Are humans a virus in the earth?

[Mr. In-Between]

Originally Posted by Tyster

If you can't discern my view and my point from my response you aren't exactly a master of nuance, are you?

Making your "point of view" obvious and making an actual argument for it are two different things. One's easier than the other, and usually a little more fun. I guess you prefer the easy way. And that's fine; that's certainly your right, and at least you admit it.

Originally Posted by Tyster

Asking if humans are like a virus on the planet is a world view question. It's not a science question.

My response is not about people that are 'different' from me. It's about a world view that is poisonous to reasoning, enlightened people.

OK, fine. But you still haven't answered the question - in what way? How does your attack against "leftists" (or whatever the heck that even means) relate to the OP? You're the one making the point; or at least attempting to make the point; I suppose if you don't think it's a point worth standing up and defending, that's your business. I won't press you on it if you don't think it's worth the trouble. I suspect I'm not missing much.

Originally Posted by Tyster

I attacked Leftists, not the OP. Do you feel like I attacked you? Did I hurt your feelings?

Oh. I understand a little better now, then. You weren't addressing the OP at all, then - by your own admission, you were just using the OP as a pretext to attack people with whose ideologies you disagree. That makes things much more clear.

Originally Posted by Tyster

Now, are you done attacking me? As you said, you seem more interested in attacking opposing viewpoints than offering rational counterpoints.

"Attacking" you? My, for someone who loves to dish it out, you certainly have thin skin when it comes time to take it. This is what is known as "attacking your post." You should learn the difference; I'm surprised you're not more accustomed to it by now.

At any rate, you yourself haven't said anything to which a rational counterpoint on this issue is possible. Because again, by your own admission, you're not even attempting to address the issue raised in the OP; you've said yourself that that isn't what you were interested in discussing. So what kind of a direct rational counterpoint is possible, without going completely off-topic? Which is something I am loath to do in this forum, which I believe is a very noble experiment and deserving of considerably more respect than that.

But you do make a good point in that as long as I'm participating in the thread, I (at least) should go to the trouble of making a case for my own point of view.

So. Toward that end...

I think there is some truth to many of the points made by the OP, but comparing humans to a virus is hyperbolic, somewhat melodramatic, and inaccurate. Humans are simply an extremely intelligent species of primate who are blessed by their uncanny ability to alter their environment to suit their wishes and perceived needs, and cursed by their frequent inability to fully understand the relationship between short-term decisions and long-term consequences.

Have you ever noticed how sometimes people's greatest strengths can also be among their greatest weaknesses? That's as true of the species as a whole as it is of individuals, perhaps even moreso. Humans are neither inherently good nor inherently evil - they're a mixture of both; if anything, I tend to think of the human race as more good than bad, and individuals as well. And while I think they generally tend to try to do what they think is the right thing overall, they frequently underestimate the longterm negative consequences of their actions.

When someone refers to the species as a "virus," one of my first reactions is to infer that that they are implying that the species as a whole is driven by malevolent or even overtly evil motivations; I personally don't think this is either an accurate or even fair characterization of the essential nature of humanity. I believe that humans in general basically do mean well; we are simply poor decision makers, and consistently tend to underestimate the longterm trouble that our decisions will get us into, and underestimate our ability to get ourselves out of it.

Those who worry that we are somehow going to "destroy" the planet are gravely mistaken; we have the power to render a large number of species on our planet extinct with our poor longterm decisionmaking, but "destroy the planet?" That's utterly ludicrous. Even if Russia and the United States went completely insane and attacked each other with our entire inventory of thermonuclear weapons, and China, France, and Great Britain all decided they might as well get in on it too and launch their own entire inventories, the world as a whole would be fine. Human populations would be greatly affected, along with many other animal species, and quite a lot of species would become extinct.

We would not be one of them. Life would go on. In a few thousand years - at most - there would be little (if any) direct overt evidence of what had happened, and people would find a way to keep chugging along. Hopefully having learned a few lessons, of course, but certainly we'd continue as a species, and the planet would be relatively completely unaffected.