“something might go wrong” is not a strong argument to never try.
Maybe we should eliminate all life.
Exactly what I’ve been advocating for years. /srs
I know no-one has the time to read long messages, so you can skip the rest of this comment if you want.
Here is a long dialogue I had on the topic. If you’re argument’s in there, please read my response before posting your argument here.
The link is trying to force me to sign into this huggingface website which I am not about to do.
You should only do it once the whole world is perfect. So never. Makes sense. Or, you know, actually make the world a better place.
Having more kids makes the world a worse place, we don’t have enough resources for the people we already have.
Citation needed. As far as I understand, that is a debunked myth.
That is not the same as “making it a worse place”. We don’t automatically have a better live if we have excess resources that we do not use.
That is “using up limited resources”. But even then I could argue that future kids are going to work towards (further) reversing that trend, developing sustainable technologies, recycling existing resources.
There’s constant war fighting for land, and tens of thousands die every day from starvation. Take off the rose colored glasses.
“Future kids will solve this problem so we don’t have to worry about it” is a selfish and unjustified perspective.
There has been essentially no fighting for land in most parts of the world since WW2. Most wars have not been about land anymore. The wars that do happen do not correlate with the birth rate.
I find it interesting how you ignore me pointing out that what you quote does not back up your previous claim.
I find it interesting how you ignore me pointing out that what you quote does not back up your previous claim.
You want me to prove that not having enough resources makes it harder to live somewhere? I absolutely backed up my point with those quotes.
