[akvadrako]

I think species have died at such rates before, during earlier mass extinction events. It's natural they happen once in a while.

If we always preserve what we have, there will be no room for something new to develop.

[gleenn]

You realize we're not in a massive extinction event now right? You're comparing things like giant meteors killing all the dinosaurs to right now? If you can see the sun, we shouldn't have all these animals dying.

[dragonwriter]

> You realize we're not in a massive extinction event now right?

We are, in fact, in a mass extinction event right now, with extinction rates estimated at 1-2 orders of magnitude greater than any previous such event.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_extinction

> If you can see the sun, we shouldn't have all these animals dying.

Not all previous mass extinctions have involved the sun be blotted out by impact or volcanic events, though several have.

[jacobolus]

Sure. A mass extinction event which will take humans with it. Then a few million years down the line new speciation will fill all of the ecological niches in whatever equilibrium arises. The planet and life themselves are unlikely to be completely wiped out, absent some future technology we can’t yet imagine.

As long as you don’t have any attachment to anything more narrow than “all life on earth” (e.g. your family, language, city, country, culture, species, ...) thriving for a long time into the future, there’s no reason not to just shrug at whatever impending apocalypse.

[akvadrako]

Interesting wording - I indeed don't have any attachment to the things you mention. I do want intelligent life (for now, humanity) to survive and stay powerful, but I'll take the bet that we're adaptable enough to manage even if 90% of the other species perish.

[dragonwriter]

> I think species have died at such rates before, during earlier mass extinction events.

No, they haven't; extinction rates in the current mass extinction event are much higher than previous ones.