This kind of thinking is becoming the norm

Translation: I am looking for another article to link without commentary.

 

you cant "destroy" the earth. that word is useless in this context.

if the earth is warmer, it is not "destroyed". when the earth was in an ice age, and then it wasnt anymore, it wasnt "ruined" or destroyed.

manhattan used to be forest. was it "destroyed" by development? of course not. the word destroy means to render useless. the things we do to the earth do not make it useless, they do the opposite.

when we burn fossil fuels, and tun oil into energy and carbon and heat, it not making the world useless, it makes humans happier. we need energy. so the net of what we do to the earth doesnt "destroy" it.

if you are a first world white person with zero problems, then you can think this way, because youa re stupid. but if you are in rural china and the coal burning power plant has industrialized your town such that your daughter can work at a factory instead of as a prostitute, you would think that was pretty cool.

the us of fossil fuels for energy doesnt "damage" the earth. the earth has no emotions. the burning of fossil fuels has brought humans into an era of unprecedented peace and prosperity.

even if humans changed the earth to the extent that it was totally unlivable, it wouldnt be "destroyed" it would just be like venus or mercury of however many billion other planets cant support human life. those planets havent been "ruined", they just are the way they are.

and we cant "use up" the earth. we just change it. if you boil water and it turns into steam, and you are thirsty, and the water is gone, you didt use it up, you just changed it into a less useful form. but the changes we make to the earth do the opposite of that, they make it more and more and more useful. thats why we can support more people on earth than we ever have before.

 

then let me rephrase "destroy the earth" destroy the earth for human habitation.

 

we are not doing that either, we are doing the opposite. industrialization and fossil fuels have made the world many orders of magnitude more suitable for human habitation, and continue to do so.

again, we could do a cap and trade on carbon here, and all it would do was shift wealth to other places in the world and hurt our economy, which is a net negative for the world. china would love to open factories that sprew more and more carbon into the environment ot pick up the slack from our loss of industry. and that would be good for them in the short term but bad in the log term because we wouldnt be as rich to buy their crap.

restricting greenhouse gases is the thing that "destroys the earth" because it hurts the economy of the world and that makes the earth less suitable for human habitation.

 

also if humankind is a "virus", like you say, then why do you care if they have a habitat to "destroy"?

 

Dude, come on, you think that we can just pollute, and burn, and destroy, and consume and it has no effect on the environment, and the planet as far as being habitable for human life?

And yes, I think we are a virus. I think that if you and I were some super alien being, and we were looking down on the planet earth, we would view humans as a cancer destroying the host.

 

if you and i are camping and we make a fire so we dont freeze to death, and the burning of logs releases "pollutants" that worsen the state of the the atmosphere, isnt it ok because we are better off for the warmth created? so havent we made the earth more habitable, not less?

and isnt the asme thing true about the industrial revolution? the chines factory spewing "toxins" into the air ir providing jobs so the people do not starve. so is the earth now more or less habitable then before the factory?

of course it has an effect, industrialization and the burning of fossil fuels has made the earth far far more inhabitable for humans, thats why the population has grown so insanely since 1900.

do you think of venus or saturn as already destroyed because destruction is defined by habitability for humans?

if i show you a phot of manhattan in 1300, and then again in 2012 do you see evidence of destruction? i dont. i see an area of success and thriving beings that have learned to manipulate the earth to create amazing things. not a virus.

viruses cant hurt inanimate objects.

 

Go screw yourself!

 

No I don't, and I amended that by saying destroying the earth for human habitation. Not destroying the earth. You are right, short of setting off a nuke that blows this place to atoms (as ming the merciless would put it) no I don't think humans can completely destroy the planet earth, but we can do enough damage to where earth is uninhabitable.