> Well, I like this comment better, and for the record I have no problem with you being condescending, so please speak plainly as need be. Cheers! > Could you

> Well, I like this comment better, and for the record I have no problem with you being condescending, so please speak plainly as need be. Cheers! > Could you expand? What is the benefit of keeping 9 billion resource hungry inferior life forms around and all of the biological matter needed to support them? Sure, and thanks for asking. From Information Theory we have the result that the unpredictability of a message is a measure of its information content. The entire rest of the known Universe has approximately thirty bits of information, as it can be completely described by a handful of equations. There is a vast amount of data, but almost no information, in the entire rest of the Universe. In contrast, the living biosphere is... there's really no way to describe it in words, even mathematically it's kind of ridiculous to represent how much information the Earth generates. To beings whose food is information, the biosphere is infinitely valuable, their attitude is akin to worship, the way plants feel about the sun. > Depth isn't a very relevant metric here, it's about how the surface area is used. The surface area of the Earth is irrelevant, they don't want to live here. They will live in space, where it's flat and cold and there's a constant energy and particle flux. (E.g. half of the Earth is eclipsed by the Earth at all times, eh?) The entire Earth is approximately infinitesimal to creatures whose natural habitat extends to the heliopause.