2 ms·

I've posted this before here. The science is screaming that these ecosystems cannot recover on any meaningful timescale because these modules form over millions

by TSiege 9mo ago

I've posted this before here. The science is screaming that these ecosystems cannot recover on any meaningful timescale because these modules form over millions of years and produce the only oxygen available in the depths of the ocean where they're located. It would be like clear cutting a forest and it growing back over the course of millions of years. It's an insane thing to do, and we as a society we're showing we have no care for anything but ourselves in this moment in time. We're choosing to permanently destroy the last best preserved ecosystems on this planet essentially for good.

usrnm 9mo ago
> we're showing we have no care for anything but ourselves in this moment in time This is very consistent with the whole history of our species, and I don't think there ever was a moment in time when this was any different
- markhahn 9mo ago
  those who remember the past are doomed to repeat it? seriously, this doesn't seem like a useful argument, regardless of whether true. the fact that humans have committed ecocide in the past doesn't seem like a reason to continue...
  - measurablefunc 9mo ago
    It's genetic, you can't change the character of an exploitative predator by just wishing for it.
  - JumpCrisscross 9mo ago
    > this doesn't seem like a useful argument It's not. It's a comforting lie to justify inaction. You see it a lot when people justify not voting or civically engaging. To be clear, I am doing jack shit about deep-sea mining. But that's a choice I'm making and I own it, even if it makes me uncomfortable. (And there are plenty of cases where that discomfort drives folks into action, however minor.)
    - fc417fc802 9mo ago
      I didn't read it as a justification for inaction but rather a reality check. The tone of the parent seemed to imply that the current situation is somehow unusual or unexpected. The difference between "he's gone mad" which seems to imply that an urgent response is warranted versus "unsurprisingly, his long standing madness continues".
- hackable_sand 9mo ago
  It is inconsistent with our history but feel free to lie about it.
JumpCrisscross 9mo ago
> It would be like clear cutting a forest and it growing back over the course of millions of years It’s closer to filling a rainforest with a nitrogen atmosphere. You’re literally removing the ecosystem’s means to respire.

by TSiege 9mo ago

usrnm 9mo ago

> we're showing we have no care for anything but ourselves in this moment in time This is very consistent with the whole history of our species, and I don't think there ever was a moment in time when this was any different

markhahn 9mo ago
those who remember the past are doomed to repeat it? seriously, this doesn't seem like a useful argument, regardless of whether true. the fact that humans have committed ecocide in the past doesn't seem like a reason to continue...
- measurablefunc 9mo ago
  It's genetic, you can't change the character of an exploitative predator by just wishing for it.
- JumpCrisscross 9mo ago
  > this doesn't seem like a useful argument It's not. It's a comforting lie to justify inaction. You see it a lot when people justify not voting or civically engaging. To be clear, I am doing jack shit about deep-sea mining. But that's a choice I'm making and I own it, even if it makes me uncomfortable. (And there are plenty of cases where that discomfort drives folks into action, however minor.)
  - fc417fc802 9mo ago
    I didn't read it as a justification for inaction but rather a reality check. The tone of the parent seemed to imply that the current situation is somehow unusual or unexpected. The difference between "he's gone mad" which seems to imply that an urgent response is warranted versus "unsurprisingly, his long standing madness continues".
hackable_sand 9mo ago
It is inconsistent with our history but feel free to lie about it.

JumpCrisscross 9mo ago

> It would be like clear cutting a forest and it growing back over the course of millions of years It’s closer to filling a rainforest with a nitrogen atmosphere. You’re literally removing the ecosystem’s means to respire.