Internet Kraken said:
Ginnipe said:
we're killing other animals just so we can live.
This one little bit confuses me.
Can you explain to me why this is a problem?
Killing above replacement.
ShredHead said:
All we've done has been pretty necessary to our own gain, maybe not collectively as a species but at least collectively within certain groups. Humanity is a whole lot of different people with different viewpoints in which way they want to better their own environment, so if these people's opinions clash then you are going to get some fuck-ups!
Of course, the OP's noting down of the most negative achievements of mankind gleefully neglects the things we have done to better our society and so obviously your going to paint a pretty grim picture. Besides, we are not causing global warming, we are just contributing to it.
Stem cell research is not designed to help people live longer, it is so people can replace defective cells that cause diseases like cancer and diabetes (I have diabetes so i feel particularly strongly about that one)
After reading your entire post, I get that this was a kind of rant about religion saying God made everything and so it should be more perfect but the fact that we've done so much good just as much takes away from your argument than the fact that we've done bad.
(I'm an Atheist by the way)
Natural cycles take WAY longer than the hundred years the world has started warming up in. Also, it'sreally very simple. Carbon dioxide SLIGHTLY increases the heat of the atmosphere which SLIGHTLY increases the amount of water vapour in the atmosphere which increases the worlds heat a bit. Consider that the sun is constantly shining on the earth, and a 40% increase in a greenhouse gas will cause a constant and accelerating warming effect. The amount of heat released sent back into space is first reduced by an increase in greenhouse gases. Then in moves onto the Arctic, where it reduces ice, (nature's best reflector, reflects 85% of heat back into space I think) with ocean water (nature's worst reflector, reflects 3% of heat, absorbes the rest)
Before I continue I would like to add that everything peaceful in nature is not calm, but the the colliding of collosal forces which cancel each other out, thus creating a balance. If one becomes more powerful then the other, life will gradually become more difficult for those on the one side. Think of it as a tug-of-war. Before humans started burning coal, the hot side (equater) and the cold side (poles) were equal. By releasing greenhouse gases you put more on the hot side, you add, say, one more person to the hot side, and both are, say teams of a hundred rugby players. Not a big deal. But the match doesn't end. Let's assume that both sides are simply holding and are leaning back onto the rope not exerting themselves. (because the hot and cold parts of the world don't get tired like humans do) The cold side now will barely notice the difference. However, unless the the carbon dioxide disappears, the world will increase it's temperature at a constant rate, aggravated by melting icecaps, release of more carbon sinks because of warming, release of more from ocean because warm water holds less carbon, and all sorts of fun stuff. I have to go now, I'll edit later and continue if you ask me too.