This is something I've been wondering for a while. These days, we hear a lot about protecting the environment, using renewable energy, protecting endangered species, protecting natural habitats. Of course, humanity is hurting the planet. That much has been proven. But in the grand scheme of things, does it really matter?
Short answer: yes. Long answer: hell yes.
It's not really about protecting the planet. It's about protecting ecosystems that are vital to our survival.
The Amazon rainforest is a great example of this. The motivation behind protecting that isn't that these plants are pretty and the world would be a less awesome place without it. It's that this area of land is rightly called "the lungs of the world" and "the world's largest pharmacy". Losing out on that for a few more Whoppers is a terrible trade.
So what's different now? Won't life adapt to our destructive ways?
Life in general, yes. Specific species, almost certainly not.
One example of life adapting in response to humans is smaller fish stocks
. The big ones are more likely to get eaten, so there's selective pressure to be small. It's evolution, baby.
Won't animals evolve so that they won't walk into busy streets and get run over? Won't they eventually come to accept cities as their new habitats?
Some have. Roaches. Pigeons. Guidos.
Aside from nuclear fallout scorching every inch of the earth, do we really have the power to end nature?
Currently, probably not. Nature would bounce back from almost any kind of manmade catastrophe. Runaway global warming would eventually reverse with no humans left to burn fossil fuels. Even nuclear winter wouldn't last forever. It'd be one hell of a global climate disruption for a few decades, but it'd eventually subside.
Humans don't have the power to destroy the world, just ourselves.
Note: I'm just asking this out of pure curiosity. Don't shoot me.
*lowers gun slightly*