How we cite our quotes: (Chapter.Paragraph)
Quote #4
The markets were open only a few days each week—"to avoid fluctuations in supply" was the common explanation, rendered on the nightly news—and with the power cuts, refrigerating was impossible. Marjorie had turned to putting up vegetables and was amassing a throng of thick-lipped jars. They waited in cardboard boxes for the promised shelving. (10.1)
The famines and poisoned food from Africa and South America begin the natural dominoes effect. Food and power are now in shorter supply—something that is unheard of for many of us. Without a solution, it'll only get worse, so let the canning parties begin.
Quote #5
"You keep talking about the small universes inside ours and how we're overhearing their tachyon messages."
"Right."
"Isn't that a bit self-centered? How do we know we, in turn, are not a vest pocket universe inside somebody else's?" (15.73-75)
We'll take a moment away from the ecological issues with this quote. As science has deepened our knowledge of nature, it has also changed our view of our place within nature. Here, we see this happening again, only now the suggestion is that our own universe might not be as important as we think. Kind of a bummer, but it sure takes the pressure off. For more on this, be sure to check out the "What's Up With the Epigraph?" section.
Quote #6
The World Council had decided to redirect money for the Javan dieback into isolating the rhino. Ecoinventory had dictated that as part of the stabilization plan, aimed at saving species. The one species in excess was, of course, humans. The Council's policies had been applauded by the environmental types, politely not mentioning that in the zero-sum game of resources, this meant less available land and money for people. "Matter of choices," Peterson said distantly, swirling the amber fluid in his glass. Wise nods. (24.68)
A zero-sum game is an idea that basically states that one person's gain is another person's loss. For example, if we cut a cake into unequal pieces, then the recipients with the bigger pieces will gain the exact proportion of what the smaller piece recipients lose. It can be a disturbing theory when you apply it to concepts like economics and agriculture, but on the other hand, there is only so much to go around.