3 ms·

Colonizing Mars is a cool project, no doubt. But in order to let humanity survive, I personally would focus on earth. We must develop ways to live in balance wi

Colonizing Mars is a cool project, no doubt. But in order to let humanity survive, I personally would focus on earth. We must develop ways to live in balance with nature. And we should have started yesterday. WWF just released its annual report. Shocking. http://www.worldwildlife.org/publications http://www.worldwildlife.org/publications

kiba 12y ago
What kind of ecological disaster would kill off humanity? As far as I know, humanity is dependent on several crops and a few animals(cows, pigs, and chickens) for our survival.
- mironathetin 12y ago
  "As far as I know, humanity is dependent on several crops and a few animals(cows, pigs, and chickens) for our survival." Indeed, missing knowledge is most dangerous. That's why education is so important. Start by reading the WWf report ;o).
maneesh 12y ago
Have you flown a plane in the last year? Because then you've used up more than your CO2 share as a human being. It's almost impossible to live in balance with nature in today's society
- user24 12y ago
  > It's almost impossible to live in balance with nature in today's society To me, that is an indication that we need to change today's society, not a justification for doing nothing.
  - simonh 12y ago
    Even our hunter-gatherer ancestors didn't live in balance with nature. They laid waste to continent sized forests (mostly using fire strip hunting - set fires to force game into a kill zone), wiped out hundreds of species of mega-fauna with over-hunting, created deserts through over-grazing. Even retreating into the wilderness and living off the land just makes a big artificial farm-shaped hole in the wilderness.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
    - lutusp 12y ago
      > Even our hunter-gatherer ancestors didn't live in balance with nature. That depends on how one defines "balance with nature". We're just a species competing for resources with other species. To argue that what we do is anything but a normal survival strategy is to buy into a supernatural role for human beings on planet Earth. In fact we're a natural species, and we follow entirely predictable patterns of natural selection. > Even retreating into the wilderness and living off the land just makes a big artificial farm-shaped hole in the wilderness. And? Is a farm distinct from an anthill, or is it a natural variation? We may see ourselves as exceptional, as separate from nature, but nature certainly doesn't see us that way.
      - simonh 12y ago
        I completely agree, we are natural creatures. That doesn't mean that wiping out species and destroying ecosystems by our activities is OK. In many cases it has long term detrimental consequences far in excess of the short term benefit of the economic activity causing the damage. Personally, I'm an advocate of factoring in the environmental costs of our economic activities and taking those costs into account. However the idea that we can live in balance without having an impact on the world around us is a fantasy.
- mironathetin 12y ago
  "Have you flown a plane in the last year?" Well, although I am a scientist and traveling to conferences is a habit that everybody does, I could limit my number of flights to one last year. The point is, we don't need to fly. Conferences are boring, we have videocons. It is just a fashion to spend vacation overseas (even over the weekend). It is just the aviation industry screwing our minds. "It's almost impossible to live in balance with nature in today's society" You certainly have to be smarter than a hunter-gatherer to do it. But that's what makes us different.
danielweber 12y ago
WWF just released its annual report. Shocking Of course it's shocking. This tells you very little about how good or bad things actually are. WWF will always say that right now is the last chance to save life on earth unless their viewpoint is given high-status.

kiba 12y ago

What kind of ecological disaster would kill off humanity? As far as I know, humanity is dependent on several crops and a few animals(cows, pigs, and chickens) for our survival.

mironathetin 12y ago
"As far as I know, humanity is dependent on several crops and a few animals(cows, pigs, and chickens) for our survival." Indeed, missing knowledge is most dangerous. That's why education is so important. Start by reading the WWf report ;o).

maneesh 12y ago

Have you flown a plane in the last year? Because then you've used up more than your CO2 share as a human being. It's almost impossible to live in balance with nature in today's society

user24 12y ago
> It's almost impossible to live in balance with nature in today's society To me, that is an indication that we need to change today's society, not a justification for doing nothing.
- simonh 12y ago
  Even our hunter-gatherer ancestors didn't live in balance with nature. They laid waste to continent sized forests (mostly using fire strip hunting - set fires to force game into a kill zone), wiped out hundreds of species of mega-fauna with over-hunting, created deserts through over-grazing. Even retreating into the wilderness and living off the land just makes a big artificial farm-shaped hole in the wilderness.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - lutusp 12y ago
    > Even our hunter-gatherer ancestors didn't live in balance with nature. That depends on how one defines "balance with nature". We're just a species competing for resources with other species. To argue that what we do is anything but a normal survival strategy is to buy into a supernatural role for human beings on planet Earth. In fact we're a natural species, and we follow entirely predictable patterns of natural selection. > Even retreating into the wilderness and living off the land just makes a big artificial farm-shaped hole in the wilderness. And? Is a farm distinct from an anthill, or is it a natural variation? We may see ourselves as exceptional, as separate from nature, but nature certainly doesn't see us that way.
    - simonh 12y ago
      I completely agree, we are natural creatures. That doesn't mean that wiping out species and destroying ecosystems by our activities is OK. In many cases it has long term detrimental consequences far in excess of the short term benefit of the economic activity causing the damage. Personally, I'm an advocate of factoring in the environmental costs of our economic activities and taking those costs into account. However the idea that we can live in balance without having an impact on the world around us is a fantasy.
mironathetin 12y ago
"Have you flown a plane in the last year?" Well, although I am a scientist and traveling to conferences is a habit that everybody does, I could limit my number of flights to one last year. The point is, we don't need to fly. Conferences are boring, we have videocons. It is just a fashion to spend vacation overseas (even over the weekend). It is just the aviation industry screwing our minds. "It's almost impossible to live in balance with nature in today's society" You certainly have to be smarter than a hunter-gatherer to do it. But that's what makes us different.

danielweber 12y ago

WWF just released its annual report. Shocking Of course it's shocking. This tells you very little about how good or bad things actually are. WWF will always say that right now is the last chance to save life on earth unless their viewpoint is given high-status.