb a tree, kick a ball around, play hopscotch (or something like it), and relate to the kids in a thousand other ways, if you're willing to. Why is this possible? Because their unstructured play using only their environment and very limited resources took on a structure of its own that echoes your own childhood experiences. During this largely unsupervised play they formed their own rules of interaction and they remind us of lessons we learned on the playground or in our backyard. These children, those as a people they look and act so different from us, remind us a little of ourselves.
In short, through the children of another culture, we realize "they" are not so different from ourselves. The picture flashed in my head of the old and not so old pictures of soldiers smiling at children and children smiling back, because they are relating to each other, even if the parents seem alien, there's a spark of familiarity between the soldier and the child.

In this age of globalization we might just be increasing the differences between developing countries and developed ones; instead of closing gaps, we might be widening them. Imagine a child from today or one born ten years from now, with their hands always on technology, with their organized sports, organized dance, organized life, and now imagine them going to a developing country for the first time when they are a teenager or an adult. Their phone may not get reception and slightly organized chaos is the schedule for the day.

Will there still be as much of a spark of recognition as they look at these alien children, will they still be able to see themselves in them and their play? It may be interesting to watch, it may be heartbreaking...I guess we'll have to wait and see.

P.S. Maybe I'm totally wrong, maybe because of often exposure to world news, to cultural events from around the world, the children of tomorrow will be able to relate to cultures other than their own better we ever could. Again, I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

Movie Review for 42: The Jackie Robinson Story and An Apology to Men With Color Other Than My Own

As I was writing the book review for To Kill a Mockingbird a particular instance which occurred when I was a busser in a restaurant kept cropping up in my mind. I went back and scanned through that book review and didn't deal with that instance there. Watching this movie made me remember it again.

There was a man I worked with who was good looking, well put together and, as I was around him more, I began to think of as sort of a “Renaissance Man” of the restaurant business. If someone was sick or didn't show up, he seemed to be able to take anyone's place. He was hired as the dishwasher but he also filled in for the prep cooks, the cooks, and helped me as a busser a few times.

The first time he helped me with bussing he said something like, “I don't want to work this position, anything dealing with money. If something goes missing, they'll look at me.” He was nervous about the tips being left on the table, he felt that because he was black he would be suspect.

A couple weeks later one of my fellow bussers was fired for stealing tips...and he was black. Supposedly one of the waitresses saw him do it, but I still felt it was unfair that I didn't even seem to be a suspect, they didn't question me or anything.

Anyway, that situation gave me a personal experience into the fact that the work Atticus started on in To Kill a Mockingbird hasn't been finished yet, justice is still not blind and people are not blind in ways they should be. And I am sorry for that. I am sorry you are still more likely to be suspected because of the color of your skin. I am sorry we still see colors in ways we shouldn't, that we still attach certain attributes to people because of how they look. In other words, I am sorry prejudice is still a problem, even after all this time, even after all that has happened and all the supposed growth.

Onto the movie. I am not good at history, especially history regarding sports, but from the brief reading I did, it seems the movie stayed true to the story, even if all the particular instances in it were not exactly correct. Whether you like baseball or not, it's a movie worth watching because it was a wonderful story of courage, not just of Jackie, but of so many around him.

I don't know how accurate Branch Rickey's character was or the reasons behind what he did, if they were noble and for the love of the game or about eventually making more money. Whether they were noble or not, it took guts to do what he did and it took smarts to choose the right player for that historic role.

I admire Jackie's wife, admire her for loving him and supporting him, even though she probably worried every time he walked out the door, every time he stepped up to bat, every time he went on the road.

I admire the players on Jackie's team who, over the course of time, were united. Who started respecting Jackie as they got to know him and his abilities.

And, of course, I admire Jackie Robinson, who held true to his word and didn't fight back, and in so doing showed that he was more of a gentleman than those white men who hurled abuse at him.

The acting in the movie was superb. Chadwick Boseman did a wonderful job of playing strong and independent Jackie (which sounds true to the real man), Nicole Beharie was beautiful, fun, strong, and charming in her role as Jackie's wife, Harrison Ford perfectly mixed the gruff old man and someone who deeply cared about baseball and people, and the cast in general just did a splendid job.

It's a movie about baseball, yes, but it is also about so much more. It's about breaking down barriers, overcoming prejudices, having the courage to not fight back (when fighting back would only make things worse), changing mindsets and changing the world. Even if you're not particularly a baseball fan, I still highly recommend it.

Mankind’s Relentless War on the Sea or Why the Mermaids are Silent

In the same vein as Zombies AttackAmerica and Lights, Camera, Cue the Alien Invasion I bring you, Why the Mermaids Are Silent.

You have been an unwitting participate in Humanity's longest war, you and, most likely, all of your ancestors. In the dawn of time, once humanity began to come into its own, to develop trade, travel further, and finally started to use the seas for trade, we were approached by emissaries from under the sea. At first they were welcome allies, beings who were civil in the world of nature that is not.

The merpeople escorted our ships, guarding them from pirates using their awful spears. After a time, the sailors began to notice that when they were accompanied, the weather was more likely to be fair and there was often a favorable wind. Sailors grow lonely in the watches of the night and so grew used to the merpeople's presence and developed friendships of a sort (at least as close to a friendship as you can come with having very little in common in terms of means of communications). Because the merpeople revealed their powers gradually and in subtle ways, they were merely incorporated into sailors superstitious ways, instead of being feared.

As you can imagine, the merpeople's technology is very different than our own. Though they developed means to go about on land, it was cumbersome and uncomfortable, besides, most of the world is made up of water, so they left the dry dirt to us. As well as developing ways they could go ashore, they made ways in which man could visit underwater. Over time the story of Atlantis has gotten twisted, it wasn't that the city was buried in water, it had always been underwater. And it wasn't the city that was destroyed but rather our means to get there and the ties which allowed us to go.

Merchants have always dealt in stories, as well as goods, and they began to tell of the powers sailors spoke of their guardians having. Also, those few merchants who had visited the underwater cities boasted of the wonders and power they saw there. These stories filtered up to kings and queens and those kingdoms which had coastlands began look from their tallest towers at just how much water there was, some dwelt in lands with water that went on forever and spread news of this neverending water to those who had never seen such a thing. From everywhere there was water came also tales of merpeople, with their weather controlling power, their spears which could go further than any weapon of our own, and their otherness. As often happens when we are confronted by things we do not understand, the rulers became suspicious and fearful of the merpeople.

Sailors had quickly learned, when they were accompanied, they could not throw their waste overboard. Their companions conveyed they could grow sick from this refuse. Well, some merchants had learned of these things and had also heard their rulers fears, so they sold this information along with an idea to weaken the ones their rulers feared.

So mankind began the most continuous onslaught of any war, and began using biological and chemical warfare before they learned of germs or really knew what chemicals were. Mankind became the merpeople's enemy. Mankind was encouraged to throw their filth into their freshwater sources, because all streams lead to the sea and, thus, would weaken our enemies. Sailors were told to throw their waste overboard to chase away their guardians.

Merpeople began hiding their dead so we could learn no more weaknesses, developed means to keep areas of water pure enough for them to live in, and, mostly, withdrew into themselves. Though occasionally a particularly hardy young one rose to the surface to seduce and drown lonely sailors. Also, the legends of Selkies or Seal Wives make me wonder if they continued to develop less cumbersome means of venturing on land.

Merpeople are a farseeing people, so as well as immediate attacks using storms, drought, and other means, they use acid rain which strip our monuments and weaken our buildings.

From the side of the merpeople, it has never been an all-out war, just an occasional extra storm or discouraged raincloud on a parched land. But then things changed. The US launched a sustained nuclear attack starting in 1946 which lasted over the course of 15 years guised under the claim of “nuclear tests” at the Pacific Proving Grounds until the Partial Test Ban Treaty finally put a stop to it in 1963. Starting at the same time Russia decided on a more passive attack of dropping their waste from their nuclear power plants into the sea and, because it was passive and used less resources, was maintained for an even longer time than our attacks.

Since then the merpeople have become more invested, causing tsunami, earthquakes, tornadoes where they have never been before and increasing the frequency of “natural disasters” in general.

Also, they are in the process of melting the icebergs and glaciers in order to devastate our coastlands. Because of this, many governments have reevaluated in the last few years, instigating clean water acts, striving to “go green;” in other words, trying to appease a species we cannot seem to destroy that is capable of destroying us.

Now the question is, is it too little too late? Have the merpeople's hate built up for us to such a degree that they are willing commit mass suicide in their attempt to enact their revenge by shutting down the global conveyor belt, canceling out Thermohaline Circulation by raising the temperatures at the poles. This would basically kill the wind, dramatically change the weather (or make the weather stop), and stagnate the oceans...in other words, change the world as we know it and turn it into a far less friendly place.

So push for peace with the merpeople, take care of your planet, or you may have a lot of help bringing about its end. Also, push for relationships with them, we all know the best way to overcome old hates and prejudices is to get to know entities from the group you hate. Maybe if they get to know a few of us who are decent, who care about them and our planet, we can all work together in preserving our planet instead of destroying it in our attempts to destroy each other.

Oh, and if you doubt that merpeople are real, how you account for the fact that mankind has so thoroughly dirtied our waterways for so long? Whether humans knew of germs or not, they had herders and merchants who told tales of how refreshing and wonderful unpolluted springs and mountain streams were. Even if you knew nothing of the benefits of clean water, you could see and taste how much better water was that did not have animal feces and all of mans waste in it. There had to be a reason to account for this madness.

P.S. I recently told my brother I don't need pre-established conspiracies...I can make up my own. :)