Like climate change seems really easy to solve if we just plant a bunch of jojoba bushes in the Mojave desert.

Also it’s the easiest thing to get the billionaires on board. Argue we are learning how to terraform Mars and suddenly Bezos and Musks’s meats would be spinning.

  • nohaybanda [he/him]
    ·
    3 years ago

    They certainly have, but we must be careful not to fall into noble savage type mythologies here. Everywhere people have lived, from the Amazon, to Europe, and Asia, indigenous peoples have deliberately and methodically shaped the ecology of their native lands.

    To call that not terroforming is to deny their successes and to centre this much needed science solely on white imperialist history and experience.

    • GreenTeaRedFlag [any]
      ·
      3 years ago

      then perhaps I should regard that as light terraforming, not to dismiss its effects but to acknowledge it as not being as damaging as heavy terraforming which is what we now suggest.

      • nohaybanda [he/him]
        ·
        3 years ago

        I don't think I'm willing to cede this knowledge space to tech bro douchbags like Musk and Gates. Indigenous practices aren't "light" terroforming, they're successful terroforming. All the sci-fi shit being proposed is mostly just capitalist vaporware and grift.

        • GreenTeaRedFlag [any]
          ·
          3 years ago

          we've been pretty successful in terraforming swamps into cities and deserts into farms, leveling mountains and making lakebeds dry. These things require more technology, and are also way more destructive.

          • nohaybanda [he/him]
            ·
            3 years ago

            Are you being deliberately obtuse right now, or just firing from the hip as the comments come in? The topic of this sub-thread is examples of successful and sustainable terroforming and how indigenous practices count for that. How is your comment a good response to my previous one?

            • GreenTeaRedFlag [any]
              ·
              3 years ago

              the second one. Anyway, you're not being clear on the metric of success. I was suggesting light and heavy as signifiers because one is far more devastating and requires more power. To bring in the idea of successful is unclear, as the altering of the environment in modern america and europe sure has achieved its goals. If you mean sustainable that still doesn't really convey what is going on, as damming rivers is sustainable for the local region but screws the people downstream over more.

              • nohaybanda [he/him]
                ·
                3 years ago

                Placeholder commmet: I'm enjoying this conversation and will resume it after dinner.

                :soviet-heart:

              • Melon [she/her,they/them]
                ·
                3 years ago

                sorry for getting remove-happy there, I shouldn't end a chain over getting petty frustration at some random point, carry on (comments restored)