As beards appear to be computation-amplifiers in India, our great saviour Sadhguru has just calculated that we are going to have 30% less water than we need in 2030.
So, as a self-appointed guardian of our planet, he has magnanimously decided to face inconvenience of driving in a 2.3 crore Mercedes G63 AGM with a small 5.5 lt engine (compared to planet-polluting 1.0 lt cars that most of us lesser mortals drive) across India to save our rivers.
While I never grudge anyone having fun at the cost of emotional suckers (as, given an opportunity, I would also love to do the same), but, I do have a small problem here, as I inhabit the same planet he plans to save.
On my planet, I don’t see herds of elephants or pterodactyl or rain forest canopy outside my window. I have (admittedly unfounded) suspicion that they are not there because it is not ecologically viable for them to be there. On my Earth, life is like a marketplace where only those who profit in commerce of energy transaction called living remain alive.
Sadhguru’s planet runs on completely different logic. When he looks at a river and can’t see one kilometre belt of trees on riversides, he knows for sure that it is a dirty trick played by us humans that has caused vanishing of these trees that would have otherwise saved the river.
So, as an ecologist, climatology and geologist rolled in one, Sadhguru has a “simplest” solution proposed on his webpage to save our rivers, i.e. “maintain a minimum of one kilometre tree cover on riversides. This will ensure our rivers are fed throughout the year by the moist soil.”
On my planet, rivers are just waterways that drain rainwater of a large catchment area, into sea, and riversides are mostly flood-plains having ecological cycle with plant species able to survive seasonal water logging. So, I don’t have an iota of idea how a kilometre belt of trees on the riversides is going to survive and perform the magic proposed by Sadhguru, but I am now seriously worried because I see a lot of starry-eyed kids getting mesmerised by the new age guru.
As far as I can see, the way life on this planet works, if riversides were really suited for trees, all our technology wouldn’t have been able to prevent them from being there (If you can’t believe it, try your hands at eradicating a simplest creature like house rat).
When you insert any life form where is naturally not there, even if it is a beautiful banyan tree or a cute rabbit, you are just messing up with energy market that is operated by nature. So, you need to force it there with brute power of artificial support. Such acts disrupt and destabilise ecological balance. So this forced-forestation is a scary idea, especially when proposed by someone as powerful as Sadhguru.
Frankly, I know that Sadhguru is an intelligent man who knows that like all “simplest” solutions, his idea is completely impossible to execute on ground, so all he is doing is pressing the tree-button, that urban youth living in concrete jungle falls for every time, to gain popularity. But, I now feel that he is having a bit too much fun at our cost.
As humanity is on a guilt trip of having “destroyed” nature, it has become highly vulnerable to these saviours proposing random ideas of saving nature. I am not too worried about nature, as it is surely not fragile; but, we as a race are.
It is unlikely that we can suffer so much saving without serious problems. Humanity needs to be saved, from the self-appointed saviours of this planet.