• Ech
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    2 months ago

    Just to clarify, 50,000 years is 50 millennia. If you meant millions if years, the term for that is mega-anna. And eons for billions.

    Other than that, I more or less agree. Humans have developed technologically much faster than we’ve been able to evolve/adapt to the changes we’re creating, and the stress from that is growing. Occasionally I wonder if it’ll prove too much for us in the end.

      • Ech
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        Evolution being slow is a good thing. Trying to shortcut it would just be a more direct way to destroy the species. Also a great example of the kind of thing I’m referring to.

        • sqw@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          species could still either thrive or die out because of or in spite of the meddling.

      • Ech
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        Yeah, I’ve wondered if it’s something like that. Seems like a fairly easy trap to fall into, but hard to say for sure with only our singular reference point.

        • samus12345@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          My guess is that in order for life to survive long enough to get to the point where it becomes sapient, it has to be selfish and short-sighted, which becomes a tragically fatal hindrance.

          “We’re not gonna make it, are we? People, I mean.”

          “It’s in your nature to destroy yourselves.”

          “Yeah. Major drag, huh?”

      • Ech
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        Had to look it up myself. I saw both, but went with the hyphen for clarity.