Quantcast
View Post
Rab said:
VAMatt said:

Okay.  I'm not going to argue that humans are perfect.  We clearly are not.  But, I hold to my claim that were better off now than at any other time in human history.  

As to the premise that humans need to take care of every species on earth, I'd just have to say that I disagree.  We need to take care of ourselves, and we only need to care about other species to the extent that their survival significantly impacts our own.  And, it appears that, in most cases, those two things are not related to a large enough degree to matter.  

 

The ongoing growth in human population and resource consumption is changing the planet in fundamental ways. One consequence of this growth is the loss of biodiversity, which is typically estimated either by the net movement of species towards higher categories of extinction risk or as the rate at which species are actually going extinct. By either measure, biodiversity loss is on the rise. As species disappear we lose both known and unknown benefits they provide

Apart from the loss of richness to the human experience if ecologies are lost, there much we don't understand about the complex web of life and how it will ultimately affect us, for our own survival it is logical to maintain as much of the Worlds biodiversity as we can 


 

The overpopulation myth is annoying though. It's not that we are overpopulated, it's just places with large populations can't properly handle themselves and now when places like China and India are starting to do that, it's much better. We need way more people to try;y be overpopulated. Scientists worried about overpopulation in the 70s and 80s but new studies show the faults lie elsewhere when we used to blame overpopulation for those



Just a guy who doesn't want to be bored. Also