The planet, yes, it's beautiful.

Humanity? I've been thinking about this a bit, but watching humanity fail to deal with climate change is an eye opener.

I've started to think that we just don't deserve to survive. We're a cruel, selfish species that can't work together to solve large problems. We don't deserve it, not in a moral sense, but in a practical one. It would be negative for such a primitive abusive force to spread in the universe.

>>6696
In this big universe, I'm sure there are plenty of planets just as or even more beautiful than Earth.

There are planets that even rain diamonds. Imagine how beautiful that must be.

File 164198773831.jpg - (70.57KB , 828x468 , greta_2.jpg )

>>6692
Yes.

>>6696
>Humanity? I've been thinking about this a bit, but watching humanity fail to deal with climate change is an eye opener.

>I've started to think that we just don't deserve to survive. We're a cruel, selfish species that can't work together to solve large problems. We don't deserve it, not in a moral sense, but in a practical one. It would be negative for such a primitive abusive force to spread in the universe.
I think that the most underrated hindrance to save the climate is NOT the polluters. Especially not coal miners. Because they are predictable. Mine coal. Get money. Repeat.

What we see now is a bunch of hibernated commies or never-was-commies or was-commies-but-had-good-intentions-also-Singapore that are scenting the morning air. Wich is really interesting, because they had not been able to think new thoughts after 1969 and not after 1989. I've been to a few climate demos in Stockholm. And if you gave me 1 SEK for every time I heard someone play "Bella ciao" I could...buy you a cup of coffee.

The best solution would be to have some kind of greenhouse gas dividends. Foot the bill to the polluters. This will cause prices to go up. But if every citizen gets an equal share for pollution produced in their own country and every citizen of EU gets an equal share of imported goods, then the problem will pretty much solve itself.

Of course this system will cost, because surveillance and maintenance isn't free. But the huge advantage is that it gives corporations an incentive to do what they are already doing best: Scale economics. Yeah, there's a bunch of sad sacks that wants more and even more regulations. Also the bunch of sad sacks that wants some kind of revolution. Wich is quite funny, because they can't tell the difference between a generator or a carbureator OR can do a violence.

Here is a rare Greta. Use it only for good.

Should never have existed

>>6692
It's are we worth saving, people would have blow up the planet.
I'm guess your just talking about humans.
Relax, some other people are making up your's and mine's future.
You can always prater H7 N4

>>6717
Love the Greta, thank you

yes

File 167202200322.gif - (0.98MB , 364x243 , ezgif-2-8e5d14a3a0.gif )

>>6692
The earth existed for billions of years before us (and before life for that matter) and will be fine once we go and possibly some more life will take our place in the future. The job of life is to propagate itself existence and if intelligent life turns out to not be good at that then I guess intelligent life wasn't made for the universe and evolutionary will not survive.

It's sad to think about. Such a vast and endless and infinite universe and yet it will be filled with inert objects and indless reproducing life forms....

To answer your question; Yes humanity is worth saving, but, is it possible? Unlikely.

>>6928
where does this gif come from? was that a movie?

>>6929
The ani-matrix.

"Saving"? You know we are only going to make it unable to support us. The Earth will go on. We will not.