Point taken, however you cant honestly think that were having a positive effect on this planet and you could in fact easily draw parallels to a virus/host relationship with us and our planet.
Define positive.
There is this mindset out there that man is not natural and what he creates is not part of nature. I disagree with those premises.
We take fossil fuels that have lain dormant for millions upon millions of years and burn them for fuel. Is the earth harmed by turning these hydrocarbons into carbon?
Honestly, what have we used up? What have we destroyed? The earth is an ever changing landscape of violent eruptions, earthquakes, floods, meteor strikes, etc... Some of which dwarf the entire history of man in terms of sheer energy produced.
Can I draw parallels? Sure.. But I can draw parallels to many things that do not result in the same conclusion.
Think it through for yourself and you will see how transparent these arguments are.
Sure, it is really romantic and altruistic to say you want to save the planet. Everybody wants to save the planet. Save the planet from what?
In America at least, our pollution standards have never been higher, the water never cleaner, the corporations never more constrained by environmentalism. FFS, there used to be so much pollution that a river in America actually caught on fire. None of that exists anymore. We have taken massive strides to keep the environment clean.
As far as effect on the planet, positive is a value judgement... Values exist only in the realm of human beings. The earth doesnt care one way or the other. It is not sentient, it has no feelings at all.
I feel what we are doing with the planet is positive for mankind... Some people dont want to put mankind first.