4 ms·

So? The planet has also gone through several extinction events. The white knighting ain't helping anyone. Obtuse or not.

• lern_too_spel 10y ago
  His obtuseness point is that you know exactly what he means by protecting the planet, but you chose to interpret that phrase literally.
  • jogjayr 10y ago
    > but you chose to interpret that phrase literally. But when we're dealing with geological timescales I think a literal interpretation may be the right way of looking at it. Would it be sad if 90% of Earth's species died off? Certainly, if there were any humans around to do the mourning. But zooming out a bit, the current die-off isn't anything new. There have been mass extinctions and rapid alterations of climate and atmosphere in the Earth's past too. Humans originated on this planet and we are a part of the ecosystem. In a way, anything we do to nature is simply one part of nature being wildly out of equilibrium. If we mess it up, it'll mean curtains for us but life itself will march on. In 10-50 million years after we're gone, there will arise lifeforms that are just as interesting and varied as anything we have now. Which, on a geological timescale, really isn't that long (between 0.0025% and 0.0125% of the Earth's age). I think that promoting environmentalism in terms of it being a means to saving ourselves might be more effective than appeals to "save the rapidly dying $ENDANGERED_SPECIES".