3 ms·
Again, that was my point. Life will be fine. The point is that we should be responsible stewards and caretakers of our ecosystem, because the moral consequences
by dpratt 5y ago
Again, that was my point. Life will be fine. The point is that we should be responsible stewards and caretakers of our ecosystem, because the moral consequences of wanton destruction of something so precious and beautiful would be beyond comprehension.
With that said, no mater what we do, short of causing our sun to go supernova or collapse into a massive black hole, life in some form on Earth will be fine. Perhaps it would even recover after a few billion years and produce another intelligent species that wouldn't end up wrecking the place.
- brimble 5y ago> Perhaps it would even recover after a few billion years and produce another intelligent species that wouldn't end up wrecking the place. I have some bad news for you about the carbonate-silicate cycle. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_far_future https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_far_future
- Sebb767 5y ago> Again, that was my point. Life will be fine. Well, some humans sit in bunkers built to withstand direct hits with a nuke and others built self-sustaining ecosystems. A massive catastrophe might wipe out 99+% percent of humans, but a small few will most likely survive in basically all cases. That makes humans far from fine. In a similar vein, I disagree that wiping of most of life from earth can be summarized as life being perfectly fine. But it's really just a minor technicality, I agree with your overall point that we should be more specific about ruining the planet _for us_.