7 ms·

Yes I am. That's how it happens and how it should happen. Coral systems live, spread, and die. That's what they do. These processes happen over thousands of y

Yes I am. That's how it happens and how it should happen. Coral systems live, spread, and die. That's what they do. These processes happen over thousands of years.

kibwen 2y ago
Unfortunately, there is no law of the universe that says that change will only occur at a survivable rate. Thousands of species are already going extinct every year, and we're still burning just as many fossil fuels as what got us into this mess. We don't have thousands of years to wait for animals to adapt, we have mere decades.
- theultdev 2y ago
  Correct, there's no law of the universe that says change will occur a survivable rate. Species have been going extinct long before humans. We should help those species who environments we damage and we should mitigate or nullify the damage in the first place, but we should not play God.
  - matrix2003 2y ago
    We are playing God now by artificially and dramatically altering Earth’s set point.
    - theultdev 2y ago
      How much are we altering it over coming out of the last ice age and the natural effects of volcanos and vents? That is still unknown and constantly shifting in predictions. Yes we should minimize our effects on the environment as much as possible, and we are doing a lot better in that goal, but we still need to live. I wouldn't say living our lives is playing God.
      - kibwen 2y ago
        > How much are we altering it over coming out of the last ice age and the natural CO2 effects of volcanos? That is still unknown and constantly shifting in predictions. No, it's not an unknown. Please stop with this cowardly delusion. Human activity is changing the Earth's climate at unbelievable rates compared to the historical norm. XKCD for scale: https://xkcd.com/1732/ https://xkcd.com/1732/
      - thatcat 2y ago
        Living life as a highly technologically advanced species that uses systems to dominate the plant for resource extraction to the detriment of countless other species with the awareness to know better is playing god, albeit rather poorly. .
  - glenstein 2y ago
    That struck me as mostly reasonable until the 'playing god' bit which upended everything. For one, that term almost never means the same thing to any two people. For another, from the context up to this point you seem to have unrealistic assumptions that this is all part of a broader cosmic give and take that balances itself, or stands over us as an indecipherable mystery. I think that temptation to stand in awe before a cosmic mystery is a common one and, in many cases a laudable one. In this case, that temptation is getting in the way of some very-knowable facts which are spelling out doom. "Not playing god" in this context seems to amount to standing by as an extinction event unfolds, and I don't think the desire to get lost in existential ditherings is an acceptable reason to stand by and let that happen.
adamc 2y ago
Then the consequence will be vastly reduced fish populations for thousands of years, which may affect human populations.
- theultdev 2y ago
  Or the fish will continue to live in the reef skeletons and move on to healthier reef systems.
  - adamc 2y ago
    I think that is very, very unlikely.
    - blindriver 2y ago
      Based on what expertise?
      - glenstein 2y ago
        I think the collective expertise of marine biologists all across the globe. But I also think a high school education about evolution would be sufficient to establish that things really do go extinct, and our natural history is not one of perfectly balanced exchanges compensating every loss.
        theultdev 2y ago
        that's not at all a relevant response to the discussion. but to play that game, you also learn about adaptation in high school
        glenstein 2y ago
        I'm sure you think you can play that game, but that's precisely the problem. The fundamental confusion here is the notion that, absent one's own personal expert credentials, we have no access to any expertise or authority of any kind that can be brought to bear on this question (funny that that requirement applies only one way). The vital role of coral in supporting marine ecosystems is a general and well understood phenomenon. So much so that our ordinary access to expertise through science communication in the media, our summary of this understanding as reflected in high school education, and, if needed, in major reports from NGOs is sufficient to address the question and indeed is central to the purpose of those respective institutions. Those are access to pertinent expertise for this kind of question. I promise you, that this consensus has not overlooked the possibility of everything being made right by adaptations later on as you seem to be implying, and I promise that no version of explanations of evolutionary adaptation has ever taught that adaptation guarantees, as a cosmic law, compensation for the destruction of ecosystems. The same resources noted above are sufficient to dismiss this as an ordinary biology 101 confusion.

Yes I am. That's how it happens and how it should happen. Coral systems live, spread, and die. That's what they do. These processes happen over thousands of years.

kibwen 2y ago

Unfortunately, there is no law of the universe that says that change will only occur at a survivable rate. Thousands of species are already going extinct every year, and we're still burning just as many fossil fuels as what got us into this mess. We don't have thousands of years to wait for animals to adapt, we have mere decades.

theultdev 2y ago
Correct, there's no law of the universe that says change will occur a survivable rate. Species have been going extinct long before humans. We should help those species who environments we damage and we should mitigate or nullify the damage in the first place, but we should not play God.
- matrix2003 2y ago
  We are playing God now by artificially and dramatically altering Earth’s set point.
  - theultdev 2y ago
    How much are we altering it over coming out of the last ice age and the natural effects of volcanos and vents? That is still unknown and constantly shifting in predictions. Yes we should minimize our effects on the environment as much as possible, and we are doing a lot better in that goal, but we still need to live. I wouldn't say living our lives is playing God.
    - kibwen 2y ago
      > How much are we altering it over coming out of the last ice age and the natural CO2 effects of volcanos? That is still unknown and constantly shifting in predictions. No, it's not an unknown. Please stop with this cowardly delusion. Human activity is changing the Earth's climate at unbelievable rates compared to the historical norm. XKCD for scale: https://xkcd.com/1732/ https://xkcd.com/1732/
    - thatcat 2y ago
      Living life as a highly technologically advanced species that uses systems to dominate the plant for resource extraction to the detriment of countless other species with the awareness to know better is playing god, albeit rather poorly. .
- glenstein 2y ago
  That struck me as mostly reasonable until the 'playing god' bit which upended everything. For one, that term almost never means the same thing to any two people. For another, from the context up to this point you seem to have unrealistic assumptions that this is all part of a broader cosmic give and take that balances itself, or stands over us as an indecipherable mystery. I think that temptation to stand in awe before a cosmic mystery is a common one and, in many cases a laudable one. In this case, that temptation is getting in the way of some very-knowable facts which are spelling out doom. "Not playing god" in this context seems to amount to standing by as an extinction event unfolds, and I don't think the desire to get lost in existential ditherings is an acceptable reason to stand by and let that happen.

adamc 2y ago

Then the consequence will be vastly reduced fish populations for thousands of years, which may affect human populations.

theultdev 2y ago
Or the fish will continue to live in the reef skeletons and move on to healthier reef systems.
- adamc 2y ago
  I think that is very, very unlikely.
  - blindriver 2y ago
    Based on what expertise?
    - glenstein 2y ago
      I think the collective expertise of marine biologists all across the globe. But I also think a high school education about evolution would be sufficient to establish that things really do go extinct, and our natural history is not one of perfectly balanced exchanges compensating every loss.
      - theultdev 2y ago
        that's not at all a relevant response to the discussion. but to play that game, you also learn about adaptation in high school
        glenstein 2y ago
        I'm sure you think you can play that game, but that's precisely the problem. The fundamental confusion here is the notion that, absent one's own personal expert credentials, we have no access to any expertise or authority of any kind that can be brought to bear on this question (funny that that requirement applies only one way). The vital role of coral in supporting marine ecosystems is a general and well understood phenomenon. So much so that our ordinary access to expertise through science communication in the media, our summary of this understanding as reflected in high school education, and, if needed, in major reports from NGOs is sufficient to address the question and indeed is central to the purpose of those respective institutions. Those are access to pertinent expertise for this kind of question. I promise you, that this consensus has not overlooked the possibility of everything being made right by adaptations later on as you seem to be implying, and I promise that no version of explanations of evolutionary adaptation has ever taught that adaptation guarantees, as a cosmic law, compensation for the destruction of ecosystems. The same resources noted above are sufficient to dismiss this as an ordinary biology 101 confusion.