I Like Humans

humans are not viruses

viruses reproduce by hijacking the genetic equipment of a host cell, humans do it through sexual intercourse.

Originally posted by SpearofDestiny
I have given you examples of how animals have also harmed humans and other animals. Are you somehow denying that animals are also responsible for "bad" events that occur ? Are you sayings that animals don't kill or spread pain of some sort ?

everything in nature is natural, except for man, r-right? 😉

Originally posted by SpearofDestiny
On the contrary, I think it's a shame that this is what you think.

You have already given up, and acquired a very Nihilistic point of view. You are being intentionally ignorant, because instead of seeing the human race as both good and bad, capable of both wondor and evil, you are purposely ignoring the good and focusing in the bad.

A person with truly open eyes, sees [b]everything, not just one side or the other. [/B]

Indeed.

It's tragic how quickly people will cast aside the very same altruism that compels them to post in the first place

No better way to say it than the quote in my sig 🙂

Im confused about what animals have got to do with this. Animals don't cut down half the worlds rain forests for trivial things which could be made from other natural, growable plants like hemp. Animals don't actively hunt down other animals for personal gain or a sense of achievement, they kill to live or defend which is only natural. Animals don't pollute the world to the point where in some places like Beijing the city is laced with fog like pollution. Animals do what they must do to survive, we only do things for personal gain.

And of course we are not all bad its just a shame our world is controlled and dictated by humans who really could not give a shit about any one or thing but there own personal goals. I don't hate people, I hate our leaders and the double standard hypocrisy of our 'democratic' societies.

Originally posted by SaTsuJiN
they are interesting creatures... but the core attitude of "self-benefit" is what keeps us from progressing in this life

Originally posted by SpearofDestiny
I know that some people don't like Humans, but [b]I do 😄[/B]

Originally posted by SpearofDestiny
I know that some people don't like Humans, but [b]I do 😄

Human Beings are fkn great !

History supplies us with centuries of Art, Science, Knowledge, Religion, and other forms of amazing development. We've come up with so much, and as of now, in terms of mental capacity and mass development, the Human Mind is the pinnacle of what this planet has to offer.

Human Beings have been responsible for the deaths of many animals. Yes. But we have also defended and saved many animals from exctinction. Humans work hard to keep Tigers, Blue Whales, Praying Mantises, and a various other load of wondorful creatures alive and breeding.

We spend our own money, and dedicate our own lives, taken away from the rest of human concentration to take care of lives that aren't essentially our responsibility.

But as the dominant species, we have taken Responsibility for the lives of our fellow Earthly inhabitors. We also fight other human beings, and put our lives on the line, to save those animals we care about so much.

Human Beings have created weapons, bombs, things that harm others. But human beings have also worked their asses off to come up with treatments and cures for diseases, that not only plague the rest of the human race, but which plague our animal freinds and pets as well !

Human Beings, in general, are pretty beautiful things, atleast when they take care of themselves.

I think the Human Body, male and female, at its peak, is the one of the most beautiful things in existance, and its something we should all appreciate.

We may be very limitted and easily influenced and distracted, but we have come a long way in discovering the workings of our universe.

And I sincerely beleive the Human Race has gotten better, as time passed, and passes still.

I dont know...call me Optimistic, but that's what I think. 🙂 [/B]

Originally posted by Magee
Im confused about what animals have got to do with this. Animals don't cut down half the worlds rain forests for trivial things which could be made from other natural, growable plants like hemp. Animals don't actively hunt down other animals for personal gain or a sense of achievement, they kill to live or defend which is only natural. Animals don't pollute the world to the point where in some places like Beijing the city is laced with fog like pollution. Animals do what they must do to survive, we only do things for personal gain.

I first thought of going point by point through this, giving examples of times in nature when animals have been responsible for such things.

However, the mention of "hemp" is almost emblematic of the scores of "green" memes that ooze together to form such a scattered rant.

The whole thing is based on a couple of fallacies. 1) Survival is not personal gain (which it is) 2) Human action is different in some "spiritual" way than the action of other animals OR human motivation is evil whereas the motivations of every other animal is good (with no reason given) 3) That the changes that humans cause to the ecosystem are different than those caused by other animals (again, no reason for this), etc...

Originally posted by Magee
And of course we are not all bad its just a shame our world is controlled and dictated by humans who really could not give a shit about any one or thing but there own personal goals. I don't hate people, I hate our leaders and the double standard hypocrisy of our 'democratic' societies.

conspiracy forum 🙄

Edit: for civility

Originally posted by inimalist

conspiracy forum 🙄

Edit: for civility

You must be extra grumpy because I didn't see a conspiracy in that....care to elaborate...civilly?

Originally posted by dadudemon
You must be extra grumpy because I didn't see a conspiracy in that....care to elaborate...civilly?

lol, maybe not a total conspiracy, but it is nicer than what I wanted to put

It's really naive to see the world as being controlled by this cabal of evil men whose personal interest is so at odds with that of the "common and oppressed man" that it causes the "double standard hypocrisy of our 'democratic' societies" (whatever that word salad means). I would consider it bred of the same paranoia that breeds conspiracy theories, though I guess since it does not actually have active "conspirators" (only "humans who really could not give a shit about any one or thing but there own personal goals" clearly more specific than the "them" of conspiracy theories) it is not technically a conspiracy theory

I stand corrected. It is a paranoia theory.

Originally posted by inimalist
lol, maybe not a total conspiracy, but it is nicer than what I wanted to put

It's really naive to see the world as being controlled by this cabal of evil men whose personal interest is so at odds with that of the "common and oppressed man" that it causes the [b]"double standard hypocrisy of our 'democratic' societies" (whatever that word salad means). I would consider it bred of the same paranoia that breeds conspiracy theories, though I guess since it does not actually have active "conspirators" (only "humans who really could not give a shit about any one or thing but there own personal goals" clearly more specific than the "them" of conspiracy theories) it is not technically a conspiracy theory

I stand corrected. It is a paranoia theory. [/B]

LOL...I'm glad you took my comment in good nature because that is the way I meant it.

Anyway...you are right about "double standard hypocrisy of our 'democratic' societies" being a word salad because he said the same thing twice with the "double standard hypocrisy".

Also, usually the paranoid design the conspiracy theories...it is nothing new: sometimes the hit it right on the head and sometimes the look like fools.

i like secks

Originally posted by inimalist
I first thought of going point by point through this, giving examples of times in nature when animals have been responsible for such things.

However, the mention of "hemp" is almost emblematic of the scores of "green" memes that ooze together to form such a scattered rant.

The whole thing is based on a couple of fallacies. 1) Survival is not personal gain (which it is) 2) Human action is different in some "spiritual" way than the action of other animals OR human motivation is evil whereas the motivations of every other animal is good (with no reason given) 3) That the changes that humans cause to the ecosystem are different than those caused by other animals (again, no reason for this), etc...

Originally posted by Magee
I would like to know what animal cut down the majority of earths rain forests.

😉

starting when?

or do you only assume that the loss of rain forest since the dawn of man are morally terrible?

Oh, and what animal has set up agencies to enforce rain forest protection?

However, as a more direct answer: You must be insane to think that humans are the only animal that causes deforestation. Your argument might look good because we are the most widely spread species and can affect all forests at once, but even today, elephants are responsible for the destruction of many grassland wooded areas. If there were elephants in the rain forest, they'd be destroying it at least as quickly as we are.

Let me go even further with this one: There has been more deforestation of rain forest due to natural climate change over the last 4.2 billion years of earth's history than man will EVER be responsible for.

Originally posted by Magee
I mentioned hemp simply because its the most versatile plant on this planet which is banned in most countries due to the buds it produces.

My point on hemp was to show that, aside from there being no coherence to your rant, you are taking prominent ideas from green movement rallies or pamphlets and just mashing them together.

I agree with you about hemp. In fact, most major business owners agree with you. Nobel prize winning economist (and libertarian) Milton Friedman has a petition singed by the heads of many major corporations that states that the ban on hemp and marijuana is unconstitutional and infringes on the rights of an open economy. It would be much more profitable for them to use hemp.

The reason hemp is illegal is the same reason that marijuana is illegal, which is Henry Ainslinger and institutionalized racism. Nothing to do with the environment.

Originally posted by Magee
Ah so you think humans are not animals,

actually, I do

Your argument is contingent upon animals and humans being different in some way. If not, a killer whale flipping around a helpless seal before it is eaten is the exact same as a factory farm. The only difference being that humans have a greater degree of adaptability than orcas (whereas, evolution has given them strength, swimming, and so on).

If it is wrong for humans to use the tools that evolution has given them to increase the likelihood of their own survival, than it is wrong for any animal to. If it is wrong for humans to harm or needlessly torture an animal, than the same is true for every other species.

Let me add as a further note: Humans are the only species that have set up proper guidelines for how other animals must be killed. I don't know a lot about these laws in America, but in Canada, if an animal is going to be killed in a slaughterhouse, a government inspector MUST be present. We can argue about conditions and all that if you want, but lets be honest, that is a HUMAN discussion. There are no orcas who think it is wrong for them to hunt seals the way they do.

Originally posted by Magee
we had other sources of getting what we needed with out damaging our planet but our greed made us take the easy road.

That is very wrong.

Lets look at cars.

At their conception, what alternative was there? Henry Ford was not looking at his engine and some other, "greener" version. It wasn't a choice of productivity over environment, it was "OMFG, we can make cars and totally change the world"

So, then we get the invention of tetra-ethyl lead. There were two major impacts of this. The first allowed for the production of engines with specifically timed combustions, and made the fast cars and especially the trucking industry possible. However, it was also responsible for innumerable environmental and health concerns. It has since been replaced by something better, but at the time, there was no other option. If you don't understand how powerful the invention of cross country trucking was, then sure you can poo poo this, but the point is that people were motivated to find better and more useful technologies, and the law of unforeseen consequences produces negative results which, once we know about them, we do whatever we can to fix them.

Now, lets look at the electric car. Remember, at the time, we didn't know about global warming, and thus, the massive environmental benefit of electric cars was never enough to offset how useless they were (there have been many improvements in recent years, due to increased interest in environmental technology). However, the dependence of foreign oil was enough to drive the market toward something else. This shows something that is counter to your hypothesis: If the masses want something, it is in the self-interest of major corporations to give it to them. If people REALLY wanted a totally green vehicle, it would be there, but they don't.

However, that sentiment has changed. Now being "green" is the new black. Its hip and cool to care about your ecological footprint. So, what happens? Major corporations have been stepping over each other to make what appears to be the most environmentally friendly items that they can. Whether they are truly environmentally friendly or just appear to be says more about the manipulability of the masses but does not negate my point.

The reason we are using polluting cars at this point is because 1) thats how they were made and how the technology evolved, before we were aware of all of the consequences. You cannot be critical of someone for not knowing everything in advance. 2) We established a system based around this technology, so even though we now know that it causes negative impacts on the environment, it would be suicide to just pitch it and 3) Now that there is awareness, the greed which you think is so negative, will actually push companies to make increasingly more green technology. It will be limited in haste due to 1) and 2), but ya...

Where did I mention cars?

it was an example

since you didn't mention anything specifically (big surprise there) I decided to use an example that I though proved a point which is applicable to most other environmental problems we have today.

th point being: We developed technology faster than the science of ecology.

Originally posted by Magee
Im confused about what animals have got to do with this. Animals don't cut down half the worlds rain forests for trivial things which could be made from other natural, growable plants like hemp.

Which is part of the reason that hemp is illegal. It's a threat to the paper industry.

But, one of the things I don't understand is why organizations like PETA want to blame humans for the methane produced by the large herds of cattle. I get why it's harmful, but I don't get the difference between man made herds and, say, the massive herds of Bison that once roamed the middle-American plains. It just strikes me as a "damned if you do/damned if you don't" kind of thing.

First of all inimalist you say ''If there were elephants in the rain forest, they'd be destroying it at least as quickly as we are.'' well we dont got them there, they cant just take a plane by will and decide that they are going to flatten a rain forest out can they, they live where they live. Its like saying if we had a million crocodiles every square mile on the planet everything would be eaten!.

Sure some people have set up agencys around the world to try to preserv the rain forests, oh I wonder why they have? cause there are humans cutting them down maybe yes? or was it to stop the whales from eating them?.

Fact is there are so many people around the world leading companys, and all kinds of stuff thats polluting the planet and doing nothing about it(or very little, some perhaps trying hard yes but not nearly all, not even close) cause they dont want to loose money, they only care about makin more profit to buy even more plants/factorys or what be to earn more, intead of using all the money to help research effective clean methods to do whatever they now are doing.

And to cut down all the forest what the hell is about that? thats killing the planet, animals dont do that.

The human race (not talking about every single human being) is effectivly destroying the planet by causeing global warming, and cutting down so many tree's, its not gonna be livable for many living creatures here if we keep this op, now I get the idea thats what the guy ment when he said the human spieces was like a virus, if you cant see that I think your being ignorant, cause its happening right now infront of your eyes if you perhaps look out the window, all around the world.

Originally posted by The Highlord
First of all inimalist you say ''If there were elephants in the rain forest, they'd be destroying it at least as quickly as we are.'' well we dont got them there, they cant just take a plane by will and decide that they are going to flatten a rain forest out can they, they live where they live. Its like saying if we had a million crocodiles every square mile on the planet everything would be eaten!.

Sure some people have set up agencys around the world to try to preserv the rain forests, oh I wonder why they have? cause there are humans cutting them down maybe yes? or was it to stop the whales from eating them?.

Fact is there are so many people around the world leading companys, and all kinds of stuff thats polluting the planet and doing nothing about it(or very little, some perhaps trying hard yes but not nearly all, not even close) cause they dont want to loose money, they only care about makin more profit to buy even more plants/factorys or what be to earn more, intead of using all the money to help research effective clean methods to do whatever they now are doing.

And to cut down all the forest what the hell is about that? thats killing the planet, animals dont do that.

The human race (not talking about every single human being) is effectivly destroying the planet by causeing global warming, and cutting down so many tree's, its not gonna be livable for many living creatures here if we keep this op, now I get the idea thats what the guy ment when he said the human spieces was like a virus, if you cant see that I think your being ignorant, cause its happening right now infront of your eyes if you perhaps look out the window, all around the world.

Inimilist is far from ignorant...probably stubborn and cynical at worst.

I fall somewhere between "Save the planet from these evil humans" and "Humans ain't messin' anything up." Really though, we ARE messing things up AND we are idiots sometimes. It IS all about business.

I want to go buy a $40,000 mass produced electric car....but where is it? I am willing to pay $20,000 more for a car if it was electric. Half the people I know want to buy a fully electric car. An electric car would raise your monthly electric bill by $5-$6 a month...But, if I can remember correctly....car pollution is only 20-30% of global warming!!! The large majority comes from business and Energy Production!!!!

These same electric cars that we want may only increase pollution at the power plant IF the power plant does not have a clean source of energy. In some areas, you can tell your company that you only want "green" energy and they will try to provide that...it costs a few cents more.

On top of that, you have got the stupid Chinese going overboard with the coal power plants because ALL they care about is making more money and becoming more successful, etc. What close minded fools, I say. Also, George Bush is a friggin' idiot because he wouldn't sign the Kyoto convention thingie....stupid friggin idiot!!! Though in his defense, I can understand why a republican would never sign something that would increase the costs of big businesses.

Originally posted by Tangible God
Human Beings are only so beautiful and wonderful because we are the only known mortals to label us so. Seeing as how we created these abstract concepts and gave them definition, it's pretty arrogant of us to assume that our supposed "beauty," both physically and spiritually, is enough to mean something to the rest of the cosmos.

I do not remember suggesting that our beauty means something to the rest of the cosmos 😬

Originally posted by The Highlord
First of all inimalist you say ''If there were elephants in the rain forest, they'd be destroying it at least as quickly as we are.'' well we dont got them there, they cant just take a plane by will and decide that they are going to flatten a rain forest out can they, they live where they live. Its like saying if we had a million crocodiles every square mile on the planet everything would be eaten!.

lets call this point 1.

this will be important later, because you refute your own argument.

Your point here is that animals can be just as destructive as humans, they just do not have the same population distribution

ok, so humans are evil because they have the adaptability to affect the environment on a global scale?

or asked another way, If humans were isolated to one continent it would no longer be immoral to clear cut a rain forest?

Originally posted by The Highlord
Sure some people have set up agencys around the world to try to preserv the rain forests, oh I wonder why they have? cause there are humans cutting them down maybe yes? or was it to stop the whales from eating them?.

See, I don't understand this point. Oh wait, it isn't one. You took my example of whales, made no bother to answer my specific point, and tried to make it look foolish.

Fine, we both know that humans are cutting down forests. However, as WE BOTH AGREE in point 1, other animals also cut down forests. Other animals can drive themselves to extinction because of their destruction of the ecosystem.

A good example of this would be a HUGE guinea pig anscestor they found in South America. I believe the thing was like 10 feet in length. It killed itself off because it ate too much. It destroyed all the food it would have ate. This is nature. Animals do this all the time, it is how that mystical balance of nature is created.

So, us being the intelligent animals we are, have seen the impact that we are having, and decided to slow it down. Have we stopped completely, no, but it certainly puts us a step above any other animal who would have indescriminatly consumed until its own extinction.

Originally posted by The Highlord
Fact is there are so many people around the world leading companys, and all kinds of stuff thats polluting the planet and doing nothing about it(or very little, some perhaps trying hard yes but not nearly all, not even close) cause they dont want to loose money, they only care about makin more profit to buy even more plants/factorys or what be to earn more, intead of using all the money to help research effective clean methods to do whatever they now are doing.

oh no!!! not THEM. THEY, who don't want to loose money!!!!!!!!!

so:

a) conspiracy forum

b) got any, you know, real examples? No, I didn't think you did either

c) I know the green movement has brainwashed you to this last point, but try to really think about it: Would you sacrifice the economy for the environment? How much of it do you think is ok to sacrifice?

Originally posted by The Highlord
And to cut down all the forest what the hell is about that? thats killing the planet, animals dont do that.

This is contradictatory to point 1. We have already established that animals DO that.

Look, animals cannot destroy their ecosystem because they are not as adaptable as we humans are. To use the elephant example again, they ARE DESTROYING THEIR HABITAT! This is something that has happened innumerable times in history. Elephants need to migrate, evolve, or go extinct. Human intervention is preventing any of this from happening with negative results to the ecosystem.

This is a very specific example of exactly what you said does not happen.

Do you think a beaver damn is immoral because it causes flooding? Are cyanobacteria responsible for genocide because they changed all the air in the atmosphere from CO2 to O2? Are the meteors that caused mass extinctions on the planet "evil"?

yes, these are ridiculous questions. But the problem is, they are supported by the point you are making. You MUST provide evidence for why human action is not "natural", or why humans are the only animal whose actions and effects on the environment are to be judged in an ethical manner.

Originally posted by The Highlord
The human race (not talking about every single human being) is effectivly destroying the planet by causeing global warming, and cutting down so many tree's, its not gonna be livable for many living creatures here if we keep this op, now I get the idea thats what the guy ment when he said the human spieces was like a virus, if you cant see that I think your being ignorant, cause its happening right now infront of your eyes if you perhaps look out the window, all around the world.

Well, to begin with, global warming is not destroying the planet, but just changing the ecosystem. We have projections about what could happen, they are proving to be somewhat reliable (although in many cases predictions are stuff like "there are reasons why global warming would make hurricanes stronger and there are reasons why global warming would make hurricanes weaker" meaning that unless hurricanes stay exactly the same, the predictions would be accurate).

Will the planet be unlivable for many creatures? of course. But that is a retarded argument. Did you know that the planet could no longer support dinosaur life? Is the climate a bad "entity" because it has changed so much in 25 million years? Of course not.

This is something that I have asked many times, and I still don't think there has been a reasonable answer given:

Other than aesthetic or moral reasons, what is the advantage to biodiversity? Why should I care if a species of rat or dolphin go extinct if my life is made objectively better by their deaths? Why should I sacrifice my standard of living to save a creature that a) is not properly adapted to the environment we are creating or b) would NOT do the same for me?

Ya, and we aren't a virus. Or, all animals are viruses, and the word virus has no meaning any longer. For instance, the fact that a virus spreads and uses resourses is not why they are defined as a virus. All life spreads and uses resourses. You might as well say "humans are eggplant" as a condemnation.

And as to me being ignorant. Wow. A green calling me ignorant. Oh, and when I look out my window I see a lush forest, a creek, some wildlife...