Think of these seasonal blog posts as like a “blog within a blog.” An easy-breezy way to add new content (on a variety of topics). These are subject to editing, right up until when the next quarterly one begins.
(1) (Tuesday, July 1, 2025) Regarding what I wrote in concluding the “Spring, 2025” series of blog posts, I never got around to creating that new quarterly feature I referred to there. I put together the framework for an abbreviated, shortened version, but haven’t had sufficient time for that either. At the very least, I’m hoping to be able to start with this new quarterly feature at the conclusion of this newly created “Summer, 2025” series of blog posts (before the “Autumn” edition appears).
I jotted down some ideas today for a children’s book related to saving the planet. It’s not something I have an especially deep desire to do, but I’m very pleased with the concept ideas I jotted down. It might be fairly easy to do and so perhaps some day I’ll get to it. The concept I have in mind, if not entirely original, is original enough, considering the holistic approach it would take. Anyhow, that’s not what I wanted to write about.
Last week, as I was reading Tim Wu’s review of two books having to do with Sam Altman and OpenAi in The New York Times (June 22), it brought to mind one of my most recent big ideas. Like all of my big ideas, it’s not something I’ve heard anyone else talk about or suggest. It’s interesting that no one has ever talked about this particular idea (at least not that I’m aware of). There are two big clues in that review that could potentially help someone come up with the same idea. Not obvious, by any means. But if one were to look for two related things stated in the review, and think in terms of finding an outside the box solution that no one else has yet suggested, the idea I’m referring to might come to you as well.
Here’s another clue. The very fact that we live in a world where thousands of people haven’t talked about this very same idea, demonstrates the depth of the hole humankind is in, and further evidences why someone like me should be given funding (pronto).
It also illustrates, by the way, why I don’t like the thought of presenting my ideas piecemeal. A small handful of my ideas in an environment such as the one we have now would be relatively pointless. What’s needed is for me to be in a position where I can finally start getting all of my (“52p52”) ideas out there, week after week, month after month, while hammering at some of the main key points (which need to be emphasized again and again) and simultaneously working behind the scenes, to make as much progress as possible in a variety of other, more specific, ways.
(2) (Wednesday, June 2, 2025) I’m trying something different here, with this particular blog posting. It’s intended for E. Jean Carroll, specifically. So if you’re E. Jean Carroll, Hi! Or if you’re friends with Carroll, please reach out and let her know Ecoideaman wrote this blog post specifically for her.
I recently read a book review published online for The Guardian, in which Lloyd Green reviewed E. Jean Carroll’s memoir, Not My Type. Carroll won a lawsuit against Donald J. Trump, plus one or more defamation suits. With accruing interest, she is expected to receive over $100 million. What is Carroll intending to do with that money? Green quotes Carroll as stating: “I, E. Jean Carroll, pledge to make Trump very, very mad by giving most of the $100m to all things he hates. If Trump despises it . . . I’m gonna be giving money to it.”
Examples? Green continues: “Think reproductive freedom, voting rights and combating the climate crisis.”
So here’s a suggestion for Carroll: For just a tiny fraction of that $100 million judgement, you can single-handedly provide 100% of the funding I need in order to be able to get moving with my ideas and strategies for ‘saving the planet.’
Let’s face it, anything having to do with ‘saving the planet,’ Trump absolutely abhors. Remember Scott Pruitt and his soundproof office?
What better way to go about funding things Trump hates, than to do so, while, simultaneously, doing something that could potentially help save the planet? And what better way to get the best bang for your buck? Wouldn’t it also be deliciously ironic knowing money going towards saving the planet came from someone of his ilk? And it would be appropriate. If someone bears much greater responsibility for there being a need to save the planet, shouldn’t they also bear much greater responsibility for paying to help save it?
I have been focused on saving the planet my entire life and have lots of original, never before released, big ideas, aimed at achieving that goal. So if you know E. Jean Carroll, please inform her: “Hey, Jean, I found something that definitely might interest you.” (Then tell her about my website, and this blog post.)
No pressure, none whatsoever, if someone doesn’t want to give me funding, I don’t want them to either. And I really mean that!
Not only might this be a great way to achieve her goal, it might also be a great legacy for her personally. Success breeds success. If I can get that initial infusion of funding, I can finally start presenting my ideas; and they might really take off! If that happens, saving the planet might actually become possible!
(3) (Wednesday, July 9, 2025) Here we go again. I had an idea for a way to compose an answer to my Sept. 27, 2024 blog post, which poses the question, “What Is My Website’s Achilles Heel?” While working on that, I needed to refer to my Home page to see the date of that posting. I found it. But in so doing, I happened to notice that the blog posts appearing on that page only go back as far as August 9, 2024. (They should go back way further than that!) I couldn’t see any way of getting to the older posts. Or any indication even that there are older posts. That happened once before, and I had to bring it to the attention of my web designer. She’s quick! So don’t be surprised if the problem’s been corrected before you’ve finished reading this paragraph. But that’s assuming I can tend to that today. In the meantime, I apologize for that. I have no idea why it’s happening. And I don’t know for long it’s been the case (that so many older blog posts aren’t showing up or being made available on the Home page).
Since this has happened twice now, let me take the time to state, here, right now, in case this happens again, or in case you’re seeing this website for the first time, unfortunately, things like this happen. It’s out of my control. Just please know that I probably started blogging around the time my website first went up (which I believe was Dec., of 2014). So there might be ten years’ worth of blog posts not showing. You can always try using the Way Back Machine (see my Links page) as a means for viewing older blog posts (if, for whatever reason, they aren’t showing).
Way Back Machine is a great tool to use, regardless. Especially concerning a website like mine. There are many things you might discover by viewing past versions of my website. For example, the original tagline I was using for quite some time (and who knows, maybe I’ll go back to it again), was this: A unique website. A singular individual. An unparalleled mission: to save the planet.
Also, getting back to something I touched upon above. Yes, I did complete a rough draft for answering the question posed in that past blog post titled “What Is My Website’s Achilles’ Heel?” I don’t know when I’ll post it. I’ll need to proofread it a few more times and do more editing. That’s if I decide to even use that draft. But also, once I complete my move, I’ll need a different means for connecting to the Internet. That might entail a separate delay. And at some point, I’ll need to get Windows 11. Ugh. Technology!
(4) (Wednesday, July 23, 2025) Regarding what I stated above, that rough draft I put together to potentially use as a ‘Part II’ follow-up for my blog post that asks: What Is My Website’s Achilles’ Heel?, well, it turns out that after checking my notes, I noticed there are several things not included in that draft that I wanted to include. So it’s back to the drawing board. I knew that wasn’t going to be an easy blog post to write, but it’s proving to be even more difficult than I anticipated. Putting together a simplified version would be a piece of cake. But due to the gravity of the subject matter, that’s not good enough. I want it done right (no matter how long that takes), or not done at all.
That said, one thing about that rough draft I’m quite pleased with is even though it’s not necessarily something I’ll include in whatever ‘Part II’ version I eventually go with, I came up with a great way to put into words something that has always been very difficult to put into words.
(5) (Wednesday, July 23, 2025) Profiling a Potential Backer
What characteristics would a potential backer possess? What attributes might indicate beforehand that someone could have what it takes to be a potential backer?
It’s not something I think about, but while brushing my teeth I had an avalanche of thoughts that fell in that direction. So I thought I’d share some of those thoughts; and some additional thoughts on that same topic.
I think a potential backer (what I’m seeking) would likely be wealthy; and would be someone who cares deeply about what we’re doing to the planet (!).
I suspect that person might also be an independent-minded, original thinker. An outlier. An iconoclast. Someone who isn’t uncomfortable thinking outside the box. Someone who is of above-average intelligence. Someone who cares about right and wrong. Who cares about the kind of world we leave behind for posterity.
They would probably not be someone with too many children. Perhaps someone with no children. A potential backer might be a couple, but I suspect it would more likely be a sole individual. It’s hard enough finding one person who fits the mold I’m describing, it’d be that much harder to find two such people living under the same roof who fit the bill. But it’s certainly possible. Presumably, if two people are married they have certain things in common — but sometimes, they have many things in common.
A potential backer might have a dog or a cat. Or some other type of pet.
They would probably be someone who agrees there’s way too much travel, air travel, vacationing, self-indulgence.
I suspect someone interested in backing me would probably bristle at the term “influencer.”
They would be an unusual type of individual. Not someone who follows the crowd. Probably not someone who goes to church regularly and prays. That’s for sure. Not an average Joe. That’s for sure. It would take someone who breaks that mold just to be someone willing to consider backing someone like me with funding. I wrote a blog post years back titled “What’s a Mini-M?” Basically, that’s what they’d be doing. But let’s face it, most people would never, ever seriously consider giving substantial funding to one single individual, no matter how brilliant their ideas and strategies happened to be for saving the planet.
Someone willing to back me would probably not be an optimist. Or else, why back me? But that’s not necessarily the case. For example, it might depend on how they define, or on how strongly they identify as, an optimist. Or perhaps they are an ironclad optimist but simultaneously realize it’s not wise to keep all of their “eggs” in that basket. Because I could be right; and they could be wrong.
Someone willing to back me would probably be someone who thinks rationally. There are so many beliefs out there that are just plain wrong, but nonetheless accepted anyway, and that always baffles me. There are dozens of examples I can toss out but I’ll just toss out one: communicating with the dead. There are lots of people who believe that sort of thing is possible. I find that scary.
Someone willing and eager to back me would probably be someone very frustrated at having to bear witness, decade after decade, to no real progress being made, mankind forever moving in the wrong direction — or wrong directions — watching the wrong people get elected (or re-elected) time and again, never seeing any real focus on deep, holistic approaches. Just more and more evidence of shallow ignorance and minimalistic, tribalistic thinking.
Someone willing to back me with funding would probably be someone genuinely excited about the prospect of backing someone with the types of ideas and thinking that could help us save the planet. Unlike with all the many organizations, NGOs, and 501(c)(3)s out there, that, combined, aren’t doing or accomplishing much, to help bring about the kind of deep, paradigmatic shift in thinking that’s desperately needed.
An authentic potential backer would be someone who realizes there may be some things we disagree on, but so what. They’re not giving me twenty billion dollars. It’s not like they’re giving me the ability to wave a magic wand and remake the world in accordance with how I think it should be. The minimal funding I’m seeking basically just allows me to get my ideas out there. It temporarily removes the necessity of needing a full-time job — so I can focus (exclusively) on getting my ideas out there. It would be nice to also have that twenty billion dollars, so I can also work on helping push along some of my key ideas. But just getting my ideas out there, that alone would be nice — and that alone might be sufficient. Some are general. Some specific. Some involve ways of helping foster different thinking. Some are things I believe we definitely need to be doing. Some are things that are optional, not absolutely essential. My ideas run the gamut. But together, they combine to create a holistic framework for what it is we need to be doing — if saving the planet is our goal.
Also, someone seriously willing to consider backing me, wouldn’t be someone who shies away from stating that upfront. Finally, I suspect a potential backer would be someone who is generous, sincere, honest, and eager to see real progress being made.
Just sharing some thoughts. If you care about saving the planet, you know how to reach me.
Oh, and by the way, this quotation came to mind as I was writing this:
“Man is an embodied paradox, a bundle of contradictions.” — Charles Caleb Colton
So, yes, I’m quite aware that someone might wind up backing me who’s quite the opposite of some of these.
Or, perhaps I nailed it! Which brings to mind, I remember reading that Howard Stern stated on his radio show (back in 2011) that: when they catch the Gilgo Beach serial killer, it’ll be a “guy from Massapequa Park, they will probably get his DNA off a pizza box or something, he is also probably an architect or some shit and he will have a huge gun collection.”
Twelve years later, based on DNA evidence obtained from a discarded pizza box, police arrested an architect, living in Massapequa Park, and, yes, he had a large gun collection.
As an interesting sidebar — and this boomerangs back to that quotation about man being “a bundle of contradictions” — the house Heuermann was living in at the time of his arrest, hardly resembled anything you’d expect the owner of a Manhattan-based architectural consulting firm to be living in. “Dilapidated,” was one of the words used to describe it.
(6) (Wednesday, July 30, 2025) Almost every day it seems, while rushing off to my job site, the same thought goes through my head: What a colossal waste it is, when someone like me has to do this, rush off to do something that has nothing to do with saving the planet, when I am in fact the only person I know of, on this planet, with unique enough and big enough, ideas and strategies, that actually rise to the level of potentially saving the planet. In short, my unique talent in this particular area I think comes down to what I call “aptitudinal perspicacity.” The question “How do we save the planet?” has been the OS (Operating System) inside my brain, if you will, for most of my life, invisibly running in the background, ready to grab hold of any thought or idea pertaining to saving the planet that might prove itself potentially useful at some point. But what a wasted talent to have, it turns out. And isn’t that ironic.