Quantcast
Humans Suck -_-

Forums - General Discussion - Humans Suck -_-

VAMatt said:
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.  

You thinking by countering a few examples as if that's the whole picture is sadly misdirected logic, it's a far bigger picture than that, you will need to do some serious research if your really looking for some truth in this complex matter   

Many major crops have progressed in areas of resistance to disease due to the injection of wild genes from natural stock, look it up, also due to the fact your unaware of this may mean you don't really have a full grasp of how interconnected we are to our ecological biodiversity, I would suggest you look into it seriously instead of countering small points   

Please don't think any improvement over a small time frame will always last (even a 1000 yrs is a short time), it's a common historical mistake which we should learn from  

Last edited by Rab - on 29 January 2019

Around the Network
Rab said:
VAMatt said:

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.  

You thinking by countering a few examples as if that's the whole picture is sadly misdirected logic, it's a far bigger picture than that, you will need to do some serious research if your really looking for some truth in this complex matter   

Many major crops have progressed in areas of resistance to disease due to the injection of wild genes from natural stock, look it up, also due to the fact your unaware of this may mean you don't really have a full grasp of how interconnected we are to our ecological biodiversity, I would suggest you look into it seriously instead of countering small points   

Please don't think any improvement over a small time frame will always last (even a 1000 yrs is a short time), it's a common historical mistake which we should learn from 

I'm not sure what to say to this.  You are pointing to evidence of progress - an example of humans taking steps to improve our lives and further our survival - and saying it is an example of problem.  It's basically like saying the fact that lifespans are increasing is a sign that humans are about to go extinct.



Rab said:
VAMatt said:

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.  

You thinking by countering a few examples as if that's the whole picture is sadly misdirected logic, it's a far bigger picture than that, you will need to do some serious research if your really looking for some truth in this complex matter   

Many major crops have progressed in areas of resistance to disease due to the injection of wild genes from natural stock, look it up, also due to the fact your unaware of this may mean you don't really have a full grasp of how interconnected we are to our ecological biodiversity, I would suggest you look into it seriously instead of countering small points   

Please don't think any improvement over a small time frame will always last (even a 1000 yrs is a short time), it's a common historical mistake which we should learn from  

VAMatt said:

I'm not sure what to say to this.  You are pointing to evidence of progress - an example of humans taking steps to improve our lives and further our survival - and saying it is an example of problem.  It's basically like saying the fact that lifespans are increasing is a sign that humans are about to go extinct.

The manner in which we are able to make crop yields so much higher is mostly unnatural. The mining needed for fertilizers can only go on so long, and when it runs out the barren soil won't grow squat.

Bees were being killed at alarming rates due to some chemicals used for crops to help attain those high yields. Those spray's have been taken off the market and new more enviro friendly one's are being used in their place, with worse results even at higher costs.

The problem with progress, is that it's far from universally agree'd upon, in it's many minute details, and that is because one man's trash is another man's treasure. Another problem, is that while animal species tend to grow and shrink, human's aren't locked into that natural balancing cycle. On one hand you can say that's proof we're 'growing' too fast, but on the other hand, as far as we know, nothing on this planet has ever come close to what we're able to do, so does that mean we can pretty much do whatever we want within reason?

The universe tends to be a balancing act, so how far can humanity push things is a question we don't yet know the answer to. Can we completely change Earth, terraform Mars, and get away with it, or are we stuck here with the way things are for as long as we can survive the natural changes? We likely can't survive staying locked to Earth forever, so that may mean eventually leaving it behind once we've stripped it bare and moved on to other planets. Should we? It's almost impossible to know the answer until it's been attempted. The bright side of that, is if it's attempted, and fails, the eventual outcome of extinction doesn't change, other than the accelerated timeline perhaps.

That being said, our progress definitely needs to be watched carefully and analyzed, because ruining Earth before we can get off her basically defeats the purpose of said progress. One step at a time is better, safer, and a much stronger momentum driver than two steps forward and one step back.



The Canadian National Anthem According To Justin Trudeau

 

Oh planet Earth! The home of native lands, 
True social law, in all of us demand.
With cattle farts, we view sea rise,
Our North sinking slowly.
From far and snide, oh planet Earth, 
Our healthcare is yours free!
Science save our land, harnessing the breeze,
Oh planet Earth, smoke weed and ferment yeast.
Oh planet Earth, ell gee bee queue and tee.

VAMatt said:
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

I'm sure you can fit more in a smaller space Matrix style!

The problem is not over population, it's over consumption.

So far all our technology only makes us consume faster.



Eagle367 said:
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?

Because those are the ones that look cute and are harmless to humans. Same bullshit with that arbitrary line of which animal is considered food and which is supposed to be cherished.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

Around the Network
vivster said:
Eagle367 said:

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?

Because those are the ones that look cute and are harmless to humans. Same bullshit with that arbitrary line of which animal is considered food and which is supposed to be cherished.

I would argue against that since mostly farm animals are easier to contain and work well with our bodies. I can't think of any other mammal so easy to consume, yet delicious as well. It's just I don't think eating a lion would be as delicious as a lamb or as easy even if there were more lions. Farm animals are our natural prey. But you're right cuteness=/=remarkable in my book



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

Eagle367 said:
vivster said:

Because those are the ones that look cute and are harmless to humans. Same bullshit with that arbitrary line of which animal is considered food and which is supposed to be cherished.

I would argue against that since mostly farm animals are easier to contain and work well with our bodies. I can't think of any other mammal so easy to consume, yet delicious as well. It's just I don't think eating a lion would be as delicious as a lamb or as easy even if there were more lions. Farm animals are our natural prey. But you're right cuteness=/=remarkable in my book

Cows and pigs were domesticated and didn't look like they did today. They've been extensively bred to be as useful as they are today. If we used deer or dogs like that they would probably be close to pigs and cows today. But it's not like the efficiency of the food source should be a deciding factor in what is ok to eat and what not. I mean we eat potato chips despite being less than favorable as nutrition. Dogs and cats might have less meat on their bones but it's still meat. It's all just arbitrary lines drawn by arbitrary morals.

People say they care about animals and then turn around and squash the next mosquito they see.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

For me it does not really matter what people eat as long as there is a minimal amount of suffering involved, meat is meat and if we take our own egoistic emotions out of it we should see that it should not be worse if a dog is killed for meat over a rabbit or cow.

And really you should also wonder why some poachers kill/catch animals like maybe they need some money to provide food for their family and what lives are most worthy to you,human or animal lives?The source problem is mostly poverty in the area affected but hey lets skip those people and make them criminals for wanting food for their kids.



I just saw a really beautiful video. So I decided to translate it and post it.

They say the perfection of humanity already exists. It's only a matter of revealing what's already there.

https://youtu.be/1RIEgMdRDgM



VAMatt said:
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.  

UN: Growing threat to food from decline in biodiversity - BBC Science (22 February 2019)

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-47308235