Evolution of the world

[emoloz]

Well i have had a really good strange think today in utter depth about this topic. What do you think about the evolution of the world basically. We used to be all cavemen and women and sharing stuff and now we have to worm to earn something that doesn't really make sence. Money.

Whats your views?

Mine is i think were a bit stupid to be honest because how on Earth has the world turned like this. All this hierarchy business and stuff. Its a load of rubbish if you actually think about it yet we have to accept it to get on with life and the world.

Like why should be work stupid long hours just so we can have a roof over our heads for a few hours of the day?

Makes no sense to me. Yet we have to accept it because otherwise were doomed.

[beautiful_death]

I really do think that we humans have decayed into capitalist slaves. It's a sad reality, really. And when you see people who are trying to go against the grain, they get severly punished for it. Just look at the fate of people who live off the land autonomously...."free trade" policies such as NAFTA destroy their ways of life in the never-ending quest for the almighty dollar.

We are all slaves to money 'till death. Sad, but true.

[earthforge]

Ah, capitalist times.

Blame the government.

Yes, we are supposedly evolved, but we are not. A recommendation I'd like to make is Star Trek: First Contact. Proves that even in the future we are obsessed with things like revenge, yet we still can get past them. Hierarchy was made for a different time. It is a form of the strongest survive. Well, that's just going to be everywhere on a basic level.

I'll post more tomorrow.

[speedphantom]

Well being the wealthy rapper you are I'm sure you're happy about it all XD.

It does suck how money rules though, when people will put their own money making ahead of the good of the world.

[Thantos-Espada]

at the end of the day, we're now screwing our planet over.


If we don't serious re design the world its gonna crumble under us and finally we'll be total screwed.


Due to the ozone issue there's more chance of insanly strong storms and typhoons...


Due to nuclear power and how insane countrys are becoming with their millitary. although it doesnt look it, im sure that there are countrys out their just waiting for a war to break out

[Frosted Heart]

Remember guys, this is the debates forum. A little more thought in your posts would be nice.

- FH

[speedphantom]

Climate change is the most immediate issue. Everyone's too worried about money to actually make a proper attempt to salvage the earth.

Nuclear threats don't really exist IMO since no country is going to launch a nuke and destroy a city and its surroundings. No country can afford to do that nowadays since all their economies are linked by trade, money again!

Way of life too is what Loz mentioned. Absolutely agree. Everything's about work and not about living. People just don't seem to be enjoying themselves when they have to work crappy jobs for a living. Working to live not living to live ><

I'd try and have some sorta life where I enjoy myself as much as possible and still not be broke but the world just has to be structured in this way ><

[emoloz]

I so agree about the climate change. Oh theres millions of meetings about how we can battle climate change. Ok then yeah fair enough so what are we doing? Erm OMG THE ECOMONY ITS GOING TO GO DOWN NEXT YEAR.

Right so did that answer my question? Nope.

I am so agreeing with that. I wish we could just all forget about money and just be happier. Holidays and stuff for free. Shouldn't have to work and get stressed and have all these life crisis's and what not. We should just live life to the full and not worry about stuff. Were only making ourselves ill because we have to worryu about everything:

Bills, emotions, death , if we will go on holiday.

Why can't we just jet off and not worry.

[Malaena]

Some form of currency has always made the world go round... I don't think society would be able to function without it.

Without some sort of motivation to do something we would be reduced to sloth.

Technological advances are made because they make money. The healthcare system doesn't exist to help you, it exists to make money. All the awesome stuff we have now is because of money.

Would you spend hours upon hours researching and testing something to get no reward from it? I don't think so...I sure wouldn't.

It would be nice if we could get away from the motivation of reward, but I believe human beings are selfish by nature (I'm a psychology student, try to guess which theory I like! lol), a person will not do something unless there is something in it for them.

On the climate issue...I side with the genius George Carlin. To paraphrase "Are we so arrogant to think we can eff up something so huge, so old, so much greater than us? We are a disease...earth will shake us off like a case of the fleas." Now I don't necessarily think humanity is a disease...but if you look at it like the Earth is a large organism, then we do fit the definition of a "parasite".

parasite
1. an organism that lives on or in an organism of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.

Okay, I'm done for now...I'm such a cheery happy person, aren't I? lol

[speedphantom]

I'd agree with humans being a disease. Its not like we're doing any good and we're not going to disappear anytime soon.

If you look at the history of the world, you get animals, more and more new animals. Its not like the animals destroyed forests, blocked rivers, changed the whole environment to suit them. They just live with whatever they need. Humans are just weird, needing to build lots of stuff which isn't entirely necessary for survival. Its like we're programmed weirdly compared with EVERYTHING else on this planet.

Everything else just does what it needs to, we just screw everything up. Most intelligent things on the planet perhaps but intelligence isn't the most smart or logical. Everything is changed to suit us only not the planet, quite selfish of us but if you ask anyone if they'd rather go live somewhere without electricity, running water and other basic things we consider normal they would most definitely not agree.

With the jobs thing I think that should be changed, not sure how but somehow ><.

[earthforge]

You may think humans are a disease, but were not.

Yes, we are dragged down by the multitude of cruel and disgusting people, but does that mean we should give into Nihilism?

NO!

We have issues that need to be solved, and we can't get into a depression about it. So Bush decided to make war on Iraq. So Hitler was allowed to rise to power. We cannot change what has been done, but we can make as many ammends as we can!

We should first cut back Greenhouse gas emissions in the US. We are the only country who hasn't, so we gotta fix that. That will help stop global warming. Then, we should help the species that are dying up in the north. Try to make some ammends, and we shall help them until the effects of Global Warming slow down (2100 or so.)

We should also begin plans for making a Mars base. Not a moon base, a Mars base (argue with me all ya want, but it still is a better idea.) We need to get to Mars, because it is a stepping stone in civilization! Just like going to the New World! Colombus never said "it's too dangerous" and chickened out. Risk! Risk is our business!

Yes, we have had our dictators and tyrants. But will we let that stop the civilization stop it's progress? That's signing our death warrant!

[Unicorn]

I think what speedy means is that the human population is fast overburdening the planet's ability to support us. With no natural predators and science / medicine ensuring that we live longer and have larger families, resources have to be spent to ensure we can be maintained that way.

So humans clear forests for houses and agricultural purposes. Leaving the native flora and fauna displaced / destroyed. When the local wildlife wander into housing estates because they simply have nowhere else to find food, they get hunted or chased away.

Scientists have long recognised that this planet's resources are being drained more rapidly than can be repaired. Also that humans are crowding each other out. Hence the research into finding other planets to live on. In a way, this depresses me. Anime shows entire planets being destroyed with one special move by one uber-badguy. Here.... we're doing the same to Earth, but its a long slow rotting death.

@ Emoloz - currency has been around for ages, just in different formats. barter trade, seashells, paper, metal, etc... Working conditions in the past is frankly more brutal, IMHO. I'm a soft female and can't handle hauling rocks to build grand structures. Much prefer my desk job atm. :glomp

[Rain]

speed talked about it earlier so i have to lol at societies mindset, its hilarious that people in general think "screw the earth i want money"

although i could care less about having loads and loads of money, it doesn't really bug me that people want money, or even that people ignore the enviroment.

We, as a society have no clue what doing something may do to the enviroment, or what the consequences of certain actions may be. We know just enough to know that we know nothing:D

eventually it will all even out (Que será, será) so there no use in worrying about it

[earthforge]

Unicorn: Predators? So what? Many people are killed each day just from an incurable disease, so honestly, do we need predators? Anime now? Good grief. Anime has nothing to do with the real world. Any connection is futile.

So what if we have a big poplation? All the more incentive to go to Mars and colonize it. Are you suggesting we need to sterilize our people for population control? Forgive me if I overexaggerate on your part, but let's face it. Is there any other way to control the population? No. So I suggest we spread our population.

Yes, you might say we are crowding out the universe. But there is a fine line, though invisible to you, between spreading luike a plague and exploring.

But your depression is a form of Nihilism that has taken control over the globe. The fear and distrust of the world getting any better is a psychological trap. Yes, we are spreading out and using resources. We can fix that (if governments stop electing conservatives... :chainsaw.) If the population can get it's act together, we can stop Darfur. We can reduce the resource consumption for more efficient strategy.

But I am proposing solutions. That's what this thread should be about, not Nihilism. Otherwise, this culture is already too far gone.

Disclaimer: I am not insulting anyone in this post. Merely trying to raise the morale of the thread. But try to talk about the points I make if you wish to respond. Thank you.

[Unicorn]

Disclaimer: I am not insulting anyone in this post. Merely trying to raise the morale of the thread. But try to talk about the points I make if you wish to respond. Thank you.
Thank you. I will.

Unicorn: Predators? So what? Many people are killed each day just from an incurable disease, so honestly, do we need predators?
Flora and fauna are also killed everyday by incurable diseases. On top of that, they have natural predators to keep the population level in check. What I'm trying to point out is that humans are overpopulating Earth beyond what nature intended, and therefore everything else (native flora, fauna and natural resources) are negatively affected.

Anime now? Good grief. Anime has nothing to do with the real world. Any connection is futile.
I know. Anime and Hollywood have desensitized alot of people (even me) to the eventual demise of Planet Earth. What are your thoughts about my point that Planet Earth is suffering a long slow rotting death, unlike Anime / Hollywood where it explodes dramatically in a spray of rocks?

So what if we have a big poplation? All the more incentive to go to Mars and colonize it. Are you suggesting we need to sterilize our people for population control? Forgive me if I overexaggerate on your part, but let's face it. Is there any other way to control the population? No. So I suggest we spread our population.
I would prefer if you didn't over-exaggerate for me, thanks.

Ways to control the population? A few ways. Government policies. Personal choices. Just my personal thoughts, is all.

China introduced the 1-child policy because they recognised that their land and resources cannot support anything more. Cruel to families? Maybe. However I think it is somewhat fair because each family would still have a child.

Australia (and a few countries) introduced the baby bonus, which is a payout to help new mothers settle in their new baby with nappies, clothes, food and etc. Some women have pounced on it as a form of income. Need a few thousand dollars? Breed. I bet $$ that their kids will grow up with the same mentality. Vicious cycle continues. If those women were to think of the environment more and the money less, perhaps it would be better overall?

Yes, you might say we are crowding out the universe. But there is a fine line, though invisible to you, between spreading luike a plague and exploring.
Refer to above point. You are suggesting colonizing other planets and 'spreading our population'. After Mars? What else? That is akin to swarms of locusts going from one farm to another, wiping out anything edible and moving on. Exploring, on the other hand, IMO is sending space shuttles to other parts of the Universe mainly to see what's there, but the humans remain on Earth to admire and learn from far far away.

But your depression is a form of Nihilism that has taken control over the globe. The fear and distrust of the world getting any better is a psychological trap. Yes, we are spreading out and using resources. We can fix that (if governments stop electing conservatives... :chainsaw.) If the population can get it's act together, we can stop Darfur. We can reduce the resource consumption for more efficient strategy.
I strongly disagree that I'm fearful and distrustful. I (and dare say everyone else in BA) will be long dead of old age before Earth crumbles into a wasteland.

I am depressed that alot of people have similar 'oooh there's plenty of other planets to live on' thoughts and how it relates to the long-term future of Earth. I agree with you that Governments need to make country-wide policies to help the environment (eg. 1 or 2 child policies, becoming greener, stop pollution etc). True, we are more aware of recycling and biodegradable items, saving endangered animals etc. However I disagree that we can reduce resource consumption if the human population booms. A bigger population requires more homes, food, water and fuel, no matter how carefully these are rationed. How do you suggest this can be done without impacting on our current resources? My suggestion is to try and reduce the population somehow by families having less children voluntarily.

But I am proposing solutions. That's what this thread should be about, not Nihilism. Otherwise, this culture is already too far gone.
Solutions by colonizing other planets?

My approach is to point out what, IMHO, the current humans should consider and teach their children. So hopefully we act more responsibly and prolong the life of Planet Earth instead of 'oh let's skip town'.

[emoloz]

@ Emoloz - currency has been around for ages, just in different formats. barter trade, seashells, paper, metal, etc... Working conditions in the past is frankly more brutal, IMHO. I'm a soft female and can't handle hauling rocks to build grand structures. Much prefer my desk job atm. :glomp

Yeah i see what you mean i just don't see why we need money to be the object we use to buy things that's all it's like an excuse. Don't have money life is crap. Shouldn't be that way you know. Should be otherways around problems and stuff. Like debt and all this. Why do we need debt its like another added stressor on life and if you really think about it stuff like this does make us stressed when it really doesn't need to be.

I think we should learn to live on mountains and in extremely hot places because eventually that is all we will have left to live on really. Would love to live on a mountain sounds cool. We need to learn to adapt more as well or cut down on populating the Earth.

I agree why are we just bulldosing everywhere to live. I think we should just learn to live in otherways. Now i am not being funny but some people don't even spend most of their days in a house so why do we really need them? There just an extra liberty to have. I know it sounds rational to think this but there could be otherways around it like sharing houses like when one set of people are out another could come in. The there we go saving mother Earth.

We actually need disease i know it sounds awful but without it then the world would be choc-a-bloc and we'd all be dead in a few years due to over population. I hate death and i wish there was better ways around it but sadly this is what happens and we can't do anything about it we need it.

We can't move to Mars at all its got nothing to keep us alive on it. If like me you can understand how the big bang theory works to me all the planets should be simular to Earth but a lot of them failed and died out so life on there just died. So how can we live on a planet that failed?

[Primera Espada]

Just to hit a few points here and there rather than arguing with anyone in particular:

Money is the great equalizer. Yes, I know it seems blatantly wrong at first, but remember, without money, then it is entirely up to the individual to barter their services for whatever they need. If you make shoes for a living, well, guess what. You have to trade a pair of shoes for an ear of corn. Then go trade a pair of shoes for a pig. What if the same guy has both the pig and the corn? He doesn't need TWO pairs of shoes. So instead, you have to go find someone who has something HE needs, trade them a pair of shoes for it, then trade the item to the man with the pig and corn.

Money means you can go to the same man and trade your bills for whatever you want, cause he can use those bills to trade for whatever HE wants. It takes out the painful negotiating and excessive back and forth trading. It means that person A who works really hard can get everything he needs, and person B, who works really hard at a different job, can get everything he needs, without either of them having to worry about each other has the right item for them.

Secondly,

Human beings a disease? *if* you look at the planet as an organism, yes. If you look at it as an ecosystem (what it is) then no. We're just a variable element. We're not the *only* animal that alters it's environment to suit our needs. Beaver's build dams, birds build nests, apes create rudimentary tools, elephants can knock nearly whatever they want out of their way. We do what *every* animal does, which is adapt to it's environment in order to survive. We, unlike other animals, have the capability of using higher intellect and larger cooperation in order to achieve things on a scale unthinkable to lower life forms.

Third,

The climate change thing is, at the moment, silly in my opinion. Scientists still can't agree on if we're having a global warming, or a global cooling, or if global cooling is a sign of global warming. And no, this isn't some bland "I'm taking what I hear in snippets from TV" analysis, this is just a simplified explanation of a rather in depth analysis, particularly focusing on the issues surrounding the kyoto protocol.

I mean, we can *all* agree, pollution is bad, and we should always try and limit pollution. However, I dislike the scare tactic being used currently, especially when the goals of such a tactic seem to attack particular economic powerhouses, while ignoring the other top contributers to greenhouse gas emissions.

But, as a whole, due to the rising cost of gas worldwide, more and more alternative fuels are being investigated, which also are often cleaner. This is the trend for *many* countries, and while the effects are not seen yet, there are clear indications that progress will be made. I don't think that it's a real "freak out" type issue.

Fourth, overpopulation.

Ha.

Just because we're not efficient at utilizing space and resources doesn't mean this planet can't handle us. You could fit all of the United States population into 15 states if we had to, with no real problem outside of social issues, crime rate, etc. Look at China. So much of their population is located on the eastern third of the country.

Population isn't the issue, it's population density, and environmental efficiency.

[earthforge]

Primera: Thank you. At least someone else here isn't in Nihilism.

Anyhow, the technical term is "global clinmate change." But whether it's cooling or warming matters less than anything.

For lurkers who don't believe this:
Global "climate change" is HERE. I suggest you go out and buy "An Inconvenient Truth." And all scientists do agree with it! Apparently, politics is slighting the view. But it is here, and animals are going to die for it. People who believe in this infuriate me by mentioning it doesn't exist. Face the facts! Scientists in science publications all say it's true-- OH! Pardon. I just realized Science is considered liberal now.

Anyhow, why the population? Seriously, I don't see a problem with the populations size. Of course, I do live in California. Why don't you move here if the population is so big where you live? :p

But honestly, population control is just silly.

But your seeing humankind akin to a disease is one point of view, and a very Nihilistic one to boot. Humanity can get it's ass together. It got it's ass together in the space race. It got it's ass together for dealing with Hitler (after some encouragement from the Japanese :roll .) Were we a disease in those times? No. Humanity can evolve. But it is Nihilistic people such as yourself who are preventing the progress of this world.

Why get depressed?! Do something to make this world better. If you care about the environment, then read the green checklist off of Al Gores page and do as it suggests. But I see that the only way to solve your Nihilism is to do things to help the world.

And do not be opposed to space! For god's sake, what pisses me off the most in the world is the people who say we don't need to go into space. But as I said earlier, and also to qoute William Shatner before he became a hambone, "Risk! Risk is our buisiness!"

Now responding to Unicorn's points:

Predators: Excuse me? Besides the bird flu, I don't know what you are talking about. And any incurable disease that affects an animal is going to affect humans! We're both eukaryotic creatures, so do you think there is much difference?! Ask a bioligist if what you're saying is true.

Mars: What is there to wipe out on Mars? A few bedrock stones? The Beagle 2? Pathfinder? Spirit and Oppurtunity? Seriously, I honestly don't think the population has to do with space travel. The chinese could migrate to the moon for all I care.

And why should we stay at home and just admire the clouds? We are explorers, damn it!!! Do you think Columbus just decided "oh, I'll just admire the sea and edge of the world" ? No! Perhaps you should adapt an attitude other than that, because that is Nihilism. The fear nothing will ever get better. And you are thinking that way about science.

Spreading to Mars: I do agree we should fix problems at home. But that is not exactly my fort. I am not a gliobal warming scientist. I admire them. But I am suggesting that similtaneously with fixing global climate change, man begins to use spacecraft and other methods of going to Mars.

You are focusing on present concerns, which I agree are of the utmost importance. But we need to think of the future as well! I have a vision. I have had this vision. And it is people like you who try to ignore visions and push the future off. The future is important!

My area is not economics, I fear. If that is what you want to argue about, I am not that person.

Again, I am not suggesting we just move to Mars. I think we should pull ourselves together and begin efforts. But not forget our current issues.

I would like to thank you. You provide me with a perspective opposed to my ideas.

Disclaimer: Neg rep me and prepare for the path to Kal'Hyah. Otherwise, if you wish to argue with me, have some good retorts (I'm not directly referring to Unicorn.) And please, I am not insulting. I am merely passionate (crappy excuse, I know but I'm wiped out.)

[Primera Espada]

o.O Um... earthforge...
An inconvenient truth is laughable to a large amount of the scientific community. Not a majority, no, but still a large part. The media is really working it over though, giving it awards and all sorts of things. Very political.

Of course these days ecology *is* political.

If you're not saving the planet, your killing it, or something like that.

I'm all for global awareness of ecological needs but I dunno, the whole thing seems too wrapped with politics for my tastes. Gore was really floundering for a long while, then suddenly he comes out with this and is on top of the world again. I'm half surprised he didn't try to run in the 08 election coming up.

Again though, it's not like we don't recognize the problem. Plenty of people argue over what's causing the problem, but we can't really eliminate (nor should we) all the causes. We can, however, limit the effect it has. And that's what we're doing.

[Unicorn]

We do what *every* animal does, which is adapt to it's environment in order to survive.
Correct. We’re possibly also the only animal that forcibly crowds every other species out of their habitat (I could be wrong). Like you, I dislike the scare tactics used in politics. However the encouragement to use environmentally-friendly items, and the fact that countries have to sign promises to cut down greenhouse gases… means that we recognise that Earth is being negatively affected somehow.

But honestly, population control is just silly.
Any reason why you say this?

Predators: Excuse me? Besides the bird flu, I don't know what you are talking about.
When I say predators, I mean other things that eat us. Like sharks and tigers and wild dogs. Whom we hunt down and kill when they mistake us for prey.

And any incurable disease that affects an animal is going to affect humans!
Some diseases don’t. Some do. What should asking a Biologist prove?

Mars: What is there to wipe out on Mars? … Seriously, I honestly don't think the population has to do with space travel…. But I am suggesting that similtaneously with fixing global climate change, man begins to use spacecraft and other methods of going to Mars. Again, I am not suggesting we just move to Mars.
You first brought up the suggestion of colonizing Mars, then you’re now suggesting otherwise. Please clarify: I believe that you support the idea of colonizing other planets?

You are focusing on present concerns, which I agree are of the utmost importance. But we need to think of the future as well! I have a vision. I have had this vision. And it is people like you who try to ignore visions and push the future off. The future is important!
I have a vision too. If we continue thinking this way (humans first!), Earth will continue to die a slow rotting death. If we take long-term actions now to try and limit our negative impact on Earth, humans many generations in the future can still live here instead of being forced to seek new land (planets).

Long-term planning is necessary. To use an analogy – without saving $ now, one can’t buy a house / car in the future.

And why should we stay at home and just admire the clouds? We are explorers, damn it!!! Do you think Columbus just decided "oh, I'll just admire the sea and edge of the world" ? No! Perhaps you should adapt an attitude other than that, because that is Nihilism. The fear nothing will ever get better. And you are thinking that way about science.
I have never protested against exploring. Just colonization. Nor did I suggest we should only study clouds from our shoreline. I support learning things beyond the shoreline, but not colonization. Where do you get these statements from?

Again, I do not fear that nothing will ever get better. The current movements to limit further damage to the planet gives me hope. I simply fear the ‘humans first’ attitudes that do not regard the environment around them, and the passing on of these attitudes to future generations.

My area is not economics, I fear. If that is what you want to argue about, I am not that person.
Simply put - do you agree or disagree that more people require more resources to support them?

[earthforge]

Any reason why you say this?

I actually apoligise for that statement. I just find the idea silly because I do not see it in the US much. I like to call it Puritanism (yep, we're just stupid puritans.) But I just don't want the idea to be so overrated that certain people are just killed off (AKA China.) But I agree that birth control is not a bad thing. It's better for the child, it's better for the society, and it's better for the mother.

When I say predators, I mean other things that eat us. Like sharks and tigers and wild dogs. Whom we hunt down and kill when they mistake us for prey.

Yeah, getting back to the initial point, I don't see that "not having predators" as an issue. It's survival instinct. Talk to an anthropologist, because you are lacking support to state that having no predators is bad.

And we are different from mosqitos and animals that grow out of control if they have no predators. We are human beings, supposedly gifted with a complex and intricate brain. We are animals, but we can turn away from animal instincts. Therefore, you cannot prove that we will go out of control because of no predators. Hell, we have gone over 4 centuries without predators and didn't spin totally into chaos.

By the way, do you support the idea of a Sumatran/Siberian tiger killing one man and injuring two more just because it was hunting and got out of it's cage? (And it was not the humans fault here.) Because that is what occured four hours ago in San Fransisco.

Because that would solve your problem with humanity perfectly.

Some diseases don’t. Some do. What should asking a Biologist prove?

All diseases that affect animals will affect us eventually. Take the bird flu. The reason why everyone is so afraid of it is because it affected birds so violently and we consume those birds. But you won't listen to me most likely, so I suggest you ask a biologist. But even when you ask a person of many credentials, you still might not believe it.

You first brought up the suggestion of colonizing Mars, then you’re now suggesting otherwise. Please clarify: I believe that you support the idea of colonizing other planets?

What I meant was that we should begin efforts to colonize Mars, not jump on there right away.

I have a vision too. If we continue thinking this way (humans first!), Earth will continue to die a slow rotting death. If we take long-term actions now to try and limit our negative impact on Earth, humans many generations in the future can still live here instead of being forced to seek new land (planets).

Right. So I suggest we change that path of a slllllooowwww, rottttinnnngggg death. Basically, kick out all of the conservative idealists from positions of power and get our act together. Unfortunately, this will not occur until Bush is out of office. So you have to bear with the crap a bitr longer.

I think there are some things we can do immediately to change global warming. Basically, I think our plan of action is to do all things to stop the rising of global warming and then salvage the situation. I am not disagreeing with you.

I am just trying to point out that as we salvage the situation of global warming, solve the Darfur conflict, and deal with present day shit America could have stopped, we can begin efforts of advancing our culture.

Long-term planning is necessary. To use an analogy – without saving $ now, one can’t buy a house / car in the future.

I couldn't agree more.

I have never protested against exploring. Just colonization. Nor did I suggest we should only study clouds from our shoreline. I support learning things beyond the shoreline, but not colonization. Where do you get these statements from?

A simple derivation from your statements.

Well, then you definitely would have supported Colombus at that time, don't ya think? (here my sarcasm.) I believe in the journey to new places. Of course, how will we learn if we don't actually land on the planet?

And then, wouldn't it be wonderful to live on another planet? It's a stepping stone in civilization. Just like the journey to the new world!

Again, I do not fear that nothing will ever get better. The current movements to limit further damage to the planet gives me hope. I simply fear the ‘humans first’ attitudes that do not regard the environment around them, and the passing on of these attitudes to future generations.

Heh. "One generation of idiots is enough," eh?

I do not believe humans are first. I agree completely that we should solve environmental problems first. I am not a conservative nutzoid ranting against the existance of global warming. But you are mistaking my belief in the future for a belief humans should rule the galaxy. To qoute from Star Trek: The Animated Series, "No one rules the galaxy" (I love that xmas present.)

But you have to have hope, or else you are too far gone. Do you think it's easy for me sitting under Bush's "tyranny" over the US as he is "occupying" Iraq? It isn't! But the future is what I believe in, and it helps in this dark time.

Simply put - do you agree or disagree that more people require more resources to support them?

It really depends on what country you are in. In America, too little market value and resources are put in supporting children, or basically, the future. The adults (AKA gen-xers) are spending it all on themselves.

Also, the kids are put through an experience that ruins them forever: middle-school. The teachers have absolutely no credentials, and the kids are psychologically manipulated. When they get to high-school, their enthusiasm is null. Then the get teachers that require deconstructionist fucked up essays. By the time the kids get out of high-school, they have either succeeded through being a successful suck-up, or they have failed the system because they cannot work through the system.

[Unicorn]

And we are different from mosqitos and animals that grow out of control if they have no predators. We are human beings, supposedly gifted with a complex and intricate brain. We are animals, but we can turn away from animal instincts. Therefore, you cannot prove that we will go out of control because of no predators. Hell, we have gone over 4 centuries without predators and didn't spin totally into chaos.
to clarify: out of control means that the population booms to dangerous
plague proportions.

Although you do have a point. Constant wars and natural disasters (and etc) keep our population in check (so far).

By the way, do you support the idea of a Sumatran/Siberian tiger killing one man and injuring two more just because it was hunting and got out of it's cage? (And it was not the humans fault here.) Because that is what occured four hours ago in San Fransisco.

Because that would solve your problem with humanity perfectly.
No. Top-of-food-chain predators don't usually get caged / shot / killed for every meal they consume. They just go on eating those smaller / weaker than them, because they can. I'll classify this as 'an accident', similar to someone bitten by a venomous snake or spider. Or a fatal car crash. Or a robbery gone wrong.

All diseases that affect animals will affect us eventually. Take the bird flu. The reason why everyone is so afraid of it is because it affected birds so violently and we consume those birds. But you won't listen to me most likely, so I suggest you ask a biologist. But even when you ask a person of many credentials, you still might not believe it.
And mad cow disease etc. Australia recently had a serious case of horse flu but there were no warnings for the public to stay away from horses. I agree that you may have a valid point. I would wholeheartedly agree with you if you said "some do and some don't" instead of "all". However I don't know any biologists and am unable to cross-check, instead relying on my library of David Attenborough's nature documentaries and National Geographic magazines.

Unfortunately, this will not occur until Bush is out of office. So you have to bear with the crap a bitr longer.
Oh dear. :p how long before the next elections are called?

Well, then you definitely would have supported Colombus at that time, don't ya think? (here my sarcasm.) I believe in the journey to new places. Of course, how will we learn if we don't actually land on the planet?
I would have partially supported Columbus. He explored, true. However it was more to gain monetary, land and fame. He also colonized. Some cultures didn't seem to mind that he arrived onshore, looked around, said "okay this now mine." and proceeded to live that way. Some cultures did.

I repeat... I do not have a problem with visitors to a country who walk around, take photos, sample the local cuisine, chat to the locals and report all this on paper or film. I do mind when new arrivals come onshore, do all the above, THEN plant a flag somewhere and say 'righty-o. All this now belongs to my country and me."

And then, wouldn't it be wonderful to live on another planet? It's a stepping stone in civilization. Just like the journey to the new world!...
What I meant was that we should begin efforts to colonize Mars, not jump on there right away.
No thanks, I prefer Earth. Although there are several good points to Mars:
- the anti-gravity thing which is good for anti-diet campaigners,
- wearing those fugly head-to-toe spacesuits will completely crush the booming plastic surgery industry (yaaay).

I read somewhere (probably National Geographic) that space exploration was being increased to find alternative sources of water, because Earth was running out of fresh water. Is this theory being supported today, or are there more explanations?

I do not believe humans are first... But you are mistaking my belief in the future for a belief humans should rule the galaxy. To qoute from Star Trek: The Animated Series, "No one rules the galaxy" (I love that xmas present.)
Thanks for clarifying.

It really depends on what country you are in. In America, too little market value and resources are put in supporting children, or basically, the future. The adults (AKA gen-xers) are spending it all on themselves.
So there still are generations of 'humans first!' people? I do hope that the new government will change this mindset.

Actually my original interpretation of resources was much simpler. Food, fresh water, land.

[Guildenstern]

Haha, when I first clicked on this thread I thought it was going to be about how the earth was created. These are interesting posts.

...I was getting ready to come in here and cut the first person who even breathed the word 'intelligent design', I'm glad to see I can put the spork down and relax. >___>;;;;

[Soranushi]

Whoa that took awhile too read and I agree with Earthforge I pretty much have always thought that way. And we already have natural predators you know Our selves and Especially disease's are what keeps the population down if they never existed we would have died out long ago from over population.

You know One day I want to wake up to a Cleaner&peaceful world were all of us Humans work together not for profit but simply to better ourselves and our world.

[earthforge]

Soranushi: Heheh, kinda changed my mind there. I did some research. I agree that human's should not be allowed to breed like rabbits. Three child limits seem reasonable.

We can't really rely on diseases. Because they are things that can be cured.

And we all want to wake up to it. But the truth is that we'll have to be part of making that new world go. Which includes booting the republicans out of power.

@Unicorn: Sorry took so long.

to clarify: out of control means that the population booms to dangerous
plague proportions.

Although you do have a point. Constant wars and natural disasters (and etc) keep our population in check (so far).

Yep.

No. Top-of-food-chain predators don't usually get caged / shot / killed for every meal they consume. They just go on eating those smaller / weaker than them, because they can. I'll classify this as 'an accident', similar to someone bitten by a venomous snake or spider. Or a fatal car crash. Or a robbery gone wrong.

Well, the story kinda changed. Turns out the three fools were throwing rocks and stones at the tiget before two brothers who were friends of Sousa (one who was killed) dangled him over the ledge. The tiger leaped over the moat surrounding the cats enclosure (which was 4 ft shorter then tthe national limit) and pulled herself up using Sousa's body, ripping a large gash in his neck. She then went chasing the two brothers.

And mad cow disease etc. Australia recently had a serious case of horse flu but there were no warnings for the public to stay away from horses. I agree that you may have a valid point. I would wholeheartedly agree with you if you said "some do and some don't" instead of "all". However I don't know any biologists and am unable to cross-check, instead relying on my library of David Attenborough's nature documentaries and National Geographic magazines.

Horse flu's an oddball, because predators do not eat horses. So yes, some do and some don't. Birds, turtles, fish. If any of them get a nasty disease, it won't be good.

And here's something really scary. An ameoba that lives in hot water is coming back to Italy due to Global Warming. It has killed two people so far. What it does is that it goes into the brain and starts gnawing at it. I am not kidding you.

Oh dear. :p how long before the next elections are called?

2008 November. And Hillary has to be voted in, because Obama is another Bush waiting to happen. Again I'll explain my logic when someone posts in the political thread,

I would have partially supported Columbus. He explored, true. However it was more to gain monetary, land and fame. He also colonized. Some cultures didn't seem to mind that he arrived onshore, looked around, said "okay this now mine." and proceeded to live that way. Some cultures did.

I repeat... I do not have a problem with visitors to a country who walk around, take photos, sample the local cuisine, chat to the locals and report all this on paper or film. I do mind when new arrivals come onshore, do all the above, THEN plant a flag somewhere and say 'righty-o. All this now belongs to my country and me."

Well, as far as I see, there are no other cultures on Mars. There is evidence of life in the past, but not current life. So how I would work it if I were in charge of the mission would be to divide it among the countries that are nearing or have the ability to build space-faring equipment. However, you can't really avoid the problem of countries who get angry at not having a chance to go there.

But I do not specialize in the colonization. I specialize in the means to get to Mars.

No thanks, I prefer Earth. Although there are several good points to Mars:
- the anti-gravity thing which is good for anti-diet campaigners,
- wearing those fugly head-to-toe spacesuits will completely crush the booming plastic surgery industry (yaaay).

I suggest you read the Red Mars series. It discusses the terraforming of Mars. And now you know what I support: terraforming Mars.

You are thinking a bit too shallow about the benefits of Mars. We're not talking about Total Recall.

I read somewhere (probably National Geographic) that space exploration was being increased to find alternative sources of water, because Earth was running out of fresh water. Is this theory being supported today, or are there more explanations?

Haven't heard about it. I wonder if it's in science news, cause I have a collecton that goes back to 2000.

Thanks for clarifying.


So there still are generations of 'humans first!' people? I do hope that the new government will change this mindset.

Then Hillary must be voted in.

Actually, here it's becoming more like "males first." Awfully misogynistic society. And women are being deconstructed by groups such as rich housewives who've only popped out a baby.

Actually my original interpretation of resources was much simpler. Food, fresh water, land.[/QUOTE]

[Unicorn]

Well, the story kinda changed. Turns out the three fools were throwing rocks and stones at the tiget before two brothers who were friends of Sousa (one who was killed) dangled him over the ledge.

As I pointed out, a tragic accident. The tiger was provoked and reacted according to its nature, only to be killed.

Horse flu's an oddball, because predators do not eat horses. So yes, some do and some don't. Birds, turtles, fish. If any of them get a nasty disease, it won't be good.

There was a recent scandal in which a major Australian supermarket was putting a mix of beef and horse mince in its generic sausages. So you never know about what exactly we’re eating.

Also, I read somewhere that mad cow / sheep disease originated because humans put cheaper animal by-products in cattle and sheep feed, causing pure herbivores to become fatally ill. It was in this way that humans were affected. Makes one think… how many diseases have been initiated by humans?


And here's something really scary. An ameoba that lives in hot water is coming back to Italy due to Global Warming. It has killed two people so far. What it does is that it goes into the brain and starts gnawing at it. I am not kidding you.

It does not surprise me to learn of a brain-eating bacteria (similar to mad cow / sheep disease). There is already a flesh-eating disease called Necrotizing fasciitis. It affects humans, have killed quite a few, and initial symptoms can be mistaken for other innocent diseases.

Also refer to my thought on how many diseases have been initiated by humans?

There is evidence of life in the past, but not current life. So how I would work it if I were in charge of the mission would be to divide it among the countries that are nearing or have the ability to build space-faring equipment. However, you can't really avoid the problem of countries who get angry at not having a chance to go there.

I foresee… another massive war to reduce the human population further.

I suggest you read the Red Mars series. It discusses the terraforming of Mars. And now you know what I support: terraforming Mars. You are thinking a bit too shallow about the benefits of Mars.

Have checked it out online. The reviews for it have been pretty good, however this book is categorized under Science Fiction and Novel. If the science is as thoroughly researched as the reviewers claim it is, I’ll be waiting for National Geographic, another science journal or a respected scientist to pick up the topic.

Haven't heard about it. I wonder if it's in science news, cause I have a collecton that goes back to 2000.

Have you checked with the science news yet? Because I honestly would like to know.

Still waiting for your response to my interpretation of resources as: food, fresh water, land.

[kiera2]

Nuclear threats don't really exist IMO since no country is going to launch a nuke and destroy a city and its surroundings. No country can afford to do that nowadays since all their economies are linked by trade, money again!
The threat of nuclear war has less to do with countries than with terrorists. Governments are generally aware of the idea of MAD, and wouldn't want to incur the wrath of other nuclear powers. Whereas extremist terrorists often consider their own lives forfeit in pursuit of their cause. The real fear with of nuclear power is that the more countries that develop it under the table, the more opportunity there is for the technology to fall into the hands of people with no compunctions about using it.

Climate change is the most immediate issue. Everyone's too worried about money to actually make a proper attempt to salvage the earth.
I think too many people take this sort of viewpoint and forget that economics is not just some abstract mathematical thing invented to please rich people. A bad economy has very real, very serious consequences for everyone from the working class on up. A declining economy doesn't just mean the country is less rich, it means rising unemployment and less money to go around for those who need it to support their families.

Obviously making steps to reduce emissions and deal with climate change is a laudable goal, but it's not as simple as dropping everything and researching renewable energy. These things have to be done within the confines of a working economy, and that takes a lot of time and politics.

A society without money sounds like a nice idea in theory. So does communism.

On the climate issue...I side with the genius George Carlin. To paraphrase "Are we so arrogant to think we can eff up something so huge, so old, so much greater than us? We are a disease...earth will shake us off like a case of the fleas."
I totally agree with Carlin's view - I think it's pretty arrogant of us to consider ourselves somehow separate to the Earth's ecosystem. We're a part of the system whether we like it or not, and in the long term anything we screw up will be corrected naturally. But when we talk about climate change, we're not talking about the long term on a planetary timescale. We're talking about making the Earth unliveable for ourselves and our children. Raising the sea level by a few dozen metres may have a negligible impact on the Earth as a whole, but it'll have dire consequences for us.

[Shdo]

the reason humanity look like this today is social evolution.
a society that look like a modern society will win and outclass a society that looked like cavemans. as time move on we will see which kind of society will prevail and forever mold the human race society as a whole.