So fire is the issue? That’s the thing that we can be 100% certain is definite bad news?

The redwoods would have to severely contest that idea.

> The redwoods would have to severely contest that idea.

WTF does that even mean?

Too bad you can’t grow redwoods in the desert I guess?

Please provide a reference to the research discovering that wildfires are a necessarily “bad thing” in deserts across bio-geologic timescales.

The onus is, without a doubt, on you to provide research supporting your initial claims here.

Also, “State of Jefferson.” snicker

Which claim do you consider unsubstantiated?

If a fire burns down your house, it's ok because it doesn't matter on bio-geologic timescales, right?

You're the one bringing the idea of bio-geologic timescales to an issue that is having an impact right now.

Yes, my house matters not at all, on any timescale.

Even less because I’m homeless.

Edit: the sequestration of land for the purpose of solely human habitation is the #1 most negatively impactful thing to the Natural order a person can do on this earth. It’s legitimately a bit hilarious to be chided by people who live in quarter acre sterile enclaves about the negative impacts of humanity on the environment while I live nomadically in wilderness areas.

HN comments section will be the death of me.

There could be an asteroid impact and someone would be jocularly arguing that asteroids are neither good nor bad, and that being sad about it is woke nonsense, and that the asteroid is winning in the marketplace of ideas, or is full of iridium or some other valued metal, and is therefore a net boon to human populations in several million years (if any) who could, after all, make cool swords out of its ore.

The absolute dissociation from anything like a tender, ecologically connected mindset is laughable until you remember that the people speaking are all mostly making six figures and are, for better or worse, our generation's elite.

This plant is choking out whole ecosystems. Yes, there are (mathematical!) measures of genetic diversity; they are trending down; this is bad because it destabilizes the food web.

Remember food? You like food, right? This is bad for the food.

> Yes, there are (mathematical!) measures of genetic diversity; they are trending down

Mathematical models of natural behaviors are, without exception, time-local. The net benefit on any timescales that actually matter have yet to be seen.

> Remember food? You like food, right? This is bad for the food.

Maybe I’ll starve. Maybe all of humanity will starve. Only one thing is certain: something else will come along to fill our niche.

<comment removed - other person not at all worth engaging>

Edit: ha, you go for the ad-hominem, can’t even manage to pull it off, then blame it on me.

What an incredibly honest way of formulating a scientific argument.

> <comment removed - other person not at all worth engaging>

Wise human. I made the same decision.

HN Comments section is endlessly frustrating, but is also, as my meditation coach always used to say, the perfect teacher. Sometimes an argument is won, but the interlocutor fails to notice. In these cases, no matter how frustrating, the argument is still won. While tempting, nothing is gained by explaining to them the interlocutor that they've lost; the not-noticing is itself the unfakeable signal of the fact.

This orange hellsite is a masterclass in discourse and rhetoric, and knowing when to rest your case turns out to be a huge tranche of these arts.

How rewarding it must be to “win” online. Especially when all you have to do is post a single comment then tell yourself “I won!”.

Thank you; it is indeed rewarding. tips hat

Distinguished members of the meta karma crew, when discussing the battle between whom will, erm, find a way, jakear says "nature" and 1attice says "human species" but it must be known, one may win in local time but the other in distant time. It cannot be known who will be right therefore this debate must be called a draw, in spite of the delightful use of a semicolon which was a reward to find, one I needed after having read this sub thread to its very end.

I would love to see your update to this comment after you and your family starves for a while and waiting for something to fill your niche.

There are few fires in desert, so any increase in the amount of plants like increases the chance of fire. But still people usually pref living in green places even if they are more likely to have fire.