Jurassic Park, reality?

[Anathema]

Actually I think cows are pretty lucky. They have the certainty that their species will continue to exist, because we need them. Same for other lifestock.

[Edric O]

Do you know what happens to a population of bacteria in a closed environment with plently of food and no predators? They breed like hell, until they poison their environment. Then they all die, leaving a wasteland behind. Sounds familiar?

What we are doing now is just like that scenario. It's not normal evoluion. We don't kill for food, we kill for fun! Fur, ivory, whale oil, rhino horns - these things aren't food!

Humans are supposed to be intelligent, so I think it's about time to be acting up to that! We must stop behaving like animals, or we will all die because of our own stupidity.

[gryphon]

How would our ability to destroy the world place us in a biological different position ?

Just becuase we are stronger doesn't mean we are that different. A Elephant is much stronger then a mice, but according to us they aren't that different. One is just stronger.

How would any abilety we have [ biological ] distinct / seperate us from other animals ? They are just other biological adaptions. Noting more.

About those cows .. That's exactly the superious way of thinking I ment. Why the H*** would we need cows ? Becuase we need them they will exists ?

- If they some how would die due to resons not related to humans, we would seek an alternative and let them die.

- If that alternative would be in our grasp before they are threatend we don't care about cows anymore.

- If a cow get's sick we simply kill an entire country's "supply" of them, just to insure safety. Yea right, we need them. But still we kill them by the thousends. [ Mad cow phenomina in GB NL and FR ]

Not to mention the fact that we need them. As if other animals shouldn't need them. The fact that every thing should be judged by our standards and importance.

Nature just doesn't work that way.

[Timenn]

Yes, that puts us in a different position. If we gone out of control (we already) do, everything will be destroyed, including us. That don't look very naturally.

Yes, why do we need cows. Because we need their milk. And we are not the only ones. Ants 'milk' bugs too. For also food/drink

But I agree with you that we actually don't care more then that for them, we kill them with thousands...

[Acriku]

Any eco-terrorism that destroys property or causes financial damages is good

All of this does affect human life! This is just another human-ignorant comment in which we all succumb to ourselves. If you think for one second violence that doesn't kill people is good then I can't help you. The violence used only slows down the corporations, they will never "surrender" and will continue doing it. Violence is not the answer, yet as many humans before have done these eco-terrorists wage "war" without reason.

gryphon, the Dinosaurs were extinct by the Impact of the comet

Even if that theory is true, not all were directly killed by the comet, some were killed because other dinosaurs died or their ecosystem was destroyed.

But since humans are so fond of saying they are better then animals, then they have no right to exterminate animals!

I'm confused on how us saying we are better takes away the right to exterminate animals? I know we have no right to kill animals, but most of the killing RIGHT NOW are to feed the 6 or so billion people living NOW. The American society is molding into a country built on political correctness, so killing animals for clothing or whatnot (uses not necessary for survival) is going to be slowly looked down upon (it has started a lot here, too).

Quote from: Acriku on August 23, 2002, 21:43:56

I would like to know what the first two are for argumentative purposes

1) Mice

2) Dolphins

Does the book tell why they are intelligent? Mice live on instinct and high breeding rates, so I don't see how they are "more" intelligent than us.

If you would just take the idea Darwin gave about survival, then it would be the fault of the species that die

I interpreted natural selection as not the species' fault for dying out, but the random filling of the niche is the cause. The species has no say in what niche is filled, so it can't be their fault. Sometimes the right niche is filled, sometimes it isn't. That's life.

What we are doing now is just like that scenario. It's not normal evoluion. We don't kill for food, we kill for fun! Fur, ivory, whale oil, rhino horns - these things aren't food!

The business set on fur or ivory or whale oil, etc, gave the people money for food as well, so it wasn't totally evil. But I still don't agree with the method.

[ethan]

i think its an expiriment on rats gone wrong :P

[gryphon]

What we are doing now is just like that scenario. It's not normal evoluion. We don't kill for food, we kill for fun! Fur, ivory, whale oil, rhino horns - these things aren't food!

Humans are supposed to be intelligent, so I think it's about time to be acting up to that! We must stop behaving like animals, or we will all die because of our own stupidity.

That is exactly what I don't get. [ Timenn said about the same so the quote also applies to you :) ]

You say it's not normal evolution ? Who not, we are not the only animals who kill just for fun. The bacteria seem to be doing it to. So it looks like it is normal biology / evolution. We as humans are no different to other animals with there behaviour to kill without reason. Even if this would endanger our own position.

Going out of controle, same as a chicken without a head, or a flie that lacks half of his body ? What about the "kill frency" some raptures have when they are iin traped positions. Killing every thing they can in a desperate hope to escape the situation.

The seconds part [ everything will be destroyed including us ] is the same as the bacteria Edric O mentioned. And again, that arn't humans, they are bacteria. So again, it's nature. Not our own stupid human postion.

Humand are supposed to be intelligent ? sais who, supposed, who sai we should be intelligent ? We as humans ?

The question, why should humans be intelligent ?

And with that you are suggersting, implieing that other animals or less intelligent or not intelligent compared to humans.

I think you had the best example Edric O. Just made a wrong assumption on the way.

"What we are doing now is just like that scenario. It's not normal evoluion."

You say we are doing the same as those bacteria. We behave the same as other animals. But "it's not normal evolution". Now why is that not normal ?

We behave the same as other animals, that should be biological correct. Same with Timenn's responds.

All the things are "animal" behavior. So we do act "normally". Even though it might seem irrational, it is biological.

Now why should humand be any better then other animals to be in a higer "uber-animal" position ? And more important, how is it possible we are the only ones placing us in that position. No other animal or fore of nature seems to find us "biological superior" or superior in any other way.

It's a "god" like thing in our way of thinking that likes to elevate us as humans above other animals and nature itself.

But why ?

edit - Acriku already replied, forgot about him, sorry.

Yep, the dinosaur died [ possibly ] due to that reason. But still, that's what I mean. There is no justified reason, the could not adapt to the ecosistem that changed due to that comet. Now where's the justification in that ? They could even help it. My point was that a lot of creatures are extinct now because of irrational and immoral ways. There is no rational way to get extinct. It just happends.

[TMA_1]

Edric you are wayyyy too idealistic. We wont stop our evil. Acriku is right in many ways. We are the superior beings of this planet right now. Superior in the fact that we have seen no other animal with a concsiousness. Just true Edric. That might piss you off but its the way it works.

Lord Johnsonius... Dumb.lol Maybe if you read the bible instead of accusing it you might not look like an ass. Ecclesiasties talks about animals having a soul. The verse says that man's soul raises to heaven while an animal's soul sinks with its body to the earth.

Oh and also. Natural selection is nothing "planned" Everything just happens by mutation. Sometimes because an animal needs to adapt. Sometimes just because a freak accident happens and an animal evolves a certain trait that helps it survive better in its environment. People have this idea that somehow animals know how to evolve. That it happens by a plan. In the case of what evolutionists say, it just happens. It is a great game in which animals adapt and conquer over its environment. Not by what it did but by how adaptable an animal is. also the cercumstances in where the animal is. Like I said most of it is by chance.

I dont believe in Macro Evolution. I think it itself is a religion in the guise of science. No arguments a bout this statement please.

[gryphon]

We have seen no other animal with concsiousness ?

You mean the same concsiousness that let's us jell at a foreigner, that beats up your classmate because he has glasses, that declares a holy war on the other half of the world. The same consciousness by which women get raped and mollested day after day.

And the same concsiousness that is being displayed by a dog when his masted died, the grief at that moment. The Mother duck who distrakts the hunter so her young will survive, of that wolf who liks the wounds of his fellow packmember.

Hope you get my point. When humans set the standards of concsiousness, that doesn't mean that really is cousciousness.

That animal aspect of concsiousness could be teh same as the thing you only know humans have. Just a biological thing. Just adapted different for us, but still the same.

[ordos45]

On the other hand, we ARE products of evolution, and if this product eradicates other species it could be called natural selection.

Gee, I'm glad that its still only a theory, or is it? One science textbook calls it a theory, and my other one calls it a fact. Nevermind that it can't be put through the scientific method. It takes as much faith to believe in as an all powerful supernatural being.

And faith according to a dictionary is belief without evidence. Thus evolution is its own religion that we are indoctrinated from the time we play with toy dinosaurs onward not to question.

"One commandment all religions share is 'Thou shall not question!"-Darwi Ordrade Chapterhouse of Dune

(However, if you look in the bible, it does say to question your faith to know if it is true, so don't try using that quote against Christianity. But if you apply it to evolution, thou shall not find an answer, thou shall be squashed by people who are trying to make up the answers.)

[Acriku]

I do think it takes faith to believe in evolution, but that is all I am going to say in hopes "Religion" thread doesn't happen again.

And ordos, perhaps could you clear up that last part on applying the quote to evolution? I don't understand what you mean.

[ordos45]

To believe in evolution it takes faith, and faith makes something a religion. Thus thou shall not question evolution!

[Timenn]

gryphon, the fact that we are now talking about this can point at something that we ARE other then other animals. I agree with you that it can be not like that in many reasons. Like search for survival, luxury, pleasure, fun. But we we are different in the way that we now talk about this. And you can't precisily say that all cats are doing the same for example.

But I've realised that we can't say that only WE can destroy Earth. What about specefic micro organism.

In that point you convinced me. But I still believe that we humans are more aware of this then other animals.

TMA_1, we have never found out if only humans have consicinous. Even we don't even know what it MEANS. We can't see it, we can't identify it. And as Descartes said. You can't prove your consicinous to others, only to yourself.

And so I agree with you last point gryphon. That consicinous can be different per specie

[Edric O]

Let's not turn this into another argument on evolution, okay? I don't believe in Macro Evolution either, but that is beside the point. For the sake of the argument, I consider it true.

Gee Gryphon, maybe you're right. Maybe we should all just start slaughtering the other animals! Yes, let's do it the evolutionary way! Let's see which animals can adapt to our bullets and which trees can adapt to our chainsaws! Hey, if they can't adapt, then they should die. It's evolution, right? Let's kill 'em all!

::) ::) ::)

Acriku, of course material damages affect human life. But for the most part, they affect the lives of "poor" millionnaires who can't buy a new yacht. Oh, my heart's breaking for them! ::) Violence is not the answer? Let me remind you that every single leap forward in human civilization was done through violence. Either by war or popular uprising or something similar. It's evil and it shouldn't be this way. But it is necessary. You will never impose a new world order without some violence.

If humans weren't breeding like rabbits, we wouldn't NEED to cause this much damage to the environment. Not that all humans are equal, though. The people in 3rd world countries have no choice but to live in relative harmony with nature, while the rich in the West waste 80% of the Earth's resources.

TMA, you bet I'm idealistic! I believe humans CAN be good. We CAN create a better world for everyone. We CAN put an end to our greed and help the Earth recover. We CAN end all wars and poverty. But only with the proper education. You see, a man's personality is greatly affected by the education his receives during his childhood. If we encouraged children to be generous and to care for their fellow man and the environment, the world would be an infinitely better place. Our current education system is hypocritical. Good human values are being praised, but in fact you can't advance in our society without being an evil greedy bastard that preys on the weak.

Welcome to corporate capitalism. It's just like social darwinism, but in a prettier package!

[gryphon]

I didn't say [ or shouldn't have tried to ] that we are the same ar other animals. Just that we are and probably stay [ at least for the next couple of hours ;) ] animals.

And ofcourse we are different from them, we have an entire culture build up that is not there in whatever other animal species on this planet. True. But that doesn't make us any better, higher or whatever greater then those other animals. It just makes us different from them, but still verry animal. With the animal behaviour that acompanies that.

Does that make it a little bit clearer ?

And Edric O. did you miss one of my posts ? About things not being good or wrong. yes we kill and probably will continue to do so. But as contradiction we have a form of sympatie towards other animals. That sympatie prohibists us to do so. Or in some cases it makes us to help other animals.

Just as that cow. We will kill them. But then, we could be genltle and caring towards them.

I didn't say we should start killing any animal. Just that we do. And I don't think any one, even those who are positieve or passifistic can deny that we as humans simply murder other animals. That even other animals kill other animals for fun, and do things that seem in a way not logical.

When you deney that, you also deney a commen habbit amoung animals.

[Edric O]

Yes, we DO kill animals for fun and we DO have an animal-like behaviour, but what I'm saying is that we SHOULDN'T. We really should try to change our ways. And we can change them, but for the moment it seems we just don't want to.

Hmmmm, here's what I said some time ago:

Humans are DIFFERENT from animals. Not superior, just different.

So you see, I have the same opinion as you do on that subject.

[Timenn]

Me too :)

But why should we on one hand, help animals. And on the other hand killing them all?

It's like slapping a dog, and after that giving it a cookie

And this topic is like some sort of three with white cherries :)

[gryphon]

Yep, that quote is the same. Just for the record [ ;D ] in the posts above it was ment as a reply fot Timenn. I still remember we have that same position from the religion and differences between humans and animals topic. :)

What I was trying to say as reply to you. Or I get the idea with your posts from now. That you might whant to change more then I think we should. [ weird way, me telling nature how to act ;D ]

So in a way, killing will be natural and nessecary. It's not something we should change. Why should we ? Who says it's wrong to kill ? [ before anyone starts quoting and exadurating it please know what I mean ].

We don not live in an idealistic world. Where we can all do good. And the world is nice. Bad things are just a part of life as good things are.

I'm confused when you say we shouldn't have animal like behaviour. Why should we ?

And why should we whant to change who we are ? If a fox is a predator, he whould be stupid to become a vegetarian. Or a fish that starts liking nuts.

That's in my view crazy. We are who we are. And can and should deal with that the best we can, but not try to change what we are.

[Timenn]

Ok, maybe I see a part of what you mean that killing is in some ways right (and not like those pesty kids who wrote to Donald Duck that they were angry on their cat because it had caught a bird)

But you are going further then this. I agree that I'm happy if I see my cat coming home with a bird, even though the bird might be ripped out of his family. And my cat gets enough food, and it might eat only the half, after torturing the bird for hours. And I must say then, that I don't feel ANY sorry for the bird. But that I'm just more fond of my cat.

This is maybe an odd example, but actually I'm now giving you right.

But I can't admit for myself as human that I want to kill kill kill. Because what people now are doing is constantly kill kill kill. While my a cat (pet cat) probably catches a mouse once per week/month/year

You see, humans don't control thereselves. They aren't stopable.

So you convinced me in the part that killing is a part of nature. But I'm still convinced that humans do it waaaay to much

[Edric O]

We should change who we are because we can become something better! What you are saying is that anything that is natural is also good. I couldn't disagree more. Nature is NOT good. Nature can be improved!

Our moral code stands ABOVE nature and her ways. If nature gets in our way, then to hell with nature! [note that I mean HUMAN NATURE, as in "our instincts and our primary drives". I don't mean the environment]

We are humans. We are different. We have a God-given moral code. (you may disagree about the God-given part, but we still have morals) We should change ourselves for the better. We have the power to change nature. I say we use it to do good instead of evil.

[The_Sadukar]

I think that the term "Inhuman" should't be used to describe unatrual crul things, but should be used to describe good thing, cos most humans are just plain cruel and careless

[Timenn]

But Edric, it's going a long way to convince everyone to be better then nature. Because in this part you are right. Why stay with Nature?

But I'm an optimist. Just like you. And that is what the world needs.

Ok maybe not. But you don't want to get right if you are a pessimist. 'I will never be understood by other people'

Sardaukar, how are you sure most humans are careless. I don't know many people who are. And it's only that idea that I get from people I don't know well

[Edric O]

Actually Timenn, I have a sort of internal struggle. One part of me is idealistic, saying that humanity can improve itself, that we can learn to live in harmony and create an utopian world. Another part of me is the complete opposite, cynical, saying that we are all fools and we will die miserabely in the mess we have created, because our greed and stupidity will always get the better of us.

Because of this I sometimes seem to make contradictory arguments, as my mood swings and one opinion takes the lead over the other. I still can't make up my mind... which one to listen to?

[Timenn]

I think you should listen to the optimistic one, who is trying to convince the opposite one

[Edric O]

Pesimistic Edric: It doesn't seem realistic though... who is going to lead humanity to create a better world? Where can we find a political leader that genuinely cares about the people?

Optimistic Edric: Okay... then go into politics and try to do that yourself.

Pesimistic Edric: ROFLMAO! Yeah right! ;D

You see, pesimism seems more realistic, given our current situation.