4 ms·

> Define why it is a problem: Biodiversity is an indicator for healthy ecologies. The extinction of endangered animals threatens the stability of ecology $Y whi

> Define why it is a problem: Biodiversity is an indicator for healthy ecologies. The extinction of endangered animals threatens the stability of ecology $Y which humans rely on for food, health, and resources So all we have to do is quantify what making changes will do to a highly complex biological system that we don't fully understand or have even observed? And that's just building something in a single field, now multiply by all the possible construction sites in the US and then add in how they interact with each other once multiple sites are changed in an area or downstream or upstream or upwind or on the same aquifer or... It's so simple, why didn't we just do this from the start? :)

cabaalis 7y ago
We live in an era with a big problem: Regular people have an attention span that's way too short to ingest enough information to vote effectively for very large issues. This leads to the politicization of everything as a means of persuading people using wit or by demonizing the other side, because those methods are effective. Combine this with very interested parties spreading disinformation, and we are in big trouble.
- xtiansimon 7y ago
  > ‘...attention span that’s way to short to..vote effectively.’ I was thinking the removal of the law that evaluates a species’ protection without regard to ‘economic impact’ would lead to each impacted community now having a chance to vote on what’s more important to them, species protection or local economy. And I believe people will organize to vote for the money.
aplummer 7y ago
I actually found this https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-26/great-barrier-reef-valued-56b-deloitte/8649936 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-26/great-barrier-reef-va... very compelling as a logical person. I think it helps to quantify the issue to people who are dealing with their pressing issues (employment etc).
jhedwards 7y ago
I ran into this problem recently when I asked someone I know, who is in the coast guard, if they knew about alkaline hydrothermal vents. They said "Yes! But I just listen to the scientists, they draw a square on the ocean and say 'protect this' and we do it. Then I have to get a one-liner 'why should we spend money protecting this' from them and it's something like 'if there will be a breakthrough therapy for some disease then it might come from here'". I was kind of unsatisfied by the justification "we might find medicine" for something as amazing as alkaline hydrothermal vents, but I couldn't think of a better one myself. There doesn't seem to be a concept that earth's creativity is intrinsically valuable. If there was, we could just say "there are highly complex geo-chemical formations in this square" and, along with a brief spec of the size, age, and properties of the formations, that would be justification enough to protect them.

cabaalis 7y ago

We live in an era with a big problem: Regular people have an attention span that's way too short to ingest enough information to vote effectively for very large issues. This leads to the politicization of everything as a means of persuading people using wit or by demonizing the other side, because those methods are effective. Combine this with very interested parties spreading disinformation, and we are in big trouble.

xtiansimon 7y ago
> ‘...attention span that’s way to short to..vote effectively.’ I was thinking the removal of the law that evaluates a species’ protection without regard to ‘economic impact’ would lead to each impacted community now having a chance to vote on what’s more important to them, species protection or local economy. And I believe people will organize to vote for the money.

aplummer 7y ago

I actually found this https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-26/great-barrier-reef-valued-56b-deloitte/8649936 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-26/great-barrier-reef-va... very compelling as a logical person. I think it helps to quantify the issue to people who are dealing with their pressing issues (employment etc).

jhedwards 7y ago

I ran into this problem recently when I asked someone I know, who is in the coast guard, if they knew about alkaline hydrothermal vents. They said "Yes! But I just listen to the scientists, they draw a square on the ocean and say 'protect this' and we do it. Then I have to get a one-liner 'why should we spend money protecting this' from them and it's something like 'if there will be a breakthrough therapy for some disease then it might come from here'". I was kind of unsatisfied by the justification "we might find medicine" for something as amazing as alkaline hydrothermal vents, but I couldn't think of a better one myself. There doesn't seem to be a concept that earth's creativity is intrinsically valuable. If there was, we could just say "there are highly complex geo-chemical formations in this square" and, along with a brief spec of the size, age, and properties of the formations, that would be justification enough to protect them.