Poll: Voluntary Human Extinction

[joystickjunki3]

As some people have pointed out before me... (like this person here)

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. .

... humans are also a part of the "natural order". We do what we do because it is our nature to do so. For us to exterminate ourselves would actually be to disrupt the natural order of things, as our emergence is a part of that natural order.

Just like I say there is no such thing as an "unnatural substance". Everything we have, from plastics to stainless steel, is made of basic elements we find in nature. If the parts we use to make them doesn't exist in nature, then where the hell did we get them? It's all natural, we just restructure it.

... Exceptions are the basic elements we can actually make ourselves, like roentgenium, but these are almost always useless and break after like 10 minutes due to instability anyway.

So no, there is absolutely no reason for us to go extinct, other than us being eaten by wolves, in which case it'd be the natural order of things.

Thank you. I'm glad I'm not alone on the matter. Even if I did not phrase it as eloquently as you have.

 

[Ace of Spades]

Why the hell would we want to exterminate the human race? That's probably the weirdest idea I've ever heard. We spent centuries getting to where we are; why would we throw it all away now?

 

[Grenbyron]

Since the act of reproducing and not actual reproducing is the number one form of entertainment in the world I think it would be best to start with population controls. But then you get into the issue of who has the right to dictate the controls? Who gets to be the exception? Why are there exceptions? Do we go to war with those that do not abide the exceptions? Why can not everyone be gay and just fix the problem that way? Does anyone really thing these people have a chance in Hades of making this work?

 

[Grenbyron]

pssh, they're welcome to abandon ship whenever they wish to. Bloody quitters.

Hehe, I totally agree. In fact I vote this answer.

 

[INF1NIT3 D00M]

maybe not population CONTROL, but definitely keep up the wars and stuff. Humans are spilling out of wombs faster than we can stick em in graves, and its not working out. Keep up the wars, and everything will balance out in the end...
Can you tell I hate my fellow man? ^^

 

[Archemetis]

People should be handed licenses to breed, stupid people, sex offenders, pedophiles and other such people of similar natures, shouldn't be allowed to have one.
and in the case of someone attempting to reproduce without a license their offspring will be terminated, forcing stupid people (and the rest) to live in underground socities and never be seen aagin.

So we've already stunted some of the populations growth, but not stopped it completely, and because non-stupid people (and the rest) are not allowed to breed (legally) It'll leave the world in the hands of the smart people who're capable of enjoying the world with a sense of cultural unity (this is of course after religion is outlawed too).


Really it's a very distopian outlook on the world of tomorrow, but really it seems like it could end up happening one day...

Kinda like the movie demolition man.

 

[naftali1]

I take offense to the hippie comment. The original hippies were about free love...that leads to ridiculous amounts of reproduction. Most hippies today have a similar view. DO NOT equate the dumb-shits of VHEMT to hippies.

 

[wewontdie11]

Well seen as how it goes against the most primal and basic instinct of pretty much every animal on the planet, no, I think the human race should continue.

 

[Anton P. Nym]

I take offense to the hippie comment. The original hippies were about free love...that leads to ridiculous amounts of reproduction. Most hippies today have a similar view. DO NOT equate the dumb-shits of VHEMT to hippies.

With respect, plenty of hippies got into Zero Population Growth in the mid '70s, as well as other movements that make up the whole flagellant wing of the ecological movement.

Besides, this movement is based on an obsolete model with an overly-limited data set [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Population_Bomb]. It's old news, and it's failed numerous tests of its predictions in any case.

-- Steve

 

[Aardvark]

Once again, space ships, extraterrestrial colonisation and expanding out into the stars will be the future of Humanity. Of course, this will only be the technologically advanced nations that manage this, so the backwards 3rd world dictatorships and fundamentalist regimes will be left behind to fight amongst themselves over this dry, empty, over-exploited husk of a planet that we leave behind.

So it's win-win!

Win-win-win, if we leave behind the hippies and degenerates who call for voluntary human extinction.

 

[Hunde Des Krieg]

Since when has population growth begun to slow? The more of us there are the faster we breed...

but even if you did remove humans, eventually another species will evolve mentally and just do exactly what we've done

Not likely, considering how long it took for a species like humanity to evolve, but still I agree with your sentiment. It's not like we are some invading alien species invading the planet to take what we want and leave, we originated here we have just as much right to be here as any other species.

 

[naftali1]

I take offense to the hippie comment. The original hippies were about free love...that leads to ridiculous amounts of reproduction. Most hippies today have a similar view. DO NOT equate the dumb-shits of VHEMT to hippies.

With respect, plenty of hippies got into Zero Population Growth in the mid '70s, as well as other movements that make up the whole flagellant wing of the ecological movement.

Besides, this movement is based on an obsolete model with an overly-limited data set [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Population_Bomb]. It's old news, and it's failed numerous tests of its predictions in any case.

-- Steve

Fair enough.

But in my defense the poll implies that all hippies buy into that when in fact it is a small portion. Therefor I still dislike it...but now my reason makes more sense.

 

[Locust]

Not likely, considering how long it took for a species like humanity to evolve, but still I agree with your sentiment. It's not like we are some invading alien species invading the planet to take what we want and leave, we originated here we have just as much right to be here as any other species.

It's not likely but neither were the creation of humans in the first place. Besides, becoming sentient is the next evolutionary step, eventually another creature will inevitability get there. Unless, of course, it takes several billion years and the sun explodes, but hey.

 

[samsprinkle]

Yeah. That's a good idea! While we're at it let's go cut off our penis(es/i, not sure) and then throw them at women saying,"hahahahahaha! I don't want what you're selling!" and then go cook our appendages and then eat them. OR we could go make babies...

 

[ChaosTheory3133]

I think its kind of high and mighty for humans to think that they are a threat to the planet, the planet is as its always been, and has survived billions of years and should survive quite a bit longer. Human's however will reach their end when the time comes, and its an inevitability, therefore it makes no sense to rush things along.

Humans are not a threat to the planet, humans are only a threat to their own survival. The earth renews itself, creates and destroys, neither judges nor rewards. Let it alone and life will find a way.

 

[SecretTacoNinja]

No... I'd like to spread my genius genes thank you very much, and also sterilize every chav and moron in existence.

Everything dies. Why speed up the inevitable?

 

[Lonan]

I'm gutted here. I do believe there should be some sort of population control. Yes it's near nigh impossible to enforce and yes it may infringe on the individuals "freedoms" but fact of the matter is, we need less people. We've ended up in the exponential growth of population that has become unsustainable. In the short term, strategically, it may not be a bad idea.

...

Because of the exponential growth we need more people to pay for the older generations survive. It's already evident that the generations following the baby-boomers are going to dole out the cash in form of taxes.

So from here there are two options 1) employ population control or 2) don't prolong the life of the elderly, let them go naturally. Now I'm bracing myself for a flaming but many live way beyond their years and are sucking up resources that could be used elsewhere. By no means should they cut their lives short or be refused treatment but perhaps just let them die rather than aggressively prolonging life.

I'm not sure I understand your point about exponential growth and taxes. Are you saying that we require exponential growth in order to retain social institutions (like Social Security)? I hope you understand that the current crisis with social security and the baby boomers is the result pricely of non-exponential growth. If had continued to grow at the rate of our grand parents then there would be no problem in funding Social Security.

--------------------------------

I have two points to make here:

Point #1: Population control is not as important as say, education in general.

Er, I'm looking for a chart I saw online. I'll edit my post if I find it. If you find it before me, please post it: It's a bar graph comparing educated to non-educated women in six or seven countries and the number of children the average woman is expected to have.

Essentially, people have studied the relationship between the number of children women have with no education and the number of children have with more education. The study compared a bunch of countries. In the USA and many western nations, there is still a trend (women with less than a high school diploma on average have something like 3.8 children), but is not as strong as it is in some developing nations, like Nigeria or Botswana or something. In those poorer African nations, uneducated women can be expected to have as many as 8-12 kids in their life time. However, high school educated women have half of that, and college educated women have even fewer.

All this implies that beyond sex education, distribution of contraceptives, etc, a better policy is just to increase the availability of education to women (especially). This is not only easier, but has many other practical applications as well (too much education can't be a bad thing, unless you're Big Brother).

-----------------------------------------------------

Point #2: Populations are starting to control themselves.

Exhibit A:

As I have previously stated, global population growth in the past few decades has slowed for the first time in human history. Global growth peaked 50-60 years ago with the Baby Boomers, and has since fallen. From 1940-1960 the human population tripled. Since then it has merely doubled (in twice as much time!). To be honest, I'm not particularly alarmed.

------------------------------------------

To me, this implies that education and social instruction are much more useful and ethical then strict population control (look at the mess in China!) or something crazy like denying health care to the elderly.

What do you mean look at China? They have 1.2 billion people, and there population is still going up. The resources they need must be gargantuan. The reason the population is still going up is because it's only a fine if you have more then one child. Lots of people do it anyway, I believe. In any case, I love China, when they want to do something, they get it done. Once the U.S. shows they care about the environment because of Obama, the people of China will wonder why they need to wear face masks when they go outside.

 

[Charli]

Well if we all stopped having sex for a week theroetically the population should drop drastically. I kid you not. Eventually we'll figure it out, so chilllaaax.

 

[Hunde Des Krieg]

Not likely, considering how long it took for a species like humanity to evolve, but still I agree with your sentiment. It's not like we are some invading alien species invading the planet to take what we want and leave, we originated here we have just as much right to be here as any other species.

It's not likely but neither were the creation of humans in the first place. Besides, becoming sentient is the next evolutionary step, eventually another creature will inevitability get there. Unless, of course, it takes several billion years and the sun explodes, but hey.

But don't forget evolution doesn't always work in steps. You can look back at our evolutionary history that way but not the future. But that's still beside the ultimate point anyway.