• ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Short term, yes, no question. But long term (a million years and beyond) we look at different challenges life on earth will face.

    It’s a fact that it won’t simply continue existing indefinitely. And definitely not in the diversity we know now. It’s not likely for rabbits or another species to suddenly rise up to the task of inventing space travel. That would need way more time than what it takes for earth to be hit by an asteroid big enough so that life won’t bounce back. The same goes for other types of mass extinction. Only humans have at least a slight chance to make life endure beyond earth.

      • ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Why shouldn’t we care, though? Personally, I see no reason why we should not try to preserve life, especially when perhaps it’s the only example of life there is.

        Rationally, since we don’t know whether there is a reason for anything, the only thing we can do is to insure that someone in the future will be able to find it. That chance is 0 if life stops existing altogether.

    • SmoothIsFast@citizensgaming.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      I mean realistically even then we don’t know for sure, it took humans and our ancestors a couple hundred thousand years to develop to to where we are at now. It’s not to say any other of our closest relatives could end up on a similar path without us in the picture in a much more tropical climate as they are used too. The question is will the earth stabilize itself when we get to that point or will we take it out of balance so severely that it goes into run away warming like Venus ending all life.