So, what if I were a bee and I navigated from far-flung flowering trees and plants to my queen and hive, back and forth, communicating with my bee brothers and sisters what's up, and what if by coincidence I helped to pollinate 1/3rd of the food supply of humans, and what if cellular communication scrambled my exquisite sense of vibration to the point that I disappear and take 1/3rd of the human food supply with me?

How would we, humans, account for that cost?

What if we discovered cell phones are chasing bees from the planet? What if our impact wasn't just bees, but other species that singly or in combination make our own survival possible?

If we had to choose between cell phones and bees, what would we do?

I posit this question in the cheerful spirit that it may never need answering exactly as posed, and yet it is precisely the order of inquiry that smashes the notion of we can just somehow slide by the impacts of global warming, without modifying our patterns of consumption in any substantive way.

[note:  at present we don't have any conclusive evidence that cell phone and other wireless radiation is to blame for bee decline;  some evidence is accruing slowly (hotly contested by cell companies of course) that repeater tower radiation may be harmful to humans, and the wrangle continues.  the author above was merely using RF and cell phones as an example of our extreme attachment to technologies that may turn out to be contrabiotic and hence maladaptive or even suicidal.]

The difference between theory and practise in practise ...