[0xbadcafebee]

The problem is that we don't allow stuff to burn naturally, so the answer is we should mess with nature even more.

Amazing how humans just can't let anything alone. In 100 years the whole planet will just be one giant bonsai.

[eagsalazar2]

If in 100 years the earth is a giant bonsai... wow, that sounds like a pretty amazing outcome given the other very likely alternatives. Honestly, it seems pretty unlikely that given the enormous human population and our incredible appetite to consume, that the earth will survive in any state we'd be happy with, without some pretty aggressive management.

[Fatnino]

How about when a wild fire (emphasis on wild) breaks out, we quickly extinguish it and note the location to come back in a few months and do a controlled burn in the same area without the risk to human life that letting a fire run free creates.

[Brusco_RF]

Reminds me of how governments "solve" problems. ie, we introduced regulation A to solve problem A, which unintentionally causes side effect B and C. So we create regulations B and C which create market distortions E F G and H....

[falcolas]

We often can't, without displacing humans and damaging property.

[cbtacy]

So you're saying that protecting property is more important than a sensible fire policy?

[falcolas]

I’m saying that the solution wont be a simple one dimensional solution that makes for a great soundbite. Because damage to private property does need to be considered in any governmental policy.

[pixl97]

Are you suggesting we depopulate the westen US then?

[cbtacy]

No. But there are obviously places where humans simply should not live, and we should respect that.