@NEStalgia The big difference is that only humans consciously and willingly carry out acts that we know are harmful. Animals and plants only act on instinct and do what they need to to survive and propagate their species. But humans always push things far farther than we need to. Known as the "Holocene extinction" humans are responsible for an on-going mass extinction due to our constant damage and changes to the environment. Everywhere humans go we pave over grasslands, cut down forests, pollute the water, over-farm, over hunt, destroy countless kilometers of wildlife habitats. We dump billions if not trillions of tons of chemicals into the air and water that never would have happened without us.
And yet there are actually people who think we can do all of this and it's never gonna bite us in the butt later. Trust me, it's only a matter of time before we push things too far. lol
tl;dr - I absolutely agree with the idea that humans are the worst lifeforms on Earth.
Nintendo Switch FC: 4867-2891-2493
Switch username: Em
Discord: Heavyarms55#1475
Pokemon Go FC: 3838 2595 7596
PSN: Heavyarms55zx
I was thinking Earth was used to be a peaceful place for animals and plants until humans started to populate on the Earth , took over the ecosystem and developed religions that caused a feud between different religions until today.
I was thinking that we were not belong here (Earth) long time ago. We were prisoners from other planet, created by a Supreme Extra Terestrial creature (we called them God ), dropped on planet Earth (the jail) as prisoners due to error or some conspiracy during the creation, treated as slaves on planet Earth, visited by different "Gods" (Another Extra Terrestrial creatures) with their evangelion and salvation to disguise their real conspiracy behind the religion.
@HobbitGamer - Fifth Element is one I’ve meant to re watch for years now. Only saw it once in the theater, and I don’t really remember much about it.
@NintendoByNature - I cleared the tower last night, traveled through time, and became an even cooler looking ninja. We’d be remiss in our praise of this game if we didn’t also mention how funny it is. I died when the shopkeeper was suddenly wearing the same hat as the messenger. He might be my new favorite game character. His stories are great! Hope you enjoy your vacation. Sounds like some well earned time away from the jay oh bee. Anything you don’t finish will just be waiting on you right where you left it.
@ThanosReXXX - I agree. We were probably meant to toil outdoors for our livelihood, just like every other creature. Instead, we work indoors at jobs which, other than providing income, really don’t have any immediate affect on our lives, and eventually; we lost the rhythm. I guess I’m not advocating we live in trees and forage our food, but we probably took a few too many steps in the other direction. Who knows? I like my house, cars, air conditioning, refrigerator and cabinets full of food, and I like that my kids have enough that they can just worry about being kids; but maybe we’d all be happier doing it another way. I try to fill the void in positive ways.
@Anti-Matter - That’s definitely one possible answer Anti, I enjoyed that. We’re all just descendants of space criminals from the future.
@Heavyarms55 Massive nail on the head right there. Couldn't agree more. And people still think we're just part of the natural cycle, and that what we do to the flora and fauna has little to no effect...
@Morpheel That's a skewed truth, to say the least. @Heavyarms55 gets it. No species has EVER been so massively disruptive and destructive as us humans. Especially not in such a short period of time.
@bimmy-lee Well, it's not a slight against people like you and me. We're living in this society, yes, and we take advantage of some of its benefits, but we're NOT the ones deforesting the jungles and woods, causing murderous mud avalanches, we're not the ones emptying out the oceans by over-taxing the fishing quota of all kinds of marine life, and we're certainly not the ones killing animals for the sake of "scientific research". (looking at you, Japan and Norway) I mean: how many more whales do you need to kill to find out all that you could possibly learn from researching their corpses? We already knew all we could ever hope to learn from them more than a decade ago...
As long as we're at the very least aware, try to be wise with the usage of water and other resources, and not use too much plastic and such, and perhaps at some point switching to electric cars, hydrogen based cars or at least some kind of hybrid, and perhaps eating meat two or three times a week, instead of five, six times a week , then we're already contributing to a better world.
The thing is, that back in the early days of man, we only took what we needed to survive, and nowadays, we've gone well above and beyond that, and then some. There are still some people/tribes on the Earth, who are living like that, such as Eskimos and certain African tribes, and you can clearly see that they produce little to no waste, and they live in harmony with, and according to that natural cycle.
But it will be hard for most city-dwelling (and/or town) people to do anything but the bare minimum to mind the environment. But imagine all of us doing even that little effort, and you'd probably be able to predict the effect of it.
One of the most important things to start with, would probably be to bring down the demand for things like palm oil, or find ways to replace palm oil in all those products we use, or alternatively, make it sustainable in some kind of way. Right now, entire forests are still cut down daily, to provide for palm oil plantations, that can fulfill humankind's insatiable need for this ingredient.
'The console wars are like boobs: Sony and Microsoft fight over which ones look the nicest and Nintendo's are the most fun to play with.'
@Heavyarms55@ThanosReXXX You guys give humans too much credit. Humans aren't that special. I agree with both of you, and especially HeavyArms55, humans are a disease and a destructive force almost exclusively. But....it's too much credit, almost the height of human arrogance, to imply humans are special and not a natural force as well. Human action isn't like an opposing force of contrary composition to nature. Human action is a result of nature as well, and human damage is a part of natural occurrence as well. Despite forming "technology" humans are just another part of nature, and our overall actions can't be separated from nature. Viruses and cancer cells are part of nature as well. Not all of nature is good - but humans, including building asphalt chemical plants on a wildlife preserve....is still actually nature. Nature isn't always good. But it's still instinct driven. Greed, conflict, arrogance, displays of power (over other nature) are all instinct-driven, just like the wood owls hunting the spotted owls. We're not that special. Other animals, plants alter the landscape around them. Hostile vegitation moving from place to place is more often due to birds, squirrels, even insects moving seeds around. We're more efficient at that than most hostile organisms, except perhaps virii....but it's still part of nature.
And of course it'll bite us. I've been the one talking about the inevitability of a mass extinction, and the fact that "world peace" reducing warfare is the single most destructive idea ever invented, after all.... Humans will be corrected to balance. One way or another. That's what nature does. And when it does, we'll wish we were already on WW-V, because delaying III will make it that much worse.... Whether by warfare (also part of nature), or by famine/plague/disaster, it'll have to reduce into the billions to correct. And it will...
@HobbitGamer That would be fitting. Whoever phttps://www.nintendolife.com/forums/5149728/editicks up the work your pickup truck could fill it with a full tank of HobbitGamer!
@Morpheel True, but that penchant for assuming humans, a biological animal species on the Earth are something OTHER than part of nature, even if it's to condemn human activity, is the very same hubris as the damaging activity. And we forget destructive eras prior to humans even existing like the volcanic period that pretty much incinerated the earth and blackened the skies in ways even humans can't manage. Earth just sucks, and the nature of nature on Earth sucks. Human, plant, or rock, can't escape that. Humans may be a disease, but it's one disease among many.
@NEStalgia Sorry, but I really can't agree with the humans still being natural point. That would only ever be true, if we were still an intrinsic part of nature's cycle/circle of life (edit: and also continuously contributed to it in a positive way). We are only natural in regards to being a mammal, and consisting of organic matter, but other than that, we're living completely and utterly outside of the actual natural realm. And technology, gaining knowledge, our skill and superior brain capacity have all brought us here, to a point at which we've actually become a huge disrupting factor, not only to animal and plant life, but also to our own kind. No other species has these capabilities or at least not to that extent (some animals like apes and birds also use primitive versions of technology), and will therefore never be able to wreak such havoc as we have done, much less in such a short period of time.
And if you're thinking of naming some other animal examples, I can already tell you that if you invest some time to research it and the reasons behind it, that you'll definitely find that any kind of plague from whatever animal or insect will either directly or indirectly also be man's fault, more than likely because of something we've done in the past.
For example: animal migration patterns changing, because of our actions, much like how we have diverted rivers and canals. Except where the latter is intended and controlled, the former can often create new problems, funnily enough for humans.
A documentary about elephants in Africa moving through and practically destroying a tourist complex of huts and tents comes to mind. The humans had obstructed their natural (and ages old) path, so the elephants simply HAD to take/choose another one, to get where they needed to go to, subsequently becoming a (literally) huge problem for the humans, but it is of course extremely laughable that most humans involved will obviously only see themselves as the victim, while they were the ones who created the bloody problem in the first place...
@Link-Hero I'm not damning all of humanity, I already mentioned earlier that there are good and smart people, luckily, but all of us aware people know that we're not the majority, meaning most of the human race is still quite busy doing what they used to. Often times, it's only governmental restrictions/guide lines that force the general populace to change their behavior.
And the key difference here is extent of damage vs period of time, as I've mentioned a couple of times now. Sure, some animals also wreak havoc on other species or on the planet, but it will not ever be to the extent of what humans have managed to do, thanks in large part to technology, and the skill, power and above all reach it has given us. No animal on Earth except we can literally do global harm.
@NEStalgia By the way: mentioning volcanoes and Earth quakes and what not, isn't really relevant, seeing as that is indeed a natural process, and isn't brought on by artificial means. Unless of course it is humans drilling into the Earth for oil or whatever other coveted product, causing said quakes...
And those destructive times before man even existed were also all part of making the Earth what it is today, because it gave us all the building blocks we needed. If we're going to use natural destruction as an example anyway, we might as well go all the way back to the Big Bang, to make man's destructive force seem even more insignificant.
'The console wars are like boobs: Sony and Microsoft fight over which ones look the nicest and Nintendo's are the most fun to play with.'
Yet for as advanced as we are, and such massive disruptions....a common cold will kill us.
Drinking from a mountain stream can kill us, and not another mammal drinking from the same water.
We congregate in small dense areas, opening up ourselves to all kinds of exposure like plague.
As a species, the only reason we think we have so much sway and importance is because we can create complex things. But if you drop Sir Branson into the Appalachian wilderness with a day's worth of food and basic clothes, he will not likely survive. Look at Steve Irwin.
We're not dangerous. We have the capacity to create dangerous things.
But meh, I'm bored now XD
#MudStrongs
Switch Friend Code: SW-7842-2075-5515 | My Nintendo: HobbitGamr
@Link-Hero Ecological/environmental/clean energy etc etc etc is political empty speak. It's happy happy feel good words and images to make people content that the problem can be fixed simply. It's a band-aid on a decapitation wound. And where do these wonderful technological items come from to produce all this ecologically friendly manufactured machinery? Cheap labor countries. That pollute to make them. That pollute to transport them. So it's out of the way while we can sit here and pretend we're harmonious with the universe, and the people in those countries would gladly burn down an entire rainforest for a clean bed and hot meal without caring a moment - and they're not wrong for doing so, nature, instinct, ones own needs are your world. But that doesn't matter because we can't see it. Meanwhile such things always (always) pad the pockets of the elite who run the show, and make life degrade more and more the lower down the ladder you go, as everything gets more and more expensive - which is the design, if it's so expensive you can't afford anything, nobody uses anything. Then THAT comes with consequences up to and including crime/violence/disease...
The presence of the sheer quantity of humans is the core problem. Even if we were to revert to a 100% agrarian civilization - sheer existence of the humans and basic needs would still be destructive. Though only theoretically, as right now we are relying 100% on technology to even produce what's needed to keep so many humans alive. If we actually relied on equilibrium with nature, actual natural living, you'd have the first billion dead within 8 months. The trouble is it never should have GOT to this point....there's no happily ever after for everyone if trying to fix it now. Any solution that fixes the waste and pollution issues resulting from SO many humans is going to make life quite miserable for quite a lot of humans. And that in turn makes life quite miserable (or temporary) for quite a few other humans.
Meanwhile the more fortunate can sit and plug their ears and dream of how great it will be when all that technology and initiatives fix the world without considering all those pesky details. Either way....nature will balance it out.... And no feel-good environmentalism cosmetic band-aid changes that equation. To fix the problem, you need to deplete population. Directly, naturally, indirectly by economic means you can close your eyes and ignore it's happening while pretending you're not involved, as a cold calculation of social engineering, or whatever, it's simply an eventuality.
We get two choices: Try to correct it now and cause immediate tremendous pain for a whole lot of humans? (Likely leading to strife, violence etc.) Won't happen in a free society. You'll need authoritarianism for that. OR, keep kicking the can down the line, let everyone do what they need in the present, and expect nature to sort it out later, inevitably. Which, historically is the more likely outcome - humans generally won't chose self-harming mechancisms that will make things better for someone else....that is some extremely high-minded altruism not common to the majority of the species, and works against natural instincts. Humans change when in the wake of devastation there's no alternative at all. Screaming about "if you only make your own life worse we can save the world!" is not likely to win much political power. And particularly not when the people insisting on such are almost always those comfortable enough materially and economically that it has no impact on them - or worse - everyone else partaking has positive economic impact for them.
Ultimately the view point of most people is always going to be: "I don't care about YOUR good. I care about MY good." Going a different route requires force. Which brings us back to the mid 20th century. Which goes back to mass depopulation. Which solves the problem correctly anyway.
As I said - it's inevitable, one way or the other. All solutions, including "do nothing" lead to the same destination.
@ThanosReXXX Regardless of all that humans are still a natural organism, of the earth. Our behaviors are primarily instinct-driven like all other natural organisms of the earth. Regardless of developing high level self aware thinking, that doesn't magically alter the fact that it's all a function of natural development. Our technology is still created using the natural elements of the earth, combining them in various ways, using other natural elements of the earth. If we start harvesting from space and bringing back materials not of this eco-system to interfere, you will be accurate. But until then it's still a biological creature of this planet, using natural elements found on this planet - we don't create things. We move things around and put them together. Put them in different temperatures. It's complicated, but we're not doing anything with anything that doesn't exist here already. No argument we're destructive with it - the argument is only that it IS all a function of this ecology and is a part of nature. And a HUGE part of why we're so destructive with it is that conflict and mutual extinction are also a part of the natural ecology for the planet's apex predator, and our high midned idea of "peace" and "war is over" prevented that natural safety release valve so to speak from functioning. As such the apex predator over-bred beyond the planets ability to support it, and the high level thinking produced technologies to sustain that population outside the natural life cycle. To be naturally functioning, to be part of the natural "circle of life" - the apex predator species must essentially trim its numbers on a regular basis as no other predator can do so. We need war. It's a natural function of our cycle. And we haven't had war in a quantity commesurate with population growth to function properly. The idea that all lives are sacred broke the cycle. So now we have a choice: Accept the necessity of preventable large scale death and act on it. Or keep doing what we're doing and wait for nature to force it. We can't have it both ways, it's one or the other. Everything else is playing pretend.
It's an ugly ugly truth of life on this planet as an apex predator.
TECHNICALLY if you wanted to argue that humans aren't part of that natural cycle, you'd be better off thinking theologically. If indeed humans were created by a deity as a special race, not attached to the flora and fauna as the theological view has always believed, then there's actually some merit and explanation to the idea of humans as a contaminant, not a function, of nature. Similarly the more "tin foil" theories that humans are actually extra terrestrials would fit that view nicely as well.
"Volcanoes":
But my point is humans ARE a natural process, unless you want to say humans are themselves artificial constructs made by an outside force, thus my comparison between natural, destructive forces. Humans, and volcanos. An organism burrowing into natural pressure wells and releasing said pressure would still be a natural function of the systems of the ecology. Even if it's human. Using pointed cones, shaped of mined iron found on the planet, is no exception.
And could it not be said we're making the building blocks that will be needed for what comes after us? The fundamental flaw I think in so many of these discussions is the assumption that humans are the final stage of the planet, and the ecology as it's been for the past 10,000 years is inevitably the way the ecology is supposed to be forever now. No. The planet changes drastically every few million years. Maybe we're modiying it in new ways. Maybe it will make us extinct. By your own view that's not such a bad thing anyway. Some other system will replace us. It will probably adapt to using building blocks we created.
Ultimately NONE of this really matters on an eternal scale. The sun is going to go red giant eventually. It will devour the whole solar system. We could live forever in utopia, or we could burn the Earth by midnight tonight. Ether way, the planet is going to die in a firey ball of helium-hydrogen fusion, so all we need to ACTUALLY worry about is maintaining the balance for the next million years or so. If we just breed to trillions, or a googolplex then it just means the googolplex gets burned in a fusion ball later on.
Everyone on Youtube wants to be a star. The good news is eventually they'll be part of one!
Forums
Topic: The Chit-Chat Thread
Posts 31,121 to 31,140 of 97,846
Please login or sign up to reply to this topic