- Sep 29, 2003
- 1,400
- 1
- 81
yeah I actually hold the worldview that there is more going on than just us being alone and that evolution is responsible for all life.... im kinda a borderline conspiracy theorist, haha.... well I mean, shit life is so insane, maybe aliens or God had their hands in our past or something. Life is wild...
so that being said, I dont think its coincidence that we "hit our technological stride" and stuff is going down hill...
of course, disregard this post now because I am obviously insane
The weak no longer die an early death. They are pushed in wheel chairs and and wear glasses and have asthma inhalers and often reproduce instead of having their deficient genes cleansed from humanity.
IHateMyJob2004
Lifer
- Sep 29, 2004
- 18,656
- 67
- 91
hanoverphist
Diamond Member
- Dec 7, 2006
- 9,867
- 23
- 76
preservation and people caring is based on what i call "ooo factor". polar bears are neet looking, interesting creatures. if it were the worlds population of cockroaches, no one would even bat an eyelash at it.
- Sep 29, 2003
- 1,400
- 1
- 81
yeah I agree with you... we have pharmacies and people are taken care of A LOT MORE (for $$$ of course)
so TONS of people survive now that would otherwise would have perished were we still in the wild.
You don't see healthy elephants taking care of deformed and retarded ones...
If we allow this "evolution" to continue, all that will be left of the animal kingdom will be people, sharks, and cockroaches.
destrekor
Lifer
- Nov 18, 2005
- 28,799
- 359
- 126
Sounds like a clear enough point to me.
But then again, I'm the resident environmentally-apathetic asshole.
The world will keep on doing its thing. We humans, well, we just happen to have a little different perspective of life (we're special omg!?). But there was life before us, and there will be life after us. The shapes and forms and intelligence capabilities, who knows. Another group similar to primates come around, that are well-versed and have innate problem solving skills, and you bet in time, as long as they can keep on living, another new "intelligent" creature will come about.
However, my point being... fuck the animals. And that includes us. We don't need to be wasting our time worrying about the quality of life for other animals. We are more important, because we are.. we. In life, you worry about your own species, all other life out there is either potential food or potential enemy, or a passive animal. What is the point of worrying about whether an animal is going to go extinct?
If the polar bears go extinct, the world isn't going to blast all of the mantle up in our face. Sure, other species might die, or another species might get the chance to thrive, and that animal might be better in some way. Maybe tasty.
Life will always balance. Our enemy? Well, we did a number on the earth's balance with that whole modern medicine thing. But end-game, balance will be achieved one way or the other.
So what is our enemy? Ourselves. We didn't beat the odds, we'll only be an example of balance from within - we'll push our population to the point that a single, even small-scale disaster will result in the deaths and misfortune of millions and millions, all because we'll be so dependent on each other, and have little in the way of parity for resources since all available resources will be on tap constantly.
And that's still natural balance. The earth can only support so much life, and we'll either end up pushing other creatures to extinction as we expand, or we'll crush ourselves.
Life on Earth will always be constantly checked and in balance. Balance might not happen immediately, but in terms of life on Earth, it happens pretty damn fast. Some other species will thrive in the absence of one, and a species that depended on one might die, and then a new competitor for the other now thriving species will come and keep population in check.
World keeps on spinning, and numerous species will go extinct, all without our input.
In short - fuck all the environmentalist hippies. We have one thing to worry about: what are we going to do to keep on living, and that includes making sure we have enough food and resources for our numbers. Don't worry, eventually a great portion of us will be killed either directly by nature or indirectly through famine, in due time men.. in due time.
Bypassed? Maybe we are in the middle of the process, hastening our own demise with our activities. We'll just naturally de-select ourselves!
We didn't, at least not at first.
But now, we somewhat are. Unlike animals we have conscious thought; this changes a lot of things.
Think of it this way, people who are mentally challenged would have died out immediately. We counter natural selection because of our ability to create and manipulate nature & because of our conscious choices.
I'm sure some forms are still around, but things such as the weak and/or defective dying out, it doesn't happen like that anymore.
As for my contribution to the topic; I think Atomic Playboy pretty much summed it all up.
You're correct, if we die out, another species will come afterward with enough passage of time. Though many people believe it would be nice for us to actually try to get this right the first time around.
You're missing the point. It isn't so much that the animals are dying, it's about what is causing the animals to die in this way. That is the point and it is very important for our own species, if not only just to prepare for the effects to come.
You're forgetting one extremely crucial point; we have developed a consciousness. Unlike other animals, we have a choice in the matter. Which gives us much greater responsibility and allows us to manipulate things to our advantage, the advantage of Earth, and of other species.
It's this exact thinking you're portraying which is keeping us from raising our awareness of these matters. Apathy and "fuck it" will never solve anything. Sure it's easy, but easy isn't always the best route to the solution.
- Sep 29, 2003
- 1,400
- 1
- 81
Originally posted by: destrekor
Sounds like a clear enough point to me.
But then again, I'm the resident environmentally-apathetic asshole.
The world will keep on doing its thing. We humans, well, we just happen to have a little different perspective of life (we're special omg!?). But there was life before us, and there will be life after us. The shapes and forms and intelligence capabilities, who knows. Another group similar to primates come around, that are well-versed and have innate problem solving skills, and you bet in time, as long as they can keep on living, another new "intelligent" creature will come about.
However, my point being... fuck the animals. And that includes us. We don't need to be wasting our time worrying about the quality of life for other animals. We are more important, because we are.. we. In life, you worry about your own species, all other life out there is either potential food or potential enemy, or a passive animal. What is the point of worrying about whether an animal is going to go extinct?
If the polar bears go extinct, the world isn't going to blast all of the mantle up in our face. Sure, other species might die, or another species might get the chance to thrive, and that animal might be better in some way. Maybe tasty.
Life will always balance. Our enemy? Well, we did a number on the earth's balance with that whole modern medicine thing. But end-game, balance will be achieved one way or the other.
So what is our enemy? Ourselves. We didn't beat the odds, we'll only be an example of balance from within - we'll push our population to the point that a single, even small-scale disaster will result in the deaths and misfortune of millions and millions, all because we'll be so dependent on each other, and have little in the way of parity for resources since all available resources will be on tap constantly.
And that's still natural balance. The earth can only support so much life, and we'll either end up pushing other creatures to extinction as we expand, or we'll crush ourselves.
Life on Earth will always be constantly checked and in balance. Balance might not happen immediately, but in terms of life on Earth, it happens pretty damn fast. Some other species will thrive in the absence of one, and a species that depended on one might die, and then a new competitor for the other now thriving species will come and keep population in check.
World keeps on spinning, and numerous species will go extinct, all without our input.
In short - fuck all the environmentalist hippies. We have one thing to worry about: what are we going to do to keep on living, and that includes making sure we have enough food and resources for our numbers. Don't worry, eventually a great portion of us will be killed either directly by nature or indirectly through famine, in due time men.. in due time.
Yeah I basically agree with your outlook on what you said. A thought I sometimes have is that the human race may, through technology, hopefully be able to build for itself a new environment with which to supply its basic needs, so that we can better thrive as an overpopulated species while expanding to new planets -- if possible.
0roo0roo
No Lifer
- Sep 21, 2002
- 64,795
- 84
- 91
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12738644
don't worry.. theres always a new kind of bear to eat your face off.
eventually
http://mulaz.org/blog/wp-conte...2008/07/manbearpig.jpg
don't worry.. theres always a new kind of bear to eat your face off.
eventually
http://mulaz.org/blog/wp-conte...2008/07/manbearpig.jpg
Yes, why care about other species at all? It's not like those species are contributing anything to our ecosystem; nor would it be troubling if species started dying off - that couldn't possibly be a sign of troubled times for humans. Even if 4 billion humans die due to some environmental crap, who cares? The rest live - such is evolution. Survival of the fittest. We'd just be stronger as a species. In fact, if we all went on a killing spree right now, why would that be bad? It just would be evolution. Animals kill each other constantly. My male cat often beats up my female cat, therefore it's natural to beat up females. I'm going to go home and beat one up right now. If she complains, I'll just tell her it's evolution and who cares?
Our technology and knowledge is capable of solving certain problems quicker and more efficiently than natural selection is able. The reason we keep these people alive is with the hope that someday there will be a cure for their ailment which will allow them to lead a normal life. The probability of that happening with the technological innovation is far greater than eliminating the problem by natural selection.
When human beings become apathetic to life (their own, as well as other organic existences), they strangely begin to incorporate human philosophies into natural law. This is essentially what allowed someone like Hitler (I apologize on behalf of Godwin
) to enact mass genocide/euthanasia on certain demographics. I don't hold Darwin, or evolution, personally responsible for this; I think that the fault is a general lack of holism in analysis of the value of life.Whatever you will say about human involvement or interference in natural methods, I think it's critical to understand that human knowledge/awareness is a consequence of the very process that we try to "correct." In other words, saving genetically disadvantaged humans or other species from death or extinction, is not unnatural, but a product of our evolutionary development. Our intelligence and emotional capacities are perfectly fit for solving problems in a far more expedient manner than nature could ever hope for.
Following from reason, we should gather that life holds "value," whether divine or not, because of our comprehensive abilities. Therefore, we should do whatever we can to benefit life of all forms (human, animal, environment) simply because we have the ability to hold it in great respect. Viewing existence with a singular philosophy (only emotionally, only quantitatively) will bring about a general detachment from what it means to be human. An extreme on either end simply misses the point, and brings about silly questions like "why don't we just let the sick die" or "why save endangered species."
With great ability, comes great responsibility.
Red Squirrel
No Lifer
The reason it's a big deal is because we are causing it. So they are trying to say we need to stop polluting etc... At this point though, it's too late. All logic is thrown out the window, only money makes decisions. It's not cost efficient to change our ways, so it will never happen. If we stopped using gas completely it would probably be enough to make a difference, but may be too late either way.
Some of these endangered species are also because of overhunting. For example, pandas, whales are victim of this. Polar bears are mostly affected by global warming I think... maybe hunting as well.
Sadly, a greater portion of humans are very selfish and don't care about other species then our own.
Some of these endangered species are also because of overhunting. For example, pandas, whales are victim of this. Polar bears are mostly affected by global warming I think... maybe hunting as well.
Sadly, a greater portion of humans are very selfish and don't care about other species then our own.
destrekor
Lifer
- Nov 18, 2005
- 28,799
- 359
- 126
do it.
While obviously your post is exaggerating the concept, tone it down a bit and I still will agree. The whole humans killing humans thing, however, is the most retarded bonus that has come with being conscious and thinking about things. We're idiots, and if we can't get over that hurdle, we're screwed like no other.
But moving on, it is about survival of the fittest. Without our wonderful technology, if we had to live off nature, 1/10 humans would probably be able to survive, if that. But that's the point of our abilities. We aren't gifted in any way, we have nothing special, other than our minds. Our body, well it's average on all fronts. Granted, having all of the features we have, is what helps put us where we are today. That average concept is also what makes us pretty hardy (the fit ones, at least) and able to adapt very well.
There is no rule of Life saying play nice or die. Not at all saying we could kill off half of the animals living on earth, not counting all the other species of life. BUT... about the only reason we should give any rats ass about what is happening to other lifeforms, is what that might mean about the environment for humans in the future. Most other species are going to act as an early warning for humans, as few species of life can adapt to a changing environment - most depend on extremely specific conditions.
However, the thing is... the only worry we need to have is about the signals regarding the environment and the changes that must be happening, as that may have an impact on human life. Any life that finds itself on the brink of extinction, why do we need to worry? I say that, because that is the crucial part of the ecosystem most people are forgetting: life will go on. When you have certain species, they tend to dominate that land. If you open that land up, other species WILL move on, as now they may not have the competitor there, and they themselves are more adaptable to the local environmental changes. When that happens, now they flourish, and likely another species, in time, will come in to challenge.
Evolution and adaptation are also tightly synced with opportunity. It is likely that evolution rarely happens without a dire need to adapt, because the first offspring of a creature starting the chain of events for evolution, which will have a mutation of some sort, will likely be shunned by the rest of its species. Unless, it is one of the few ones surviving in the region, and any remaining of the species might mate for the sole reason of... well I guess you are the last one left, gotta mate I guess, or, they identify that one is surviving the environment far better than the rest, which will equate to dominance - depending on the style of the species involved (like tribal, herds with a leader, etc). Not going to go any more in depth into that, pretty pointless.
Originally posted by: RapidSnail
Our technology and knowledge is capable of solving certain problems quicker and more efficiently than natural selection is able. The reason we keep these people alive is with the hope that someday there will be a cure for their ailment which will allow them to lead a normal life. The probability of that happening with the technological innovation is far greater than eliminating the problem by natural selection.
When human beings become apathetic to life (their own, as well as other organic existences), they strangely begin to incorporate human philosophies into natural law. This is essentially what allowed someone like Hitler (I apologize on behalf of Godwin
Whatever you will say about human involvement or interference in natural methods, I think it's critical to understand that human knowledge/awareness is a consequence of the very process that we try to "correct." In other words, saving genetically disadvantaged humans or other species from death or extinction, is not unnatural, but a product of our evolutionary development. Our intelligence and emotional capacities are perfectly fit for solving problems in a far more expedient manner than nature could ever hope for.
Following from reason, we should gather that life holds "value," whether divine or not, because of our comprehensive abilities. Therefore, we should do whatever we can to benefit life of all forms (human, animal, environment) simply because we have the ability to hold it in great respect. Viewing existence with a singular philosophy (only emotionally, only quantitatively) will bring about a general detachment from what it means to be human. An extreme on either end simply misses the point, and brings about silly questions like "why don't we just let the sick die" or "why save endangered species."
With great ability, comes great responsibility.
Yeah, I'm not not sharing the same views.
We should most definitely hold onto the notion that HUMAN life has value. It's our own damn species, we should care about the survival of our species.
Side-stepping a bit, the survival of our species, which leads to that survival of the fittest philosophy, once led to eugenics. Hitler wasn't the first to believe in eugenics, but he was the first following the philosophical eugenics movement to put it into play.
Big names in the US also believed in eugenics in the 1920s and 30s, the idea of selective breeding and trying to weed out the weak genes. But after the Holocaust, well... everyone who supported eugenics was now turning around and asking "what's eugenics? :gasp: can't believe people would believe in such a thing!"
Morality has been both a blessing and a curse for humanity. It helped get us to where we are today, but... well, look where we are today. Could we be better as a species? I certainly argue we could. Healthcare could be less of an issue if some major genetic diseases weren't in the breeding pool any more.
The only thing I'd argue in favor of doing anything about that, is genetic therapy. Parents plan on having kids, or wife is pregnant, but the family has a history of certain genetic diseases... do some genetic therapy, and have the kid born without a single disease the family has in the bloodline. Just like abortion, that kind of topic has some heavy morality concerns, but is minimal in scope since it's just not a pressing concern due to lack of technology as of today. In the future, when the possibility becomes there, it'll be a shitstorm of ethical and morality debates. Blame religion on that one. Good in history, worthless today. ahem, moving on.
But on to all life has "value". Bull. Life has life, and there is one purpose in life. Make more life. Some do this peacefully, some make more life by invading other organisms. Sometimes, again, without ill effect, or even beneficially, but sometimes with dire consequences for the organism it infects.
Does a virus have value? Bacterial organisms that make spores and/or toxins that infect organisms?
Note: I am far from stating viruses and bacteria are worthless. In fact, it's the best damn thing life ever invented. The perfect population control tool. When a very potent virus comes around, and it finds a suitable target that also has extensive population density, well... that little bug says SCORE. However, we are even now beginning to devise ways to get around that problem, and plagues/pandemics will likely never again cause the kind of devastation to the human population that they once were capable of. That's a huge concern, because that was the last great life threat. Now all we can truly worry about (never stop worrying about anything, that's what the scientists do so we can keep living life with little worry), is the Earth itself. Weather and violence from below (or space) are really the only hope of bringing out population down, unless one last bug comes around and that is able to spread fast enough before we can invent something with which it can be combated.
However... this whole morality thing has led to that pressing feeling that all life is important. Life is only important in so far that it can support other life. But we should always put our needs above any other creatures, because the ecosystem will balance itself out. There are plenty of creatures that don't have large populations, that easily could if given the opportunity.
We needn't really worry about the ecosystem one bit, but the main concern will be the environment, as all environments contribute to the rest of the world essentially. The atmosphere, global temperature, local weather patterns, can all be effected by a change in one region.
That's the pressing concern about the ice caps. Those go, and the world will be a lot different. Don't worry about the polar bears, worry about what is causing the polar bears their problems.
But the hippy-ism of being radical about animals and whatnot. Who the hell cares. They are not concerns. Oh they look cute, oh their animals, we love all animals! Bah. Worthless and those people wouldn't survive in nature as they'd be too sickened to hurt an animal, and they'd die.
But short point - animals are going to go extinct. We are also going to indirectly cause some of those extinctions, maybe even directly. But our continued life, the way we currently know it, will have to continue if we want to progress at all as a species. Lose energy, we lose research. We backtrack. Pointless for us, just because we wanted to save some damn animals. So drill in Alaska, in the Arctic, put those pipelines there. Do what we can to progress and continue to advance, just so long as we can maintain the environment at an acceptable level. However, that acceptable level, for us, may impact some species. Other species will replace them.
Also, note - while I do find it quite plausible we are encouraging global climate change, no way in hell is it only because of us. Remember, the world didn't always have permanent ice caps. Technically we are still in a true ice age, as the real ice ages were defined by the presence of polar ice caps. The current alignment of the tectonic plates might have something to do with how they have been persistent, but those ice caps won't always be there.
Hell - look at Venus and Mars. Even if they once harbored some kind of life, it doesn't appear they ever harbored large lifeforms, anything that could have any impact. Both were pretty similar to Earth.
However, on their own, they suffered massive changes. Venus used to have a normal atmosphere, but the atmosphere began trapping massive amounts of greenhouse gasses, and continued to build, and now it has an atmospheric pressure where standing on the surface would be equatable to standing at the deepest point in the ocean.
Mars had a comparable atmosphere, but some CO2 got locked up in ice caps (frozen CO2), while the rest of the atmosphere completely disappeared, floated away if you will.
That's just to drive home the fact that whatever is going to happen on the planet, is going to happen, period. We may have the ability to alter the speed at which anything happens, but it will eventually happen regardless.
Sure, we may want to stave off any catastrophe for as long as we can, because that may mean a longer presence for humans on Earth. End goal though, we need to get our asses off this rock. As an intelligent species, we cannot lock ourselves up to one planet. If anything catastrophic happens, our species is gone and our existence proves worthless. Move off into space, into multiple colonies, multiple planets if possible, then if anything happens, other humans are still there to preserve the continued survival, and pass on knowledge learned from any mistakes.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter