
We’re Eating This Planet to Death - 23throwaway23
https://www.wired.com/story/ipcc-land-report-food/
======
skilled
The general HN narrative is that, "yes, there are issues. we should fix them".
So, I would love to hear some concrete examples of what is being done to
reverse this.

For example, the deforestation efforts in Amazon are putting tribes at risk
every single day. Not to mention the loss of animals, plants and other
wildlife. Is there anyone here on HN that has given actual thought to how this
could be resolved?

And I am not talking about hoola hooping the government either. Clearly that
is not an approach that is ever going to work.

------
t0mbstone
We aren't eating the planet to death. The planet has survived asteroids and
all sorts of things, including the mass extinction of the dinosaurs and most
of the life on earth.

The only thing we might be doing is ruining humanity's own long-term chances
of survival. There's a distinct possibility that humans will undergo a mass
extinction. That doesn't mean the planet is dead, though.

There is bacteria that can survive in extreme temperatures (for example, in
extremely hot underwater volcanic plumes).

Worst case scenario, humans go extinct and some other life-form ends up
evolving. You could be looking at some kind of sentient jellyfish taking over
the planet in a billion years or whatever.

~~~
antisthenes
Whenever these articles write 'planet', it's obvious that the connotation is
_Biosphere_ , aka living creatures.

Sometimes it also means _civilization_ , which encompasses a broad spectrum of
things, but mostly a standard of living above subsistence
farming/hunting/gathering, and being able to organize in groups larger than
small tribes.

> Worst case scenario, humans go extinct

Sure, might take a while. I think the bigger immediate problem is that to
survive in a global warming environment, traits will be selected for that
aren't necessarily conducive to preservation of civilization (which is our
main achievement as a species)

