[murat124]

Former Exxon CEO and former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson famously stated in 2013 during a meeting with Exxonmobil shareholders: "What good is it to save the planet if humanity suffers"[1]. He explained, "As a species that’s why we’re all still here: we have spent our entire existence adapting. So we will adapt to this. It’s an engineering problem, and it has engineering solutions."

The idea that the humans will somehow adapt to this is the stupidest idea I've ever heard. Koch bros are pushing the same idea, on the evolutionary level, that humans will learn to live.

To me humanity is already dead, we are eternally doomed. We just don't know it yet. It's better to realize and accept it[2], as if we're told we have cancer and our days are numbered. This is a very pessimistic approach, but it is an honest one and may help mitigate problems for future generations.

[1] https://thinkprogress.org/exxon-ceo-what-good-is-it-to-save-...

[2] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/apr/26/were-doo...

[karl11]

Fortunately for the rest of us, that optimism has worked pretty well for thousands of years now. Besides, if you really believe we're doomed, what difference does it make to you what anyone thinks about anything?

[lostmyoldone]

Even if it were true, thousands of years is barely anything on any time scale that matters. Disregarding that, we've certainly not lived through thousands of years of global anthropogenic climate change, which is what this is all about.

It's worth to remember that adaption doesn't necessarily equate survival in the way we tend to think about it, as dinosaurs adapted too.

Humanity, at least on this planet, is already doomed. The sun will eventually consume us as a natural part of its life cycle. It's a very long time until that happens, but life here will eventually end. So as we're already doomed, should we then do nothing to prevent suffering and pain until then?

It should be a rhetorical question, but apparently it isn't always.

The argument can be made quite simple: As long as we continue to have children, or accept people having children, we have chosen - as a species - to not give up on them, and their descendants.

Preserving a livable environment, and preferably much more than livable, is simply a duty springing from that fact.

There is no need for any deep philosophy, to care for the environment is - essentially - a consequence of choices already made.

[justin66]

> Besides, if you really believe we're doomed, what difference does it make to you what anyone thinks about anything?

If you believe you're probably doomed because of what a large number of your most idiotic compatriots believe, what other people think is of great interest.

[sdwa]

Why do you think it's appropriate to rely on blind optimism just because it's worked for us so far when the challenge we face is totally unprecedented as well as existential? Seems awfully careless to me.

[sosborn]

I don't think humans will have much trouble adapting. Cities will move to accommodate the rising sea, we will move on to other food sources as the need arises, and life for us will go on.

It's the other species – the ones that had no hand in this – that I worry and feel regret about.

[namarie]

And where are those food sources coming from? As good farmland becomes too hot and the colder regions that warm up don't usually have good soil...

And sure, "cities will move" - so much political chaos happening on Europe just because of a million refugees - now imagine 50 times more coming to northern europe just from southern europe. Similar things happening all over the world. What fun!

[Haga]

"I have no reason for concerns as far as I'm concerned", makes for a nice final diary entry for a king.

[sosborn]

Roaches will be along forever and are a viable food source.

I never said it would be fun, I said we would survive as a species.

[toper-centage]

Aquaponics everything!

[pimmen]

We can't substitute water for anything, though. Hundreds of millions of people will lose their water, won't adapt to that, and will move to the northern hemisphere which holds the vast majority of the world's surface level fresh water, or they'll die trying.

If people think the current refugee crisis is bad, boy are they in for a shocker.

[ptah]

once the bees are gone, there will be no food for anyone of any kind

[jefflombardjr]

People discount the economic value of nature. The bees are a perfect example of this.

Yes we could come up with some automated polinator machine, but treating it like an engineering problem is insane! Nature has had 10000s of years to adapt to specific functions. The notion that a team of starry-eyed engineers can do a better job is egotistical and dangerous.

There is an excellent documentary from the 90s that lays this out in no uncertain terms: https://www.nfb.ca/film/whos_counting/

[abootstrapper]

In other words - “I have faith your children and grandchildren will adapt to the catastrophe we created. Not to mention the catastrophe is totally worth it. Trust me.” - Person who gains the most from said catastrophe

[maxxxxx]

That's sort of in line with the "starve the beast" ideology. Take on a lot of debt now so the next generation has no choice but to shrink government.

[Haga]

Defeatist is also very comfy as minimal effort is required.