The Human
- Auteur de la discussion phalaris
- Date de début
Entheonaut
Holofractale de l'hypervérité
- Inscrit
- 29/5/06
- Messages
- 1 076
We are the oldest form of cancer :roll:
phalaris
Holofractale de l'hypervérité
- Inscrit
- 7/5/05
- Messages
- 1 112
Hmm, I thought the message was somewhat eery and wary for the future..
but to call ourselves a cancer...., well, in that case we should call any lifeform a cancer that has the chance to expand.
I think it would be a good thing to expand into the unviverse and colonize other planets/moons. The mental change that would accompany such an endeavor could change us for the better. I think. I hope.
And another thing: here on this planet we have to be very carefull were we dump our toxic waste and such just to make sure is does not backfire a few years later.. Don't shit were you eat, so to speak. But I don't see problems with sending our waste into the sun or large gas planets. The sun is nuclear waste..
But I do agree we should do better in using resources/energy than we do at the moment. I hurts when I fill up my diesel powered car, not just because it slurps up my money, but I commit a crime when I try to use vegetable oil as fuel. Plus, the normal combustion engines are hopelessly ineffient.
Lots of room for improvement..
..social and political wise.
but to call ourselves a cancer...., well, in that case we should call any lifeform a cancer that has the chance to expand.
I think it would be a good thing to expand into the unviverse and colonize other planets/moons. The mental change that would accompany such an endeavor could change us for the better. I think. I hope.
And another thing: here on this planet we have to be very carefull were we dump our toxic waste and such just to make sure is does not backfire a few years later.. Don't shit were you eat, so to speak. But I don't see problems with sending our waste into the sun or large gas planets. The sun is nuclear waste..
But I do agree we should do better in using resources/energy than we do at the moment. I hurts when I fill up my diesel powered car, not just because it slurps up my money, but I commit a crime when I try to use vegetable oil as fuel. Plus, the normal combustion engines are hopelessly ineffient.
Lots of room for improvement..
..social and political wise.
hi phlaris-
Absolutely. But before we go colonizing outer space, we need to get over our desire as animals to continually wreak conquest upon each other...ie; we need to get over our mammalian territory issues. Otherwise we run the risk of continuing our sad habits of war and subjugation of each other.
I agree 100% with you on the internal combustion issue.
I read in the paper today that Richard Branson, the CEO of Virgin Airlines, has offered a 25 million dollar cash reeward to any scientist that can develop a method of extractin C02 from the atmosphere
to alleviate the greenhouse effect.
I think that is a good gesture, but I would take it a lot further, if thats any surprise. All the auto industries should solve this problem, NOW,
EVEN IF it bankrupts every single one of them.
Those bastards have made a lot more money than 25 million dollars in the process of fucking up the earth.
Absolutely. But before we go colonizing outer space, we need to get over our desire as animals to continually wreak conquest upon each other...ie; we need to get over our mammalian territory issues. Otherwise we run the risk of continuing our sad habits of war and subjugation of each other.
I agree 100% with you on the internal combustion issue.
I read in the paper today that Richard Branson, the CEO of Virgin Airlines, has offered a 25 million dollar cash reeward to any scientist that can develop a method of extractin C02 from the atmosphere
to alleviate the greenhouse effect.
I think that is a good gesture, but I would take it a lot further, if thats any surprise. All the auto industries should solve this problem, NOW,
EVEN IF it bankrupts every single one of them.
Those bastards have made a lot more money than 25 million dollars in the process of fucking up the earth.
tryptonaut
Holofractale de l'hypervérité
- Inscrit
- 20/11/04
- Messages
- 3 440
No, usually lifeforms don't expand more when they have reached a healthy limit. That is called a functioning eco system. Only humans think we can always grow, get bigger, get more, get faster without limits. Well we can, until our earth is so over-populated and polluted that we're all gonna die. That is the definition of a cancer cell: it won't stop growing until its own organism dies.
phalaris
Holofractale de l'hypervérité
- Inscrit
- 7/5/05
- Messages
- 1 112
There is no such thing as a natural or healthy limit per se; who or what should decide what that limit is ?
You are right to say an equilibrium state will be reached.. but that is only because the resources become more and more depleted. When an organism first expands into a new area (of foods/light/recources) and it is given the chance, it will consume like crazy. The "given a chance" part is crucial, there are no organisms that use some sort of birth control. Well, apart from humans, and we fail miserably. Instead of birth regulation, nature uses death to control group-size.
Selfdestructive growth is very common in nature, the difference is that we are just very good at it.
Last summer, my gardenpond became infected with an agressive algea. It took over the whole pond in a few weeks. Then, after it grew into a large green blob and used up all nutrients, it suffocated everything.. including itself. A few weeks later still, my nice pond was reduced to black smelly water of death.
This spring I'll use the water from the pond to feed the plants in my backyard.
There is life to be found in death.
Here's a bit about population growth. The smooth leveling off towards a steady state is just one of several possible systems.
http://www.nas.nasa.gov/About/Education/Ozone/modeling.html
I still think colonizing other planets is a good option in the long haul. Who am I to forbid a couple from India or south Dakota from raising 3 children when both have good enough living standards ?
For now, we should just try to think of ways of sustainable lifestiles into the future. Restrictive measurements are not the way to go.
You are right to say an equilibrium state will be reached.. but that is only because the resources become more and more depleted. When an organism first expands into a new area (of foods/light/recources) and it is given the chance, it will consume like crazy. The "given a chance" part is crucial, there are no organisms that use some sort of birth control. Well, apart from humans, and we fail miserably. Instead of birth regulation, nature uses death to control group-size.
Selfdestructive growth is very common in nature, the difference is that we are just very good at it.
Last summer, my gardenpond became infected with an agressive algea. It took over the whole pond in a few weeks. Then, after it grew into a large green blob and used up all nutrients, it suffocated everything.. including itself. A few weeks later still, my nice pond was reduced to black smelly water of death.
This spring I'll use the water from the pond to feed the plants in my backyard.
There is life to be found in death.
Here's a bit about population growth. The smooth leveling off towards a steady state is just one of several possible systems.
http://www.nas.nasa.gov/About/Education/Ozone/modeling.html
I still think colonizing other planets is a good option in the long haul. Who am I to forbid a couple from India or south Dakota from raising 3 children when both have good enough living standards ?
For now, we should just try to think of ways of sustainable lifestiles into the future. Restrictive measurements are not the way to go.
