Some people warn that humans are destroying the planet. One culprit is the burning of fossil fuels.
In an attempt to reduce this dependence, man has invested heavily in nuclear energy. This subject is a constant theme of conflict in Germany; other major industrial countries seem to have accepted its dual-edged-sword aspects.
Events in Japan raise old and new questions about safety and sustainability of atomic energy. Opponents have been having a field day, smugly touting their "rightness". To my simple mind: that's not the issue. No one seems to be credibly addressing the question of how to provide energy to a hungry, growing human population. Few want to walk, use candles, and freeze in winter. There is no simple solution available.
For the moment, the only quick solution to lowered reliance on nuclear energy is increased burning of carbon...
...which will aggravate changes in the earth's atmosphere and alter conditions on the surface for humans. It will not destroy the planet, but it will affect human survival.
So, here's the point of the post headline: Does that mean that the planet--in the form of a humungous earthquake, which changes human behavior--is changing the planet? Now, that would be ironic.