3 ms·
Re: environmentally conscious primitives. It is a myth that early/primitive societies didn't destroy their environments. Basically all recent (past 100k years)
by ivalm 7y ago
Re: environmentally conscious primitives. It is a myth that early/primitive societies didn't destroy their environments. Basically all recent (past 100k years) megafauna extinctions were driven by human migration. Plenty of fragile environments (eg Easter Island) were wrecked by early/primitive societies. The only thing that prevented previous generations from wrecking the environment the way we do now is the same thing that prevents chimps: lack of capability.
Re: space as the new frontier. I agree that resource net positive space exploitation is a long ways away. So long away that we might have critical resource/environmental catastrophe here on earth before space can bail us out. I am not super positive on human long term survival (heck, even 1000 more years; we're too dumb and have too many ways to kill ourselves), but if our descendants do live in a million years, I am fairly certain space exploitation will be part of the equation.
- projektfu 7y agoI'm not sure what your position is. That we're very smart? Smarter than the "primitives" who also destroyed their habitats? But definitely smarter than the humans who managed to live in their habitat for at least a hundred thousand years until our culture came along? I can agree we are more capable than chimps, but only in the sense of being able to plan and make tools, that sort of thing. But chimps are adapted to their environment, at least until it gets upset by habitat loss or change.