Quantcast
Humans Suck -_-

Forums - General Discussion - Humans Suck -_-

Eagle367 said:
VAMatt said:

Okay.  I'm not going to argue that humans are perfect.  We clearly are not.  But, I hold to my claim that were better off now than at any other time in human history.  

As to the premise that humans need to take care of every species on earth, I'd just have to say that I disagree.  We need to take care of ourselves, and we only need to care about other species to the extent that their survival significantly impacts our own.  And, it appears that, in most cases, those two things are not related to a large enough degree to matter.  

So 2 different things indeed. Because if you shat in your pants 12 times a day and now you do it 3, that's still not taking care of yourself

Well, I do not agree that we (humans) aren't "taking care of" ourselves.  I think we're taking great care of ourselves, as evidenced by the fact that life has continually gotten better (on average), since the beginning of human history.  We could always do better.  But, that's not the same as doing poorly.  



Around the Network
VAMatt said:
Eagle367 said:

Tell me what your metric is because my initial claim wasn't about where we are vs where we were, it's about properly handling ourselves. We can't solve simple issues with two neighbouring countries, how are we in a position to take care of every species on earth. That was my premise and you yourself are helping my case here. You're not really arguing against me here neither am I against you. We are just talking about 2 different things

Okay.  I'm not going to argue that humans are perfect.  We clearly are not.  But, I hold to my claim that were better off now than at any other time in human history.  

As to the premise that humans need to take care of every species on earth, I'd just have to say that I disagree.  We need to take care of ourselves, and we only need to care about other species to the extent that their survival significantly impacts our own.  And, it appears that, in most cases, those two things are not related to a large enough degree to matter.  

The ongoing growth in human population and resource consumption is changing the planet in fundamental ways. One consequence of this growth is the loss of biodiversity, which is typically estimated either by the net movement of species towards higher categories of extinction risk or as the rate at which species are actually going extinct. By either measure, biodiversity loss is on the rise. As species disappear we lose both known and unknown benefits they provide

Apart from the loss of richness to the human experience if ecologies are lost, there much we don't understand about the complex web of life and how it will ultimately affect us, for our own survival it is logical to maintain as much of the Worlds biodiversity as we can 




VAMatt said:
Eagle367 said:

So 2 different things indeed. Because if you shat in your pants 12 times a day and now you do it 3, that's still not taking care of yourself

Well, I do not agree that we (humans) aren't "taking care of" ourselves.  I think we're taking great care of ourselves, as evidenced by the fact that life has continually gotten better (on average), since the beginning of human history.  We could always do better.  But, that's not the same as doing poorly.  

Just because it has been true for a short time doesn't mean it will stay true, antibiotics once readily available, could now be unusable over the next decades leaving Humans again vulnerable to simple infections our ancestors died from, all this gain and loss happening in roughly 100 years, a drop in time, our food crops are constantly injected with wild genes to improve survivability of those crops, if we have no more wild varieties our very food supply is at risk over coming 100 years, taking even bees for granted has been a huge threat, bees need a healthy wild landscape to thrive, which includes many species not directly seen as beneficial to us       



CaptainExplosion said:
alternine said:
By all means you're welcome to leave.

The fuck are you saying?

I'm saying you're welcome to leave in the NICEST WAY I can put it on VGChartz. I understand there's plenty of problems in our ecosystem and world but I cant stand self hating deluded people like you. You're threads say a lot about you. I mean this when I say you need to talk to someone. Youre lucky this site is VERY tolerable. 



"Say what you want about Americans but we understand Capitalism.You buy yourself a product and you Get What You Pay For."  

- Max Payne 3

Rab said:
VAMatt said:

Okay.  I'm not going to argue that humans are perfect.  We clearly are not.  But, I hold to my claim that were better off now than at any other time in human history.  

As to the premise that humans need to take care of every species on earth, I'd just have to say that I disagree.  We need to take care of ourselves, and we only need to care about other species to the extent that their survival significantly impacts our own.  And, it appears that, in most cases, those two things are not related to a large enough degree to matter.  

 

The ongoing growth in human population and resource consumption is changing the planet in fundamental ways. One consequence of this growth is the loss of biodiversity, which is typically estimated either by the net movement of species towards higher categories of extinction risk or as the rate at which species are actually going extinct. By either measure, biodiversity loss is on the rise. As species disappear we lose both known and unknown benefits they provide

Apart from the loss of richness to the human experience if ecologies are lost, there much we don't understand about the complex web of life and how it will ultimately affect us, for our own survival it is logical to maintain as much of the Worlds biodiversity as we can 


 

The overpopulation myth is annoying though. It's not that we are overpopulated, it's just places with large populations can't properly handle themselves and now when places like China and India are starting to do that, it's much better. We need way more people to try;y be overpopulated. Scientists worried about overpopulation in the 70s and 80s but new studies show the faults lie elsewhere when we used to blame overpopulation for those



Just a guy who doesn't want to be bored. Also

Around the Network
Rab said:

Just because it has been true for a short time doesn't mean it will stay true, antibiotics once readily available, could now be unusable over the next decades leaving Humans again vulnerable to simple infections our ancestors died from, all this gain and loss happening in roughly 100 years, a drop in time, our food crops are constantly injected with wild genes to improve survivability of those crops, if we have no more wild varieties our very food supply is at risk over coming 100 years, taking even bees for granted has been a huge threat, bees need a healthy wild landscape to thrive, which includes many species not directly seen as beneficial to us       

Progress has been true forever, not for a short time.  

Antibiotics....well, there is certainly some risk there, but that's all it is - risk.  There is no certainty that were fucked, or even close to it.  

Crops - I don't even know what you're talking about.  Crop yields, resistance to drought, resistance to pests, and just about everything else having to do with the food supply is moving in a positive direction.

Bees - there simply isn't a problem.  Bee populations are experiencing massive growth.  There was an 18 month scare, which appears to have been significantly overblown.  



Eagle367 said:

The overpopulation myth is annoying though. It's not that we are overpopulated, it's just places with large populations can't properly handle themselves and now when places like China and India are starting to do that, it's much better. We need way more people to try;y be overpopulated. Scientists worried about overpopulation in the 70s and 80s but new studies show the faults lie elsewhere when we used to blame overpopulation for those

It sure is annoying.  The world is not even remotely close to having too many people.  If the growth rate continues as it has, maybe that discussion will make sense in a few thousand years.  

For those of you that haven't seen it, check out this article, explaining that the entire human race can fit inside Tunisia, New Zealand, or even a small US state.  https://www.fastcompany.com/3016331/think-the-world-is-crowded-you-could-fit-the-entire-human-race-in-new-zealand



Animals kill other animals, in competition for food, shelter, etc. (and sometimes even for sport); human beings have been pretty good by this measure, pretty successful, though not nearly so successful as some others (like bacteria). Why should we feel any particular guilt for acting according to our biology and nature?

It's understandable why we sometimes extend our concern to members outside of our species -- part of our extraordinary evolutionary heritage is the capacity for empathy -- but this doesn't turn us into villains for hunting or being industrious.



donathos said:

Animals kill other animals, in competition for food, shelter, etc. (and sometimes even for sport); human beings have been pretty good by this measure, pretty successful, though not nearly so successful as some others (like bacteria). Why should we feel any particular guilt for acting according to our biology and nature?

It's understandable why we sometimes extend our concern to members outside of our species -- part of our extraordinary evolutionary heritage is the capacity for empathy -- but this doesn't turn us into villains for hunting or being industrious.

Because rising above our natural instincts is a noble goal and being more than our animalistic instincts instead of giving in is a fight worth fighting as a species



Just a guy who doesn't want to be bored. Also

CaptainExplosion said:

These are 100+ notable animals that went extinct in record history because of us.

I try to stay positive, I really do, but this leaves such a big mess behind that I don't know if anyone can fix. Why do we suck so much as a species? Why aren't more of us trying to fix this? -_-

Another point, we've made extinct many more than a 100. Why are these notable but not others? Why are they notable or especially remarkable?



Just a guy who doesn't want to be bored. Also