Re:'I’m not having children because I want to save the planet'
by 317070 on Wednesday April 11, 2018 @07:13AM
(#16809904)
Animals, plants and other beautiful things. Saving it for life in general does not sound too bad? If it goes between leaving a dead rock in space, or keeping this lively rock around albeit without humans, that does not sound too bad. You can turn your question upside-down. Why should there be humans around to enjoy it in order for it to be a thing to strive for?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:'I’m not having children because I want to save the planet'
by taneq on Wednesday April 11, 2018 @07:16AM
(#16809932)
Earth's gonna get hit by another big meteorite at some point. When we get to that point, any species that hasn't been lifted off the planet by humans (or whatever equivalent is around at that point) are gonna be wiped out regardless. We're the best hope for a continued existence in the long run, for all life.
And if the argument is that animals are happier without humans around, you should watch some nature documentaries. Nature is brutal.
Re:'I’m not having children because I want to save the planet'
by arkh on Wednesday April 11, 2018 @07:26AM
(#16810020)
Even without meteorite: 1 billion years from now the Sun will output enough energy to make it a lot less enjoyable.
5 billions years from now the Earth is no more.
So long term if you want Earth based life to endure you need it to start getting the fuck out and spread. At the moment it seems the best positioned for this are humans.
Re:'I’m not having children because I want to save the planet'
by Will_Parker on Wednesday April 11, 2018 @07:23AM
(#16809994)
> Why should there be humans around to enjoy it in order for it to be a thing to strive for?
Advanced consciousness may be the key thing the universe has going for it.