Quantcast

endagered species

SkaredShtles

Michael Bolton
Sep 21, 2003
67,408
13,953
In a van.... down by the river
BurlyShirley said:
I wasnt arguing any of that. Im just saying that humans arent "the worst thing to happen to nature" becuause humans are, in fact, part of nature. There have been numerous cases of mass-extinction throughout the earth's history. Some from Ice ages, comets, volcanos, etc. Arguing over which occurs at a quicker rate is really irrelevent. Species come and go, and thats just how it works.
And dont get mre wrong. I think people should do all they can to protect the world, but technically speaking, whatever happens is supposed to happen. That's nature for you.
Yup. Humans are just taking the place of a comet/asteriod strike. We're just doing it *much* more slowly. How's that for a postivie spin?

:D
 

BurlyShirley

Rex Grossman Will Rise Again
Jul 4, 2002
19,180
17
TN
SkaredShtles said:
Yup. Humans are just taking the place of a comet/asteriod strike. We're just doing it *much* more slowly. How's that for a postivie spin?

:D
yeah, I just think people look at this issue in an odd way. I mean, the things we're doing now, to save forests and endangered species and stuff, I totally support it, but in truth, the earth doesnt care. It'll keep spinning and growing off wierd life forms no matter what happens. We could pave the planet, and over time, once we've all died off, the earth would recover and start anew. I happen to like forests and streams and the animals that inhabit them, but I dont see THAT (undisturbed nature) as how the world is truly supposed to be. I think its supposed to be just how it is. Men are just animals that capitalize very successfully off of their resources. Nature made us that way.
 

SkaredShtles

Michael Bolton
Sep 21, 2003
67,408
13,953
In a van.... down by the river
BurlyShirley said:
yeah, I just think people look at this issue in an odd way. I mean, the things we're doing now, to save forests and endangered species and stuff, I totally support it, but in truth, the earth doesnt care. It'll keep spinning and growing off wierd life forms no matter what happens. We could pave the planet, and over time, once we've all died off, the earth would recover and start anew. I happen to like forests and streams and the animals that inhabit them, but I dont see THAT (undisturbed nature) as how the world is truly supposed to be. I think its supposed to be just how it is. Men are just animals that capitalize very successfully off of their resources. Nature made us that way.
I agree wholeheartedly. The earth (if it could) would scoff at our feeble attempts to destroy things. :D
 

macko

Turbo Monkey
Jul 12, 2002
1,191
0
THE Palouse
I'm just not agreeing with this point of view. The earth is not here for us to completely exhaust. Just because we have the technology and the industrial prowess to pave and "modify" every square inch of land does not mean that we should. I think that a more impressive feat would be for us [mankind] to show enough restraint that we can live in harmony with nature, not dominate it.

I find it very curious why so many people have the "buy it because I can, build it because we can, destroy it because I can" attitude towards life. Everything must be in reckless excess; there is no conservation, there is no respect.

And if you think that's a bunch of garbage, look at it from a point of self-preservation: "The more you poison the environment, the more the environment will poison you." - David Folari (I believe...)
 

BurlyShirley

Rex Grossman Will Rise Again
Jul 4, 2002
19,180
17
TN
macko said:
I'm just not agreeing with this point of view. The earth is not here for us to completely exhaust. Just because we have the technology and the industrial prowess to pave and "modify" every square inch of land does not mean that we should. I think that a more impressive feat would be for us [mankind] to show enough restraint that we can live in harmony with nature, not dominate it.
Well, technically speaking, the earth actually IS here for us to exhaust. All we have to do is walk out the door and take what we want. "restraint" is a relatively new concept when it comes to harvesting natures bounty, and that's a good thing for our species and many others, but as I said, the earth doesnt care. It's an emotionless rock spinning in space with little microbes bouncing around on top of it. If some die, new ones will grow back. I love the wilderness as much as anyone you know, I swear it, and like I said, Im glad we're protecting it. But there is NO right and wrong. Only nature. We're living it.
 

SkaredShtles

Michael Bolton
Sep 21, 2003
67,408
13,953
In a van.... down by the river
macko said:
I'm just not agreeing with this point of view. The earth is not here for us to completely exhaust. Just because we have the technology and the industrial prowess to pave and "modify" every square inch of land does not mean that we should. I think that a more impressive feat would be for us [mankind] to show enough restraint that we can live in harmony with nature, not dominate it.
Ahhh...... to be so young and naive. ;) I doubt many people would disagree with you. The main point people haven't gotten yet is that not only are we going to f**k the planet, we're going to f**k our own species in the process. Problem is, the vast majority of the world's population has many more pressing *short* term needs that trump their long term outlook.

I find it very curious why so many people have the "buy it because I can, build it because we can, destroy it because I can" attitude towards life. Everything must be in reckless excess; there is no conservation, there is no respect.
Do you really know people who have this attitude? Usually people do things for real (or perceived real) reasons..... not just because they can.