[madnak]

[ QUOTE ]
but I can perform a Sklanskyism with respect to my original argument i.e. even if it was provable that a massive calamity now was an advantage to humanity from the year 3,000 onwards its obviously true that we would still want to avert the calamity now. Hence it cannot be because of these future generations that we want to avert climate change.

[/ QUOTE ]

We care more about the current generations than future generations, but that doesn't mean we don't care about future generations all. I do think we "should" allow the calamity in this case - though I'm not sure how willing I would be to do so if it really happened.