You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
Terraforming is ethically corrupt. But so is landing humans on Mars since the bugs that humans carry with them could hurt the local indigenous bugs leading to Martian ecocide! We should leave Mars alone, ENTIRELY!!!
If one accepts that an environment and a non-human lifeform are of value, then one would do what one can to protect them. On Earth, this means not blowing up nuclear devices in such environments, not polluting such environments, not unnessarily killing the organisms in such environments. The same applies to Mars. IT IS JUST THAT TO DO THIS, WE MUST NOT GO TO MARS IN THE FIRST PLACE SINCE TO DO SO WOULD ENDANGER SUCH VALUED ENVIRONMENTS AND THE LIFEFORMS THEY CONTAIN!
Landing humans on Mars is the same ecological action as going to Yellowstone and spreading Agent Orange all over it, or going to the Lakes District and blowing it up with a nuclear device!
REALISE THIS: There's no special moral treatment I'm giving Mars, except that which the Martian environment requires for its own protection.
Now, my own intrinisic value means that I might undertake means to defend my own well-being to the detriment of the intrinsic value of other organisms. As I need to eat and clean and wash and defacate to survive, I can only apologise to those beings whose lives I destroy in these acts. I do not-- however--need to go to Mars to maintain my well-being--therefore it is unethical for me to endanger the intrinsic life of lifeforms that may exist there! And neither should you!
Terraforming is ethically corrupt. But so is landing humans on Mars since the bugs that humans carry with them could hurt the local indigenous bugs leading to Martian ecocide! We should leave Mars alone, ENTIRELY!!!
We still have no conclusive proof of life on Mars. That is one reason for going there.
Landing humans on Mars is the same ecological action as going to Yellowstone and spreading Agent Orange all over it, or going to the Lakes District and blowing it up with a nuclear device!
Okay, you should stay as far away from the topic of CALDERAS as you can especially regarding Yellowstone. This topic makes your whole statement moot. Life is very resiliant.
Now, my own intrinisic value means that I might undertake means to defend my own well-being to the detriment of the intrinsic value of other organisms. As I need to eat and clean and wash and defacate to survive, I can only apologise to those beings whose lives I destroy in these acts. I do not-- however--need to go to Mars to maintain my well-being--therefore it is unethical for me to endanger the intrinsic life of lifeforms that may exist there! And neither should you!
I agree that everyone should try to live in a manner that does not bring about unnecessary destruction to other lifeforms; however, should the itroduction of a new lifeform inadvertantly eliminate another that doesn't mean that lifefrom is evile. It comes down to survival of the fittest. Are we, as humans who absolutely depend on photosynthetic/ O2 producing lifeforms, nothing but co-conspirtitors with these organisms in an effort to have eradicated Earth's original reducing atmosphere and it's ecosystem? Hmmmm
Pages: 1