Does this mean you don't agree with what I posted? I am not sure, as I don't see it as ingenious at all, it is an observation of how a tree works that might have been made by a five year old. It indicates we are at a very initial state of development as a species, in fact in the process of being born. After that, it is inevitable we will expand, similarly as the tree expands to do the good work it does, adding energy to Earth. Why wouldn't we do the same? Of course we can choose not to do it, and perish at birth, if we thought this was not possible, or maybe not the best outcome. Can you see how that could happen instead?

Here is a thought for you: if the latter happened and we just stopped now, having exhausted all of the consumable energies of Earth, the end result would be our existence only ever having had a negative, destructive effect on Earth.

Earth would be like a mother, who had done all of the work of bearing a very demanding baby until the point of birth, when it died.

It is only after our species is born, that we are capable of adding postive energy, by hooking into the power of the sun, and adding that to Earth, like all of nature has tried to do, until about now, when our final efforts are overcoming it, if we are not born by hooking up to solar.

So it is our duty now as a species to pay put back the energy we took out to get us to this stage, by being born into use of solar power, like nature. When we do that, we start to help nature, instead of always working against it.

I can't see any logical, scientific, ideological, philosophical, spiritual, political, cultural, religious argument against this. There seems to be no basis for doubting that this is the truth, other than maybe ego. Where would you put your own argument?