Date: 7 May 91 18:26:04 GMT
From: email@example.com (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Ethics of Terraforming (was Re: Terraforming Venus)
In article <1991May7.firstname.lastname@example.org> email@example.com
(Ken Sheppardson) writes:
> Is there anyone else out there who questions the ethics of tampering
> with other planets (with or without the presence of life) to make them
> more 'earthlike'? ...
I assume, then, you oppose the terraforming of Los Angeles? After all,
it's fine the way it is, with smog and asphalt everywhere; why introduce
foreign phenomena like trees and clean air to make it more "earthlike"?
How do you feel about the Hawaiian Islands, which were bare volcanic rock
until all those foreign plants and animals moved in and started tampering?
If what nature did there was right, how can it be wrong for nature (which
includes us) to do the same thing elsewhere?
And the bean-counter replied, | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
"beans are more important". | firstname.lastname@example.org utzoo!henry