January 9, 2014 at 4:36 pm #153375
The Landscape Architecture Foundation collected the responses of landscape architects to the question: “What’s Next for Landscape Architecture.”
Here are just a few below:
You can check out the full set on LAF’s Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/landscapearchitecturefoundation/sets/72157639481827626/
What do you think is next for landscape architecture?January 9, 2014 at 6:15 pm #153395
Dealing with the issue of urbanization and land rights. Land grabbing continues to occur at the expense of the people working the soil, for example in China where they’re being forced into high-rise cities, similar to what happened in this country (UK) except it was into factories rather than high-rises. Has happened in numerous other countries too.
Urbanization is the result of this practice of concentrating land ownership into the hands of the wealthy. I would like to see L.A being more political and revitalizing towns, villages, real communities.. not fake morally deprived city “communities”. The city is not where it’s at.
Forget the fraudulent global warming nonsense. Reconnecting people with the land is what will balance out our increasingly stretched, stressed, and going no-where society.January 9, 2014 at 9:19 pm #153394
Some ideas I hope will come out of this series of lectures?
Future got to be linked to the promotion of sustainable planning, design & management and in the UK getting more young people into the profession in the first place as entry onto accredited course is down year on year! Seems everyone wants to chase the money?January 10, 2014 at 1:57 am #153393
‘fraudulent global warming nonsense??’January 10, 2014 at 11:30 am #153392
Yes. Fraudulent. It is politically sanctioned science that has no real basis in reality what so ever and is being used to defraud the public/further certain agenda’s of the ruling class. Climate change happens, it always happens, but global warming is complete crap. It amuses and saddens me that so many people have been taken in by this tosh; the absolute trust in the media and infallible scientists is incredible.January 10, 2014 at 1:32 pm #153391
Now this may be inappropriate thread hijacking, but I am so curious. If the UN and 97% of scientists state that human activity has contributed to climate change, what do you base your …um…opinion (?)…on? Your own climate research? Have you completely rejected science as a way of knowing the world?January 10, 2014 at 5:23 pm #153390
Science by way of democratic/consensus belief, I don’t do. There is so much political and funding pressure on scientists to come up with the answers required of them by certain interests, and this occurs in other areas of science too. I’m not interested in what scientists believe, only the science, and as far as I see the science simply is not there. Lots of statistics, graphs, assumptions, not a lot of science. Don’t kid yourself.. scientists are not infallible.
We have trouble predicting weather accurately in the short-term, and I’m expected to believe the predictions and computer models for something massively long term, and when many of the predictions that were made simply haven’t happened?
It’s all hysteria.January 10, 2014 at 6:09 pm #153389
Well, I rather think there is more corporate funding of studies to dismiss human influenced climate change than the other way around, but to each their own. (How wealthy is the Green lobby, after all?) You are young so you’ll get the chance to see it play out for the next few decades (if you are “lucky”). I hope for your sake that your skepticism is warranted. Otherwise you’ll see more ugly eventsJanuary 10, 2014 at 7:01 pm #153388
since the concept has been brought up, not *one* single study published by scientists has proven global warming is a fake. Only tabloids and general press articles, the writing of which is at best ignorant.
All scientific reviews articles agree that global warming is a fact. I’m surprised we still find negationists around…January 10, 2014 at 7:04 pm #153387
What’s Next for Landscape Architecture?
-> less aesthetics, more serious commitment to the sites and to people.January 10, 2014 at 7:25 pm #153386
What scientist in his right mind is going to even attempt to publish something going against the massive consensus. That’s a one way ticket to losing your funding and having to clear out your desk. That does not mean that the viewpoint is wrong though.
Rob: I’m more worried about Fukushima than about GW.. there is a disaster still in motion that is not going to go away any time soon. And yet no one is talking about it.. because there is no monetary gain from doing so.January 10, 2014 at 8:08 pm #153385
At the risk of derailing this thread even further…
I believe there are scientists who do publish against “the massive consensus.” Some of these people may truly believe that climate change is an overblown topic and others may be funded through corporations/organizations who have a vested interest to cast doubt on the subject and do not want to curtail their productions or be penalized in the name of global warming.
That said, there’s a lot of money to be made or lost either way and it’s a very political issue.
MIT Scientist Richard Lindzen is one such person who doesn’t seem to be funded by shadow organizations like I mentioned, but he is very skeptical and critical of global warming: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1CR0v7dwXUJanuary 10, 2014 at 10:15 pm #153384
@SS27 – The Japanese are talking about it non-stop.
And should anyone be proposing a new nuclear plant, they will hear all about it.
Lucy – sorry to have taken this so far. My thoughts on whither landscape architecture: if the profession can get over its fixation on architects, one sector will lead the way towards more sustainable living. Another sector will continue to ally with developers and do the opposite.January 10, 2014 at 10:23 pm #153383
Best advice for you: change majors since you are still a student. You won’t make it as a “Landscape” Architect. I’m not even going to waste another precious minute of my time debating with $#&% who refuse to believe in climate change. Recent examples are all around us. You live in England, check your neighbors, Iceland and Greenland. For starters, look at aerial photos today and 50 years ago and compare! Good heavens, man!
As for the future of LA? Nada. There is no future. The profession will be dead in 10 years.January 11, 2014 at 10:01 am #153382
As fate would have it this video was published on youtube yesterday. It deals with a particular interest of mine, cosmology, and is a fantastic example of where political/funding interferes with science; it talks about the astronomer Halton Arp who’s observations essentially proved there was no big bang/no expanding universe.
I bet you could find an example in every branch of science, regardless this backs my assertion that GW is junk science promoted through political and funding pressure.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.