crm@duke.UUCP (Charles R. Martin) (01/15/84)
What is the difference between "destroying" an environment and "changing" an environment? I suspect that what I see as "controlling my environment" and thereby ensuring the survival of my progeny (and thereby, the human race) might very well be something like the sort of desctruction others have derided. I believe that humans are more valuable than uninhabited planets. I amke no immediate claim that this is logical, and in fact suspect it is at essence a religious question. However, anyone who believes that mankind shouldn't change things to suit themselves is cordially invited to stay the hell outa my garden. Charlie Martin
jss@rochester.UUCP (Jon Stumpf) (01/16/84)
I have nothing against making the environment in which
we live in (or an environment in which we WILL live in) more
suitable for our existence within it, but I can not see any
correlation between terraforming a planet and, let's say,
weeding a garden. Just because our race decides to colonize
a planet does not give us the right to terraform it (since
this would be to our benefit(?)). Because there is no intelligent(?)
life on this planet to say, "What do you think your doing?",
does not mean it is fine and dandy either.
"Since it benefits me, it's ok" is not a good enough reason
(to me) to play with something as delicate as a planets environment
nor would I want someone with that attitude to make the decision
to do so. Like I said before, I have nothing against making the
environment in which we live in more suitable for existence within
it, but I think we should worry about our own environment for now
before we start abusing another one.
a concerned, spacebound observer,
Jon S. Stumpf
U. of Rochester
rochester!jss