3 ms·

"We only have one small planet to live on, and we are destroying it." We're not destroying the planet, we're destroying our habitat, and the habitat of those a

"We only have one small planet to live on, and we are destroying it." We're not destroying the planet, we're destroying our habitat, and the habitat of those animals unfortunate enough to live at the same time as us. The planet is going to be just fine, it's us who's going to suffer. I love this quote from George Carlin: "The planet has been through a lot worse than us. Been through earthquakes, volcanoes, plate tectonics, continental drift, solar flares, sun spots, magnetic storms, the magnetic reversal of the poles … hundreds of thousands of years of bombardment by comets and asteroids and meteors, worldwide floods, tidal waves, worldwide fires, erosion, cosmic rays, recurring ice ages … And we think some plastic bags and some aluminum cans are going to make a difference? The planet isn’t going anywhere. WE are! We’re going away. Pack your shit, folks. We’re going away. And we won’t leave much of a trace, either. Maybe a little Styrofoam … The planet’ll be here and we’ll be long gone. Just another failed mutation. Just another closed-end biological mistake. An evolutionary cul-de-sac. The planet’ll shake us off like a bad case of fleas."

patagonia 8y ago
Recent article reported: “So many animals will go extinct in the next 50 years that it will take Earth at least 3 million years to recover” Add to that the impacts of the technosphere (the artifacts of humanity which would not have existed in our absence) which was reported to be 30 trillion tons in 2016. Our impact to climate. Our impact to geography. Sure, in all likelihood there will be a big round ball hanging around in our solar system despite humanity’s best efforts. But that seems like a distinction without a difference. To say the argument is disingenuous would be generous.
- ProAm 8y ago
  99.9% of all creatures who have existed on earth are extinct. [1] The world will continue to move on just as it always has, humans maybe not, but it would just be nature taking it's course. [1] https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/extinction/massext/statement_03.html https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/extinction/massext/statem...
birksherty 8y ago
OK, I'll say it. That is a stupid statement. I've seen that "planet will be fine" line too many times. Here is the truth: the main purpose of that line is to hide the wrongdoing. The planet is not just a rock in space. It includes the environment and everything that is there. When we destroy that, we are destroying the planet itself.
- hfourm 8y ago
  Honestly though, even if it isn't a stupid statement, it doesn't change anything. The planet WILL be fine, the solar system, universe, existence.. Yea, in the big scheme of things it WILL be fine. Conservation is about conservation of the human species, and there is no reason we shouldn't talk about it like that. Honestly, more right wing / anti-environmentalists would probably respond better if they understood how dire the threat to humanity is.
- SuddsMcDuff 8y ago
  "the main purpose of that line is to hide the wrongdoing" I think by focusing in on that line you're missing the bigger picture. What I'm trying to say is that we're primarily a threat to ourselves, not to the 'planet'. I think people would be much more engaged if it weren't "save the planet" but rather "save the human race".
- manfredo 8y ago
  > The planet is not just a rock in space. It includes the environment and everything that is there. When we destroy that, we are destroying the planet itself. Except... not? Altering, or even completely destroying the biosphere is not nearly the same thing as destroying the planet. Mass extinction events have occurred in the past, in terms of history on a planetary scale the anthropecene's mass extinction is nothing new.
  - birksherty 8y ago
    Except yes? Who cares about a planet without the biosphere? There are literally billions of such rocks. There is something different between Earth and other planet and that's what people are taking about destroying. Extinctions happened were natural, nobody could stop it. This time it's because of greed and selfishness. It could have been stopped but not and still going on even though we know it. Don't justify this time with before. Also we are not debating whether that happened before or not. Some (mostly american from what I've seen) people will take any excuse to justify it.

patagonia 8y ago

Recent article reported: “So many animals will go extinct in the next 50 years that it will take Earth at least 3 million years to recover” Add to that the impacts of the technosphere (the artifacts of humanity which would not have existed in our absence) which was reported to be 30 trillion tons in 2016. Our impact to climate. Our impact to geography. Sure, in all likelihood there will be a big round ball hanging around in our solar system despite humanity’s best efforts. But that seems like a distinction without a difference. To say the argument is disingenuous would be generous.

ProAm 8y ago
99.9% of all creatures who have existed on earth are extinct. [1] The world will continue to move on just as it always has, humans maybe not, but it would just be nature taking it's course. [1] https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/extinction/massext/statement_03.html https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/extinction/massext/statem...

birksherty 8y ago

OK, I'll say it. That is a stupid statement. I've seen that "planet will be fine" line too many times. Here is the truth: the main purpose of that line is to hide the wrongdoing. The planet is not just a rock in space. It includes the environment and everything that is there. When we destroy that, we are destroying the planet itself.

hfourm 8y ago
Honestly though, even if it isn't a stupid statement, it doesn't change anything. The planet WILL be fine, the solar system, universe, existence.. Yea, in the big scheme of things it WILL be fine. Conservation is about conservation of the human species, and there is no reason we shouldn't talk about it like that. Honestly, more right wing / anti-environmentalists would probably respond better if they understood how dire the threat to humanity is.
SuddsMcDuff 8y ago
"the main purpose of that line is to hide the wrongdoing" I think by focusing in on that line you're missing the bigger picture. What I'm trying to say is that we're primarily a threat to ourselves, not to the 'planet'. I think people would be much more engaged if it weren't "save the planet" but rather "save the human race".
manfredo 8y ago
> The planet is not just a rock in space. It includes the environment and everything that is there. When we destroy that, we are destroying the planet itself. Except... not? Altering, or even completely destroying the biosphere is not nearly the same thing as destroying the planet. Mass extinction events have occurred in the past, in terms of history on a planetary scale the anthropecene's mass extinction is nothing new.
- birksherty 8y ago
  Except yes? Who cares about a planet without the biosphere? There are literally billions of such rocks. There is something different between Earth and other planet and that's what people are taking about destroying. Extinctions happened were natural, nobody could stop it. This time it's because of greed and selfishness. It could have been stopped but not and still going on even though we know it. Don't justify this time with before. Also we are not debating whether that happened before or not. Some (mostly american from what I've seen) people will take any excuse to justify it.