haha all this overpopulation garbage was started by a global elite to start a green movement which doesn't even help the human agenda, its only meant to shut down independency through out the united states so they can profit overseas with cheap labor, and while all the environmentalists support these bureaucrats, the real environmental problems still exist like GMO foods, Fluoride, arsenic, and other toxic chemicals in the water, and genetic engineering.
They've been referring to it as the 6th extinction' for years, at least 10 years ago I first read of it. People are complaining here like the person who made this video just made up the whole extinction thing. .Look-To someone who's read about the environment, animals wiped out, oceans & forests killed etc. for decades, it's hard to take anti-environment types seriously when they make it obvious they never cared about it anyway, much less studied it or bothered learning anything for themselves
Funny how they emphasized that this is a problem, but never explained exactly what will happen, and how mass extinction will cause billions of people to die.
@OrchidRa I agree. The best solution is not to consume less or reduce our individual footprint (though those help), but to STOP BREEDING. The population is growing exponentially. Think we can shrink the footprint per person exponentially to compensate? Hell no! Stop breeding, and even shrink the population , and problem solved.
eww, environmentalism. You guys are dead set on bringing humans back to the jungles and caves.
How could anyone think that you will live on through the life that eats your remains? Your circle of life mentality of caring for the entire circle is inhuman I feel.
Isn't it true that natural selection has resulted in our domestication of the environment? Isn't it also true that it is nature which kills it's self. We are not derailing the process dear, we are the process.
eww, environmentalism is what you have to say in the face of total ecological collapse? Yo are an idiot.
Nature does not kill itself or if would have never gotten of the ground. Yes there is death in nature, because that is the way it must be for life to continue. Organic Nature is simply life. So what exactly is your problem?
Ergo Proxy showed mass extinction. Was it fiction? Yeah. But it's a step in a direction of thought most people don't want to face. A world where the only way to survive is to make giant bio domes, and to step outside is death. What startled me was going from predictions of 1,000 years to 100, now a mere 30 years! Most predict mass fresh water shortages in the next decade!
It should be noted that calcitic cosmopolitan marine invertebrates are the organisms that are used to correlate stratigraphic successions and determine which extinction events constitute a mass extinction. Therefore it is not applicable to compare the extinction of megafauna or insects, which are usually not preserved in the fossil record, to previous mass extinctions because there is too little data available to compare them on those grounds.
While it is generally true that cosmopolitan organisms w/calcitic skeletal elements are important in biostratigraphy, notable exceptions that jump quickly to mind are graptolites, conodont elements, diatoms and palynomorphs such as acritarchs & pollen. All of these are of importance in the temporal resolution & correlation of stratigraphic succession & the biotic events recorded therein.
My differentiation of the Pleistocene extinction was in response to your mention of it.
The fact that I didn't mention those does not mean that am not aware of them and I have not worked with themthem(graptolites and conodons specifically). Everthing you mentioned, with the exclusion of pollen which is only really useful in lakes, are marine oganisms that are either plantonic or live on the carbonate platform. The point I'm trying to make is that these organisms are well represented in the fossil record. Megafauna are not.
Maybe this sounds odd but I'm all in favor of this. Homo Sapiens has grown far too big for its britches. The earth will recover and life will be just as diverse then as it is now. This will sound even stranger: I think that humans, as a collective are aware of this but we deny the reality of it. I strongly suggest everyone read "The Denial of Death". As a species we are bright but very immature.
The six largest extinctions were the terminal Cambrian, terminal Ordovician, Late Devonian, terminal Permian, terminal Triassic, and terminal Cretaceous. Since a greater number of genera went extinct in any one of these events that have during the entire Holocene. Palmer, A.R. (1965), Biomere: A New Kind of Biostratigraphic Unit , Journal of Paleontology, vol. 39, pp. 149.
Raup, D. & Sepkoski, J. (1982). "Mass extinctions in the marine fossil record". Science 215: 1501–1503.
Your citing of Palmer (1965) & the "four trilobite biomere extinctions in the Cambrian" is puzzling as it is not pertinent to Phanerozoic global biotic crises, and represent regional faunal disruptions. None are recognized in the well studied Balto-Scandia area, for example; the very definition of the term precludes its use in relation to global events.
The Biomeres are all Laurentian phenomena, but more genera went extinct at the end of each biomere than estimated number of genera that when extinct during the Pleistocene-Holocene extinction event. If anything the fact that they are not global events and still are of higher magnitude than the "sixth" extinction only strengthens the arguement against refering to the current antropologic extinction event as such.
I put the citations at the end of the posts, if this confused you and caused you to think I was associating the biomeres(which were mentioned in the previous post) with the Phanerozoic global extinction events then I appologize. This posting system places new posts above old ones, so reading them can be counterintuative.
Calling the Holocene exitinct event the "Sixth Extinction" is utter crap. The twenty extinction events in the Ordovician to Devonian, the four trilobite biomere extinctions in the Cambrian, terminal Miocene, Ecocene, and Pleistocence extinctions were all of greater magnitude than our current extinction, both in the total number of genera that went extinct and the percentage of know genera that went extinct.
*) The "Terminal" Cambrian is not one of "The Big 5" (in fact it appears to have been less severe than the preceding Series 2 Botomian Event).
*) There were no "twenty extinction events in the Ordovician to Devonian".
From the Early Cambrian to End Devonian, a series of *9* (possibly 10) global extinction events have been recognized (but even this is not recognized by *all* workers), mostly of lesser extent.
*) More genera went extinct during, the terminal Cambrian extinction then during the Early-Mid Cambrian Anoxia Event(Botomain). We usually use genera rather than species to determine what constitutes a mass extinction in the Cambrian due to the high speciation rate amoung trilobites and conodonts during that period.
Because of taphonomic and sampling considerations it is not at all clear that the end-Cambrian event was more severe than the two-phased Botomian extinction.
Again, a simple 'counting of the bodies' is not very informative; there is a distinct taphonomic trend during the Cambrian correlative w/warming climatic conditions that bears directly on questions of origination and extinction, and our ability at present to quantify them.
*) There were twenty extinction events between the Terminal Ordovician extinction and the Terminal Devonian extinction that were each of greater magnitude(counting number of species this time) than Pliestocene-Holocene Anthropogenic extinction.
"twenty extinction events between the Terminal Ordovician extinction and..."
I'm guessing that you're counting each 'cyclical' extinction datum w/in separate events; for instance, those comprising the Lau Event.
Regardless, these are universally recognized as minor regional events which are in no way comparable to the Hirnantian or the P-T crises, for instance.
Note that I am not disputing their importance from a regional perspective, only as globally affective events.
To be clear, I'm not referencing minor extinctions (regional or global) of varying severity. lower order regression-driven faunal turnovers, basin-scale events, community replacement episodes or even taxic differences due to changes in lithology or taphonomic disparity, but rather coeval, trans-environmental, global mass extinction events.
They point isn't that they are comparable in magnitude to the KT or PTr events. It's that they are conparable in magnitude(but still larger than) the current anthroplogic extinction event. The issue isn't whether an extinction event is occuring, it is whether the number of genera that have gone extinct is the at least the sixth greatest recorded. Which it is not, so calling it the sixth extinction when these cratonic extinctions are larger just seems like a gross exaggeration.
*) An extinction need not be global to be of greater magnitude than the ungoing extinction event. For example the Biomere extinctions only pertain to the Laurentia, but were still larger. They were probably caused by a rise in the thermocline and the introduction of cooler water onto the carbonate platfom/ramp.
Then we're comparing apples & oranges. And, for the same reason, we don't compare genera loss against species loss between events.
The vid is entitled "*Facing* the 6th Extinction", not "Looking Back on the 6th Extinction w/Hindsight"
The temporal resolution of the stratigraphic record doesn't allow a useful comparison of an event hundreds of thousands or millions of years in duration w/what is currently taking place...
A simple numerical comparison of genera (or species) loss between a past event that primarily affected a small number of trophically related groups with the ongoing, presently observed & demonstrably biosphere-wide events can be nothing short of misleading.
*) The inclusion of the Terminal Eocene in your list also seems arbitrary (why not include the Cenomanian-Turonian event?); again, another minor event in a long history of extinctions; not one of "The Big 5".
Actually the was, I was a small on that primarily effected corals and foraminifera, I was small but still larger than any event in the Pleistocene or Holocene.
"... a small on that primarily effected corals and foraminifera."
Yes, an end Miocene biotic perturbation *has* been documented for the Mediterranean area, as well as the a taxonomic restructuring of the molluscan communities of New Zealand. I intended to say there was no global mass extinction closing the Miocene. My apology for the confusion.
Because of YouTube character limits, I try to be as economical with words as clarity permits. Seems clarity was sacrificed in that post
There was also a reduction of coral diversity in the Gulf of Mexico at the time, associated with the "closing " of the Panama seaway. The coral species were reduced essentially down to porities only and reefs became smaller as porties doesn't tend to aggrigate very well. The current hypothesis is that cooler water was introduced onto carbonat plateforms possibly do to rise in the thermocline, but a coorleative eustatic rise has not been found yet.
*) Finally, the Pleistocene megafauna extinctions cannot be separated from the Holocene events. By citing the Devonian Frasnian-Famennian event, you are doing so with 375 my of hindsight, neglecting the fact that this extinction was drawn out over a period of about 15 my... the Holocene encompasses the last 12,000 years of Earth history... hardly comparable.
In other words, the Pleistocene decimation is ongoing; and it's going on all around you - right now.
My contention is not that the current extinction could not become the largest in history if we where to actively replace the entire biosphere. My point is that as it is right now. Even including the Pleistocene decimation(which attributing to human activity alone is contentious since climatic changes no doubt contributed to the extinctions), this current extinction event is not yet large enough to be called the sixth extinction.
"My contention is not that the current extinction..."
Then our disagreement is a minor one.
I'm simply saying that to compare past biotic crises w/the present based simply on a 'final body count' proves to be not only deceptive, but impossible.
We don't *have* a final body count for the present.
But it is in our best interest to mitigate that count *now*...
biotic recovery from past global events are measured in the millions of years.
we need a proper nuclear war wiping out all but maybe 100 million, after which nazis with eugenics etc can take over and make reproduction a government controlled matter. Along with archological towers, wherein over million fits into a square km.. a end of freedom and private property.
It's funny that Thomas Huxley, one of the great founders of modern atheism is also credited for the the near extinction of Tuna. He encouraged the capture of tuna, to a great extinct, and replied to critics that tuna will always be plentiful.
It's funny that Martin Luther, the great founder of modern Protestantism is also credited for the the near extinction of European Jews. He encouraged the murder of Jews, to a great extent, and replied to critics that Jews were "the devil's people" and "poisonous envenomed worms", and that Christians were "at fault in not slaying them".
The best thing that could ever happen was if the economic crisis really hit the rock bottom. Instead they prolonged it by letting the people pay once again. What they are doing is trying to save their own banks, bank accounts and fortunes with OUR money. They don't care about the little people.
Wake up or die... Yes, that probably sums it up. As sad as it may sound, 90% of the human populace is probably not ready for the change. One day people have to be ready though, whether we like it or not.
we have to stop behaving like parasutes, we need a symbiosis with nature
we need to integrate ourselves into the dynamics of nature
the problem is that we see ourselves seperate from nature. it does not matter if we try to safe or destroy nature - the problem is our perspective from "outside"
we ARE part of ecosystems and we have to start seeing it that way and behaving that way
unless we will kill the earth or it (she) will kill us
We don't even have poor management of our resources on this planet, we have no management at all. It's the economic predators that owns and suck the life out of this world, producing only junk for sale for the benefit of their bank acounts. We need other leaders and other guidelines if we want to survive this mess.
We have the wisdom to deal with this. North american indians always say u must think ahead at least 7 generations when making a decision. Todays leaders plan ahead maybe months or a few yearsat any cost. 90% of all activity we all do in daily life does not contribute to anything but a few rich peoples bankaccounts on the expense of all the others and future generations. Is that not a waste of both time and resources?
How many humans might die? All of us. I think that fact that our dependancy on other ecosystems cannot be overempasized. We're busy farming, fishing, fighting, and fucking our way to our own extinction at breakneck speed. If we don't start getting control of our numbers and how we share the earth with other life, we won't need to worry about anything anymore. Earth will carry on without us just fine.
"We're busy farming, fishing, fighting, and fucking our way to our own extinction at breakneck speed"
That, ultimately, is the problem I have with the larger, organized, monotheistic religions. I don't really care what drivel you believe in the privacy of your home; but when you talk about BILLIONS of people who see the world as doomed by "Heavenly Decree" anyway and nothing more than dress rehearsal for an after-life Paradise, spent eternally praising (fill in blank w/favorite deity)...
@SpeakerForrTheDead: And add to that those various sects who preach that it is their Holy Mission to procreate (ie. "quiverfull?") and cover the Earth with their progeny and you've got the recipe for a Malthusian nightmare. We'll be like rats, fighting over the bodies of the dead for food. Not quite a zombie apocalypse, but certainly, more likely.
haha all this overpopulation garbage was started by a global elite to start a green movement which doesn't even help the human agenda, its only meant to shut down independency through out the united states so they can profit overseas with cheap labor, and while all the environmentalists support these bureaucrats, the real environmental problems still exist like GMO foods, Fluoride, arsenic, and other toxic chemicals in the water, and genetic engineering.
PE64088 2 months ago
They've been referring to it as the 6th extinction' for years, at least 10 years ago I first read of it. People are complaining here like the person who made this video just made up the whole extinction thing. .Look-To someone who's read about the environment, animals wiped out, oceans & forests killed etc. for decades, it's hard to take anti-environment types seriously when they make it obvious they never cared about it anyway, much less studied it or bothered learning anything for themselves
stuntcat666 6 months ago
Why are you so sure the humans killed the megafauna ? I always though it was the climate change
GTXMAN 8 months ago
@OrchidRa or use a a very thick condom
xy274 8 months ago
Funny how they emphasized that this is a problem, but never explained exactly what will happen, and how mass extinction will cause billions of people to die.
@OrchidRa I agree. The best solution is not to consume less or reduce our individual footprint (though those help), but to STOP BREEDING. The population is growing exponentially. Think we can shrink the footprint per person exponentially to compensate? Hell no! Stop breeding, and even shrink the population , and problem solved.
HyperSpify 8 months ago 2
eww, environmentalism. You guys are dead set on bringing humans back to the jungles and caves.
How could anyone think that you will live on through the life that eats your remains? Your circle of life mentality of caring for the entire circle is inhuman I feel.
Isn't it true that natural selection has resulted in our domestication of the environment? Isn't it also true that it is nature which kills it's self. We are not derailing the process dear, we are the process.
superearthbender 1 year ago
@superearthbender
eww, environmentalism is what you have to say in the face of total ecological collapse? Yo are an idiot.
Nature does not kill itself or if would have never gotten of the ground. Yes there is death in nature, because that is the way it must be for life to continue. Organic Nature is simply life. So what exactly is your problem?
apexcreatures 11 months ago
Ergo Proxy showed mass extinction. Was it fiction? Yeah. But it's a step in a direction of thought most people don't want to face. A world where the only way to survive is to make giant bio domes, and to step outside is death. What startled me was going from predictions of 1,000 years to 100, now a mere 30 years! Most predict mass fresh water shortages in the next decade!
sagemakaiserxl 1 year ago
It should be noted that calcitic cosmopolitan marine invertebrates are the organisms that are used to correlate stratigraphic successions and determine which extinction events constitute a mass extinction. Therefore it is not applicable to compare the extinction of megafauna or insects, which are usually not preserved in the fossil record, to previous mass extinctions because there is too little data available to compare them on those grounds.
12345combination 1 year ago
@12345combination
While it is generally true that cosmopolitan organisms w/calcitic skeletal elements are important in biostratigraphy, notable exceptions that jump quickly to mind are graptolites, conodont elements, diatoms and palynomorphs such as acritarchs & pollen. All of these are of importance in the temporal resolution & correlation of stratigraphic succession & the biotic events recorded therein.
My differentiation of the Pleistocene extinction was in response to your mention of it.
TheHatefulDead 1 year ago
@TheHatefulDead
The fact that I didn't mention those does not mean that am not aware of them and I have not worked with themthem(graptolites and conodons specifically). Everthing you mentioned, with the exclusion of pollen which is only really useful in lakes, are marine oganisms that are either plantonic or live on the carbonate platform. The point I'm trying to make is that these organisms are well represented in the fossil record. Megafauna are not.
12345combination 1 year ago
@TheHatefulDead @12345combination: Y'all's science words is sexy.
angrylittlegirl 11 months ago
Maybe this sounds odd but I'm all in favor of this. Homo Sapiens has grown far too big for its britches. The earth will recover and life will be just as diverse then as it is now. This will sound even stranger: I think that humans, as a collective are aware of this but we deny the reality of it. I strongly suggest everyone read "The Denial of Death". As a species we are bright but very immature.
angrylittlegirl 11 months ago
The six largest extinctions were the terminal Cambrian, terminal Ordovician, Late Devonian, terminal Permian, terminal Triassic, and terminal Cretaceous. Since a greater number of genera went extinct in any one of these events that have during the entire Holocene. Palmer, A.R. (1965), Biomere: A New Kind of Biostratigraphic Unit , Journal of Paleontology, vol. 39, pp. 149.
Raup, D. & Sepkoski, J. (1982). "Mass extinctions in the marine fossil record". Science 215: 1501–1503.
12345combination 1 year ago
@12345combination
Your citing of Palmer (1965) & the "four trilobite biomere extinctions in the Cambrian" is puzzling as it is not pertinent to Phanerozoic global biotic crises, and represent regional faunal disruptions. None are recognized in the well studied Balto-Scandia area, for example; the very definition of the term precludes its use in relation to global events.
TheHatefulDead 1 year ago
@TheHatefulDead
The Biomeres are all Laurentian phenomena, but more genera went extinct at the end of each biomere than estimated number of genera that when extinct during the Pleistocene-Holocene extinction event. If anything the fact that they are not global events and still are of higher magnitude than the "sixth" extinction only strengthens the arguement against refering to the current antropologic extinction event as such.
12345combination 1 year ago
@TheHatefulDead
I put the citations at the end of the posts, if this confused you and caused you to think I was associating the biomeres(which were mentioned in the previous post) with the Phanerozoic global extinction events then I appologize. This posting system places new posts above old ones, so reading them can be counterintuative.
12345combination 1 year ago
Calling the Holocene exitinct event the "Sixth Extinction" is utter crap. The twenty extinction events in the Ordovician to Devonian, the four trilobite biomere extinctions in the Cambrian, terminal Miocene, Ecocene, and Pleistocence extinctions were all of greater magnitude than our current extinction, both in the total number of genera that went extinct and the percentage of know genera that went extinct.
12345combination 1 year ago
@12345combination
Were these posts intended as some sort of test?
*) The "Terminal" Cambrian is not one of "The Big 5" (in fact it appears to have been less severe than the preceding Series 2 Botomian Event).
*) There were no "twenty extinction events in the Ordovician to Devonian".
From the Early Cambrian to End Devonian, a series of *9* (possibly 10) global extinction events have been recognized (but even this is not recognized by *all* workers), mostly of lesser extent.
TheHatefulDead 1 year ago
@TheHatefulDead
*) More genera went extinct during, the terminal Cambrian extinction then during the Early-Mid Cambrian Anoxia Event(Botomain). We usually use genera rather than species to determine what constitutes a mass extinction in the Cambrian due to the high speciation rate amoung trilobites and conodonts during that period.
12345combination 1 year ago
@12345combination
Because of taphonomic and sampling considerations it is not at all clear that the end-Cambrian event was more severe than the two-phased Botomian extinction.
Again, a simple 'counting of the bodies' is not very informative; there is a distinct taphonomic trend during the Cambrian correlative w/warming climatic conditions that bears directly on questions of origination and extinction, and our ability at present to quantify them.
TheHatefulDead 1 year ago
@TheHatefulDead
*) There were twenty extinction events between the Terminal Ordovician extinction and the Terminal Devonian extinction that were each of greater magnitude(counting number of species this time) than Pliestocene-Holocene Anthropogenic extinction.
12345combination 1 year ago
@12345combination
"twenty extinction events between the Terminal Ordovician extinction and..."
I'm guessing that you're counting each 'cyclical' extinction datum w/in separate events; for instance, those comprising the Lau Event.
Regardless, these are universally recognized as minor regional events which are in no way comparable to the Hirnantian or the P-T crises, for instance.
Note that I am not disputing their importance from a regional perspective, only as globally affective events.
TheHatefulDead 1 year ago
To be clear, I'm not referencing minor extinctions (regional or global) of varying severity. lower order regression-driven faunal turnovers, basin-scale events, community replacement episodes or even taxic differences due to changes in lithology or taphonomic disparity, but rather coeval, trans-environmental, global mass extinction events.
TheHatefulDead 1 year ago
@TheHatefulDead
They point isn't that they are comparable in magnitude to the KT or PTr events. It's that they are conparable in magnitude(but still larger than) the current anthroplogic extinction event. The issue isn't whether an extinction event is occuring, it is whether the number of genera that have gone extinct is the at least the sixth greatest recorded. Which it is not, so calling it the sixth extinction when these cratonic extinctions are larger just seems like a gross exaggeration.
12345combination 1 year ago
@TheHatefulDead
*) An extinction need not be global to be of greater magnitude than the ungoing extinction event. For example the Biomere extinctions only pertain to the Laurentia, but were still larger. They were probably caused by a rise in the thermocline and the introduction of cooler water onto the carbonate platfom/ramp.
12345combination 1 year ago
@12345combination
"An extinction need not be global to be..."
Then we're comparing apples & oranges. And, for the same reason, we don't compare genera loss against species loss between events.
The vid is entitled "*Facing* the 6th Extinction", not "Looking Back on the 6th Extinction w/Hindsight"
The temporal resolution of the stratigraphic record doesn't allow a useful comparison of an event hundreds of thousands or millions of years in duration w/what is currently taking place...
(cont)
TheHatefulDead 1 year ago
(cont)
A simple numerical comparison of genera (or species) loss between a past event that primarily affected a small number of trophically related groups with the ongoing, presently observed & demonstrably biosphere-wide events can be nothing short of misleading.
TheHatefulDead 1 year ago
@12345combination
*) The inclusion of the Terminal Eocene in your list also seems arbitrary (why not include the Cenomanian-Turonian event?); again, another minor event in a long history of extinctions; not one of "The Big 5".
*) There was no "terminal Miocene" extinction.
TheHatefulDead 1 year ago
@TheHatefulDead
Actually the was, I was a small on that primarily effected corals and foraminifera, I was small but still larger than any event in the Pleistocene or Holocene.
12345combination 1 year ago
@12345combination
"... a small on that primarily effected corals and foraminifera."
Yes, an end Miocene biotic perturbation *has* been documented for the Mediterranean area, as well as the a taxonomic restructuring of the molluscan communities of New Zealand. I intended to say there was no global mass extinction closing the Miocene. My apology for the confusion.
Because of YouTube character limits, I try to be as economical with words as clarity permits. Seems clarity was sacrificed in that post
TheHatefulDead 1 year ago
@TheHatefulDead
There was also a reduction of coral diversity in the Gulf of Mexico at the time, associated with the "closing " of the Panama seaway. The coral species were reduced essentially down to porities only and reefs became smaller as porties doesn't tend to aggrigate very well. The current hypothesis is that cooler water was introduced onto carbonat plateforms possibly do to rise in the thermocline, but a coorleative eustatic rise has not been found yet.
12345combination 1 year ago
@12345combination
*) Finally, the Pleistocene megafauna extinctions cannot be separated from the Holocene events. By citing the Devonian Frasnian-Famennian event, you are doing so with 375 my of hindsight, neglecting the fact that this extinction was drawn out over a period of about 15 my... the Holocene encompasses the last 12,000 years of Earth history... hardly comparable.
In other words, the Pleistocene decimation is ongoing; and it's going on all around you - right now.
TheHatefulDead 1 year ago
@TheHatefulDead
My contention is not that the current extinction could not become the largest in history if we where to actively replace the entire biosphere. My point is that as it is right now. Even including the Pleistocene decimation(which attributing to human activity alone is contentious since climatic changes no doubt contributed to the extinctions), this current extinction event is not yet large enough to be called the sixth extinction.
12345combination 1 year ago
@12345combination
"My contention is not that the current extinction..."
Then our disagreement is a minor one.
I'm simply saying that to compare past biotic crises w/the present based simply on a 'final body count' proves to be not only deceptive, but impossible.
We don't *have* a final body count for the present.
But it is in our best interest to mitigate that count *now*...
biotic recovery from past global events are measured in the millions of years.
TheHatefulDead 1 year ago
we need a proper nuclear war wiping out all but maybe 100 million, after which nazis with eugenics etc can take over and make reproduction a government controlled matter. Along with archological towers, wherein over million fits into a square km.. a end of freedom and private property.
karlmarx1488 1 year ago
Interesting film on an important topic. A bit too many talking heads for my taste, but still very good.
6thExtinctionDoc 1 year ago
I want to live with animals and plants, I would suffocate with a planet that only has human beings who cage animals. We are so noisy...
AliensMadeUs 2 years ago
It's funny that Thomas Huxley, one of the great founders of modern atheism is also credited for the the near extinction of Tuna. He encouraged the capture of tuna, to a great extinct, and replied to critics that tuna will always be plentiful.
DebateCrusher 2 years ago
Damn!
On how many levels, and in how many ways, can one comment be TOTALLY FUCKING ABSURD??!
TheHatefulDead 2 years ago
It's funny that Martin Luther, the great founder of modern Protestantism is also credited for the the near extinction of European Jews. He encouraged the murder of Jews, to a great extent, and replied to critics that Jews were "the devil's people" and "poisonous envenomed worms", and that Christians were "at fault in not slaying them".
Oh, wait...
That's actually TRUE.
TheHatefulDead 2 years ago
Its sad that the best thing you can do for the environment is to die.
DrawingYou 2 years ago
The best thing that could ever happen was if the economic crisis really hit the rock bottom. Instead they prolonged it by letting the people pay once again. What they are doing is trying to save their own banks, bank accounts and fortunes with OUR money. They don't care about the little people.
kaxitaksi 2 years ago
Wake up or die... Yes, that probably sums it up. As sad as it may sound, 90% of the human populace is probably not ready for the change. One day people have to be ready though, whether we like it or not.
DecepticonLeader 2 years ago
the change must be radical.
we can't just change our system a little bit, so that we do less harm.
we need a completely NEW system.
you can see the behaviour of a civilization, as a whole, as one big organism.
with our culture, we are a parasite.
it is not enough to become a less harmful parasite... we have to completely renew our whole system.
we have to STOP being a parasite
GeistWerk 2 years ago
I agree with everything you say here. If the change is not radical, we will die...
DecepticonLeader 2 years ago
"the change must be radical."
So radical, in fact, that most Westerners are terror stricken at the prospect.
SpeakerForrTheDead 2 years ago 3
we behave like parasites
to the biosphere earth, we are cancer
we have to stop behaving like parasutes, we need a symbiosis with nature
we need to integrate ourselves into the dynamics of nature
the problem is that we see ourselves seperate from nature. it does not matter if we try to safe or destroy nature - the problem is our perspective from "outside"
we ARE part of ecosystems and we have to start seeing it that way and behaving that way
unless we will kill the earth or it (she) will kill us
GeistWerk 2 years ago 3
"the problem is that we see ourselves seperate from nature."
That is precisely the problem.
Because of that perspective, we have become like an invasive species to the entire Earth.
And, yeah, the "Save The Earth" idea belies the notion we have of separation from the natural order.
It's a matter of saving ourselves. The Earth will be just fine without us... the converse is not true.
SpeakerForrTheDead 2 years ago
Is More Meremen...Better?! Why?!
warwithangels 2 years ago
How about the mass murder and semi extinction caused by god in Noah's flood?
How can we hold him accountable? All the fetuses in all the pregnant women hardly had a chance to be sinful. God summarily murdered them all
imaginethereisnogod 2 years ago
We don't even have poor management of our resources on this planet, we have no management at all. It's the economic predators that owns and suck the life out of this world, producing only junk for sale for the benefit of their bank acounts. We need other leaders and other guidelines if we want to survive this mess.
kaxitaksi 2 years ago 7
"It's the economic predators that owns and suck the life out of this world"
The thinking is almost certainly, "Gimme what I can get NOW, the world will definitely last until I'm dead; after that, F*ck It"
SpeakerForrTheDead 2 years ago 2
We have the wisdom to deal with this. North american indians always say u must think ahead at least 7 generations when making a decision. Todays leaders plan ahead maybe months or a few yearsat any cost. 90% of all activity we all do in daily life does not contribute to anything but a few rich peoples bankaccounts on the expense of all the others and future generations. Is that not a waste of both time and resources?
kaxitaksi 2 years ago
Comment removed
kaxitaksi 2 years ago
How many humans might die? All of us. I think that fact that our dependancy on other ecosystems cannot be overempasized. We're busy farming, fishing, fighting, and fucking our way to our own extinction at breakneck speed. If we don't start getting control of our numbers and how we share the earth with other life, we won't need to worry about anything anymore. Earth will carry on without us just fine.
magick205 2 years ago 13
Couldn't agree more. This isn't a matter of "bad", this is honestly a matter that determines the longevity of our species.
*cont*
SpeakerForrTheDead 2 years ago
"We're busy farming, fishing, fighting, and fucking our way to our own extinction at breakneck speed"
That, ultimately, is the problem I have with the larger, organized, monotheistic religions. I don't really care what drivel you believe in the privacy of your home; but when you talk about BILLIONS of people who see the world as doomed by "Heavenly Decree" anyway and nothing more than dress rehearsal for an after-life Paradise, spent eternally praising (fill in blank w/favorite deity)...
SpeakerForrTheDead 2 years ago 4
...it's a fairly hopeless concern.
Without people understanding and accepting our place in reality, it just seems fairly hopeless.
We NEED a complete paradigm shift in religion, or we NEED to shed it altogether.
SpeakerForrTheDead 2 years ago
@SpeakerForrTheDead: And add to that those various sects who preach that it is their Holy Mission to procreate (ie. "quiverfull?") and cover the Earth with their progeny and you've got the recipe for a Malthusian nightmare. We'll be like rats, fighting over the bodies of the dead for food. Not quite a zombie apocalypse, but certainly, more likely.
magick205 2 years ago