Poll: Voluntary Human Extinction
- Thread starter Uszi
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I am actually a fairly big fan of population control since I think overpopulation is the ultimate threat to Earth and the human race, but there's a big gap between controlling the population and eliminating it entirely. What the hell is the point of protecting the Earth if no one's alive anymore to enjoy it? Goddam exremist psychotic human-race hating hippies.
For the good of the world, I think that the human race should try to do less to impact the world around it, but I don't think that an all-out extinction is even slightly reasonable. Population control is well and good, but look what it's doing to the Chinese. The poor men are having issues finding girls to marry. I myself like to think that we take steps towards bettering our impact on the earth every day, and that we as a race can do what is necessary without killing ourselves off. My opinion doesn't really fall into any of the options, so I'm just putting it here.
I've already consigned myself to never being able to reproduce and even I think it's a stupid idea...
Meh, I disagree, but then Earth will most likely recover no matter how bad we fuck up. Us hoomahns should worry about ourselves, the odds of us getting nuked by other factions of us are much greater than earth becoming irrevocably uninhabitable, if'n ya ask me.
*snicker*...*giggle*...HahahahahahahahaHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAH!
Oh my god (hahaha) are they serious? (hahahahahaha) If this is a joke (haha) then it's awesome. (hahaha) If it isn't (hahahaha) then it's the stupidest thing I've heard in a long time. Either way (hahahaha) it's HILARIOUS!
I mean, I all for saving the environment, but this is ridiculous.
The stuff written on that site was just so stupid I...can't...stop...LAUGHING!
(HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA)
(Sorry for all the "ha"s but this is so funny I really can't stop laughing.)
Oh my god (hahaha) are they serious? (hahahahahaha) If this is a joke (haha) then it's awesome. (hahaha) If it isn't (hahahaha) then it's the stupidest thing I've heard in a long time. Either way (hahahaha) it's HILARIOUS!
I mean, I all for saving the environment, but this is ridiculous.
The stuff written on that site was just so stupid I...can't...stop...LAUGHING!
(HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA)
(Sorry for all the "ha"s but this is so funny I really can't stop laughing.)
This is the epitome of those people who sit and moan about how humans are evil and deserve to be extinct. It's ridiculous. The Earth's purpose is to create and sustain life, removing humans from the equation does not fulfill that purpose, it merely stagnates because there are no intelligent lifeforms. Humans are the next step in creating life because we've been gifted with higher intelligence, why undo that? Maybe it sounds selfish, but even if you did remove humans, eventually another species will evolve mentally and just do exactly what we've done, meaning their efforts are pointless. Their views are akin to that of a suicide cult.
yeeeaaahhh but its simply not going to happen is it? its human nature to reproduce, to try and stop people from doing so will simply cause outcry, especially since it goes against basic human rights.
I'm actually quite sick of people who think that just because we are on a higher level of intelligence that we should cease acting along our own natural track of behavior. Before we came along, animals ate other animals (fuck PETA), animals shit where they ate/drink (pollution), and cave men (not cromagnon (sp?)) waged small wars. We did not cause, in my opinion, Global Warming, but I do believe we are contributing to it.
And thinking we can reverse endangerment of species is counterproductive to evolution. As is any sort of plan to level the playing fields for every single human in the world. Eventually, if we keep this up, we will not be able to survive w/o some kind of artificial immune system (albeit extremely far into the future from now).
And thinking we can reverse endangerment of species is counterproductive to evolution. As is any sort of plan to level the playing fields for every single human in the world. Eventually, if we keep this up, we will not be able to survive w/o some kind of artificial immune system (albeit extremely far into the future from now).
I think the entire idea is
(A) Sad
(B) Pathetic
(C) Bloody Stupid)
(D) All of the above.
God, reading through their website, is like listening to a smarmy asshole who acts all holier/smarter than thou, I mean, it sounded like someone speaking down to me. Condescending. (Mean). But that's not my issue. My issue is the idea of people being so bloody stupid that they would want a species to waste away and go extinct, because they think the alternatives are stupid and won't work. Thank god most people are smart enough not to listen to them. I want to wash my brain out now.
(A) Sad
(B) Pathetic
(C) Bloody Stupid)
(D) All of the above.
God, reading through their website, is like listening to a smarmy asshole who acts all holier/smarter than thou, I mean, it sounded like someone speaking down to me. Condescending. (Mean). But that's not my issue. My issue is the idea of people being so bloody stupid that they would want a species to waste away and go extinct, because they think the alternatives are stupid and won't work. Thank god most people are smart enough not to listen to them. I want to wash my brain out now.
See Option 4. I'll add it though, if you feel it's sufficiently different from option 4.fluffylandmine said:
Pretentious how-so? Because you would be pretentious to think that, or that is it pretentious that I included it. If the latter, then poo-poo on you, since it's a legitimate view point in so far as its held by many, many people. If the former, then there isn't much to discuss. Perhaps it is.fluffylandmine said:
Eh. I looked into changing it, but only change I could see would be to make it more generalized, removing strictly enforced. This would change it to "we should implement some sort of population control. I don't see how you would make it less "generalized." An option saying, "If we knew what the consequences were, we should..." would have no place in the poll.fluffylandmine said:
I do not see your logic.fluffylandmine said:
I get the impression they were kicked out of PETA meetings for their extremism.TheNecroswanson said:
--------------------------------------------------
Let me play devil's advocate then (this is directed at whoever is reading now); would a planet without humans be better or worse off then a planet with humans?
You have to admit: the dodo birds and Tasmanian tigers would be happier. So would the loggerhead sea turtles caught in nets each year, and the large mammals in National Parks that are on the brink of extinction due to habitat shrinkage.
(D), no argument here. These people make me sick. If they really wanted the human race to go extinct, why are they still alive? Because they cherish their little worthless lives, of course. It's the same "logic" that allows environmentalists to pass tons of regulations on the lumber industry (taking the food from people's mouths, not to mention that most foresting nowadays includes replanting trees-just good business), while sitting pretty in their giant SUVs.Haddi said:
If somebody was really committed to the idea of making humankind extinct, they'd take a more active role. We call those people anarchists/serial killers/3rd-world dictators. I think most people who believe in the aforementioned way of thinking do so because it's somewhat politically correct (since it's all about how EVIL humanity is to the environment). Yeah, I think humankind HAS had some kind of impact on Global Warming, but I really don't see how racial genocide (in this sense, "race" referring to the race of humanity) is an acceptable answer.
I don't think a world without humanity would be any better for animals than a world with us. Why? Animals are too stupid to notice a difference. I don't mean that they are "dumb," this is just a statement of fact. A seagull doesn't notice whether dying on the beach is better than choking on a plastic wrapper-all it cares about is the whole "dying" issue. A single sea lion can eat 50 salmon per day. Do the salmon really care whether they're swimming in polluted water or not, with the more pressing danger of sea lions?
Nature is cruel. Nature is unfeeling. The animals at the top of the chain do whatever they want. Sure, some races have died out because of humans, but who's to say some other animal species wouldn't have died out on their own? I suspect that Koala bears and Pandas, if left alone, would have died out regardless of humanity. Their diets are just too specific. That's my 2 cents, anyway.
this is an example of why man is flawed in contrast to nature: man cares whereas nature doesn't. if we blow up the planet with nuclear bombs nature won't care. new lifeforms will emerge and survive in the new environment. if anything, we should be happy that we can adapt the way we can and take full use of a planet. if we blow it up, it'll only hurt ourselves - and nature will be right there to rub it in our faces with the new environment created.
as for these people, let nature take care of them. survival of the fittest still works, and in due time, there'll be less people thinking like this... and with good reason. a problem solving itself.
as for these people, let nature take care of them. survival of the fittest still works, and in due time, there'll be less people thinking like this... and with good reason. a problem solving itself.
Fine, vhment can carry on not procreating and let themselves die out. Personally I fully enjoy a fine woman, and no one is taking that away from me.
Nature is indeed unfeeling, but it isn't cruel, except in the sense that it won't let us eat as many truffles as we'd like all the time. Evolution and natural selection only work the way they do because that's how the physical processes have worked out. The system requires death to work, but death is a part of life, so it's just using what's already there. There's no emotional component to it. Everyone always anthropomorphizes nature, then acts like it's doing something to them or us. Nature isn't a thing to begin with. Life just happens, and it is what it is.Samurai Goomba said:
And that's why anyone feeling so passionately about saving us or destroy us is sort of off their nut. Humans are just another animal on the planet, so hating us or loving us is pretty goofy. We do what we do only because it's what works at the moment, and we'll change to survive, or won't and we'll die. No one can control or predict it. And if people are so set on avoiding sex, it's probably a result of other emotional issues to begin with, so their whole point is suspect.
I for one don't get why everyone gets so worked up about everything in the first place. The advocacy organizations, the lawsuits, the aggressive nationalism, the screaming. When did we get this bored? When did daily life get so boring to us we had to start making waves? Someone please explain this to me.
