destruction of our planet & religion

[kman_69]

^^but what is your reasoning then?

 

[S O F I]

My reason is quite simple: I see no point to preservation of life, as the questions of life such as the meaning of life are yet to be answered. It's an unpopular belief on my part, I'm pretty sure. We're blind, we don't know how we came here and we don't know our purpose. People just desperately wait for science to prove that there is no God. Now, why does it seem logical to preserve this planet and help advance us?

 

[S O F I]

Report: Human Damage to Earth Worsening Fast

Wed Mar 30, 9:17 AM ET Science - Reuters


By Alister Doyle, Environment Correspondent

OSLO (Reuters) - Humans are damaging the planet at an unprecedented rate and raising risks of abrupt collapses in nature that could spur disease, deforestation or "dead zones" in the seas, an international report said on Wednesday.





Calling Future Phones
What's a cell phone? They make movies, play music, pack GPS units, and will do more. They're also a new virus magnet.




The study, by 1,360 experts in 95 nations, said a rising human population had polluted or over-exploited two thirds of the ecological systems on which life depends, ranging from clean air to fresh water, in the past 50 years.


"At the heart of this assessment is a stark warning," said the 45-member board of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment.


"Human activity is putting such strain on the natural functions of Earth that the ability of the planet's ecosystems to sustain future generations can no longer be taken for granted," it said.


Ten to 30 percent of mammal, bird and amphibian species were already threatened with extinction, according to the assessment, the biggest review of the planet's life support systems.


"Over the past 50 years, humans have changed ecosystems more rapidly and extensively than in any comparable time in human history, largely to meet rapidly growing demands for food, fresh water, timber, fiber and fuel," the report said.


"This has resulted in a substantial and largely irreversible loss in the diversity of life on earth," it added. More land was changed to cropland since 1945, for instance, than in the 18th and 19th centuries combined.


GETTING WORSE


"The harmful consequences of this degradation could grow significantly worse in the next 50 years," it said. The report was compiled by experts, including from U.N. agencies and international scientific and development organizations.


U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan said the study "shows how human activities are causing environmental damage on a massive scale throughout the world, and how biodiversity -- the very basis for life on earth -- is declining at an alarming rate."


The report said there was evidence that strains on nature could trigger abrupt changes like the collapse of cod fisheries off Newfoundland in Canada in 1992 after years of over-fishing.


Future changes could bring sudden outbreaks of disease. Warming of the Great Lakes in Africa due to climate change, for instance, could create conditions for a spread of cholera.


And a build-up of nitrogen from fertilizers washed off farmland into seas could spur abrupt blooms of algae that choke fish or create oxygen-depleted "dead zones" along coasts.


It said deforestation often led to less rainfall. And at some point, lack of rain could suddenly undermine growing conditions for remaining forests in a region.


The report said that in 100 years, global warming widely blamed on burning of fossil fuels in cars, factories and power plants, might take over as the main source of damage. The report mainly looks at other, shorter-term risks.


And it estimated that many ecosystems were worth more if used in a way that maintains them for future generations.


A wetland in Canada was worth $6,000 a hectare (2.47 acres), as a habitat for animals and plants, a filter for pollution, a store for water and a site for human recreation, against $2,000 if converted to farmland, it said. A Thai mangrove was worth $1,000 a hectare against $200 as a shrimp farm.





"Ecosystems and the services they provide are financially significant and...to degrade and damage them is tantamount to economic suicide," said Klaus Toepfer, head of the U.N. Environment Program.

The study urged changes in consumption, better education, new technology and higher prices for exploiting ecosystems.

"Governments should recognize that natural services have costs," A.H. Zakri of the U.N. University and a co-chair of the report told Reuters. "Protection of natural services is unlikely to be a priority for those who see them as free and limitless."

Well...

 

[Prophet G]

who gives a fuk when we'd all be dead by then...

 

[ARon]

^Don't you worry for your kids or your grandkids, or the human species as a whole.

 

[ARon]

My reason is quite simple: I see no point to preservation of life, as the questions of life such as the meaning of life are yet to be answered. It's an unpopular belief on my part, I'm pretty sure. We're blind, we don't know how we came here and we don't know our purpose. People just desperately wait for science to prove that there is no God. Now, why does it seem logical to preserve this planet and help advance us?

It seems logical to me that you would want to preserve life so one day maybe humans could find the answers that you seek. Obviously i doubt we will be here but that is my reason for you wanting to preserve life, to find answers.

 

[kman_69]

^^exactly.

 

[S O F I]

It seems logical to me that you would want to preserve life so one day maybe humans could find the answers that you seek. Obviously i doubt we will be here but that is my reason for you wanting to preserve life, to find answers.

We won't find the answer that we seek. If we found the answers we seek, we'd crumble because we wouldn't be able to handle it. However, you make a very valid point.

 

[kman_69]

^^our brains are pretty amazing things....ud be supprised how well we could handle the right answers

 

[S O F I]

^People couldn't handle the fact that the Earth was round.

 

[makaveli_411]

You're right kman_69 about what our brains can do. But the problem is we are barely using about 10% of our brain, so just imagine multiplying this by 10, then you'll be able to see that the human race could do a lot of intelligent things instead of doing the inverse.

Peace

 

[Illuminattile]

^People couldn't handle the fact that the Earth was round.

Some couldn't, no. But with time people learned to (at least, most people did). There have been innumerable discoveries about our planet or our Universe that have seemed incredible at first, but that are now accepted without blinking an eye. Obviously discovering conclusive proof regarding the origins of the Universe or the origins of our species might be hard to believe, especially if they differed from the theories we have, but people would get used to it. A discovery which were, hypothetically, to prove the nonexistence of God would be a different matter. Undoubtedly theists would struggle to cope with it, some would deny it, others might "crumble" as you put it, but over time it would become accepted.

I think you underestimate the capacity of human acceptance and understanding. We understand and accept a lot of things which seemed ridiculous upon their suggestion.

 

[Illuminattile]

You're right kman_69 about what our brains can do. But the problem is we are barely using about 10% of our brain...

That's a old myth. We don't only use 10% of our brains.

http://www.snopes.com/science/stats/10percnt.htm
http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/tenper.html

If we only used 10% of our brains (and therefore only needed 10%, or less, to operate), then taking a bullet to the brain would be very survivable. Of course, it's not.

 

[S O F I]

Some couldn't, no. But with time people learned to (at least, most people did). There have been innumerable discoveries about our planet or our Universe that have seemed incredible at first, but that are now accepted without blinking an eye. Obviously discovering conclusive proof regarding the origins of the Universe or the origins of our species might be hard to believe, especially if they differed from the theories we have, but people would get used to it. A discovery which were, hypothetically, to prove the nonexistence of God would be a different matter. Undoubtedly theists would struggle to cope with it, some would deny it, others might "crumble" as you put it, but over time it would become accepted.

I think you underestimate the capacity of human acceptance and understanding. We understand and accept a lot of things which seemed ridiculous upon their suggestion.

Not some, but most. Think of the kinds of changes the world would undertake if somehow, hypothetically, as you put it, nonexistence of God was proven. But, I sidetracked a couple of posts ago. I didn't neccesarily mean to make a post that shows me underestimating the capacity of human acceptance. I just meant to take my opinion across, which is that I don't believe that preservation of life is as important as people think. What is your reason for living life? What is your reason for not dying?

 

[ARon]

Not some, but most. Think of the kinds of changes the world would undertake if somehow, hypothetically, as you put it, nonexistence of God was proven. But, I sidetracked a couple of posts ago. I didn't neccesarily mean to make a post that shows me underestimating the capacity of human acceptance. I just meant to take my opinion across, which is that I don't believe that preservation of life is as important as people think. What is your reason for living life? What is your reason for not dying?

You answered it yourself.
The reason not to live is to die, and the reason for not dying is living. Obvious really. You underestimate our existence, that is my reason for you not having belief. Belieif that life must go on, why, why not. Why not see what we are capable of, why not see what glories we can find, why not see what other planets we can call home, why not see what other species we might come across. Why not try to preserve this life, do you not enjoy living, do you not enjoy being able to think? The meaning of life to me is living, being able to do everything you do on a dialy basis, because in reality we have nothing else.

 

[S O F I]

You answered it yourself.
The reason not to live is to die, and the reason for not dying is living. Obvious really. You underestimate our existence, that is my reason for you not having belief. Belieif that life must go on, why, why not. Why not see what we are capable of, why not see what glories we can find, why not see what other planets we can call home, why not see what other species we might come across. Why not try to preserve this life, do you not enjoy living, do you not enjoy being able to think? The meaning of life to me is living, being able to do everything you do on a dialy basis, because in reality we have nothing else.

I don't underestimate our existence. People underestimate our existence with the "big bang" theories and such related. To a common person, it's enough to think that we came from monkeys. Not to me, and I will admit it. I believe that the way to find out our meaning of life is to die, basically. Now, someone may ask, "Why don't you kill yourself and find out?" Well, it's the fact that I'm human that is preventing me from it.

 

[S O F I]

Why not try to preserve this life, do you not enjoy living, do you not enjoy being able to think? The meaning of life to me is living, being able to do everything you do on a dialy basis, because in reality we have nothing else.

To you, the meaning of life is to live, to do things on a daily basis, such as wake up, go to school/work, come home, and go to sleep again, only to repeat the same. Surely, you must have thought about the meaning of life more than you're telling me.

 

[imported_MAKaveli_10]

Dont destroy the planet. Plant a tree!

 

[kman_69]

I don't underestimate our existence. People underestimate our existence with the "big bang" theories and such related. To a common person, it's enough to think that we came from monkeys. Not to me, and I will admit it. I believe that the way to find out our meaning of life is to die, basically. Now, someone may ask, "Why don't you kill yourself and find out?" Well, it's the fact that I'm human that is preventing me from it.

yeah i knew it...

this really proves my point even further....and franky it really scares me that people have this kind of view

 

[S O F I]

What's your point? That it's wrong to think like that? Why? We already discovered life and we've seen it, life after death, we haven't. This life is too unique to just end when you die.