hes totally right
hes totally right
http://us.battle.net/wow/en/characte...tknight/simple - Retired ( miss my ret paladin )
http://us.battle.net/wow/en/characte...hostx/advanced - alt
http://us.battle.net/wow/en/characte...nknight/simple - Monks are OP ! ( new main )
if we can ever achieve having impact on universe, we will. you can argue it might be a negative impact, but going away with humans now is like complaining that baby can't open a jar, and all they can do is eat and poop.
Yes we have an overpopulation issue; people saying it's the rescourses not us are pretty ignorant, it's even speculated that in 2020 here in belgium we will have to cut back on using drinking water and by 2050 the whole world will be so over populated we will be doomed. Thats only 7 years until it will become a big problem in the western world. Also humans developed nuclear weapons to kill other humans which also take a huge toll on the planet ; korea even announced they will test a new nuclear weapon on America. WE are the problem i mean our technology will be our doom : just look at cars or so ! Humans were not made to go that fast. And someday one of the only actual options will be cannibalism : too much humans and too little food. I just hope i won't live that day.
'T Vlaamse heir staat immer pal, Daar 't winnen of daar 't sterven zal. Alhier, Aldaar aan lange lansen de leeuwen dansen, de leeuwen dansen.... En de leeuwen dansen, de leeuwen dansen.
OT: Hysterical shrieking about overpopulation is nothing new (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon%E...3Ehrlich_wager in 1968) and has been proven wrong time and time again. Attenborough is just the latest in a long line of 'experts' who have come to completely misguided conclusions. He deserves the respect he's earned as a conservationist, but there's a line drawn at sandwich-board, end-of-the-world nuttery.
Aside from that, to 'correct the human plague' would require at minimum some form of overarching world government with complete and utter control over the entire human population, even just to implement some sort of contraceptive measures. Look to the Kyoto Agreement to see just how effective simple promises are. There is no question, force would have to be used to bring those who disagree into line. Anyone who supports such thinking should be kept away from any positions of power; they've already stated that they're willing to murder anyone who disagrees to achieve their goal.
This doesn't even get to the elitism that drives the eugenics movement (because what is being suggested in this thread is not just population control, but population control of the "wrong" people, the people who have "ruined the planet"). We've already seen people suggest killing off "modern savages" in some of the responses above. This kind of thinking is supremely dangerous; such disrespect for human life undercuts the most basic freedoms that people enjoy.
It cannot be repeated enough: Those who support such measures (forced sterilization, forced contraception), fully realize that in order to implement such a program they will have to butcher a significant portion of the world's population. There is no peaceful alternative to bring about your vision for the world. This is the real reason why mass murder is connected to population control: People are not, generally, going to allow themselves to come under tyrannical rule without the threat of real force.
For all the people that think humans are a plague and the earth will be better off without us...
Lead by example already, and remember it's Down the road, not across the street.
The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity but the one that removes the awareness of other possibilities.
These are long term plans to educate people and this is fairly harmless. These kind of measures can only be taken while overpopulation is still not yet a problem. Further technological improvements are definitely good but I don't think standing idly by while hoping everything will turn out just fine is a nice approach to a potentially extremely bad situation.
there ok with there table being there
We need the emperor, he takes care of that.
More serious though... we are not overpopulated on earth, we will someday.
And no we won't erase ourself and kill humans. The chance for that is incredible small and will fade as soon as we reach the point of non existing diversity in mankind.
Different culture will die out, so does everything else that can differ between humans.
If we reach that point, we won't die out, maybe forever. But we certainly won't be the cause of that.
"Why do we fight? To protect home and family, to preserve balance and bring harmony. For my kind the true question is, what is worth fighting for?"
Q: whats the difference between the extreme right and extreme left?
A: the extreme right wants to kill some groups of people and are evil for it. The extreme left wants to kill off large classes of people (oh excuse me we need to compare the process to culling animals per Attenborough) and bring down the human population for the sake of the environment, and this is a nuanced position we need to take seriously.
One side gives us the jewish question. The other gives us human question.
Sure; some of his ideas might be a bit strange (such as the notion that humans were aquatic mammals once), but the very fact that people have some weird opinions doesn't make them complete whacks.
For instance: Stephen Hawking. I bet most of us can agree that he's a genius. He's also completely off-his-rockers delusional. Still a genius.
That Kaku guy who loves doing those 'rabbit hole' documentaries? Completely nuts. His beliefs make no sense, and are certainly not backed up by the sciences he claims back up his beliefs. Still a genius in his own right.
Tsoukalos; let's not forget about him. "I'm not saying it's aliens, but..." You know; the guy's pretty smart. Sure; he isn't that good at separating observation from personal bias, but if we're going to judge a person's complete worth on that alone, we'd have to concede that anyone who holds any supernatural belief (not religion itself, but the belief that God is literally a guy who decides everything) is completely worthless in every respect just because they base a large portion of how they see the world on belief rather than demonstrable fact (note that I'm not suggesting that belief is wrong, per say. Merely that it isn't demonstrable fact).
We really can't do that. All sorts of people have all sorts of ideals, ideas, beliefs and convictions. Having one contrary or controversial view does not make an entire personality invalid.
David Attenborough has contributed to this "plague" by having kids of his own. Why doesn't he just off himself? Help the environment! Mass suicide!!!! lol
On a serious note, nature will fix this on its own. We humans are but a blip in Earth's history. New species will emerge and inherit the earth after we are long gone. It's called evolution.
I would ask if you consider yourself to be a plague as well. I have a hard time imagining somebody say "yes, I am a parasite, sapping the world of its resources" without trying to fix that. It would imply that you are just fine being a plague.
When was the last time you saw a swarm of locusts destroy itself out of emo-ness?
There's nothing morally or inherently wrong with being a plague.
So here it is:
"Yes, I am a member of a plague species (though not a parasite; it is something completely different, thank you very much (though I wouldn't care much if I were; the terminology is simply incorrect)), and I'm pretty much fine with that. There's loads of things we can do to make our behaviour sustainable, and I applaud most of those things because it allows us to plague on lots more, and have a nice and rich environment to boot. Of course we're sapping the world of resources (as does any other species of life, but we're giving so much back! We just have to make sure we don't kill ourselves off with the things we're giving back." :P
Didnt Agent Smith say the same thing to Neo?