{"id":4008,"date":"2010-08-01T01:10:29","date_gmt":"2010-08-01T06:10:29","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/paganpages.org\/content\/?p=4070"},"modified":"2010-07-29T15:31:13","modified_gmt":"2010-07-29T20:31:13","slug":"pagan-theology-20","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/paganpages.org\/emagazine\/2010\/08\/01\/pagan-theology-20\/","title":{"rendered":"Pagan Theology"},"content":{"rendered":"

Pagan theology: \u00a0Are we the last hope?<\/strong><\/p>\n

By nature I\u2019m a pretty fatalistic and ruthlessly practical person.\u00a0 Make a psychic prediction?\u00a0 Then you\u2019ve got to convince me you\u2019re not a cold reader [1].\u00a0 If you claim that recycling is beneficial to the environment: you\u2019d better have done a mass and energy balance [2].\u00a0 I try to look at the data, but, unfortunately when one does look at the data one can often come to some pretty depressing conclusions.\u00a0 Like the state of the environment.<\/p>\n

Since we just dumped a 435,000 \u2013 2,262,000 barrels [3] of oil into the Gulf of Mexico I thought it might be useful to consider some even more depressing environmental facts.\u00a0\u00a0 Facts that make the Gulf spill pale in comparison.<\/p>\n

One of the problems that humans have is a tendency toward ethnocentrism.\u00a0 We focus on our problems and ourselves and often miss the bigger picture of what is going on.\u00a0 One place where this is especially true is time.\u00a0 It\u2019s hard for us to conceive of time horizons beyond the range between our grandparents and our grandchildren, and it is even harder for us to comprehend time outside of historical time.\u00a0 However I contend that to really understand the environment, Gaia, or whatever you want to call the world, you need to understand it in the context of geological time because that is the time horizon for Gaia.<\/p>\n

In the last 530 million years that have elapsed since creatures with skeletons evolved on the earth there have been more or less 15 mass extinctions.\u00a0 Five of these may have resulted in the elimination of 50 percent or more of the species living at the time [4] and three can be said to have completely reorganized the way things work [5].<\/p>\n

We are in the middle of the fourth.\u00a0 Between 2.5 million and 10,000 years into the middle of the fourth, depending on which continent you are living on.<\/p>\n

Coincidentally the numbers for when the large mammals began going extinct on various continents coincide roughly with the arrival of people [6].\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 There is also considerable debate and discussion about modern extinction events.\u00a0 Islands, particularly the Hawaiian islands, are known to be particularly vulnerable due to the lack of predators and the unique and highly speciated ecosystems that develop on them.\u00a0 However, even in historical times, the number of native species being lost on the Hawaiian Islands is enormous.\u00a0 Of the 1000 (roughly) native snail types found on the islands in the 1800\u2019s when such things began to be cataloged, the islands may now be down to 75 percent of what it once was, and it is most likely headed downward [7].<\/p>\n

Similarly there were about 70 bird species in the islands when Cook visited in 1778, since then 16 have gone extinct, and 24 are listed as endangered.\u00a0 Looking further back in time, of the 100 or so unique bird species that existed before the arrival of Polynesians, only 9 are in sufficient numbers now to say they will survive [8].\u00a0 And the Hawaiian Islands are merely a metaphor for what is happening elsewhere. Exact estimates of human-caused extinction difficult because good baseline data on species variety and on what is and isn\u2019t extinct is not available.\u00a0 But things are not looking good for many species around the world.<\/p>\n

There is no need to go into a lot of detail about extinction.\u00a0 You get the point.\u00a0 When humans arrive, species start going extinct.<\/p>\n

But there are some more subtle points.\u00a0 First, \u201cmodern\u201d peoples are not the only ones to blame for extinction.\u00a0 In many cases first peoples did enormous damage to the ecosystems they encountered.\u00a0 What we see today as \u201cuntouched\u201d nature may in fact be only a shadow of what it was before we began moving around the world.<\/p>\n

This, in turn, means that the current extinctions we see in our ecosystems are part of a larger change in current fauna that is taking place ever since people became mobile hunters.\u00a0 When we arrive we change the fundamental nature of the ecology, and we import non-native species that eventually end up affecting local ecosystems.\u00a0 Many of these changes, on a geological scale, are fundamental to the ecosystems and represent the same kind of changes that would occur due to climate change, volcanism, or other natural disruptions.\u00a0 There may be no going back to a nature anywhere near what it once was.<\/p>\n

And it continues: species are going extinct every day.\u00a0 They may not be large land mammals, but insects, plants, fish, and other small creatures are constantly succumbing to habitat disruption and human imported species [9].\u00a0 As we need to claim more of the earth to accommodate ourselves, more and more species don\u2019t have the space in which to maintain reproductive populations, much less actually have a chance to survive disruptions on a geologic time scale.\u00a0 Small populations are simply the walking dead.<\/p>\n

The problem with our simple, ethnocentric, perspective is that we don\u2019t see the true magnitude of the problem.\u00a0 We see that some species are endangered, and we are happy when they are put on a list and they bounce back.\u00a0 What we don\u2019t see is that even if they bounce back there is insufficient long-term viability in either the ecosystem range available to them or the population for them to survive.\u00a0 They will likely survive 100 or even 1000 years, but that is merely a blink of an eye in geologic time.\u00a0 Given population and climate pressures is it likely that your grandchildren will only be able to see large African animals in zoos.\u00a0 And not long after that, nowhere.<\/p>\n

So what is the cause of extinction?\u00a0 In the geologic past, barring meteors or humans, it has been climate change.\u00a0 Human induced climate change has been much in the news lately, but it represents only a few degrees of change in global mean temperature over many years, and the changes will not be uniform.\u00a0 Not everywhere will bake to death, and ecosystems have dealt with such changes in the past.\u00a0\u00a0 There will be changes that take place, most worrisome in the oceans, but they may not be as dramatic as other changes.\u00a0 It is human activity that is responsible for most modern extinctions on land.\u00a0 Habitat reduction and burning are the two most significant things we can do to kill off species on land.\u00a0 If the animals don\u2019t have any place to live, or they are actively hunted, then they will die.\u00a0 Pretty simple.\u00a0\u00a0 Introduced species are another problem, but that boat has pretty much sailed.\u00a0 All we are waiting for is the snakes to arrive in Hawaii to finish all the birds off.\u00a0 And they\u2019ll get there eventually as long as we keep sailing ships and flying airplanes.<\/p>\n

What will kill many of the species in the future is simply bumping into humans, a lot of humans, who need to be fed, housed, and given space to run their All Terrain Vehicles (ATVs).\u00a0 The current African megafauna will simply be displaced by farming, because an increasing population has to eat somewhere.\u00a0\u00a0 If by 2050 China, for example, starts eating as much meat as the United States does now the total number of additional cows (not pounds of meat, but whole cows) will need to increase by about 632 million cows, or 6.5 times the total number of cows in the US right now, in order to supply just the Chinese and the additional US domestic population with 125 kg of meat per person that we eat now.\u00a0 And that does not include other developing countries, or an increase in waistlines here in the US.\u00a0 That\u2019s a lot of cows.\u00a0 Cows that have to be put somewhere (along with their poop).\u00a0\u00a0 Those cows will displace existing species at a ferocious rate, unless some sort of \u201cspace cow\u201d is developed where meat is grown in vats.<\/p>\n

While you could argue that technology, and development, will diminish many of the issues associated with population and economic growth, there is, ultimately, a carrying limit where the only thing happening on the planet is sustainment of humans.\u00a0 Not to mention the occasional Gulf Oil Spill.\u00a0 Say we \u201conly\u201d do one of those ever ten years.\u00a0 What will the oceans look like in 100 years, or 500?\u00a0 The trends are pretty grim, no matter what Fox News says.<\/p>\n

So what can we do about it?\u00a0 Recycling will not stop ecosystem deforestation in the developing world, or make the Chinese any less hungry for steak.\u00a0 The forces we are dealing with are large, and strong.\u00a0 Individual solutions, like you choosing to stop eating meat, while laudatory, are not going to work.\u00a0 Probably the best we could hope for is to stop current species extinction, and create some steady-state environment where additional destruction and conversion to human resource requirements did not happen.\u00a0 A steady-state economic model as opposed to a growth model.<\/p>\n

Growth, however, is an essential component of the current economic system.\u00a0 Lack of economic growth seems to send everything spiraling out of whack, probably because we are all constantly demanding increased control over our environment, and individual status.\u00a0 There are many things that go into a need for economic growth, but luxury, status, and entertainment are key aspects of what we seem to need.\u00a0 We need to re-think this idea of constant linear progress, trade it in for something more organic, seasonal, and closely tied to the environment.\u00a0 Sure sounds like trading in the book religions for Paganism [10].<\/p>\n

What would living in a world where Paganism was the dominant religion look like?\u00a0 First, time in human terms would be viewed as a cycle not a line that stretches out to some ultimate paradise.\u00a0\u00a0 We celebrate the seasons for a reason: they are what sustains agricultural life.\u00a0 A life we have gotten away from (farm much?). This lack of linear time would imply that progress was not the only goal, living in time might also be important.\u00a0 Second, modern Pagans are nothing if not attuned to technology.\u00a0 And it would be crazy to throw out thousands of years of technological progress.\u00a0 But technology can be used to increase output, or it can be used to increase flexibility.\u00a0 It can be used to differentiate, or it can be used to bring people together.\u00a0 Our choices in technology might be more organic, more attuned to a natural set of priorities associated with health, peace, and the earth.\u00a0 Third, a focus on the earth and our connection with it might be important.\u00a0 Modern living with its constant movement requires a lot of infrastructure to sustain.\u00a0 It is expensive in many ways to move people around, both locally and internationally.\u00a0 And movement separates us from the land, from our local space which is an essential part of understanding the Gods and Goddesses.<\/p>\n

So what would the world look like?\u00a0 It might be more local, more focused on production of high quality food and goods and less on moving manufactured materials from a distance.\u00a0 We\u2019d have less, but we\u2019d produce more of what we and our immediate neighbors need.\u00a0 Technology would enable all of us to entertain all of us.\u00a0 Instead of a great, centralized entertainment infrastructure, democratic distribution of entertainment production would mean a lot more, but lower quality, entertainment.\u00a0 At least until people got good at it.\u00a0 It would mean more farming and less travel.\u00a0 It would mean distributing the population over a wider area, but in farms and communities that were more integrated with the local ecology.\u00a0 You\u2019d have more trees, more shade, and more time to interact locally with other people, and with the world through technology.\u00a0 Species would again localize with less travel, and less travel would mean fewer emissions.<\/p>\n

So what might you do now?\u00a0 Plant a garden.\u00a0 Open your windows more.\u00a0 Don\u2019t get in an airplane (lots of resources going out those engines).\u00a0 Stay, eat, live local.\u00a0 Buy less stuff, and create through both craft and technology.\u00a0 Much of this is going on, but its not organized into a coherent movement or theology.\u00a0 That is where we could help.<\/p>\n

At least that\u2019s one world.\u00a0 Others are possible, but in order to get anywhere we need a Pagan vision for a post-industrial world, and we need to think about whether we need more Pagans.\u00a0 I\u2019d say we need both.\u00a0 And soon.<\/p>\n

[1] A stage magic technique that uses astute observations about the person and their condition to convince the person (usually \u201cvictim\u201d) that the reader knows a lot more about them than they actually do.\u00a0 If you\u2019re over 55 you\u2019ve probably \u201clost someone significant to you in the past,\u201d for example.<\/p>\n

[2] You\u2019d be surprised.\u00a0 Don\u2019t want to generate trash?\u00a0 Don\u2019t buy stuff in the first place.<\/p>\n

[3] 5,000-26,000 (estimated range) barrels per day times 87 days (till it was stopped).\u00a0 But who is counting.<\/p>\n

[4] Species.\u00a0 Not individuals, but species.\u00a0 And not genera, you could lose several different species but not lose the genus.<\/p>\n

[5] I\u2019m drawing directly from the really accessible book by Peter D. Ward:\u00a0 Rivers in Time:\u00a0 The Search for Clues to Earth\u2019s Mass Extinctions<\/em>, Columbia, 2000<\/p>\n

[6]\u00a0 Though the overhunting hypothesis is strongly debated by many, it just seems too coincidental to me to be an accident.\u00a0 However other factors, such as climate and human set fires may have been a factor in some ecosystems.\u00a0 For a summary see Timothy F. Flannery.\u00a0 \u201cDebating Extinction,\u201d\u00a0 Science<\/em>, 283:5399, 8 Jan 1999, pp. 182-183.\u00a0 For a pretty convincing case study see the discussion on the Australian megafauna here:\u00a0 Gifford H. Miller, et al. \u201cEcosystem Collapse in Pleistocene Australia and a Human Role in Megafaunal Extinction,\u201d Science<\/em>, 309:287,\u00a0 8 Jul 2005, pp. 287-290.\u00a0\u00a0 There are other references but the basic idea is that climate change, combined with human hunting, sent many of these species down the extinction tube.\u00a0 (Note that throughout this I\u2019m simply referencing Science<\/em> as it was easy for me to access, other journals will have similar stuff).<\/p>\n

[7]\u00a0 The problem with estimating species extinction on isolated islands is made difficult by the fact they are isolated, you can\u2019t count something that you can\u2019t count.\u00a0 However this was made a bit easier in the case of Hawaiian snails due to a huge mid 1800\u2019s snail shell collecting craze that hit the islands.\u00a0 Of course that didn\u2019t help the snails very much.\u00a0 A wildlife management mistake gone awry killed another 25% of the snail species in the 70\u2019s.\u00a0 And none of this, of course, counts for the damage done by the indigenous peoples who arrived on the islands before 1800.<\/p>\n

[8] Ward, pp. 252.<\/p>\n

[9]\u00a0 One estimate (Jennifer B. Hughes, et al. \u201cPopulation Diversity:\u00a0 Its Extent and Extinction\u201d, Science<\/em>, 278, 689, 24 Oct 1997, pp. 689-692) has it at 1800 per HOUR or 16 million populations per year (populations are geographical entities within a species, distinguished either ecologically or genetically, there is an average of 220 populations per species which would give 8 per hour or 73,000 per year species going extinct).\u00a0 The data is, of course, all over the map and these are controversial estimates.\u00a0 The authors claim they were being conservative.<\/p>\n

[10]\u00a0 Just to be clear, a lot of the current problem was created by Pagans.\u00a0 However early Pagans also worked with trophy heads of their enemies and sacrificed live animals.\u00a0 We evolve.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Pagan theology: \u00a0Are we the last hope? By nature I\u2019m a pretty fatalistic and ruthlessly practical person.\u00a0 Make a psychic prediction?\u00a0 Then you\u2019ve got to convince me you\u2019re not a cold reader [1].\u00a0 If you claim that recycling is beneficial to the environment: you\u2019d better have done a mass and energy balance [2].\u00a0 I try to look at the data, but, unfortunately when one does look at the data one can often come to some pretty depressing conclusions.\u00a0 Like the state of the environment. Since we just dumped a 435,000 \u2013 2,262,000 barrels [3] of oil into the Gulf of Mexico I thought it might be useful to consider some even more depressing environmental facts.\u00a0\u00a0 Facts that make the Gulf spill pale in comparison. One of the problems that humans have is a tendency toward ethnocentrism.\u00a0 We focus on our problems and ourselves and often miss the bigger picture of what is going on.\u00a0 One place where this is especially true is time.\u00a0 It\u2019s hard for us to conceive of time horizons beyond the range between our grandparents and our grandchildren, and it is even harder for us to comprehend time outside of historical time.\u00a0 However I contend that to really understand the environment, Gaia, or whatever you want to call the world, you need to understand it in the context of geological time because that is the time horizon for Gaia. In the last 530 million years that have elapsed since creatures with skeletons evolved on the earth there have been more or less 15 mass extinctions.\u00a0 Five of these may have resulted in the elimination of 50 percent or more of the species living at the time [4] and three can be said to have completely reorganized the way things work [5]. We are in the middle of the fourth.\u00a0 Between 2.5 million and 10,000 years into the middle of the fourth, depending on which continent you are living on. Coincidentally the numbers for when the large mammals began going extinct on various continents coincide roughly with the arrival of people [6].\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 There is also considerable debate and discussion about modern extinction events.\u00a0 Islands, particularly the Hawaiian islands, are known to be particularly vulnerable due to the lack of predators and the unique and highly speciated ecosystems that develop on them.\u00a0 However, even in historical times, the number of native species being lost on the Hawaiian Islands is enormous.\u00a0 Of the 1000 (roughly) native snail types found on the islands in the 1800\u2019s when such things began to be cataloged, the islands may now be down to 75 percent of what it once was, and it is most likely headed downward [7]. Similarly there were about 70 bird species in the islands when Cook visited in 1778, since then 16 have gone extinct, and 24 are listed as endangered.\u00a0 Looking further back in time, of the 100 or so unique bird species that existed before the arrival of Polynesians, only 9 are in sufficient numbers now to say they will survive [8].\u00a0 And the Hawaiian Islands are merely a metaphor for what is happening elsewhere. Exact estimates of human-caused extinction difficult because good baseline data on species variety and on what is and isn\u2019t extinct is not available.\u00a0 But things are not looking good for many species around the world. There is no need to go into a lot of detail about extinction.\u00a0 You get the point.\u00a0 When humans arrive, species start going extinct. But there are some more subtle points.\u00a0 First, \u201cmodern\u201d peoples are not the only ones to blame for extinction.\u00a0 In many cases first peoples did enormous damage to the ecosystems they encountered.\u00a0 What we see today as \u201cuntouched\u201d nature may in fact be only a shadow of what it was before we began moving around the world. This, in turn, means that the current extinctions we see in our ecosystems are part of a larger change in current fauna that is taking place ever since people became mobile hunters.\u00a0 When we arrive we change the fundamental nature of the ecology, and we import non-native species that eventually end up affecting local ecosystems.\u00a0 Many of these changes, on a geological scale, are fundamental to the ecosystems and represent the same kind of changes that would occur due to climate change, volcanism, or other natural disruptions.\u00a0 There may be no going back to a nature anywhere near what it once was. And it continues: species are going extinct every day.\u00a0 They may not be large land mammals, but insects, plants, fish, and other small creatures are constantly succumbing to habitat disruption and human imported species [9].\u00a0 As we need to claim more of the earth to accommodate ourselves, more and more species don\u2019t have the space in which to maintain reproductive populations, much less actually have a chance to survive disruptions on a geologic time scale.\u00a0 Small populations are simply the walking dead. The problem with our simple, ethnocentric, perspective is that we don\u2019t see the true magnitude of the problem.\u00a0 We see that some species are endangered, and we are happy when they are put on a list and they bounce back.\u00a0 What we don\u2019t see is that even if they bounce back there is insufficient long-term viability in either the ecosystem range available to them or the population for them to survive.\u00a0 They will likely survive 100 or even 1000 years, but that is merely a blink of an eye in geologic time.\u00a0 Given population and climate pressures is it likely that your grandchildren will only be able to see large African animals in zoos.\u00a0 And not long after that, nowhere. So what is the cause of extinction?\u00a0 In the geologic past, barring meteors or humans, it has been climate change.\u00a0 Human induced climate change has been much in the news lately, but it represents only a few degrees of change in global mean temperature over many years, and the changes will not be uniform.\u00a0 Not everywhere will bake to death, and ecosystems have dealt with such changes in the past.\u00a0\u00a0 There will be changes that take place, most worrisome in the oceans, but they may not be as dramatic as other changes.\u00a0 It is human activity that is responsible for most modern extinctions on land.\u00a0 Habitat reduction and burning are the two most significant things we can do to kill off species on land.\u00a0 If the animals don\u2019t have any place to live, or they are actively hunted, then they will die.\u00a0 Pretty simple.\u00a0\u00a0 Introduced species are another problem, but that boat has pretty much sailed.\u00a0 All we are waiting for is the snakes to arrive in Hawaii to finish all the birds off.\u00a0 And they\u2019ll get there eventually as long as we keep sailing ships and flying airplanes. What will kill many of the species in the future is simply bumping into humans, a lot of humans, who need to be fed, housed, and given space to run their All Terrain Vehicles (ATVs).\u00a0 The current African megafauna will simply be displaced by farming, because an increasing population has to eat somewhere.\u00a0\u00a0 If by 2050 China, for example, starts eating as much meat as the United States does now the total number of additional cows (not pounds of meat, but whole cows) will need to increase by about 632 million cows, or 6.5 times the total number of cows in the US right now, in order to supply just the Chinese and the additional US domestic population with 125 kg of meat per person that we eat now.\u00a0 And that does not include other developing countries, or an increase in waistlines here in the US.\u00a0 That\u2019s a lot of cows.\u00a0 Cows that have to be put somewhere (along with their poop).\u00a0\u00a0 Those cows will displace existing species at a ferocious rate, unless some sort of \u201cspace cow\u201d is developed where meat is grown in vats. While you could argue that technology, and development, will diminish many of the issues associated with population and economic growth, there is, ultimately, a carrying limit where the only thing happening on the planet is sustainment of humans.\u00a0 Not to mention the occasional Gulf Oil Spill.\u00a0 Say we \u201conly\u201d do one of those ever ten years.\u00a0 What will the oceans look like in 100 years, or 500?\u00a0 The trends are pretty grim, no matter what Fox News says. So what can we do about it?\u00a0 Recycling will not stop ecosystem deforestation in the developing world, or make the Chinese any less hungry for steak.\u00a0 The forces we are dealing with are large, and strong.\u00a0 Individual solutions, like you choosing to stop eating meat, while laudatory, are not going to work.\u00a0 Probably the best we could hope for is to stop current species extinction, and create some steady-state environment where additional destruction and conversion to human resource requirements did not happen.\u00a0 A steady-state economic model as opposed to a growth model. Growth, however, is an essential component of the current economic system.\u00a0 Lack of economic growth seems to send everything spiraling out of whack, probably because we are all constantly demanding increased control over our environment, and individual status.\u00a0 There are many things that go into a need for economic growth, but luxury, status, and entertainment are key aspects of what we seem to need.\u00a0 We need to re-think this idea of constant linear progress, trade it in for something more organic, seasonal, and closely tied to the environment.\u00a0 Sure sounds like trading in the book religions for Paganism [10]. What would living in a world where Paganism was the dominant religion look like?\u00a0 First, time in human terms would be viewed as a cycle not a line that stretches out to some ultimate paradise.\u00a0\u00a0 We celebrate the seasons for a reason: they are what sustains agricultural life.\u00a0 A life we have gotten away from (farm much?). This lack of linear time would imply that progress was not the only goal, living in time might also be important.\u00a0 Second, modern Pagans are nothing if not attuned to technology.\u00a0 And it would be crazy to throw out thousands of years of technological progress.\u00a0 But technology can be used to increase output, or it can be used to increase flexibility.\u00a0 It can be used to differentiate, or it can be used to bring people together.\u00a0 Our choices in technology might be more organic, more attuned to a natural set of priorities associated with health, peace, and the earth.\u00a0 Third, a focus on the earth and our connection with it might be important.\u00a0 Modern living with its constant movement requires a lot of infrastructure to sustain.\u00a0 It is expensive in many ways to move people around, both locally and internationally.\u00a0 And movement separates us from the land, from our local space which is an essential part of understanding the Gods and Goddesses. So what would the world look like?\u00a0 It might be more local, more focused on production of high quality food and goods and less on moving manufactured materials from a distance.\u00a0 We\u2019d have less, but we\u2019d produce more of what we and our immediate neighbors need.\u00a0 Technology would enable all of us to entertain all of us.\u00a0 Instead of a great, centralized entertainment infrastructure, democratic distribution of entertainment production would mean a lot more, but lower quality, entertainment.\u00a0 At least until people got good at it.\u00a0 It would mean more farming and less travel.\u00a0 It would mean distributing the population over a wider area, but in farms and communities that were more integrated with the local ecology.\u00a0 You\u2019d have more trees, more shade, and more time to interact locally with other people, and with the world through technology.\u00a0 Species would again localize with less travel, and less travel would mean fewer emissions. So what might you do now?\u00a0 Plant a garden.\u00a0 Open your windows more.\u00a0 Don\u2019t get in an airplane (lots of resources going out those engines).\u00a0 Stay, eat, live local.\u00a0 Buy less stuff, and create through both craft and technology.\u00a0 Much of this is going on, but its not…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"iawp_total_views":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4008","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/paganpages.org\/emagazine\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4008","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/paganpages.org\/emagazine\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/paganpages.org\/emagazine\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/paganpages.org\/emagazine\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/5"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/paganpages.org\/emagazine\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4008"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/paganpages.org\/emagazine\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4008\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/paganpages.org\/emagazine\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4008"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/paganpages.org\/emagazine\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4008"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/paganpages.org\/emagazine\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4008"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}