Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well, being human I don't want 90% of humans to die, plus it would be the wrong ones again, anyway. I am not a Darwinist or anything like that.
And most people don't want such a thing to happen but it really is "when" not "if." And there actually is in fact a number of rich and powerful people who want it to happen...so the world would be their playground, with just a small number of, basically, slaves, to work for them. Sounds crazy but it's true...many of them are the leaders or financing sources of groups like the sierra club...
Location: Visitation between Wal-Mart & Home Depot
8,309 posts, read 38,768,892 times
Reputation: 7185
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neuling
Well, being human I don't want 90% of humans to die, plus it would be the wrong ones again, anyway. I am not a Darwinist or anything like that.
I should hope not, that would be a disaster of unfathomable and unprecedented proportions. Also, if you think there are right and wrong people to die in a cataclysm then I think understand something about you.
One can also survive on one's own by planting stuff. If hunting were good, it would be good for humans everywhere. But what will happen if 6 billion people started hunting animals? Nature would be done within a couple of weeks.
We can grow enormous amounts of plants, there is a group of professions taking care of that. Why would I want to hunt in order to feed myself? Do I know anything about medicine so I can operate myself in case I need it? No, I resort to people who know how to do it. That is what modern societies are about. Without specialization we would still be living like people in the stone age.
well, 6 billion people will never all become hunters. for starters, the human population is too large for this world to sustain naturally. second, many people have on means to hunt. people living in NYC can't hunt
but let me turn this on YOU: what do YOU think would happen if 6 billion people all became vegetarians? I'll tell you what would happen: since most of the vegetation on this planet can't be eating by humans (either b/c it's poisonous or we just don't have the means to digest and gain nutrients from them), the ONLY way we could sustain an entire planet of vegetarians would be to hack down the Amazon rainforest and other natural forests and raze them for farmland to grow foods humans can eat. you'd be permanently altering entire ecosystems trying to grow produce in areas they shouldn't be grown (not every patch of land is suitable for growing soy). we'd have to up the ante in the war against garden pests (since we can't afford to have a major food source decimated by bugs) and may have to resort to chemicals if we expect to keep up (who knows what the statistic is of how much of their crop do organic farmers have to dump due to pests?). and no, we can't grow and enormous amount of plants, at least no where near enough to satisfy the world hunger. there isn't enough viable land, weather is too harsh in many locales, and it's just too time intensive (a chicken lays an egg daily and can be fit to eat in a year or so. it can take longer for a fruit tree to bear fruit) for it to work. that's not even taking into account that a single massive infestation of bugs, a bad strain of disease, or a massive natural disaster like a hurricane or prolonged freeze can kill off any entire crop and practically doom many people to starve.
how is THIS any better? the world can't sustain a wholly vegetarian human race any more than it could sustain a wholly carnivorous human race. the world can, and has been for many, many, many generations, support a omnivorous human race.
I should hope not, that would be a disaster of unfathomable and unprecedented proportions. Also, if you think there are right and wrong people to die in a cataclysm then I think understand something about you.
And you're right, you are not a "Darwinist."
Right and wrong as with people suffering the most from climate change. It is the poor people of this world who are most affected, not the ones who have been ruining the environment for centuries and thus deserve "more" to be affected.
well, 6 billion people will never all become hunters. for starters, the human population is too large for this world to sustain naturally. second, many people have on means to hunt. people living in NYC can't hunt
but let me turn this on YOU: what do YOU think would happen if 6 billion people all became vegetarians? I'll tell you what would happen: since most of the vegetation on this planet can't be eating by humans (either b/c it's poisonous or we just don't have the means to digest and gain nutrients from them), the ONLY way we could sustain an entire planet of vegetarians would be to hack down the Amazon rainforest and other natural forests and raze them for farmland to grow foods humans can eat. you'd be permanently altering entire ecosystems trying to grow produce in areas they shouldn't be grown (not every patch of land is suitable for growing soy). we'd have to up the ante in the war against garden pests (since we can't afford to have a major food source decimated by bugs) and may have to resort to chemicals if we expect to keep up (who knows what the statistic is of how much of their crop do organic farmers have to dump due to pests?). and no, we can't grow and enormous amount of plants, at least no where near enough to satisfy the world hunger. there isn't enough viable land, weather is too harsh in many locales, and it's just too time intensive (a chicken lays an egg daily and can be fit to eat in a year or so. it can take longer for a fruit tree to bear fruit) for it to work. that's not even taking into account that a single massive infestation of bugs, a bad strain of disease, or a massive natural disaster like a hurricane or prolonged freeze can kill off any entire crop and practically doom many people to starve.
how is THIS any better? the world can't sustain a wholly vegetarian human race any more than it could sustain a wholly carnivorous human race. the world can, and has been for many, many, many generations, support a omnivorous human race.
I am not sure at all of your arguments, actually I think they are wrong. The only thing that might happen is that we would still need to transport food from here to there, especially when there is a drought.
If we switched to vegetarian, we would also have to think more of what we plant. There are plants that tire the soil, corn for instance, if I am not mistaken. We would not have to plant nor eat everything everywhere. Many of the plants they grow in Germany these days, were not even known there before the Spanish introduced that stuff from Latin America. Those alien plants cause a lot of problems. At the same time the Indians are having huge problems ever since they fell for the Green revolution, which actually has turned into a nightmare. They had an incredible variety of plants, that endured all the extreme climates there, but they made the mistake of switching from small-scale subsistence to large-scale industrial farming, with everything that comes with it, e.g. the dependence on external seeds, the bugs, the chemicals...
And most people don't want such a thing to happen but it really is "when" not "if." And there actually is in fact a number of rich and powerful people who want it to happen...so the world would be their playground, with just a small number of, basically, slaves, to work for them. Sounds crazy but it's true...many of them are the leaders or financing sources of groups like the sierra club...
I'm glad you are so trusting that the social safety net will always be there for you. You go on depending on others; it is your right. I'll be the first to admit that we are all dependent on one another to a certain extent. But I am unwilling to extend that dependence to 100% as you are. It just seems a bit foolhardy to me, given our species' history.
Well, I believe in the advancement of humanity. We are way more advanced culturally than we were just century ago. As long as people stay reasonable and peaceful, society will continue to work and there is no need for everybody to know how to do everything on their own. Thus I hope religions will disappear one day, they are ticking time bombs.
Bush wasn't a dictator, no comparison with Hitler. We got rid of him the last election, although the current one is taking more power than Bush did...
If Bush or any other president had refused to step down when a new one was elected, I have no doubt something would have been done, either through the courts or otherwise.
Only loyal Nazis had weapons. The German gun laws restricted weapons to persons considered trustworthy and loyal...Nazis, IOW, most were disarmed before the worst of what he did started. The U.S. is different because so many have guns that if even 10 percent of them rebelled, the government would collapse.
Basing any argument on majority views is always wrong. Not all majority held views are wrong but basing any argument on the majority is.
Again, I am not basing my opinion on the majority, it just happens that my and their opinions are the same. That is a huge difference.
Also, what you say about Germans back then is just not true. A lot of Germans used to have weapons back then, there was no register, nobody of the Nazi apparatus knew who had how many weapons, and thus many people still had weapons, especially outside the big cities.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
