3 ms·

The environment has a limited capacity to sustain human life. Temporarily taking more from the environment than is sustainsble brings temporary human happiness

The environment has a limited capacity to sustain human life. Temporarily taking more from the environment than is sustainsble brings temporary human happiness, followed by great human suffering when the environment we rely on collapses. Civilizations throughout history have collapsed for this reason. Our civilization is not so powerful as to be immune.

quotemstr 5y ago
We've been hearing about this inevitable collapse since Malthus, yet is never comes. And yet, like the brainwashed follows of a doomsday cult leader, anti-human environmentalist types keep up the faith even as the predictions keep failing. It's embarrassing. There is no particular reason to believe that we've overshot the planet's carrying capacity, that our technological ability to deliver prosperity will break down, or that some kind of collapse is about to come. This belief in imminent ecological collapse is just a rebranding of eschatology, the idea that the end of the world is coming and that when it does, the good and bad will be separated and judged. It's an aesthetic judgement --- you start with the premise that industrial civilization is bad, understand that bad things must be punished, and hope for Gaia to be the instrument of that punishment. I don't subscribe to this kind of thinking. I don't see any limits to human ingenuity. There's no need to limit growth, and anyone attempting to do it is committing a crime against the future.
- mandmandam 5y ago
  Buddy the consequences of 7 billion people living beyond the planet's means aren't just visible. They're a fucking rocket flare in the darkness on a clear night. How are you not seeing this? Our water sources are polluted. Our oceans are acidifying. We've strip mined our topsoil. Our rainforests are at a tipping point, on the verge of catastrophic loss. Did you see those fires in Australia last year? Disastrous weather events are up 83% in only twenty years. Top strategists and CEOs are preparing for water wars and refugee crises. And you're here telling us there's no need to limit growth, that doing so is criminal, that the environmentalist cult predictions are failing? In the comments of an article about how there's no American Bumblebees in eight states, which was predicted 20 years ago? WTF Broseph.
  - quotemstr 5y ago
    > Our water sources are polluted. Our oceans are acidifying. We've strip mined our topsoil. Our rainforests are at a tipping point, on the verge of catastrophic loss. Did you see those fires in Australia last year? Disastrous weather events are up 83% in only twenty years. Top strategists and CEOs are preparing for water wars and refugee crises Every single generation points to things going wrong now and thinks the end of nigh. It's been that way since at least the invention of writing. All you've done is present a list of problems. You have done nothing to build an actual case that the engine of human innovation is breaking down. What makes you think we won't overcome the problems you mention just as we've overcome all our previous problems? > And you're here telling us there's no need to limit growth, that doing so is criminal, that the environmentalist cult predictions are failing? Yes, I am. Because those predictions are failing, and they are failing because they imagine that we exist in a bizarre alternative world where we don't invent technology to solve problems but instead just breed, like deer or something, until we collapse. Wrong model, thus wrong predictions. Did you know forest cover has actually increased over the past 100 years? Under your theory, we should have chopped down the last tree ages ago. Our rivers don't catch on fire anymore either. Under your theory, we should all be drinking turpentine by now. Turns out we can live in a clean world without arbitrary and murderously limiting growth or capping the number of people who can exist. > In the comments of an article about how there's no American Bumblebees in eight states, which was predicted 20 years ago? Well, yeah. Doing something about the neoniconoid pesticides causing the bee problem is probably wise. That's not the object of my objection. The object of my objection is this idea that bees are suffering because humanity arrogantly tries to "play god" with technology and that we should stop and go back to the trees or something. That's an absurd and destructive worldview, and one that's embarrassingly common among comfortable tech types.
    - mandmandam 5y ago
      Your argument reduces to, well we haven't destroyed ourselves yet. ... It's not a strong argument.
      - quotemstr 5y ago

quotemstr 5y ago

We've been hearing about this inevitable collapse since Malthus, yet is never comes. And yet, like the brainwashed follows of a doomsday cult leader, anti-human environmentalist types keep up the faith even as the predictions keep failing. It's embarrassing. There is no particular reason to believe that we've overshot the planet's carrying capacity, that our technological ability to deliver prosperity will break down, or that some kind of collapse is about to come. This belief in imminent ecological collapse is just a rebranding of eschatology, the idea that the end of the world is coming and that when it does, the good and bad will be separated and judged. It's an aesthetic judgement --- you start with the premise that industrial civilization is bad, understand that bad things must be punished, and hope for Gaia to be the instrument of that punishment. I don't subscribe to this kind of thinking. I don't see any limits to human ingenuity. There's no need to limit growth, and anyone attempting to do it is committing a crime against the future.

mandmandam 5y ago
Buddy the consequences of 7 billion people living beyond the planet's means aren't just visible. They're a fucking rocket flare in the darkness on a clear night. How are you not seeing this? Our water sources are polluted. Our oceans are acidifying. We've strip mined our topsoil. Our rainforests are at a tipping point, on the verge of catastrophic loss. Did you see those fires in Australia last year? Disastrous weather events are up 83% in only twenty years. Top strategists and CEOs are preparing for water wars and refugee crises. And you're here telling us there's no need to limit growth, that doing so is criminal, that the environmentalist cult predictions are failing? In the comments of an article about how there's no American Bumblebees in eight states, which was predicted 20 years ago? WTF Broseph.
- quotemstr 5y ago
  > Our water sources are polluted. Our oceans are acidifying. We've strip mined our topsoil. Our rainforests are at a tipping point, on the verge of catastrophic loss. Did you see those fires in Australia last year? Disastrous weather events are up 83% in only twenty years. Top strategists and CEOs are preparing for water wars and refugee crises Every single generation points to things going wrong now and thinks the end of nigh. It's been that way since at least the invention of writing. All you've done is present a list of problems. You have done nothing to build an actual case that the engine of human innovation is breaking down. What makes you think we won't overcome the problems you mention just as we've overcome all our previous problems? > And you're here telling us there's no need to limit growth, that doing so is criminal, that the environmentalist cult predictions are failing? Yes, I am. Because those predictions are failing, and they are failing because they imagine that we exist in a bizarre alternative world where we don't invent technology to solve problems but instead just breed, like deer or something, until we collapse. Wrong model, thus wrong predictions. Did you know forest cover has actually increased over the past 100 years? Under your theory, we should have chopped down the last tree ages ago. Our rivers don't catch on fire anymore either. Under your theory, we should all be drinking turpentine by now. Turns out we can live in a clean world without arbitrary and murderously limiting growth or capping the number of people who can exist. > In the comments of an article about how there's no American Bumblebees in eight states, which was predicted 20 years ago? Well, yeah. Doing something about the neoniconoid pesticides causing the bee problem is probably wise. That's not the object of my objection. The object of my objection is this idea that bees are suffering because humanity arrogantly tries to "play god" with technology and that we should stop and go back to the trees or something. That's an absurd and destructive worldview, and one that's embarrassingly common among comfortable tech types.
  - mandmandam 5y ago
    Your argument reduces to, well we haven't destroyed ourselves yet. ... It's not a strong argument.
    - quotemstr 5y ago