Question

crazy loss of direction or skill at some level for sure. and while indigenous peoples and many rural peoples can still see the stars, most of the worlds population cannot. thats particularly an urban thing, where theres all this light. from my farm, through the open skies, at night i can see the glow of detroit lakes, and thats 25 miles away. it turns out that being dark part of the time is a good idea for animals, and for ourselves. thats the way its supposed to be. what is the main idea of ladukes argument in this section? light pollution is bad for fireflies but good for humans. since light pollution is bad for fireflies it is likely not good for humans. its not very important that light pollution may be bad for fireflies. people should do more to protect and conserve fireflies.

Explanation:

The text mentions that being dark (not having excessive light, i.e., no light pollution) is good for animals and ourselves. Light pollution is an urban issue (as most of the world's population in urban areas can't see stars). The idea that light pollution is bad for animals (like fireflies, implied by the general statement about animals) and also bad for humans (since "it's a good idea for animals, and for ourselves" when it's dark) aligns with the option "Since light pollution is bad for fireflies it is likely not good for humans".

Answer:

Since light pollution is bad for fireflies it is likely not good for humans.