I gotta write a little paper discussing this quote for English class. It's a really open-ended promt, I just wanna hear what some of ya'll think about it. Walt Kelly was the author of Pogo, a daily American comic strip which ran from 1948-1975. The episode, which dealt with environmental issues, was created for the first Earth Day in 1970. So post up, bitches!

__________________

We will kill ourselves by man-made weaponry before we ever come close to changing the temperature of the planet. And before you give me the shit about "oh, well the temp of the planet has risen 1 degree in the last five years", just be hush for a minute. Do you really not believe that earth cycle changes can have a much more profound impact on weather than our use of aqua net?

__________________

And by "you", I don't necessarily mean, you man.

__________________

We and our enemies are not that different. Everyone is fighting for the same things, trying to avoid the same things. One is called a dictator, one a citizen appointed official, etc. Regardless, they're still fighting the same war, just on different sides. Wants. Desires. I dont know where Im going with this I am so fucking tired.

__________________

umm... we pollute. DUH!!! FUCKING EARTH DAY!!! nothing to do with weapons... i think its how our waste builds up.

could you build your thesis on analysing possible different meanigns? like we are the enemy because of war, or because of pollution, or what... or does it have to be like THIS MEANS THIS AND YOU'RE MY BITCH MOFUCKA!

or perhaps even arguing that this quote means nothing and he was jsut fucked up on acid.

__________________

... What the fuck are you talking about?

__________________

No question that pollution is harmful. I'm completely for anything that will limit the amount of CFC's that end up in the air. But, I just think we give ourselves way to much fucking credit if we say that global warming is our own doing.

__________________

Is depth a problem for you, brother? He asked for what we thought about that quote, and that's the first thing that comes to mind. The fact that hippies will say anything to spin shit their way. Just like conservatives or anyone else with an agenda will spin shit their way.

__________________

Well, like I said, it's very open-ended. But either way, war, pollution, etc. all fall under possible ways the human may bring on its own demise. So it's a matter of harnessing our nature per se, which I think will (naturally) be the deciding factor.

__________________

Obviously, it's a great problem. Let me explain my utter shallowness.



Do you really believe anyone with more than one sixth of a functional brain thinks this is evidence?



Which 'earth cycle changes' are you talking about, specifically?

Are you conflating 'the weather' with climate change?

What is aqua net? Is it like SkyNet? Does it want to go back in time and kill Sarah Connor?

Sum of above: refer to previous question.

__________________

Well, first of all, it seems that only 1 sixth of the population are not that idiotic. Alright, I think I've mentioned this before, but Greenland actually used to bear grass, and Venice's canals have actually froze over. Ever hear of the ice age? Think maybe it wasn't caused by man's pollution? That's what will happen if the earth temp continues to rise. Ice caps will melt causing oceans to cool, causing harsh winter conditions.

Aqua Net is a cheap hairspray.

__________________

I'm probably going to bomb on this, but I'm going to give it a try.

Do I believe that humans have contributed to the pollution of our planet? Yes. But when you think about it; Global Warming, ice caps melting and wather conditions worsening, could it really be prevented? If we weren't here, would any of this stuff NOT happen? I agree with belphegor on how we give overselves too much credit for bring upon this change. I think it's safe to say that it is inevitable.

The earth has undergone and endured many catastrophes in it's existance that have shaped it to what it is today, and the conditions created by these catastrophes made it possible for organisms to exist. As conditions changed, species evolved to keep up with the change. Global Warming and the conditions it will soon create will spark the era for a new and more advanced species.

Will we die out? Possibly. Is there anything we can do to prevent this? Doubt it, and even if there was a way, what gives us the right to do it? By trying to prevent Global Warming, we would be stifling and weakening us.

I read that quote now, and to me it says pretty mch the same thing; We are our own enemy, but not because we are "destroying" this planet. It's because we have a need to survive, no matter what, even if it means a life of stagnation.


Again, I probably fucked up completely with this post, and more than likely not helped this guy with his paper. I'm just jotting down what this quote made me think about.

__________________

Actually, that was pretty well said. We can't be sure about anything. I mean, a super-volcano like the one under Yellowstone could go off, which would cause a world-wide famine. The earth can purge us in many ways.

__________________

Ok you're gay. You're just as fucking biased as your opposition. Does it matter what I fucking believe? If you make it a personal question you're being as ambiguous as you fucking want. Maybe if you asked a person who has studied the topic for years and years you could get an educated response. I highly doubt you are part of a research team or similar. No, internet articles don't cut it. Thanks for your opinion stated as fact with no evidence.

haha. Good one.
Yeah that "aqua net" threw me off. Hopefully its not some sort of water computer intelligence that is planning on taking over the human race via us polluting the globe and melting ice caps.

It started off for about 5 seconds as a decient response, then it just turned ridiculous haha. (Belphegors)

My ideas about global warming have definitely changed since being a geo major and taking geology classes.
I personally don't care whether we are "effecting" Co2 levels in the atmosphere not. Even with out "best" efforts I imagine we could never reproduce the changing effects of natural balancing processes of the globe.

Its obvious that with polar caps being melted that there would be a good bit of coastal cities that would eventually get flooded out, or significant human protection of the cities would be needed to maintain them, but so what? Its not an over night process thats for sure. Also kind of what Belphegor said that over time the earth has produced dramatically "worse" effects than polar caps melting. We are yes, past the end of the last ice age, and the earths temperatures are on the way up, but obviously in order to peak those temperatures it'll take millions and millions of years.

The question i guess that should be asked, is whether or not it seriously makes a difference whether we can speed up a tiny portion of those millions of millions of years now, or waiting it out? (if that makes sense)

Sooner or later it will happen, obviously not in our lifetimes or the lifetimes of descendents of us pretty damn far down the road.

__________________

Step back and look at the question from a strictly "specie" (is that the singular of species?) aspect.

Other species compete amongst themselves, but not to the magnitude humans do. Humans put other humans in cages, not to mention war or genocide.

__________________

You can go millions of different angles of a paper with something like this. That is comparing and contrasting the difference between humans and other species and how we "produce" our own demise.

When i think of this i immediately think about how we often over think things. We create simplicities and complexities that drastically distort sometimes obvious things. Maybe thats the bane of being a rational, reasoning being.

So maybe another way to look at the quote is saying that its our intellect and rationality that allows us to have our unique fruits in life and our unique undoings both at the same time. A seemingly true oxymoron.

__________________

Exactly. So instead of wasting time trying to prevent such disasters from happening, we should really be preparing for them. And if we die out, it's only because we weren't strong enough.

The weak must die out to make room for those more superior.

__________________

Alright, unless you're talking about your father which would make it a fact, is it really necessary to come in calling someone gay, just because you feel differently about something? I didn't state my opinion as fact, but obviously I happen to think my opinion has a good chance of being correct or else I wouldn't have an opinion. No we can't know any of this shit for sure, we can only make educated guesses.

Oh, yeah of course it matters what you believe. Your opinion is no less important than mine. Thanks for your time, jewbag.

__________________

It happened with the extinction of dinosaurs so yeah, it will probably happen to us at some point.

__________________

Yeah, but I don't think the idea of preventing things like volcanos or tsunamis, etc. ever really stood as a consideration for very long. The way I see it, why not look at all sides of situations like this? Is overpopulation not but another threat to our existence as a species? Why not welcome with open arms a few volcanos, tsunamis, tornadoes, and other natural disasters to do as they will? (...as if we had any choice to begin with) A gift from our dear earth to prolong the human with natural population control. And sure, like you said, let natural selection take its course.

__________________

natural selection has pretty much tookin a different course in our future...especially here in America. Its not now who is more tuff but who owns the "Most Cash"...

__________________

Its widely known americas at least initial ability to be so successful is due to the unrestricted resources and no "natural enemies."

Also belphegor79 i think comparing dinosaurs to us is fundamentally flawed in almost every single way, and it seems a lil naive to think that just because climate destroyed the dinosaurs that it will happen to us. In my opinion.

__________________

natural selection quit when the "social contract" came into play. however, there is still natural selection from a societal standpoint (SEE DARFUR/NATIVE AMERICANS).

who knows? maybe WALT KELLY is just a fuckin masochist freak who likes handcuffs and furry gerbils.

__________________

Exactly. The reason we don't "welcome with open arms" the many natural disasters this Earth provides is because of our need to survive. See a tree beginning to fall towards us; we jump out of the way. See a tornado in the distance; get to a basement. When most people hear how much Global Warming is going to affect our weather, their need for survival kicks in and what do we do? We make hybrid cars, we recycle, we do whatever we can to "save the world," despite the fact that this Global Warming isn't all caused by us.


Extreme climate changes like those caused by a meteor crashing into the Earth can and did kill a dominant species like the dinosaurs. If a similar catastrophe happened to us and we survived, that just means that we are still strong enough to live and that there is no need to make room for something stronger.

__________________

LoLz DaD iNsUlTs. Yes it necessary, but I don't necessary feel differently about the issue. I didn't state my views, I just stated the flaws of your first post. If you don't think your post:
"We will kill ourselves by man-made weaponry before we ever come close to changing the temperature of the planet. And before you give me the shit about "oh, well the temp of the planet has risen 1 degree in the last five years", just be hush for a minute. Do you really not believe that earth cycle changes can have a much more profound impact on weather than our use of aqua net?"

...is stated as fact then you have a problem. There are no "I think" 's or anything similar. You're saying "we will kill ourselves..." and then you're saying you're only making an educated guesses?


And no, I was saying what I believe doesn't matter since I have basically no knowledge on the subject. You asked the question "Do you really believe...". Belief is different than fact. Beliefs are subjective, not objective, which is what we want. The question you asked is dumb anyway. "Do you really not believe that earth cycle changes can have a much more profound impact on weather than our use of aqua net?" Do you know how the fucking Earth works? Just because we're currently supposedly in a heat-age doesn't mean shit as we basically have no experience with how the Earth works technically.


Lol I disagree with this. This might mean we're stronger than the dinosaurs, but it's not like a meteor (or possibly a few) hitting the Earth is the strongest catastrophe possible.

Now, you're not saying that exactly, but your view is odd (imo). So the dinosaurs died, but if we survived, it proves that we're stronger than the dinosaurs and don't need to make preparations for something (ourselves to be) stronger? Is this because our fate lies in mother nature's hands and if she wants she could kill us all off but this is a strong enough temporary proof? Is that kinda what you're saying? Got me confused.

Very well, change everything I post to begin with the words "I believe" then because opinions are all we really have anyway. Thanks for analyzing my words so closely. I feel important now.

Your point about the lack of experience we have with the earth is basically what I was thinking of when I started in on the whole man-made global warming thing anyway. Al Gore's view is just as skewed and spun the same way people that Matt Drudge's seems to be when he makes statements hinting that this cold winter is somehow evidence that global warming doesn't exist. How does he know?

__________________

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0vjtW8hKnE

A little bit of George Carlin's take on it.

__________________

I agreed with you up until this point. Your last sentence is extremely confusing.

Do you mean:
A. We don't know how the earth works or has worked over the years?
or B. We haven't been "alive and around" to "experience" climatic changes?

Response if its A. Thats probably the most naive assumption ever, not to mention a huge trivialization of the amount of knowledge we've gathered about the earth and its processes. Especially in the field of geology which has a multitude of substational evidence for climatic changes.

Response if its B. So what? What bearing does this have on any arguement what so ever?

__________________

That's kind of what I'm saying. If we prove to be strong enough to survive such extreme conditions, then we have earned the right to exist. If not, then we must be killed off to make room for a more advanced and stronger species. "It's clearance day on EARTH! EVERYTHING MUST GO!"

Life is a test. You pass if you're strong or you fail if you're weak.

__________________

Except everybody fails. Why is it that unlaid losers who spend the bulk of their time on the internet, completely immobile, always believe in the most extreme versions of survival of the fittest?

By the way, what could be more trivial than quibbling about the specific way we'll kill ourselves?

Our failure and downfall is another one's rise to power.

Think about it; This world has undergone 6 mass extinctions, and everytime something has survived to dominate the Earth. Why? They were strong enough to survive whatever killed off everything else. The same thing will happen to us, and after we're gone, someone better will come along and make this place an even better world to live in, until they, too are wiped out and another species rises to power, and this cycle will most likey continue until something somes along that is an actual threat to the planet itself, such as the galaxy Andromeda (sp?) heading towards us.

And dude, just because "unlaid losers" are the ones saying these things, does it make it any less or more true? If a murderer says murder is wrong, is it a lie?

__________________

Hell look at seinfeld the episode where george can't have sex for like a month and he becomes a genius. Uh oh he may have been onto something haha.

__________________

Yeah, but George wasn't a virgin.

__________________

The fact that the people who would be killed off immediately in a real 'survival of the fittest' contest always pretend like it's the absolute law of the land does make it less true, yes. Or, more precisely, the fact that such people exist does. The correct analogy would be a murderer denying that murders occur and such a thing as a 'murderer' exists.

'Better' or 'worse' is a dumb value judgment to make when it comes to what survives a catastrophe. The whole revolutionary thing about evolution, that made people hate it so much, is that it's not teleological: there's no progression towards higher and higher species. There's just random shit changing at random, surviving based on whatever pressures happen to be in place.

we are all humans and most of our enemies are humans

__________________

Hey, a reasonable answer to the original question.

i didnt even read the rest of this thread hahahaha , i figured everyone would skip the obvious one. hard to write a paper on such a barebones interpretation though

__________________

Kinda both pretty much. The amount of data gathered may be a lot, but it is only for a short period of time. We don't know how the Earth works over thousands of years. I'm no geologist, but the 'substantial evidence' is only concerned with about... 200? or so years? (since detailed, 'modern' recordings began). The climate may fluctuate unpredictably (which it pretty much does) and that evidence may simply be temporary changes and nothing long term at all.

The B. response... We haven't been around to experience the changes, and this has a bearing to Belphegors
"and before you give me the shit about "oh, well the temp of the planet has risen 1 degree in the last five years", just be hush for a minute. Do you really not believe that earth cycle changes can have a much more profound impact on weather than our use of aqua net?"
Yet he's talking about Earth cycle changes like the Sport.

Not even close man. I recommend taking a basic physical geology class. you'd be amazed at the information gathered, and its just an intro class. We have extremely solid evidence towards a little over 3.5 billion years. When you start getting close to 4 billion it begins to get hazy because of crust that was reheated again and again in the predicted early stages of the earth. This is called the Hadean eon which goes back to about 4.5 billion years.

In regards to weather and climate we have more evidence than you can possibly fathom over the years. Evidence of glacier weathering, reheated elements, areas that originally contained flowing water or ice and all sorts of other things.

Hell we even have dated the shifts in the electromagnetic poles of the planet via cooled magma containing magnetic materials and their alignment across the globe.

I definitely recommend taking a class or picking up a geology book.

200 years? PFFF. You could pick up random rocks dated well beyond 200 years if you wanted to. Hell if you wanted to do some digging you could easily find sand/silt/mud stone containing fossils of organisms millions of years old.

__________________

I think humans are too smart for our own good.

People have mentioned survival of the fittest but that doesn't really apply to us as a species in the western world anymore, at this very moment. With modern medicine, weak people who would've died hundreds of years ago are living on, having kids and weakening the general population. More educated and 'successful' people have kids later in life when infertility is more common and risk of abnormal births are higher. Trailer trash/rednecks/ferals have kids early on and a fuck load of them and many turn out like their parents.

If someone ever discovers a cure for cancer, or the silver bullet, they will be praised, showered with awards and labeled a saviour of millions. Realistically, it'll fuck us more than benefit us. 1/4 of all deaths will cease. Over-population will become more apparent than ever.

When the world's main problem becomes over-population, which will happen regardless, I believe it will be solved through nuclear war.

I know it's nazi like but it's probably realistic

__________________

You need to look much more indepth into the subject. First of all you're comparing a process that takes thousands to millions of years to "modern" events and changes. Thats your first mistake.

Also why just the "western world?" What are "we" doing that the rest of the globe isn't doing? Are we so fundamentally different that the basics of human survival and living are different?

What does "trailer trash", "rednecks" , or "ferals" have to do with anything? In my opinion that was one of the most ignorant comments i've ever read/heard. Also what does that have to do with producing a number of kids or that they'll end up "just like their parents?"

Furthermore you should read up on the LONG term effects of disease and sickness before making broad assumptions that you have.

Hence another case of somebody putting their 2 cents in without any knowledge base to go on. Although we all do it from time to time, opinions or just b.s. is usually passed off as facts.

__________________

You're right. I'm a dumbass. When I was typing my response before, in my mind I had data graphs such as the sunspot cycle graph. I was thinking about graphs humans have collected observations (as they occured) for.
As soon as I started reading your post, all the fucking Discovery and NatGeo programs i've viewed over the years flooded into my mind. Yearly weather through trees (corkscrew core), erosion, caves, soil analysis, bacteria, shit heaps of imagery into my head. Fuck. Earlier today I was out of it, and still am, which you can probably tell by the disjointed flow of this response.

Anyway, goodnight.

personally i think the statement is far far too vague and open ended to possibly box an answer, you could expand on this for a very very long time and it would take alot of effort to word everything effectively. focus on one or 2 cohesive points and go with it.

I remember reading the comic and I remember Pogo being a cool character with an awesome nose. That's about it.

__________________

That really isn't saying much. As with most (pretty much all) species, there's competition among ourselves as there is competition from outside species, as well. A profound revelation!!

__________________

Tada! haha. It happens. If anything you make me feel better in thinking that you aren't so retarded and living in a box to honestly think we have no knowledge past 200 years. Hell the american constitution is older than that and its just sitting down the road..

__________________

Yeah but you can't compare a fucking constitution to observational evidence really. Meh

id disagree, if aliens that we had never met before just flew in and write a new constitution, do you think it would look anything like ours? no, because they havn't studied and observed, they dont have the knowledge that we have of ourselves. if we didn't study and observe ourselves, how would we know what to put into a constitution.

What if we saw their constitution? And found out their entire species was in conflict.. just like us. Would we then teach them our number and maths system just so we could emphasize the importance of the number 42? No, but we would correct in saying that those aliens we had never met before had never met us before yet we had met them before, so then the study of thier constitution by them would be fairly arbitrary.

Lol what the fuck that literally does not make sense!

After rereading it for the 2nd time i'm still

__________________

dont worry he told me it was just bullshit to annoy me

Excuse me, but how the hell did this topic go from talking about the enviroment to discussing the quote to the US constitution to ALIENS?

__________________

Welcome to Metal tabs, and furthermore welcome to Chit Chat.

Cunt.

Oh and btw you could use the constitution for observational analysis of <200 years. I'm not sure how much "climate" data you could get out of it, especially since its now like uber locked up in a vaccum sealed glass container.

I was just simply throwing out something random over 200 years old.

But regardless we've concluded climate and enviornment can and has easily been recorded over time.

Here is another random idea for the topic. What about something like employeers and their "battle" with internal dissent and theft. I read or heard somewhere that most crimes committed against companies are internal. Could be an intresting topic to write about.

__________________

So something as dramatic as the introduction of antibiotics can't or won't possibly have any affect on the genetic pool? Antibiotics have rendered some genetic traits useless as it's brought things back to an even playing field. Those with slightly less effective immune systems who potentially would've been knocked off as kids have the chance to pass on their faulty genes and those with better immune systems have little chance to distinguish themselves from the rest. Who says that this won't go on for thousands of years and eventually make a mark on the gene pool? And then a possible widespread nuclear war with lack of resources or a pandemic involving a new disease untouched by antibiotics to fuck us over?


Wake up. You don't think that third world countries suffer more from different life-threatening diseases than developed countries (TB, typhoid, malaria, cholera...etc) and that they have less resources to deal with it? Or are you suggesting that this has no impact on survival?


It seems too easy to call someone ignorant, straight out, for using labels such as trailer trash. You'd have to be ignorant not to understand that people of lower socio-economic standing generally (as in the majority) have children earlier and more of them than those more well off. You'd also have to be ignorant to believe that they have less problems such as health (mental and physical), substance abuse, social problems...etc and that people growing up like that aren't less likely to get higher education and break out of the self perpetuating problem. I just thought it was ironic that 'survival of the fittest' is about the strongest, more valid passing on their genes and it seems that it's been totally turned on its head.


What the fuck does that mean? Are you talking about chronic disease or how disease effects populations? If you're talking about the cure to cancer thing, I'm not saying that 1/4 of the population won't die, I'm saying that those who would die at 30-50 from cancer are more likely to live on to older ages (70-90), contributing to over-population and being a burden on the population. You can't say that that won't have any impact


All you did was pick apart my shit without adding anything. Where the fuck's your facts? Prove to me how antibiotics/cure for cancer haven't/can't have an impact on populations.

Basically what I was saying, in a round about way, was that we've moved totally away from the basic human survival. The concept of being the fastest, stongest and more able to survive and procreate has become almost totally obsolete in our world. Everybody but the bottom of the bottom has the base requirements (shelter, food, water) to survive and reproduce, even if they haven't earned it themselves (government support, the dole, charity...). Our life goals have totally changed. It's all about being employed to earn money to spend on shit that we don't really have enough time to enjoy because we're too busy earning money so we can buy it. Compare that to hunting/growing/gathering food to eat, building shelter, making clothes (ie doing all the basics). We used to spend time working and achieving for our own direct benefit, now we spend time, and too much of it, 'contibuting to the community' and being left to worry about bullshit like mortgages, bills and buying our own happiness. As I said, I think we're too smart for our own good. We've gone too far in trying to make things easy for ourselves to the point that it's become over complicated. Essentially we are our own enemy.

I'm sorry that got lost on you in your attempt to feel good by picking apart yet another persons opinion with with your own broad comments with no real answers. Cunt

__________________