And all those other walking talking heads in the back of the Hummer.
About the bloggingheads.tv appearance – interesting and thought provoking. I certainly don’t agree with you but the discussion was interesting to follow. For me your views were contradictory in many ways. One that bothered me most was that the best way to promote your views is to have children as they are most easily influenced by you (not a guaranteed result of course) and the world be a better place with more intelligent, enlightened people running around rather than the other kind…
And obviously if humans would die out and take nature with them, they are not going to take all of them, probably not even most of it in terms of biomass. And if some species are going to die out, that means there will be new species that will replace them. This is a dynamic not a static world and it is arbitrary to say that species-configuration of 1900 is better than species-configuration-2010. Nature prefers creative destruction.
Private ownership of nature normally means the preservation of it. Public ownership (if you can call it that, because if it belongs to everyone it belongs to no one) usually means destruction of nature.
P.S. I’m sorry to let you know (but I’m not sorry for myself obviously) that I’m doing my part of getting Estonia out of negative population growth by having my second child this past Wednesday.
@Paul – Fortunately, I don’t expect anyone to agree with me. It’s cool on those very rare occasions when they do, but if I clung to that expectation I wouldn’t have any friends. Also, oddly, there are some issues very dear to me, wherein most of the people who do agree with me I can’t actually stand (*cough* animal rights *cough*). Hooray for social diversity!
Love this one—your best M&E yet!
Also, Paul Vahur’s defense of privatizing nature is so wrong about so many things that a proper refutation would require volumes. That nature has rebounded from mass extinctions in the past in no way argues that such extinctions are a good thing.
Eh? There’s little if any connexion between “creative destruction” and the observed fact that private stewardship is more reliable than the political kind.
[...] What You Can’t Accept, Deny! Es claramente la actitud adecuada ante el mundo. [...]