Alright I know its been ages since I've posted one of these... And I am dropping that stupid format I had before. From now on I'm just going to quote the intro and get right into the "question" although most of these haven't really been questions anyway so I might start calling these "theoretical thoughts"... or something similar... Anyway on with my crazy rantings...

LIFE! So to introduce the crazy thoughts that I am bringing up today I want to first bring up what made me think of it. It was Kobra's stupid new sig image about going green... It got me to thinking. All this hype about going green. Well of course I know what it is for, to "save our planet" from these horrible things we are doing to it. But then think for a minute... The planet will soon be destroyed anyway no matter how "green" we go. Even if we limit down our amount of emissions to a tenth of a percent of what they are now, the planet will be destroyed eventually anyway and we will soon need to find another place to live, so instead of "saving" our planet we are just going to try to stall the inevitable destiny of it being uninhabitable until we find an alternative location for us to create a civilization?

Now many argue no. They say we are trying to save our planet for our decedents, so they can live in a world as good as ours. But why? Why are we bonded so closely to our own kind? Why is any creature? What would be the big tragedy of us all going extinct anyway? I'm sure I'm going to get a lot of annoyed replies for that comment, but think for a moment. We're acting like people who commit suicide to "get back" at the people they don't like, but they don't realize that the'll be gone and it doesn't even matter. So what if a couple trillion people aren't born and have to face life and then die. How is that going to change that much? Nature is the force that decides what lives or dies and we have sure done a number on nature to try to stay alive. Perhaps we have come to a point where we need to back down and let nature take its course, even if that means our kind going extinct.

Now that being said, I would like you all to know that these are marly thoughts floating through my brain that I felt like sharing with you... No I do not believe that we should destroy our planet and no I do not actually believe that it doesn't matter if we go extinct because I am a human like the rest of you. But if you haven't already read through the post with a logical stand point. I think some of you may find these thoughts rather interesting.

 

 

 

Reply

I don't know what else to say but we shouldn't worry about the future too much especially that far into it. We will be dead and our children and theirs long before the earth will die.

In relation to the bible I read a bit of the watchtower magazines given to me by some church people and it talked about us living in the last days where God will soon end this system of things. I had a thought since it says its been about 6000 years since the beginning right? What if another 6000 years past and there is no ending would that prove that the bible is not correct since if we are near the end then it should of came before then?

Sorry if I'm going off topic I just had that thought and it seems to sort of fit here with world ending and all.

Reply

lol, I made that because I thought it be funny to insult apple and encourage people to help the environment at a time, okay I wont deny I think the Ipod is great but everything else is well, terrible!

Yes it is true the planet will be destroyed but that wont be our fault but imagine if we create something that will allow us to stop this happening or move to another planet, we need to give science that chance so the longer we hold off on the destruction of earth the better, this is about stopping something that will ruin this planet years and years before it is meant to be destroyed, I see what you mean, but isnt that the point of life, to reproduce, carry on the species... if your not going to do that then you might as well just top yourself now. Of course there are many other points like to have a fun good life. but dont our decendants deserve that?

Reply

Of course they do, but standing at a less human more logical standpoint (sort of how summer glau would look at it in the Sarah Conner Chronicles on fox ^.^), the decedents who's lives are on the line don't exist yet. It would be one thing if they were to be born and then suddenly die of our doing, but who exactly are we hurting if they will never exist?

Reply

"Soon" is fairly relative in this case. The planet certainly wouldn't soon be destroyed naturally relative to your lifetime, but may soon be destroyed through pollution etc. The argument you put forward here is the same as saying "I won't redecorate my house, because the paint will only fade again and I'll have to redecorate." Yes, your action is ultimately undone by the destruction of the planet, but in the meantime it does some good.



If you believe some predictions, we are saving the planet from our parents for ourselves. Slightly selfish, but look after number one and all that...



The problem though is that nature has not been allowed to take its course. There are theories for both sides, but if we assume that global warming and all the current environmental problems are due to human activity then the current state of the planet is due to humans and not nature. If those "couple trillion people" aren't born then it may be due to human activity, not nature, and you are therefore interfering in nature. Trying our best to ensure the next generation will have somewhere habitable to live is the best we can do, and is only reversing human effects, not reversing nature.



I think you would have great difficulty in stopping the current population, ahem, 'creating more people' We can therefore say with confidence that our descendants will exist, and so therefore their lives are on the line. They will be born, and may well die due to human activity.

 

 

 

Reply