We won’t subject you to pontification; well, maybe only a little.  

At RarAvis and Wildlife Art Journal, we believe in trying to foster a smart discussion about the natural world and the place of humans in it. 

Our bias, worn here on our sleeves, resides with putting more faith in the conclusions of rigorous peer-reviewed science than making listening posts out of tavern chatter, Tarot Card readers, and those who assert the ancient Egyptians enlisted dinosaurs to help them build the pyramids.

Science and spirituality, however one defines it, obviously can, and do co-exist.  This is not a rant against organized religion.

We also enjoy providing opportunities for readers to obtain free reports on important scientific issues shaping society.  One of them, of course, is climate change.  

Not long ago, the U.S. National Academies of Sciences issued a short, non-turgid document, intended for the lay reader, that represents the conclusions of hundreds of peer-reviewed studies and research documents.  The document is titled the Ecological Impacts of Climate Change and you can receive a free hard copy simply by going to the National Academies website and requesting one.

Not only will the effects of climate change shape the quality of human life on Earth, but already it is reshuffling the deck for how we think about species and where we presently find them.  

Artists who turn to the natural world as a muse play a vital role in reminding society of the aesthetic treasures found in nature, and you are serving as interpreters and documentarians of your/our time.  It’s important, whether you choose to embrace the role, or not.

“Climate change is happening on a global scale, but the ecological impacts are often local,” the booklet reads.

Artists help society see and understand things it normally might not.

In addition to encouraging you to pick up a copy of the National Academies report and sharing it with your kids or young people you know—its writing is accessible to readers of any age—we direct you to the document’s cover.  

What’s on it?  What’s used to capture your attention?

Nature art.

In this case, photographs of animals and plants taken in the wild.

The subjects are: a polar bear; an egret in a wetland; an evergreen forest with a post-glacial stream running through it; and blossoming flowers. They were provided by shooters who submitted their work to Jupiter Images, a stock agency affiliate of Getty Images.

All of us have our own totemic species; the animals we relate to most.  

Here, a note for those who embrace the ostrich.

Some of you may pooh-pooh the report, perhaps even point to a passage in a religious text and conclude the world is 10,000 years old. That is your choice and your right.

But rejecting the findings of the National Academies—the most prestigious scientific body in the U.S. — means you are casting aspersions upon the same confederation of independent scientific institutions that play a vital role in judging the efficacy of medicines, food safety, and the soundness of structures in the built environment.  The National Academies are non political by mandate and in the U.S. they have served as the source “for independent, objective advice on issues that affect people’s lives worldwide.”

You are also calling into question the credibility of the most respected scientific minds on the planet that have risen to positions of respect because they have been natural skeptics but with climate change persuaded otherwise by the evidence.

The world needs critics and skeptics, but their opinions—like those of art critics—are only valid if they can be defended in the face of informed scrutiny by their peers.

Of course, it is also your choice and right to disagree with this, too.