lemur Posted October 26, 2010 Posted October 26, 2010 Not entirely true. If you wiped out all humans, the rest of the earth would be better off. How do you know this? Obviously there are competing interests and symbiotes. What makes you so sure humans have more competitors than symbiotes?
DanielC Posted October 26, 2010 Posted October 26, 2010 How do you know this? Obviously there are competing interests and symbiotes. What makes you so sure humans have more competitors than symbiotes? A simple plot of earth's biodiversity against time will show a steady drop ever since the earliest hunters began killing all the mega-fauna in almost every continent thousands of years ago, and continuing through the modern era through massive deforestation, pollution, over-fishing, and so on. We need to take all of the predictions of water and goldilock's zone with a massive pinch of salt No one has predicted water as far as I know. I read the paper and they found a good signal for a planet smack in the middle of the Goldilocks zone. We don't know what the planet is made off, except that its mass is consistent with a rocky planet. The Goldilocks zone is defined as the region around the star where it is possible for liquid water to exist. That is all that I've said. Nothing more, nothing less.
creationist Posted October 26, 2010 Posted October 26, 2010 danielc...if you really believe that crap about Earth being better off without humans,you would do the world a favor and recycle yourself. -2
Mr Skeptic Posted October 26, 2010 Posted October 26, 2010 danielc...if you really believe that crap about Earth being better off without humans,you would do the world a favor and recycle yourself. How would recycling himself get rid of the humans? That's like thinking you can destroy an ant nest by killing one of the ants, it won't work and he'll be replaced very quickly. If he wanted to do the world a favor by killing someone, it certainly wouldn't be himself, but rather someone who is causing even more harm... How do you know this? Obviously there are competing interests and symbiotes. What makes you so sure humans have more competitors than symbiotes? Yes, because we're killing off species faster than any of the historical mass extinctions have. Obviously our domesticated plants and animals will also suffer without humans, and a few species like rats that are favored by the conditions we create. Humans really aren't good for the environment, at least not right now. In the future we could stop the earth from being destroyed by the sun turning red giant, but that won't be for quite a while. And none of this is really related to Gliese 581g.
lemur Posted October 26, 2010 Posted October 26, 2010 How would recycling himself get rid of the humans? That's like thinking you can destroy an ant nest by killing one of the ants, it won't work and he'll be replaced very quickly. If he wanted to do the world a favor by killing someone, it certainly wouldn't be himself, but rather someone who is causing even more harm... He wouldn't kill anyone but would rather indoctrinate as many people as possible into a culture that is more harmonious with nature. Go green!
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted October 26, 2010 Posted October 26, 2010 danielc...if you really believe that crap about Earth being better off without humans,you would do the world a favor and recycle yourself. creationist, if you really think this is an acceptable level of civility for the forums, please do us a favor and re-read the forum rules.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now