@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 | Nintendo Network ID: 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!
Ok, I'm over the past 40 days. I threw my eye away by accident. Between that and the car I'm done. Welp I guess I'm wearing customs till I can save up the cash and PTO next year.
Taiko is good for the soul, Hoisa!
Japanese NNID:RyuNiiyamajp
Team Cupcake! 11/15/14
Team Spree! 4/17/19
I'm a Dream Fighter. Perfume is Love, Perfume is Life.
3DS Friend Code: 3737-9849-8413 | Nintendo Network ID: RyuNiiyama
@Ryu_Niiyama That sucks! Those things are ridiculously expensive. Sorry to hear that, dood.
@Tyranexx You missed the great schism and the philosophical contributions and/or detriments of humankind on the rest of the...every...thing?
Oh, and Dora brought the knife.
God I love my neighbour, or should I say local gravitational pull, who enjoys throwing things and shouting abuse at relatives on the regular with volume to rival an Airborne concert.
This time it's 11pm and something about work and a holiday and how she hates her son or some such.
One day I'll just go down and put my boot in her gob to shut her up because my God broken record love.
But hey this is an upgrade over 9am arguments when I would finish work at 7:30am.
Now Playing: Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart, Crash Bandicoot 4
@Knuckles-Fajita Sounds to me like she needs to start her drinking earlier in the evening.
...Pretty much this. If it didn't sound like you lived in a highly populated area already, I'd say keep an air horn on hand to blast whenever she starts shooting her mouth off.
Forums
Topic: The Chit-Chat Thread
Posts 31,161 to 31,180 of 96,531
Please login or sign up to reply to this topic