To think pronatalists are on to something?

No, I'm not comparing myself to Copernicus, I'm using the relationship as an analogy. But I'm wasting words, I see.

No, but humans are only known species currently, or soon to be, able to take other species off this planet.

Are you of the opinion that the human species and ‘life’ are the same? There are plenty of species which have died out and yet ‘life’ continues. Mass extinctions in the past have removed 90% of species on earth and yet, here we are. Extinction of our own species would potentially make way for better…

You seem to be confusing scientific fact with your personal opinion. And comparing yourself to Copernicus, which, forgive me for saying so, does not make me inclined to take you particularly seriously.

Well, the pope fundamentally disagreed with Copernicus, yet here we are today 🤷‍♀️

I fundamentally disagree with you that:

"The sooner life forms are on other planets, the higher is the chance of surviving possible total obliteration of life..."

so I'm afraid that's an argument that isn't going to convince me that humanity dying out would be a disaster for life.

And how long do you think any of those would take to evolve to a stage of a planet lift off, while humans are likely only decades away from doing so?

The sooner life forms are on other planets, the higher is the chance of surviving possible total obliteration of life - which, just because it hasn't happened before, doesn't mean still having all the eggs in one single basket in the whole universe (that we know of) is a very smart idea.

Its hard for.me to believe that, because I live in an over crowded area. There are so many immigrants here. I'd hate to see even more people living here. It's horrible. The gp.is full, and there's numerous single.parents of 4/5 kids in 2 bedroom flats here.

No we don’t need to keep increasing population size.

We need to stop thinking quantity > quality when it comes to later life. Just because we can keep people alive medically doesn’t mean we should. Assisted dying.

We need to plan for meaningful financing of later life better-from the first paycheck. As individuals and not reliance on the state. The social care budget shouldn’t be for aged care. Working longer will be part of it but we also need to identify jobs which older people can do-and enjoy-which will probably mean a change in career/job role later on.

We need to live like we’re going to reach 100. Eat (much, much) better, stay active throughout life. Obesity needs to be eradicated. Mental health needs really addressing and not just treating with drugs.

Having more kids isn’t the solution…

That's really all you have to say to my comment? 😂

Fine, I will happily retract the final phrase and reiterate that many, MANY organisms survived the last time the Earth was hit by an asteroid. And many will survive the next time it happens- just probably not humans, if we're even still around by then.

1. Your original comment, which I was responding to, implied that an unpopulated planet would be the immediate result of humanity dying out. It would not. Humanity dying out would not directly cause the death of all other living organisms on Earth.

2. Not one of those five mass extinction events has wiped out every single organism on Earth. Many species, from each of the domains, survived each mass extinction event.

3. Your claim that only humans have a chance of surviving the next mass extinction event is utter nonsense. Even if humans were to survive briefly when every other member of the Eukarya domain was wiped out, along with every single member of the Archaea and Bacteria domains (which quite obviously wouldn't happen), humans would die out very quickly afterwards since we are entirely reliant on other organisms for food.

You do realise the "amoeba stage" was a bit of caricaturisation, don't you?

Did you read the comment thread? I was responding to someone who said that an unpopulated planet would be the immediate result of humanity dying out. It wouldn't.

Also, last time the Earth was hit by a giant asteroid, we didn't lose all life as we know it. We lost many life forms, but many others survived- we didn't go back to the amoeba stage.

There have been five mass extinction events in Earth’s history (and plenty of smaller scale ones, eg before and after the last Ice Age). Only humans have a (albeit small) chance of surviving the next one.

What on earth are you on about? Species go extinct all the time and the planet doesn't become "desolate', humans are just another species, one amongst millions. Even without humans, this planet would still have the most advanced forms of life in the known universe.

They are the scariest, weirdest couple - I really feel for the poor children...

Unfortunately, only humans (barring a coexisting alien race on a same intelligence level trajectory) are approaching the ability to export living beings off the only place supporting life in the universe (that we know of) before we get hit by another asteroid (which is guaranteed to happen at some point) and lose all life as we know it or get reduced to evolving all the way from amoebas in hopes one day someone figures out how to save life forms on this planet again. Hopefully that life form doesn't get bogged down in bunfights over nursing home fees before figuring out how to give life forms maximum chance of survival by spreading as far and wide as possible.

It would not be unpopulated! It would be populated by trillions of non-human living organisms!

This is one of my favourite comments ever.

I’ve never heard of two people so proud to be such shit parents.

Um, the planet wouldn't be desolate without humans. There are literally millions of other species of living organisms on Earth.

I really struggled to get past the names they've given their children, so I mostly skim read the rest of the article. They sound like quite shit, negligent parents who are having child after child almost as an experiment.

The most useful word I can think of to describe them both is 'punchable'.

Earth wasn't always desolate before humans came along. We're an incidental by-product, not Earth's raison d'être.

So you think we should continue to be overpopulated, using up resources, ruining the planet.... So there will be enough people working in old people's homes in fifty years time?

Most nursing homes are run privately for profit with low staffing levels and pay already. Having more people won't change that. Also people can be in care homes at any age. Who is going to look after them?

Haven’t you noticed we have other, hugely less destructive species on this planet? The sooner humans die out and leave the place to get on with getting back into balance the better!