>>513716807 (OP)I’ll give you my opinion on this question. And it’s a fair question. I’ve followed Avi Loeb long before this and if you are a fan of futuristic science literature you will understand. Consider this speculative scenario. As we are to less consciousness animals generally (excluding psychopathy and food). We generally like to observe and protect and enjoy the diversity of species and appreciate their continued natural existence and development. We safari we study we consider how limit our impact on the planet so as not to overwhelm or sterilise it to their detriment.
But those animals have no idea who or what we are even when they are staring at us thinking we might be dinner in a caged bus on the Serengeti. So my speculation is that minimal intrusion and disruption to natural development is let’s say a universal imperative for such mindsets. Now consider our current predicament. Humans tend to large scale conflation about every 4 generations. Which were localised but are now only globalised . So a pattern that has always repeated is on the verge of repeating in a world where the loss of life will be not just immense but recoverable. But immense and potentially not recoverable in the presence of nuclear weapons. So a filter is upon us. Either break the pattern that’s never been broken or face a horror beyond all horrors before. Now in this scenario. Where the species or environment itself is at risk. Even we would make great disruptive interventions in other species. So I would say. If you throw all the incredibly unlikely things the data is showing us about 3I/ATLAS we must also consider the fact we are on the verge economically, culturally, militarily, technologically arriving at a climax where all that’s been built could be lost in utter stupidity of corrupt leadership.
