Quote:
Originally Posted by M3JetPilot
Thanks for the kind words and same to you. I get your point but I’m just using the phrase “killing the planet” to say the same thing. Consume all the natural resources, kill off all the life forms, and make it difficult if not impossible for life to continue in any form. That last one would require a nuclear war but hopefully we aren’t that stupid, though recent events make me wonder. If I were to say Mars is a dead planet, would you agree? Sure, the planet is still here but it’s dead as far as complex life as we know it is concerned. If we turn Earth into Mars, I would argue we murdered a planet. I’m curious, why do you think the distinction is important?
For anyone reading this I would also clarify I do not consider myself an environmentalist. I would simply say humans need to be good stewards of the planet. Those who consume indiscriminately and those who would ban consumption are both illogical and unrealistic in my opinion. For example, instead of banning Brazilian Rosewood, protect the rainforest, create Brazilian Rosewood tree farms and then harvest the wood responsibly. The solutions are complex, have long time horizons, are difficult to achieve, and have large financial costs. The extremes on both sides of this issue don’t help the situation.
|
Once again, you have proven yourself to be the "human" we all should aspire to be like.
My friend, you've nailed it on the head; until we acknowledge that the greed and love of Money and, power, as the underlying issue, not fossil fuel as an example, we will never address the real issues that plague the planet at present.
None of us "need" a new phone every year, but hey, Apple 16 looks better than Apple 15 so let's get one - and so on, and so on.
Fundamentally, we need a massive global catastrophy to wake us up - one much worse than COVID - sadly, that's exactly where we're heading.
As for your Mars analogy, I'm not sure if we will kill Earth, not even with an all out nuclear war. Crocodiles and cockroaches survived what destroyed most life on the planet 65 million years ago. If you look at "life" as a living concern seperate from the organisms enjoying it, then life will probably survive even if most living organisms may perish through our arrogance.
As such, I remain hopeful we won't roast Earth like something or somebody did Mars.
The distinction is that we are so arrogant as a species that we think very little of all other species - you don't have to be an environmentalist or any other ***ist to realise that.
Once again I salute you for your level-headedness