Balance of nature: human and theological implications (Introduction)

by David Turell , Thursday, February 20, 2025, 19:24 (14 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: You are pressing for more concern. I am not. […]

dhw: You clearly share my view that we need to find viable and, of course, efficient alternatives. You just don’t care as much.

DAVID: Yes.

dhw: That is the nub of the matter. Instead of focusing on exaggerations, distortions and false alarms, you accept that there is very real damage being done by current practices, and alternatives must be found in order to prevent further damage. I don’t know why you reject the suggestion that the changes should take place as quickly as pragmatically possible, except of course that you and I won’t be around to see the consequences of delay, and you don’t care as much as I do about the wellbeing of future generations.

DAVID: You short-change our innate resilience. From Erectus to Sapiens we overcame all challenges.

dhw: Sorry, but erectus didn’t make it. But yes indeed, I hope that our innate resilience and ingenuity will enable us to create new forms of fuel and modes of transport and agriculture to put an end to the damage being caused by current fuels and methods. I’m pleased that you have recognized all the dangers, and that you recognize the need for us to make the necessary changes. I find that far more reassuring than your earlier focus on distorted interpretations and statistics.

I don't focus on the doom and gloom folks as you do.