Earth's oceans on course for mass extinction
POSTED BY: Niki2
UPDATED: Monday, September 26, 2011 06:09
VIEWED: 3627
PAGE 5 of 6
How does forgiving myself or punishing myself (if I felt the need to) come into it? I was commenting that I don't think what you posit is feasible, that has nothing to do with forgiving myself. I'm confused.
There's nothing I can do to stop what's coming; the studies of other extinct civilizations show the course they took, and we're right on the mark. The difference is that we're all over the globe, so there's nowhere to go in the time I believe we have remaining to change things, and no sign to me that things WILL change dramatically enough in time.
Every fallen civilization follows much the same path...overpopulation leading to abuses of the environment to feed the populace to shortages, starvation, war, end. We're much like Easter Island; once we cut down that "last tree", there's nowhere to go.
Every life is important to me, very much so. But my feelings about every life don't change anything and never will. I think globally/act locally, and there are many of us who do. But not enough, even in just America, much less evolving societies or third-world countries just trying to survive NOW.
In my opinion we ARE different than every other species on earth in that we are dominant, we change our surroundings to fit us (which changes the balance of nature), and we cover the globe.
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off 
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Your comment about not wanting to see humans do the same thing to other worlds.
I'm not trying to be rude here, I just can't see what's being expressed here as anything but, well, racial suicide. That's concerning to me. You clearly don't want our race to die, yet you insist it's impossible to save ourselves. You're dismissing solutions that might have a chance of saving us because you feel like we don't deserve it, support a solution that's likely to end up destroying us anyway through genetic bottlenecking and which will likely destroy the planet we're on by us continuing to stay on it, regret the measures of that solution and even seem to think it won't work anyway, and then you're sad that we're rushing off a cliff.
I can't say I understand it.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
In my opinion we ARE different than every other species on earth in that we are dominant, we change our surroundings to fit us (which changes the balance of nature), and we cover the globe.
All animal species do this BTW. Herd animals convert forest area into meadow land, and overgraze into desert. Predator species kill herd animals and shift things back into forest.
Except for Antarctica, this is true everywhere. Those species trying to survive, it's good, and yet with us, it's bad. It's a double standard.
Now, okay, we mine and drill and have man-made chemicals we pollute with, but on a basic level, we're not any different than any other animal. So sometimes I hear arguments, and none of them from anyone on here, but some people say that it would be best if all humans died so that the Earth and all other animals would recover. But things don't work that way, and killing humans fixes nothing, because the problems we've made will remain.
I actually think we do have some responsibility to clean up after ourselves, so even though I want to see us go to the stars for our own survival, I'm not saying we should leave Earth trashed. But I don't think we can help anything while we're still onworld, y'know?
That's the thing about humans, yes, our attempts to survive have done damage, but unlike the other animals, we're the only ones that can really fix all that too. I have to think that makes us worth saving.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Interesting; I can't understand your position either, and I certainly don't see it as "racial suicide" (I'm guessing you mean "species suicide"?). One of the differences is that I DO feel every life is important...EVERY life, not just human life.
"Suicide" means you want to die. "Short sightedness", "lack of global agreement", "unwillingness to finance technology" are the things I've addressed, "suicide" has nothing to do with it.
Another is that I don't believe some science or other will "save" us, when I see nothing in history OR in the current state of the world which indicates it will in the time we have, or that there is the will to do so. I consider that REALISM, not "suicide". I'm not "insisting" it's impossible to save us, I'm stating that from ALL our history as a species, our way of dealing with things indicates we won't. Not that we couldn't, if we had the time and the conviction that it HAD to be done. But that we are a short-sighted species, always have been, and by the time enough people are convinced that we'd better do something, it will be too late. Maybe it already is.
Where you got the "don't deserve it" is totally beyond me. I've disagreed with the solution you proposed for a number of reasons, none of them having anything to do with deserving. I said I think what you posit may be possible--tho' I have serious doubts--but that it won't happen in time. See above.
I never said no other species changes its environment...or I misspoke if I did. What I meant to say was that we are SO dominant and that we have populated essentially the whole earth--and WOULD populate it if there were the resources and we kept on going as we are. One species can alter its environment to the detriment of the environment, which will then cause that species (if they can't adapt or move) to become extinct. But one species doesn't inhabit the entire planet. We do, and we've fouled all our environment to an enormous degree. When the oceans can't cleanse themselves, it's a pretty strong indication Nature won't be able to recover from what we're doing and if we continue to do.
That you believe we can "fix" what we've done in time puzzles me. I've never seen any example of our species doing so. Every civilization which ran out of natural resources disappeared, from the Myans to the Easter Islanders and so on. Do you know of any example of civilizations which have changed their ways and still survive when they couldn't move and have made survival impossible where they are? I don't.
I take issue with your stance that the removal of humans wouldn't fix anything. There was a TV series of documentaries showing what would happen if we vanished tomorrow, and Nature did a damned good job of recovering and renewing. I'm one of those who doesn't believe we are a positive influence, and I think you're referring to me, given I have said in the past that if my death resulted in all humans vanishing from Earth, I'd give my life gladly. As I said, I value ALL life, not just human life. It has nothing to do with "deserving" or not deserving, it's merely looking at things, seeing what's happened throughout history and what's happening now, and extrapolating what I believe the future would bring for this planet.
You speak of how we have the technology to go into outer space. I don't know if that is completely true, but it's not merely about technology. It's about how the human brain works, and convincing enough governments/politicians/people to make the EFFORT. That you think we could accomplish this in any time frame prior to the earth becoming unsustainable is something I don't understand. History, and even what is going on around us every day, show otherwise.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I probably shouldn't question what you've told me about your motivations, but it's the way you say things. Like how you say you'd die if it meant that you could kill off all other humans, it's really concerning, and really does almost suggest blaming all humans for something most of them have had no say about. It seems to suggest wanting to punish them.
Not wanting humans to go into space, to stay here and go extinct, that sounds like a punishment to me.
Maybe I should let this go. It kind of makes me sad.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Byte, you're still not getting it. I've got nothing against humans going into space (yeah, I made a crack, but it was a CRACK). Actually I think it would be neat, especially if we cleaned up our act and were responsible once we got out there. My point is THERE ISN'T TIME. I'm talking logic, not personal opinion of humans. That's my whole main point; you can't get enough people to agree it needs to be done and agree to DO IT (and PAY FOR IT) before time's up. That's the human failing I'm trying to express, obviously poorly.
No, it's not about punishment, and I said nothing about killing human beings, or ME killing them (which I would never do). The idea was that if my own death would cause all humans just not to exist (which is different from "killing" them, as in causing pain and suffering) and allow Nature to repair this lovely blue marble for all the other species.
Has absolutely nothing to do with blaming or punishing or anything like that, merely that our species have certain propensities which aren't healthy for what I consider an absolutely magnificent planet.
Let's see...would you "blame" and "punish" a dophin for playfully splashing you in your best Sunday clothing? Horrible analogy, I know, but the idea is I'm not BLAMING humans for being humans...I'm ashamed of us, certainly, because I think there's a huge potential for us to be better, but I'm looking at our actions throughout history and assuming they will continue.
If I revere ALL life, how can I be in favor of one species which is destroying not only others of its own species, but causing the suffering, death and extinction of so many millions of other species, and destroying the habitat of almost all those who remain? To do so is, to me, a special kind of selfishness...something we do share with all other species, but we're supposed to be better, or so people say, because we think, reason, have empathy, etc.
You say you're sad about my beliefs, but they're just MY beliefs, and I happen to love humans. One at a time and those I can respect, anyway. I think we're amazing; I think our brains are inconceivably fantastic, I'm just sad that we never "grew up" as a species. If I had my druthers, I'd wish we'd evolve beyond our more base tendencies and work to heal the world. I don't see it happening, there CERTAINLY isn't time for THAT! That makes ME sad, but to me it's just a fact of life. To twist a signature, "It's not personal, it's just LIFE!"
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
If all humans just "vanished" I don't think the end result would be all that positive and wonderful for the world, and I think wanting people to disappear is just as scary as wanting them to suffer and die.
You're ashamed of humans, and want us to disappear. Or maybe never exist. But you don't see that other species can be destructive as well. Other species kill each other, other species hunt each other. Other species will use up all available resources to the detriment of the environment. You talk about species never growing up, and maybe humans aren't perfect, but humans are more grown-up and more evolved than the other species.
Does that give us some responsibility as caretakers? Yes. Have we sucked eggs at being caretakers? Yes. Does it make us evil?
No.
As for "time," most climate scientists predict we'll hit 600 ppm CO2 in about 100 years. Even that's not untenable, and it's unlikely we're all gonna die in some horrible climactic cataclysm.
We have time. It's the other animals who don't.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Did I ever say we were "evil"? No, nor do I believe it. Did I ever say I was ashamed of my species? No, nor do I believe it. Please don't mischaracterize me. I agree to disagree, and your judgmentalism is starting to get to me, so how about we give up? It's my OPINION, and like I said, I've seen and read estimations of what would happen if we weren't around, and Nature WOULD recover...at this point.
I was very clear in saying that, while other species do some of the same things, they don't inhabit the entire world; their actions are limited to individual areas. Why you're not reading what I'm writing is beyond me, but I ask you to do me the decency of not putting your own views out in such a way as to judge me. I voiced my opinions; I didn't judge you for YOURS, I just said I don't think there's time (by numerous scientists' studies) and that I don't think going into outer space may be viable. Let's just let it go, if you don't mind. Better than that, I'm just not going to respond further. Think what you want, it's your right.
Our oceans are dying, that's the point of this thread; and if they die, we eventually die too.
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Byte: You are doing the equivalent of "Beam Me up, Scotty.
First of all, pushing significant numbers of people and material up the gravity well and creating self-sufficient colonies (either exo-planet or in space) takes a LOT more resources than creating the same number of self-sufficient colonies here on earth. We would strip the planet bare trying to appreciably lower our population's impact... make things worse, not better, that way.
Second, if we haven't been able get things OK here, yet, on Earth, what makes you think we will be able to make things better elsewhere?
Our test is now, not later.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"There really isn't anything that's a deal breaker with Mars."
Lack of sufficient gravity for healthy bones. That IS a deal-breaker. And no one has figured a way around it. It's why people in the space station have to come back to earth.
But there are too many other things we know about and can't recreate (sunlight, phytonutrients, minerals) and don't know about that people need to stay healthy long-term. Look at autism. What's causing it? What would prevent it? We don't know. If we don't know, how can we be sure to do things right? We can't. The same could be said for asthma, communicable diseases and their vaccines (do we let chickenpox, measles and polio sweep through small isolated communities or vaccinate?), population genetics, minimum population size and required skill-set etc.
If you are looking at a place for people to go to SIGNIFICANTLY relieve Earth's overpopulation - say a place for 4 billion people - Mars ain't it.
What's your plan B for space colonization?
"We have time."
Whatever makes you think that? People have already destabilized the ozone layer, the global climate and the ocean biosphere. The only thing that's keeping us alive at our current numbers is our technology. But once a single prop is knocked out - and it could be an EMP, lack of clean fresh water, a disease, war, nuclear war, or major food supply failures - and the system begins to fail - the FIRST thing to go will be technology. No more atomic level IC chips, exotic minerals for advanced materials, goods from China or raw materials from S Africa ... and we are left scratching for survival in the rubble. Is THAT a society about to establish space colonies? Or even massively deploy technology here on earth? Once our technology goes we are in worse shape than the other species because of our artificially inflated numbers when facing a depleted unbalanced earth.
Remember when teachers, public employees, Planned Parenthood, NPR and PBS crashed the stock market, wiped out half of our 401Ks, took trillions in taxpayer funded bailouts, spilled oil in the Gulf of Mexico, gave themselves billions in bonuses, and paid no taxes?
Yeah, me neither....
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME