1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Humanity - Disrupting the Natural Order of Things or Helps to Balance It?

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Amenhotep7, Jan 31, 2005.

?

What should be done with Humanity's explosive population?

  1. We are doing only as nature intended. Leave population and the growth of it alone.

    16 vote(s)
    66.7%
  2. We are doing as nature intended, we are probably growing too quickly. Decrease the rate of growth.

    2 vote(s)
    8.3%
  3. Population growth should stop. It's good the way it is. Let the population stagnate.

    2 vote(s)
    8.3%
  4. We are a nuisance, but not deserving of destruction. The population should decrease a bit.

    1 vote(s)
    4.2%
  5. We are a virus or a cancer. Severe population reduction or extermination is required.

    3 vote(s)
    12.5%
  1. Amenhotep7

    Amenhotep7 Spartiate

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2003
    Messages:
    6,597
    Location:
    Preparing for the Persians...
    I am somewhat amazed by the number of people I have met who say that Humanity's population should be either greatly reduced or exterminated entirely. (You guys remember VHEMT?) I pondered this philosophy.

    The thinking behind this opinion is that mankind, since it evolved, has been as a cancer, a virus. Rather than create a natural balance about them, they take and give little to nothing back to nature, thus ruining the earth. Indeed, it would seem as though this opinion can be uncontested.

    But then I thought to myself: If all these processes originate from nature, if all creatures evolved through a natural process, then it should be understood that humanity also evolved from natural processes. We had nothing. We're not very fast, not very strong. So through natural selection did we grow to become the most intelligent beings on the face of the globe.

    Now, humanity has no way of survivng, except through one thing. Our minds. Our brains. Our innovation, our imagination, whatever you want to call it. And in our pursuit to survive did we create all the things we see. We grouped together into communities to protect ourselves, which became towns, which became cities. We needed to find a better way to protect ourselves, so did the process of weapons evolution begin, from big wooden clubs to Smart Bombs.

    And so now we see two points. That we evolved naturally, and that we survive using our minds. But did this mind not evolve by the evolutionary process? If we were given the capability to "destroy the earth", then it must be realized this capability is our adaptation, what was given to us by nature.

    And if we evolved this capability via a natural process, and are merely using our adaptation, are we not doing exactly as was inteded by nature? Are we simply balancing out the equation, so-to-speak? Yes, yes we are. To create the great industrial centers, to build grand cities, to carve roads into the earth, all of this is exactly as nature intended.

    So no, we as a species, IMHO, are not destroying the earth, and thusly we should purge ourselves, but we are merely doing as nature intended. To use our adaptation, to adapt to an ever-changing world, so that we may continue the process of life.

    Comments? Thoughts? What are your opinions? Does humanity "balance out the equation", or are we truly a pestilence upon the natural order of things? A virus? A cancer?
     
  2. Bozo Erectus

    Bozo Erectus Master Baker

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2003
    Messages:
    22,389
    Nature has a way of regulating itself. When the population of a species exceeds sustainable limits, a mass die off occurs that restores the original balance.
     
  3. ummmm........

    ummmm........ Extremely normal.

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2003
    Messages:
    5,959
    Location:
    An RKO Radio Picture
    Nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so.

    EDIT: Missed one friggin' word. I knew it didn't sound right.
     
  4. ~Corsair#01~

    ~Corsair#01~ Deity

    Joined:
    May 28, 2004
    Messages:
    3,245
    Location:
    x
    Well, we are undeniably a plague, but I don't think there's a need for population reduction. There will be other planets to rape once we've killed this one. ;)
     
  5. Vladyc

    Vladyc the Destroyer

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    209
    Location:
    New York
    We shouldn't do anything about it. Either the problems caused by overpopulation will naturally cause growth to stop or decrease, or we will find a scientific solution to the problem, such as colonization of other planets. So far the human race has always been able to adapt, so I see no reason why it shouldn't again.

    Also, although we are a part of the natural order of things, we are the first living things with the capability to seriously disrupt nature's balance.
     
  6. Yom

    Yom Re-ese Mekwanint

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2002
    Messages:
    5,551
    Location:
    Axum
    "There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so"

    Hamlet

    You forgot two words. ;)

    Leave the population growth rate alone. It will decrease naturally when there are not enough resources to support more people. Either way, we'll need the population for colonization of other planets.


    Edit: Apparently Vladyc thinks just as I do.
     
  7. Shadylookin

    Shadylookin master debater

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2002
    Messages:
    6,719
    Location:
    eternal damnation
    we should probably slow down growth, that way we can each enjoy more resources and stop overpopulation problems
     
  8. Rhymes

    Rhymes Drive 4 25 is back

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    4,076
    Location:
    Montreal, quebec Nuts: 2
    We are not a nuisance to the planet, she will survive after we disappear with no problem.
    But for our own sake we should really look out for overpopulation as it could be the main reason for our downfall.
     
  9. mrtn

    mrtn Shaven not stirred

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2002
    Messages:
    8,635
    Location:
    Stockholm
    Nature don't think, thus can't intend anything. It's just stupid chance.
    But for the sake of the species I hope we start colonising other planets quite soon... It's stupid to put all eggs in one basket.
     
  10. nonconformist

    nonconformist Miserable

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2003
    Messages:
    18,740
    Location:
    Canterbury
    Neither of the options. But we are a blight upon the planet.
     
  11. ummmm........

    ummmm........ Extremely normal.

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2003
    Messages:
    5,959
    Location:
    An RKO Radio Picture
    No, I left the there is off on purpose. The EDIT refers to what the line looked like before I edited it. Which I guess does make it sort of pointless.
     
  12. JohnRM

    JohnRM Don't make me destroy you

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2004
    Messages:
    11,582
    Location:
    Death Star
    Problems always solve themselves.
     
  13. zeon252

    zeon252 Keydet

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2004
    Messages:
    539
    Location:
    Soon, the barracks
    Quit whining about humans being bad for the enviornment, everything works out and adapts. Besides we got to the top of the food chain....
     
  14. elfangor801

    elfangor801 So cold....

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    552
    Location:
    Minneapolis, MN, USA
    I think it's a bad poll....were kind of obviously bad for the planet, but I still think growth should continue.
     
  15. CIVPhilzilla

    CIVPhilzilla Reagan Republican

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Messages:
    4,714
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    We'll know once w are too large. Eventually mother nature will not produce the food we need, or release severe climate changes on us. Until then the human species will grow and grow. The Earth will naturally balance itself out.
     
  16. Rhymes

    Rhymes Drive 4 25 is back

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    4,076
    Location:
    Montreal, quebec Nuts: 2
    We might be bad for other living species, but I hardly see how we could be bad for the planet? She existed long before us and will continue to exist long after us.
     
  17. CenturionV

    CenturionV Warrior Forever

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2001
    Messages:
    1,993
    Location:
    Canada
    First I would like to say some thing.

    The earth and all of the natural world is totally non-sentient. Nature cannot do anything, cannot give or take anything from us, has no drive, no purpose, no flow.

    Nature is simply the machine of the universe, and like all machines, it ultimately did not do anything to create or advance itself.

    That said I think people as the crowning acheivment of God's natural creation are of inherent value, we are not however ONLY the most advanced creatures, but those with the absolute most resposibility, as the universe only pro-creating sentient species (at least as far as we know) we are natures caretakers, and just as a caretaker is never lesser than what he cares for so are we to nature, nature is there for us to take care of and manage, not the other way around. And its our duty to manage it well for our own advantage.

    In the end nature is only the enviroment, not the focus of creation. We are.

    There is a stable trend throughout history as our population grows, so does our overall standard of living, and prosperity, even the poorest nations now have technology that even the richest of the rich only a few hundred years ago could not even dream of, even in the poorest of poor nations people live far longer than they have at any other time in recorded history, and they live in more confort, with more freedom. As the population of the world has boomed over the last 100-200 years our technology has boomed at an insane rate too, and we are still in a slow period, it can only get faster, and better. we will likely make more advances in the next 50 years then we did over the whole course of human history before, of course we will also discover ever better ways to manage this technology without becoming overwhelmed. More of us, is simply better. :)
     
  18. Amenhotep7

    Amenhotep7 Spartiate

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2003
    Messages:
    6,597
    Location:
    Preparing for the Persians...
    Note: I know nature isn't sentient, It's just an expression. "As nature intended". :p
     
  19. Perfection

    Perfection The Great Head.

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    49,772
    Location:
    Salisbury Plain
    Well, I'm going to disagree with CenturionV's creationist mumbo jumbo, but there are a large number of similarities between our opinion. When we evolved we became superior to other life. This is because we are capable of highly advanced analysis of the world around us and can transfer the knowledge very efficiently. We can build discover philosophise understand and create, something that no animal can do in any comparable amount. People simply kick ass!

    That said, there is still much we should do to preserve nature. It keeps our ecology stable, it provides a fascinating array of phenomena to examin, and it provides inspiration and perspective.
     
  20. North King

    North King blech

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2004
    Messages:
    18,142
    I believe that we've essentially destroyed the environment, thrown it out of wack, and controlling the population to a safe, sustainable level that won't kill the environment in it's entirety is very desirable.
     

Share This Page