U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Philosophy
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-20-2016, 04:15 PM
 
Location: Missouri, USA
4,344 posts, read 2,973,384 times
Reputation: 2026

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matadora View Post
If you do not understand then there nothing more to discuss. Just wow is all I can say.

It baffles my mind why you think humans (hardly considered mankind) are so important that they deserve to populate another solar system?


Bizarre thought process if you can even consider it a thought process.

It's not jealousy it's clearly an understanding about the the Human Condition that you have not even thought about, is why a person would not want to see humans starting life in another solar system.
Yes, and you are so very astoundingly brilliant, supposedly, but all you spout is hate. Wisdom has little purpose if the teacher doesn't share it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-20-2016, 04:16 PM
 
Location: Subconscious Syncope, USA (Northeastern US)
2,367 posts, read 1,635,031 times
Reputation: 3814
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawk55732 View Post
I really do not understand why people would be against trying to save mankind if such a situation as the OP suggests was to happen. It baffles my mind that people wouldn't want mankind to survive even if they are not the ones who would live.


The only thing I can think of is that they do not think they would be in the survivor group and hence would be jealous.
Well, not me. I'm pretty confident I am going to be on another plane of existence in 75 years, whether the Earth and Mankind are destroyed or not, lol. I just don't see mankind treating a new 'virgin' planet any different than they have treated this one. If they restored this one, I would probably be more supportive of colonizing a new one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2016, 06:20 PM
 
Location: Missouri, USA
4,344 posts, read 2,973,384 times
Reputation: 2026
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConeyGirl52 View Post
Well, not me. I'm pretty confident I am going to be on another plane of existence in 75 years, whether the Earth and Mankind are destroyed or not, lol. I just don't see mankind treating a new 'virgin' planet any different than they have treated this one. If they restored this one, I would probably be more supportive of colonizing a new one.
I used to assume that just about everyone would want humanity to reach for the stars, but the people who don't are more numerous than I'd thought, and they're often pretty reasonable. Oftentimes, it's the people who want to reach for the stars who are the unreasonable ones.

I saw a speech by a writer of books of the steam punk genre awhile back who talked about French artists of a century or two ago who were regularly dreaming of and drawing images of floating, sky cities, held up by balloons. We have blimps, of course, but these sky cities were permanent residences. People love to dream, and those dreams aren't always plausible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2016, 06:31 PM
 
Location: Missouri, USA
4,344 posts, read 2,973,384 times
Reputation: 2026
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawk55732 View Post
I really do not understand why people would be against trying to save mankind if such a situation as the OP suggests was to happen. It baffles my mind that people wouldn't want mankind to survive even if they are not the ones who would live.


The only thing I can think of is that they do not think they would be in the survivor group and hence would be jealous.
Well, if we're actually going to save a significant amount of people, I agree. However, if we can warn humanity about the approaching neutron star 75 years in advance so that anyone bright stops having children and most people pass away before the star destroys Earth anyway, considering the difficulty of constructing such a ship, I could see not wanting to construct the ship as worthy of consideration.

However, humanity dwindling away of old age one by one doesn't sound real pleasant, so I'd be all for the ship to the stars so long as we could get a decent amount of people onboard. I think Mordant said he'd support it if we could send off at least 1,000 people. I think that sounds like a good number.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2016, 06:01 AM
 
Location: Subconscious Syncope, USA (Northeastern US)
2,367 posts, read 1,635,031 times
Reputation: 3814
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clintone View Post
I used to assume that just about everyone would want humanity to reach for the stars, but the people who don't are more numerous than I'd thought, and they're often pretty reasonable. Oftentimes, it's the people who want to reach for the stars who are the unreasonable ones.

I saw a speech by a writer of books of the steam punk genre awhile back who talked about French artists of a century or two ago who were regularly dreaming of and drawing images of floating, sky cities, held up by balloons. We have blimps, of course, but these sky cities were permanent residences. People love to dream, and those dreams aren't always plausible.

Thank you for this post. Maybe my advancing age is making me more cynical than I care to consider. I'm usually a rather optimistic person, but apparently not in this case.

What is a man without his dreams? Ultimately, yes, man should continue to reach for the stars. And, if the question boils down to - is mankind worth saving? Yes it is.

Without man reaching for the stars, there are so many positive accomplishments that were and are continuing to be made, that never would have been considered. Even if the goal remains illusive, there are usually positive by-products.

It's always easier to overlook the positive, while the negative remains glaringly burned in our brains.

Thanks again.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2016, 05:32 PM
 
Location: Pacific 🌉 N, 🌄W
11,037 posts, read 4,817,435 times
Reputation: 7067
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clintone View Post
Your posts are spooky because your aggression makes you seem to me to be someone I wouldn't invite into my house, out of concern that you'd make my skin into a hat.
Your posts are BARBARIC and sick to the core. You are no one that I would care to associate with. I don't find those who genuinely ponder euthanizing non-human predator carnivores and sterilizing nonhuman herbivores to be any one that I would want to associate with. I don't find humans that display a lack of conscience appealing.

Aggressive due to pointing out how disturbing and twisted your posts are as well as pointing out that you have no scientist understanding...at all about anything?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clintone View Post
When did I say animals were here for our sake? I don't recall ever having typed that.
You don't? Well let me help out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clintone View Post
Whether or not we should bring animals along for their sake, rather than just for ours...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clintone View Post
Are you a sociopath who's playing games with me?
That would be you...the person who ponders euthanizing non human carnivore predators and sterilizing non human herbivores.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clintone View Post
I actually find this kind of amusing.
I don't find any amusing about your posts. They are shameful and make Americans look really dense. People who are beyond ignorant of the world they live in as well as those who are not scientifically literate are not amusing in the least.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clintone View Post
The part in bold shows that I did not say what you mentioned.
Sure you said it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clintone View Post
I have wondered if it would be genuinely a good idea to painlessly euthanize all nonhuman predators, and sterilize most nonhuman herbivores to minimize suffering though, if humans could live off world in space and ignore the other organisms after that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clintone View Post
How's about explaining why it is bad to ponder euthanizing all nonhuman predators and sterilizing most nonhuman herbivores (or whatever I said) rather than yelling about how I'm the debil? That could be helpful.
How about learning to write like a person who supposedly studied English? Instead of me wasting my time to educate a person such as you...I suggest you go to college and earn your own science degree. How about that? If was totally ignorant about a subject that I was interesting in learning anything about it...I would go out of my way to educate myself vs. stilling on lazy tail and expecting someone to spoon feed me.

If you are not intelligent enough or motivated enough to Google the things I have already mentioned to you or read the Ecology link that I offered then that's your problem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clintone View Post
I'm flattered by your offer to give me your address, but no thanks. I don't really feel I know you well enough to begin dating, despite these warm and friendly discussions of ours. I do feel a great deal of affection for you though.
LOL flattered? Not too bright eh?

Nope there is amusing about interacting with obtuseness.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clintone View Post
Yes, and you are so very astoundingly brilliant,
Not only brilliant, but also well educated, and wordily wise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clintone View Post
Wisdom has little purpose if the teacher doesn't share it.
I shared plenty of knowledge with you. You are just too intellectually lazy to make an effort to understand it...or you simply don't possess the sophistication to learn. I can only go by your posts and so far you have shown some very serious deficit's.

Sitting around pondering if it would be genuinely a good idea to painlessly euthanize all nonhuman predators, and sterilize most nonhuman herbivores, shows serious deficits.

I gave you plenty of word hints and even a link to get you started in understanding the delicate balance of our ecosystems. If you want to learn you need to put forth effort. A wise teacher does not spoon feed.

BTW are you a Millennial? Your mindset and lazy entitlement attitude reeks of it.

I have met a few outstanding Millennials but the majority act like you. Entitlement and laziness is not an impressive attribute to have...nor will it get you very far in life.

What good does it do to offer information and knowledge but the student is either too dumb to learn or is intellectually lazy?

Last edited by Matadora; 06-21-2016 at 06:42 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2016, 09:04 PM
 
Location: Missouri, USA
4,344 posts, read 2,973,384 times
Reputation: 2026
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matadora View Post
Your posts are BARBARIC and sick to the core. You are no one that I would care to associate with. I don't find those who genuinely ponder euthanizing non-human predator carnivores and sterilizing nonhuman herbivores to be any one that I would want to associate with. I don't find humans that display a lack of conscience appealing.
Let me ask you this. My sister's boyfriend has a brother who is severely retarded. I think he should be allowed to make some decisions for himself, but not all. If he wants to go chase a ball into a busy highway, for example, a non-retarded adult would ideally get the ball for him instead, and tell him to stay out of the street. I am more intelligent that the severely retarded person. It's my job to determine how much freedom that person should have, if there is no one better suited. If he can't get a job and feed himself, and begins eating stuff off the floor because he's hungry, I probably should have fed him better rather than having expected him to get a job.

So, why shouldn't humans be the organisms to determine what is best for nonhuman organisms, when we've thought about it a lot? I haven't thought about it much, but you seem to see wild animals as better at knowing what's best for them than human beings are capable of knowing. I don't know why. That's why I'd consider painlessly euthanizing predators and sterilizing many herbivores.

I find the fact that you have such an objection to simple discussion of ideas on a website meant for that purpose to be revoltingly childish. It is an example of the most destructive type of behavior I can think of someone doing on a discussion thread: attacking the mere suggestion of certain ideas.

Quote:
Aggressive due to pointing out how disturbing and twisted your posts are as well as pointing out that you have no scientist understanding...at all about anything?
You don't? Well let me help out.
That would be you...the person who ponders euthanizing non human carnivore predators and sterilizing non human herbivores.
I don't find any amusing about your posts. They are shameful and make Americans look really dense. People who are beyond ignorant of the world they live in as well as those who are not scientifically literate are not amusing in the least.
I think I am, actually. I've taken an oceanography course. I've taken environmental biology course in college. I've taken a college course called on American environmental history. I've long had an interest in animals and have read several books on insects and space and biology in my spare time as a kid. I love science. It's not my field, but I think I have a decent understanding of the basics of it.

Quote:
Sure you said it.
How about learning to write like a person who supposedly studied English? Instead of me wasting my time to educate a person such as you...I suggest you go to college and earn your own science degree. How about that? If was totally ignorant about a subject that I was interesting in learning anything about it...I would go out of my way to educate myself vs. stilling on lazy tail and expecting someone to spoon feed me.
I have educated myself about a great many things. You, however, talk about nature nonhuman life as if it exists in some kind of perfect, utopian state. Your personality screams "biased." Nobody should listen to you.

Quote:
If you are not intelligent enough or motivated enough to Google the things I have already mentioned to you or read the Ecology link that I offered then that's your problem.
LOL flattered? Not too bright eh?
I already have quite a bit of knowledge about all the things you're complaining about.

Quote:
Nope there is amusing about interacting with obtuseness.

Not only brilliant, but also well educated, and wordily wise.
I shared plenty of knowledge with you. You are just too intellectually lazy to make an effort to understand it...or you simply don't possess the sophistication to learn. I can only go by your posts and so far you have shown some very serious deficit's.

Sitting around pondering if it would be genuinely a good idea to painlessly euthanize all nonhuman predators, and sterilize most nonhuman herbivores, shows serious deficits.

I gave you plenty of word hints and even a link to get you started in understanding the delicate balance of our ecosystems. If you want to learn you need to put forth effort. A wise teacher does not spoon feed.

BTW are you a Millennial? Your mindset and lazy entitlement attitude reeks of it.
I was born in 1985

Quote:
I have met a few outstanding Millennials but the majority act like you. Entitlement and laziness is not an impressive attribute to have...nor will it get you very far in life.

What good does it do to offer information and knowledge but the student is either too dumb to learn or is intellectually lazy?
It might help if you tried.

Last edited by Clintone; 06-21-2016 at 09:37 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2016, 09:36 PM
 
Location: Missouri, USA
4,344 posts, read 2,973,384 times
Reputation: 2026
p.s. Oxygen used to be a poison, more or less:

The increased production of oxygen set Earth's original atmosphere off balance. Because oxygen was poisonous for large numbers of anaerobic organisms, many anaerobic types of bacteria were eliminated, opening up ecological 'niches'. The researchers have determined the existence of many new types of multicellular cyanobacteria subsequent to the fundamental climatic event, and are deducing that these occupied the newly developed habitats. "Morphological changes in microorganisms such as bacteria were able to impact the environment fundamentally and to an extent scarcely imaginable," concludes Schirrmeister.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...0117084856.htm
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2016, 10:01 PM
 
Location: Pacific 🌉 N, 🌄W
11,037 posts, read 4,817,435 times
Reputation: 7067
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clintone View Post
p.s. Oxygen used to be a poison, more or less:

The increased production of oxygen set Earth's original atmosphere off balance. Because oxygen was poisonous for large numbers of anaerobic organisms, many anaerobic types of bacteria were eliminated, opening up ecological 'niches'. The researchers have determined the existence of many new types of multicellular cyanobacteria subsequent to the fundamental climatic event, and are deducing that these occupied the newly developed habitats. "Morphological changes in microorganisms such as bacteria were able to impact the environment fundamentally and to an extent scarcely imaginable," concludes Schirrmeister.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...0117084856.htm
LOL this is how obtuse you are. Look up what an anaerobe is..specifically an obligate anaerobe. Once you understand what it is then you should be able to connect the dots.

NO Oxygen is not considered a poison...not now not ever. Nor is it a waste product as you also mentioned somewhere in this thread.

You don't understand much do you?

I have no time to waste on any more of your obtuse posts. Get a science education or learn how to think, and then we will talk.

Better yet apply that euthanasia plan on yourself that you think is such a grand idea...you know the one that you want seen done to other creatures, which are no doubt much more intelligent than you have shown yourself to be.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2016, 10:11 PM
 
Location: Missouri, USA
4,344 posts, read 2,973,384 times
Reputation: 2026
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matadora View Post
LOL this is how obtuse you are. Look up what an anaerobe is. Once you understand what it is then you should be able to connect the dots.

NO Oxygen is not considered a poison...not now not ever. Nor is it a waste product as you also mentioned somewhere in this thread.

You don't understand much do you?

I have no time to waste on any more of your obsoletes posts. Get a science education or learn how to think, and then we will talk.
I have an idea of what an anaerobe is. It's an organism that does not require oxygen to live. I'm unsure about the more specific definition, and I don't see it as particularly important...but oxygen was, according to my link, harmful to many of them. The link describes it has having been poisonous to many of them.

Anyway, my point with that post I made about oxygen having been a poison (whether it was or not) was that this happy, utopian equilibrium you seem to fantasize about? That equilibrium happens because things die in appropriate amounts to keep too many species from going extinct at once. Here is a statement by Harvard Evolutionary Biologist Richard Dawkins:

“The total amount of suffering per year in the natural world is beyond all decent contemplation. During the minute that it takes me to compose this sentence, thousands of animals are being eaten alive, many others are running for their lives, whimpering with fear, others are slowly being devoured from within by rasping parasites, thousands of all kinds are dying of starvation, thirst, and disease. It must be so. If there ever is a time of plenty, this very fact will automatically lead to an increase in the population until the natural state of starvation and misery is restored. In a universe of electrons and selfish genes, blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won't find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice. The universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless indifference.”
Quote by Richard Dawkins:

I am not an antinatalist, but I wonder about the benefits of antinatalism. For humans, we can heavily modify our behavior, so I'd much prefer just teaching us to be better. For nonhumans though, I assume their lives are worth living, but it could be that they're not, and if their lives are not worth living now only humans can do something to change that. They can euthanize animals. They can euthanize predators and sterilize herbivores to make life more pleasant for the surviving animals. They can domesticate animals, etc.

I think all that would be a waste of time and resources when we have human beings starving now. However, if we ever have the potentially infinite resources of space available to us through, say, solar powered sails that could let us zip around the solar system mining and gathering energy from sunlight, maybe it would be an option. I doubt it...but I'm not sure.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Philosophy
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top