Humanity should kill itself.

Started by Daxisheart, May 31, 2009, 02:50:25 pm

Previous topic - Next topic

Daxisheart

There's a friend of mine that I always debate this with every now and then. He's very stereotypical of the average human mind, so he always takes the predictable argument. I always seem to win, so I'd thought I'd make a topic about this... I would have posted this topic sooner, but my internet was(and still is) down, so I'm using my sister's computer.

Humanity should kill itself off the face of the earth. We're nothing good for the world, we only harm the environment and life cycles of the world. There's really only one solution for the overpopulation and all that, and that's to kill ourselves. We can't wait for anyone to die before reproducing, we're too selfish for that.

Basically,
Spoiler: ShowHide
Serial killers should get medals.
"Oh hey look godless stuff": ShowHide
What is really, really interesting is that while Abrahamic Christians give so much importance to their own free will, by their very definition of their God they deprive Him of free will.
The concept that He is not human and thus not derive the same morals as us really does not work. If his idea of morality, good or evil, is beyond us, is beyond our comprehension, why should we care? If he judges that not saving a woman from being raped a murdered a moral decision, then we should still trust him?
god i am such an atheist asshole.

I am on such a coolkid atheist rampage this week.

Diokatsu

Seriously?



I mean, seriously?



Who cares if we're no good for the planet. Do you even enjoy your life? I suppose in the end killing ourselves is great for everything else, but do you want to die? Go fucking kill yourself and become a martyr for that cause and then maybe I'll believe that you actually think killing yourself is a solution.

Daxisheart

That right there is called selfishness. You're saying that the world can go to hell, as long as you can keep living. Survival instincts tell you that, that's all.

Who says I won't kill myself? :P
"Oh hey look godless stuff": ShowHide
What is really, really interesting is that while Abrahamic Christians give so much importance to their own free will, by their very definition of their God they deprive Him of free will.
The concept that He is not human and thus not derive the same morals as us really does not work. If his idea of morality, good or evil, is beyond us, is beyond our comprehension, why should we care? If he judges that not saving a woman from being raped a murdered a moral decision, then we should still trust him?
god i am such an atheist asshole.

I am on such a coolkid atheist rampage this week.

Pokol DaErran

Quote from: Daxisheart on May 31, 2009, 02:50:25 pmHumanity should kill itself off the face of the earth.

Humanity can do that without you telling them to.
"...Sometimes, the impossible can become possible- if you're awesome!"
--Bolt

Diokatsu

Quote from: Daxisheart on May 31, 2009, 02:56:30 pm
Who says I won't kill myself? :P


Do it faggot.
Quote from: Daxisheart on May 31, 2009, 02:56:30 pm
That right there is called selfishness. You're saying that the world can go to hell, as long as you can keep living. Survival instincts tell you that, that's all.

Yeah, I'm selfish. Worlds are expendable. There are more. We adapt and change to suit them. We go on living. Once you're dea, you're dead. You don't have anything. I still have some things I want to do, so I'm selfish. I want to live. Being selfish isn't something bad neccessarily.

Daxisheart

Selfish isn't bad. Really? Sure.
I'm saying humanity should kill itself because that the world freaking needs it. Earth's environment/life is going to last 2, 3 hundreds years more, tops, if we keep living the way we do, and because of selfish assholes like you, we aren't changing. Either 99% of humanity kills itself off now, or the entire world would suffer.
You know that other topic in intelligent debate, where people are animals? Yeah, we kill them all the time, time to start killing yourselves. Not much different. Morals are relative.
"Oh hey look godless stuff": ShowHide
What is really, really interesting is that while Abrahamic Christians give so much importance to their own free will, by their very definition of their God they deprive Him of free will.
The concept that He is not human and thus not derive the same morals as us really does not work. If his idea of morality, good or evil, is beyond us, is beyond our comprehension, why should we care? If he judges that not saving a woman from being raped a murdered a moral decision, then we should still trust him?
god i am such an atheist asshole.

I am on such a coolkid atheist rampage this week.

Diokatsu

May 31, 2009, 03:06:38 pm #6 Last Edit: May 31, 2009, 03:09:41 pm by Diokatsu
Hahaha.

What good is a world that we can't enjoy?

You talk all this shit, but I don't see you killing yourself.

Daxisheart

What good is a world you can't?

If I killed myself, I wouldn't be able to post anymore.
Besides, I'm killing myself at 42. All my friends already know this. So, wait 27 years, check the newspapers, and you'll find "Asian dude killed himself."
"Oh hey look godless stuff": ShowHide
What is really, really interesting is that while Abrahamic Christians give so much importance to their own free will, by their very definition of their God they deprive Him of free will.
The concept that He is not human and thus not derive the same morals as us really does not work. If his idea of morality, good or evil, is beyond us, is beyond our comprehension, why should we care? If he judges that not saving a woman from being raped a murdered a moral decision, then we should still trust him?
god i am such an atheist asshole.

I am on such a coolkid atheist rampage this week.

Diokatsu

Like I said, there is more than one world.

Daxisheart

"Oh hey look godless stuff": ShowHide
What is really, really interesting is that while Abrahamic Christians give so much importance to their own free will, by their very definition of their God they deprive Him of free will.
The concept that He is not human and thus not derive the same morals as us really does not work. If his idea of morality, good or evil, is beyond us, is beyond our comprehension, why should we care? If he judges that not saving a woman from being raped a murdered a moral decision, then we should still trust him?
god i am such an atheist asshole.

I am on such a coolkid atheist rampage this week.

Diokatsu

It's called the universe. And there are tons of stars like ours with tons of planets like ours. Even if we can't find a planet suitable, we can design away around it. We can adapt.

Daxisheart

Wow. I must really be behind. I mean, I didn't realize that we'd already started colonizing or even have the freaking technology for that kind of s***.
1: It'll take dozens, if not hundreds, of years for a ship to reach those kinds of planets.
2: We don't have the techonology for that. Even then, the smallest error and then the ship would just fly by that planet that's freaking lightyears away
3: How many people can possibly go to these planets? How large can a spaceship be? By saying we can do that...
4: that means that only a smalll, smalll, small, miniscule portion of humanity can go to these planets, and by the time we reach them...
5: It would be hundreds of years later and earth would have already been destroyed by selfish people like you.
"Oh hey look godless stuff": ShowHide
What is really, really interesting is that while Abrahamic Christians give so much importance to their own free will, by their very definition of their God they deprive Him of free will.
The concept that He is not human and thus not derive the same morals as us really does not work. If his idea of morality, good or evil, is beyond us, is beyond our comprehension, why should we care? If he judges that not saving a woman from being raped a murdered a moral decision, then we should still trust him?
god i am such an atheist asshole.

I am on such a coolkid atheist rampage this week.

Diokatsu

You make it sound like we aren't making any efforts to halt the "end of the world". You also make it sound like we couldn't possibly have such technology in so few years. I mean, what was I thinking. Technology doesn't actually grow fast at all, especially existing technology. We couldn't have efficient and commercial space flight in a couple hundred years, that's absurd. And everyone couldn't possibly be saved, you're right. A small portion is great from what I can see. We also reproduce funny enough. Rebuilding the population wouldn't take that long.

Also, shut the fuck up about selfish people like me. People like you just piss me off. I might be selfish, but at least I know how to live. I desire life, love and happiness. I want fufillment. I want to be satisfied and I want to bring my satisfaction about. I have everything to gain, while you have nothing. When it comes down to it, you can kill yourself at what ever age you want, but you won't have lived in any way that I can respect. I'm selfish and vain and lustful. I'm human. But that doesn't mean you know anything about me. In your way of solving things, you never really got to the heart of the issue. It's not about eliminating people, it's about living in harmony with nature. You think that our deaths will be like some sort of saving grace, but in the end all you've done is advocate genocide.

Daxisheart

1: wtf, I've got a whole shitload of stuff to gain, where does that come from?
2: I'm not advocating basic genocide. No discrimination. Just kill off random people.
3: I'd rather not get my happiness, fulfillment, and love by killing off others, by the suffering and destruction of things. I mean, I do do that, and it does happen, but I'd rather not have that
4: 6-7 billion people, and harmony with nature? Yeah, right.
5: about the efficient and commercial space flight, I said that by the time a few hundred years pass, it'll be too late, anyways.
"Oh hey look godless stuff": ShowHide
What is really, really interesting is that while Abrahamic Christians give so much importance to their own free will, by their very definition of their God they deprive Him of free will.
The concept that He is not human and thus not derive the same morals as us really does not work. If his idea of morality, good or evil, is beyond us, is beyond our comprehension, why should we care? If he judges that not saving a woman from being raped a murdered a moral decision, then we should still trust him?
god i am such an atheist asshole.

I am on such a coolkid atheist rampage this week.

Blizzard

May 31, 2009, 04:01:13 pm #14 Last Edit: May 31, 2009, 04:04:19 pm by Blizzard
If people weren't selfish, they would have died out. Survival instinct almost IS selfishness. If somebody is about to get hit by a car and you don't react even if you could have, that's selfishness. Why didn't you do it then? Because it could have killed you. Survival instinct and selfishness are very corelated.

Also, killing oneself is also selfish. While everybody else has to endure the pain we call life, you simply took the shortcut rather than helping other people to get by. What a selfish action suicide is.

In case anybody thinks I'm joke, I'm not. I'm serious.
Check out Daygames and our games:

King of Booze 2      King of Booze: Never Ever
Drinking Game for Android      Never have I ever for Android
Drinking Game for iOS      Never have I ever for iOS


Quote from: winkioI do not speak to bricks, either as individuals or in wall form.

Quote from: Barney StinsonWhen I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

Daxisheart

While I do agree that suicide to end suffering is selfish, I'm not saying suicide to end our pain, but to help the world out. Ignore the survival instinct for the sake of helping the world, because humanity is hurting the world by living. The problem is our survival instinct, and if this instinct makes us selfish and harm the world... kill it.
"Oh hey look godless stuff": ShowHide
What is really, really interesting is that while Abrahamic Christians give so much importance to their own free will, by their very definition of their God they deprive Him of free will.
The concept that He is not human and thus not derive the same morals as us really does not work. If his idea of morality, good or evil, is beyond us, is beyond our comprehension, why should we care? If he judges that not saving a woman from being raped a murdered a moral decision, then we should still trust him?
god i am such an atheist asshole.

I am on such a coolkid atheist rampage this week.

Blizzard

I don't think so. Why should I kill myself? What has the world ever done for me? Everybody has the right to live and deserves a chance. Evolution is the survival of the fittest and if the human race is the fittest, then so shall it be.
Check out Daygames and our games:

King of Booze 2      King of Booze: Never Ever
Drinking Game for Android      Never have I ever for Android
Drinking Game for iOS      Never have I ever for iOS


Quote from: winkioI do not speak to bricks, either as individuals or in wall form.

Quote from: Barney StinsonWhen I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

Daxisheart

Survival of the fittest is basically the surivival intinct and thus selfishness. Why does an organism evolve and adapt? So it can live long, better, reproduce easier. Kill off the others and any competition, that's what it is.
Where was I going with that?
Ignore this survival instinct, and kill yourself because the world is suffering. Humanity does nothing good for the world, we only harm it. If we kill off ourselves now, we can preserve the world for future generations of organisms and their evolution. Scientifically, the world has existed for 4.5 billion years, life has existed on it for 3.7 billion years. In just the millions of years since the homo genus has arrived, and in the just thousands of years since the homo sapiens have started creating civilization, the very face of the earth has changed, the atmosphere has been totally fucked up. Science may evolve fast, but so does our desecration of the earth. The last thousands of years, what about the next thousand, the next hundreds, hell, how about the next couple of decades? Humanity's prescence is just too much with 6-7 billion people. How does one solve this? Death.
"Oh hey look godless stuff": ShowHide
What is really, really interesting is that while Abrahamic Christians give so much importance to their own free will, by their very definition of their God they deprive Him of free will.
The concept that He is not human and thus not derive the same morals as us really does not work. If his idea of morality, good or evil, is beyond us, is beyond our comprehension, why should we care? If he judges that not saving a woman from being raped a murdered a moral decision, then we should still trust him?
god i am such an atheist asshole.

I am on such a coolkid atheist rampage this week.

Blizzard

Why should we kill ourselves? Why should the world not kill itself so it makes it easy on us?
Check out Daygames and our games:

King of Booze 2      King of Booze: Never Ever
Drinking Game for Android      Never have I ever for Android
Drinking Game for iOS      Never have I ever for iOS


Quote from: winkioI do not speak to bricks, either as individuals or in wall form.

Quote from: Barney StinsonWhen I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

Pokol DaErran

War
Can't the human race kill itself off without us helping it?
"...Sometimes, the impossible can become possible- if you're awesome!"
--Bolt

Blizzard

Yeah, why so serious. Humanity's gonna kill itself off again anyway sooner or later.
Check out Daygames and our games:

King of Booze 2      King of Booze: Never Ever
Drinking Game for Android      Never have I ever for Android
Drinking Game for iOS      Never have I ever for iOS


Quote from: winkioI do not speak to bricks, either as individuals or in wall form.

Quote from: Barney StinsonWhen I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

Daxisheart

Quote from: Blizzard on May 31, 2009, 05:27:17 pm
Why should we kill ourselves? Why should the world not kill itself so it makes it easy on us?


WTF? how the hell would that make it easy on us?


Quote from: Pokol DaErran on May 31, 2009, 06:07:43 pm
War
Can't the human race kill itself off without us helping it?


...Really, no. War can't really kill off a good percentage of the human race so that nature can start healing itself. As a matter of fact, war would harm nature even more(Hiroshima anyone), which is the whole point of me telling everyone, not just five people but everyone, to die.

If humanity's going to screw itself up sooner of later,why not sooner than later so that nature can start healing itself, rather than later, when the world would be too scarred to continue?
Oh yeah, the selfishness...
"Oh hey look godless stuff": ShowHide
What is really, really interesting is that while Abrahamic Christians give so much importance to their own free will, by their very definition of their God they deprive Him of free will.
The concept that He is not human and thus not derive the same morals as us really does not work. If his idea of morality, good or evil, is beyond us, is beyond our comprehension, why should we care? If he judges that not saving a woman from being raped a murdered a moral decision, then we should still trust him?
god i am such an atheist asshole.

I am on such a coolkid atheist rampage this week.

Blizzard

Well, by your logic the one that kills itself helps out everybody else. So why should the rest not kill itself off for us instead?
Check out Daygames and our games:

King of Booze 2      King of Booze: Never Ever
Drinking Game for Android      Never have I ever for Android
Drinking Game for iOS      Never have I ever for iOS


Quote from: winkioI do not speak to bricks, either as individuals or in wall form.

Quote from: Barney StinsonWhen I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

Kagutsuchi

No specie is just going to kill it self, espcially humans. Think about what we have accomplished! We have developed technology that the other species on earth can't even dream about! Why should we kill ourself?

fugibo

I agree with Pokol.

Oh yes, and you're an idiot, Daxis. Really, you are. It's one planet out of the universe, so noone really cares if it gets a little boo-boo. However, as far as we an tell we are the only sentient life within a rather large portion of that, so we're kind of important.

Oh, and I think you should kill yourself. Honestly. If you believe that's how we should go, go ahead and do it, right now. Prove that you actually want too.

And when you say "my friend always takes the stereotypical argument," I gather that you mean he wants to _live_? How is that bad?

tSwitch

I think this thread is funny.

Ok, Daxis, I'm willing to debate.
Since I didn't read a lot of that wall of text first page between you and Dio, please explain to my how Humans killing themselves would help the environment.

I'm expecting an argument about pollution and natural resources, but do explain yourself before I make assumptions.


FCF3a A+ C- D H- M P+ R T W- Z- Sf RLCT a cmn+++ d++ e++ f h+++ iw+++ j+ p sf+
Follow my project: MBlok | Find me on: tSwitch.us | Twitter | Tumblr

Daxisheart

Sorry, not internet, It'll take a while..


Blizz: I'm not really using analogies like the one you used, because the world killing itself, the animals and plants and organisms like that, killing themselves would NOT do good for the world. That's pretty much the opposite of what I'm going for and what I'm trying to achieve. I want to help the world, and the human species is one organism that does not do that, so that's why it can go to hell.

kagutsuchi: yeah, we got lots technology and achievements, yet what exactly has that done for the world/nature besides fuck it up? Pollution didn't exist before humanity did.

Well, duh, the stereotypical argument would be to want to live. And who the hell said I didn't want to live? I'm saying what humanity should do, not what it will do. I definitely don't so all the things I should do.

Yes, definitely, pollution and natural resources are obviously the main points of what I'm trying to get across: before humanity, mainly civilization, existed, there was no pollution or wasting of natural resources. These things harm the world. The very atmosphere has changed because of human existence/interference. As long as this civilization continues, the world's going to suffer. The sea's not infinite, you know, nothing is. As long as humanity exists, pollution, destruction, mass killings of organism will still exist, and no one's going to do anything about it because everyone's too lazy.
PS: That everyone includes me, duh.
"Oh hey look godless stuff": ShowHide
What is really, really interesting is that while Abrahamic Christians give so much importance to their own free will, by their very definition of their God they deprive Him of free will.
The concept that He is not human and thus not derive the same morals as us really does not work. If his idea of morality, good or evil, is beyond us, is beyond our comprehension, why should we care? If he judges that not saving a woman from being raped a murdered a moral decision, then we should still trust him?
god i am such an atheist asshole.

I am on such a coolkid atheist rampage this week.

Kagutsuchi

Quote from: Daxisheart on June 01, 2009, 12:44:50 pm
kagutsuchi: yeah, we got lots technology and achievements, yet what exactly has that done for the world/nature besides fuck it up? Pollution didn't exist before humanity did.


Volcano eruptions and astroids/comets colliding with earth have done more damage to earth than us humans ever have. Also, all humans do is follow the basic rule of nature. Survival of the fitest. The onces that are best adaptable are the once to survive. We humans can even make nature adapt to us! Not many species have been able to do that!

Blizzard

@Daxis: And who are you to judge what is good for the environment? From my knowledge a meteor crashing into earth would cause more damage than the human race during this entire civilization (as Kagutsuchi already stated) and humans might be able to prevent a scenario like that. What is worse? An armageddon scenario and some little pollution and change of environment?
Check out Daygames and our games:

King of Booze 2      King of Booze: Never Ever
Drinking Game for Android      Never have I ever for Android
Drinking Game for iOS      Never have I ever for iOS


Quote from: winkioI do not speak to bricks, either as individuals or in wall form.

Quote from: Barney StinsonWhen I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

tSwitch

Quote from: Daxisheart on June 01, 2009, 12:44:50 pm
Yes, definitely, pollution and natural resources are obviously the main points of what I'm trying to get across: before humanity, mainly civilization, existed, there was no pollution or wasting of natural resources. These things harm the world. The very atmosphere has changed because of human existence/interference. As long as this civilization continues, the world's going to suffer. The sea's not infinite, you know, nothing is. As long as humanity exists, pollution, destruction, mass killings of organism will still exist, and no one's going to do anything about it because everyone's too lazy.


alright.
Your main point is pollution.
Back in the day, before all of our brilliant technology (and back when pollution awareness was startlingly lacking) you may have had a point, however, look at all the companies that are 'going green' if not to help the environment, but just to look good.

As far as natural resources go, there's a lot of recycling going on as part of the 'green' movement as well.  Metal, paper, and plastics are being reused and reworked into new products.  Look at the new line of Macbooks, they're all created entirely from recycled aluminum.

also..mass killings?
I'm sorry what?


FCF3a A+ C- D H- M P+ R T W- Z- Sf RLCT a cmn+++ d++ e++ f h+++ iw+++ j+ p sf+
Follow my project: MBlok | Find me on: tSwitch.us | Twitter | Tumblr

Blizzard

There are no mass killings ever since people realized what they are doing. It's true, earlier there were much more fish in the seas and today only a fraction of their numbers exist, but people have realized what they are doing and they have changed their ways and methods.
Check out Daygames and our games:

King of Booze 2      King of Booze: Never Ever
Drinking Game for Android      Never have I ever for Android
Drinking Game for iOS      Never have I ever for iOS


Quote from: winkioI do not speak to bricks, either as individuals or in wall form.

Quote from: Barney StinsonWhen I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

fugibo

Quote from: Daxisheart on June 01, 2009, 12:44:50 pm
Sorry, not internet, It'll take a while..


Blizz: I'm not really using analogies like the one you used, because the world killing itself, the animals and plants and organisms like that, killing themselves would NOT do good for the world. That's pretty much the opposite of what I'm going for and what I'm trying to achieve. I want to help the world, and the human species is one organism that does not do that, so that's why it can go to hell.

kagutsuchi: yeah, we got lots technology and achievements, yet what exactly has that done for the world/nature besides fuck it up? Pollution didn't exist before humanity did.

Well, duh, the stereotypical argument would be to want to live. And who the hell said I didn't want to live? I'm saying what humanity should do, not what it will do. I definitely don't so all the things I should do.

Yes, definitely, pollution and natural resources are obviously the main points of what I'm trying to get across: before humanity, mainly civilization, existed, there was no pollution or wasting of natural resources. These things harm the world. The very atmosphere has changed because of human existence/interference. As long as this civilization continues, the world's going to suffer. The sea's not infinite, you know, nothing is. As long as humanity exists, pollution, destruction, mass killings of organism will still exist, and no one's going to do anything about it because everyone's too lazy.
PS: That everyone includes me, duh.


Ever heard of the Ice Age? The meteor that hit the Yucatan Peninsula? Snowball Earth? Earth itself has killed more than we might have by driving cars.

Blizzard

An active volcano produces yearly much more greenhouse effect causing gases than all humanity in case you didn't know, Daxis.
Check out Daygames and our games:

King of Booze 2      King of Booze: Never Ever
Drinking Game for Android      Never have I ever for Android
Drinking Game for iOS      Never have I ever for iOS


Quote from: winkioI do not speak to bricks, either as individuals or in wall form.

Quote from: Barney StinsonWhen I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

Vell

June 01, 2009, 03:45:36 pm #33 Last Edit: June 01, 2009, 03:47:04 pm by UltaFlame
Global Warming, which i assume is one of your major OH NOES, is more likely just a natural phase in the earth's life.

as you say: humanity is overpopulated. true. this is a problem. but hundreds die each day. in places of the world - EVEN IN 2004 - populations were going DOWN.  There's such a thing as 'carrying capacity.' we've reached ours. our numbers fluctuate up and down, now.

I'll begin by assaulting your thoughts on civilization: too many people because of it(this is your viewpoint). we have 6-7Billion people. well, I'm sure glad civilization exists. I mean, if we didn't have those huge sprawling cities with those gigantic skyscrapers, those 500+million (per city) people would have to spread out. then we'd have even Less forests, even Less meadows... really, I'm glad we concentrate our numbers in such a way.

pollution's already covered.

Mass killings of animals: Poor cows. good thing we have nature reserves where this species, and thousands of others, live safely in the wild, protected by laws.

people growing more than theyre dying? well. with all those Genocides going on, the holocaust some odd number of dozens of years ago, those tsunamis and tornadoes wiping out entire towns... I'm simply amazed that we're having SO MANY babies per day.

tl;dr version: GO FUCK YOURSELF. I'm all for advocating pessimism and stuff, but mass suicide is worse than mass genocide. no. it IS mass genocide.

EDIT: someone go call the UN on this guy and other people like him. they're a crime against humanity just by talking. I doubt you win your debates. people like you usually end up just thinking you've won. or your friends don't want you to die right in front of them. or maybe they're just afraid you'll take that knife out on them.

fugibo

June 01, 2009, 04:03:56 pm #34 Last Edit: June 01, 2009, 04:06:23 pm by WcW
++UltaFlame; --DaxiHeart; Blizz.signal(:suggest) do
 USERS.delete("DaxisHeart");
end

Blizz.signal(:jk)

Also, I find it funny that the entire front page is DH arguing that everyone else is selfish, when his only other point is "OMG I IZ WINNIN ARGAHMNTS!!!!"/morbidexaggeration

Kagutsuchi

Now that we are slightly touching upon global warming, I feel like mentioning the sun. Scientists believes that there is not only a 11 years sun cycle, but also a 200 years sun cycle, which have a much larger effect than the one on 11 years. However the 200 years sun cycle is difficult to confirm because it is, well, 200 years long. But if it exists a "mini iceage" is soon going to come, and the global warming caused by humans might actually make things more stable.

Another point regarding global warming, the average temprature on the earth have gone down a bit since year 2000.

The 11 years sun cycle should have caused the sun to increase it's activity by now, but it have not.

~80% of the greenhouse effect is caused by H2O

Subsonic_Noise

First, we can't kill themselves to save the world because we are a part of this world.
We devoloped during millions of years from microscopic to what we are now. We belong
to this world and we would not save it by just killing ourselves.

Second, you are argueing from the point of view of a human, which is understandable as we all
are humans. But from the point of view of the earth, the harm we do to it is nearly nothing. As
others already said, the world was already destroyed many times just to recover itself over time.
Do you know those little bugs which can destroy a whole forest? It may be shocking for us to see all those
dead trees, but after a long period of time, there will be a new forest at the same place with even more    richness in species because the soil has become more fertile by the dead trees. Do you know what I mean?
The world will survive us and recover from the harm we did to it.

You do have some points, though. We will need to change some things we do for the sake of all the animals
who are living now including ourselves, but mass killings are not the right thing to do.

(Please excuse strange phrases and / or grammar mistakes as I am from germany)
(Hurray for my first post^^)

fugibo

@Kagutsuchi:
Because we've obviously had 10 Ice Ages since the year 0. Logic fail.

Blizzard

Mini-iceage != Iceage I suppose.

self.recv(self.signal, Users.WcW)

*goes off to delete the account*

self.recv(self.signal, Users.WcW)

... oh, it was just a joke. Ok. xD

@Subsonic_Noise: From Germany? O_o

Also, we ARE affecting the world around us, there is no doubt about it. But we aren't affecting it only in bad ways and we are not the only ones affecting it in bad ways as Subsonic_Noise already said.
Check out Daygames and our games:

King of Booze 2      King of Booze: Never Ever
Drinking Game for Android      Never have I ever for Android
Drinking Game for iOS      Never have I ever for iOS


Quote from: winkioI do not speak to bricks, either as individuals or in wall form.

Quote from: Barney StinsonWhen I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

Daxisheart

Sorry, internet down, I have to go, so real quick:

those are natural disasters, unavoidable, and are a part of nature. Do we need to pollute? No. Do we need to take more than we need and shit over everything else? No.

I'll be back in probably 30-40 minutes.
"Oh hey look godless stuff": ShowHide
What is really, really interesting is that while Abrahamic Christians give so much importance to their own free will, by their very definition of their God they deprive Him of free will.
The concept that He is not human and thus not derive the same morals as us really does not work. If his idea of morality, good or evil, is beyond us, is beyond our comprehension, why should we care? If he judges that not saving a woman from being raped a murdered a moral decision, then we should still trust him?
god i am such an atheist asshole.

I am on such a coolkid atheist rampage this week.

Vell

Quote from: Daxisheart on June 01, 2009, 09:51:11 pm
Sorry, internet down, I have to go, so real quick:

those are natural disasters, unavoidable, and are a part of nature. Do we need to pollute? No. Do we need to take more than we need and shit over everything else? No.

I'll be back in probably 30-40 minutes.


Guys. he's not listening. this is not a debate. a Debate is two sided with each side carefully considering the other and allowing it a possibility in one's mind before stating their own opinion. he's just forcing his on ours. he's just a wanna-be depressed moron who has little to no excuse for being a whiny baby. I suggest locking this, or moving it to spam.

Starrodkirby86

Let's wait until what he says after coming back. You probably might not get his full position or words in this part because of his Internet and the lack of time he has in writing it.

What's osu!? It's a rhythm game. Thought I should have a signature with a working rank. ;P It's now clickable!
Still Aqua's biggest fan (Or am I?).




Vell

alright, moddy. then I shall respond.

Responding to questions.

Do we need to pollute? actually, at this point in time... yes. People ARE looking for alternative fuels, but at the moment to keep society... societal, it is necessary to use the fuel we have. so we must pollute.

ok. pollution unavoidable. do we all need to die? NO! sooner or later there will be a major mass-extinction(AKA the IceAge/whatever happened to the dinosaurs) Earth has them. several times all life has been wiped from the earth(or so i've been taught) and it's always come back. even if we make it desolate and destitute and a literal wasteland, Earth comes back. you can raze an entire forest, and turn that into a desert, eventually small plants will pop up, and then slightly bigger ones, and eventually you will have a forest again. it's called Natural Succession or somethin, Iunno, it's been a while since I had a class on this.

your turn now,I'm bored.

Daxisheart

I'm going to try to adress as many points as possible since my last real post. I do try to listen to others and respond in turn, sorry if it sounds like I'm pushing it on you.(then again, you should see the kinds of reactions I get on RMXP's religion thread a while back...)

Kagutsuchi: I've sort of answered yours already, those are natural disasters and unavoidable. NATURAL disasters. It's a part of nature for it to happen. Volcanoes erupt. Cyclones destroy. You can't really blame a single person for it, there's really nothing to blame, shit happens.
Now pollution and stuff, however, you can blame. That company that dumps waste into the ocean? Yeah, you can actually blame people for that.

Now, for something related: Humanity pollutes. Yeah, we exist, and we do that. So, humanity = pollution, no humanity = no pollution. Pollution is so that thus, can be stopped, if humanity is gone from this world. So, pollution and damage to the environment and all this can be stopped. But it doesn't, because we exist and we are too selfish to do anything. And by anything this means more than two or three people out of every 100(I wish) recycling- that means something like 99 out of every 100 people recycling for an actual impact on the environment. I mean, if people actually actively do that, and various other things, maybe it can work.

Namkcor: I think I just adressed you in the above paragraph, but I want to add something: If humanity didn't exist, it wouldn't even be needed to recycle alumnium...

The mass killings thing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exxon_Valdez_oil_spill
admittedly, that was probably an accident. Still...

Holocaust a couple years back: Although I hate it, since it was a discriminatory type of killing, in the end it did benefit us somewhat(like all wars). Let's see, if it didn't exist, then let's add 11 million people to the world population. And increase it by however many generations in between. Do all that for all of the wars, and human overpopulation would be even more of a freaking problem, and it's a huge enough problem even now. And even with these catastrophes, humanity still manages to one up nature and grow even more. Sure, tsunamies and hurricanes and holocausts may kill of thousands and millions of people, yet if you look at the world population ten, twenty years later, it's still exponentially higher.
"Oh hey look godless stuff": ShowHide
What is really, really interesting is that while Abrahamic Christians give so much importance to their own free will, by their very definition of their God they deprive Him of free will.
The concept that He is not human and thus not derive the same morals as us really does not work. If his idea of morality, good or evil, is beyond us, is beyond our comprehension, why should we care? If he judges that not saving a woman from being raped a murdered a moral decision, then we should still trust him?
god i am such an atheist asshole.

I am on such a coolkid atheist rampage this week.

Subsonic_Noise

Well if you want to look at the holocaust that way (I hate it when people say something like that  :roll:)
I think it did much more harm the the earth than it avoided. Think about all the pollution as the result of
the production of tanks, highways, airplanes etc. and all the nature destroyed during the war. I'm sorry but
you totally fail with this argument.

@Blizzard: Yeah I'm from Germany, what's strange about that? o.O

Vell

Blizz speaks german fluently I believe.

impulszero

Quote from: UltaFlame on June 01, 2009, 10:29:06 pm
Do we need to pollute? actually, at this point in time... yes. People ARE looking for alternative fuels, but at the moment to keep society... societal, it is necessary to use the fuel we have. so we must pollute.


if i can say u're wrong would u trust me?
ex.1. > Solar energy can reproduce much more energy that fuel and nuclear energy
ex.2. > Wing Energy can produce more energy
ex.3. > Hydro energy can blah blah blah....
dont trust? just google the "solar/hydro/wind energy facts"
The point is we pollute cuz country like (ex.)america needs money. there is safer and un-polluted ways of geting energy, but its have no profit for country of that tipe. The country that are based on economy will never accept other recource who dont give profit.
<br /><br />Order is for idiots, Genius can handle Chaos.

Vell

meh. not like I've done any actual research. of course, I'm aware of these things, but ya know, I never bothered to check if they were sufficient. I say we'll all either die when the next ice age comes along, or some huge super-disaster. if humanity can survive that, then I say we deserve to live. until then let us go on till we're tested.

and btw. species go extinct and pop up like their going out of style - always. We have no change on that. sure, we could kill less, but it's natural for species to go extinct. all things must die eventually. we all will too. Humanity is not eternal.

Daxisheart

I'm just saying; it would be easier if humanity died now.

Ps: I'm pretty sure that for every living species, 100 have gone extinct.
"Oh hey look godless stuff": ShowHide
What is really, really interesting is that while Abrahamic Christians give so much importance to their own free will, by their very definition of their God they deprive Him of free will.
The concept that He is not human and thus not derive the same morals as us really does not work. If his idea of morality, good or evil, is beyond us, is beyond our comprehension, why should we care? If he judges that not saving a woman from being raped a murdered a moral decision, then we should still trust him?
god i am such an atheist asshole.

I am on such a coolkid atheist rampage this week.

Vell

so we're not doing anything wrong. How can you be so sure we're ACTUALLY csusing so much destruction? have you monitored the earth and everything that's happened to it SINCE IT'S CREATION?! I doubt the polar ice caps have been there since day 1. did you know most of the land was covered in a giant ICE BERG? as in, ALMOST ALL OF IT?

besides, we've already changed the face of the world far too much. without us there anymore, all of the space we've used will just go to waste. by the time 'nature' has completely eradicated every trace of us and begun 'healing' from us, if we didn't die we'd have found several ways to live 'co-existently' with 'nature'. Humans are a part of nature. Species ARE the face of the earth, Living beings ALWAYS change it.

your biggest issue here is treating 'nature' as something apart from humanity. 'oh, we're above all those dumb animals and lifeless things in the background, but we're harming them, so let's die.' humans are as much a part of nature, and are as natural, as everythign around us. the world, the EARTH, has checks and balances.  the different forms of trees that live change the shape of the earth, the different creatures that live allow other different species to live, and so on. Humans just don't realise that they ARE natural. they are as susceptible to mother nature as everything else. in fact, we're equivalent to everything else. it takes more than 4 bullets to the forehead to make a bear stop charging you. sure, it'll be dead soon, but it'll live long enough to kill you and continue for a short while.  read this in a book couple years back. one bullet to our rm and we can't move at all. I know you have all those movies and stuff that show people taking three bullets and moving like it's easy. it won't be. in fact, you'd probably be unconscious, if not dead. blood loss does that to ya. so withotu our technology we wouldn't even be around still. your probably still incredibly young and see thigns in black and white. there's always another side to the coin. theres always a light to the dark, and dark to a light.

Valcos

Im pretty sure killing of people would cause more pain. Just imagine people dropping dead everywhere! I know id go insane and probably kill myself or something :^_^':
"We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars."
-Oscar De La Hoya

Diokatsu

Quote from: Daxisheart on June 01, 2009, 09:51:11 pm
Sorry, internet down, I have to go, so real quick:

those are natural disasters, unavoidable, and are a part of nature. Do we need to pollute? No. Do we need to take more than we need and shit over everything else? No.

I'll be back in probably 30-40 minutes.

But our greed is part of our nature. That's why capitalism works. You'd be harming another nature to save one.

Vell

Quote from: myself, thank you.Humans just don't realise that they ARE natural. they are as susceptible to mother nature as everything else

Reno-s--Joker

I don't understand... for the sole reason that we pollute and damage the environment? I don't see burning toxic clouds, zero plant-life and super overheated greenhouse effects yet - oh wait - that's Venus. Just because there is no-one to blame for Venus' state does not mean the situation is not the same. If we seriously went and killed everyone that was to blame for something then no-one and nothing would progress. People aren't pure and they make mistakes. If no-one makes mistakes then no-one learns, etc etc.

Anyhow, if you wanted to be technical - who said the environment (that is plants and animals) is natural anyway? When it all boils down to it, the universe is made up of particles, predominantly hydrogen. Why don't we just destroy the universe in a reverse Big Bang so it can all go back to the way it was? Life is a weird sort of anomaly in a non-organically dominated universe.

I think someone's being a little short sighted here. Personally I think that humanity has realised its mistake fairly early (only a few hundred years since the Industrial Revolution in the billions that the Earth has existed). There are enough people trying to solve the environmental problem in other less drastic ways than mass suicide. This is an opinion which is kinda like "Yeah, all stupid people should be killed." No. As much as I hate them, who says I'm not one? Who is to decide? Who will thank us when we all kill ourselves; when the remorseless Sun drags the Earth into itself and destroys all our efforts?

Why was reproduction invented - why is sex fun? Why does death and the dead smell so bad (although some strange people whom I will run away from might think otherwise)? Life and the living want to survive. They were created/developed (choose whatever you will) that way. So we should not kill ourselves over some misguided idealism.

Anyhow, it's good to see you're so passionate about our planet you would sacrifice your life for it. I don't want to you sacrifice your life - I'd rather you do something more productive. Please?

...
Okay I'm probably repeating what everyone has said already. D:

Vell

this 'debate' is about him repeating himself, and us repeating ourselves. we've all said more or less the same thing these whole three pages.

Blizzard

Check out Daygames and our games:

King of Booze 2      King of Booze: Never Ever
Drinking Game for Android      Never have I ever for Android
Drinking Game for iOS      Never have I ever for iOS


Quote from: winkioI do not speak to bricks, either as individuals or in wall form.

Quote from: Barney StinsonWhen I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

Daxisheart

Well, I got nothing. I'm repeating myself too much, and ulta's points are pretty valid. There are some stuff I might say in response, but it doesn't feel related to this topic enough. Anyways, I'm out, sorry bout that.
And I'm not saying am I sacrificing my life, just arguing that one SHOULD. Big diff. Either way, even if everyone agrees that humanity should do such and such, we won't.
Or at least I won't.
PS: INTERNET'S BACK! final-freaking-ly
"Oh hey look godless stuff": ShowHide
What is really, really interesting is that while Abrahamic Christians give so much importance to their own free will, by their very definition of their God they deprive Him of free will.
The concept that He is not human and thus not derive the same morals as us really does not work. If his idea of morality, good or evil, is beyond us, is beyond our comprehension, why should we care? If he judges that not saving a woman from being raped a murdered a moral decision, then we should still trust him?
god i am such an atheist asshole.

I am on such a coolkid atheist rampage this week.

fugibo

Quote from: Daxisheart on June 03, 2009, 11:12:14 am
Well, I got nothing. I'm repeating myself too much, and ulta's points are pretty valid. There are some stuff I might say in response, but it doesn't feel related to this topic enough. Anyways, I'm out, sorry bout that.
And I'm not saying am I sacrificing my life, just arguing that one SHOULD. Big diff. Either way, even if everyone agrees that humanity should do such and such, we won't.
Or at least I won't.
PS: INTERNET'S BACK! final-freaking-ly


That makes Winston Smith.

LurkerKoetsu

In OP's defense. People agree with him, and he has a point.

Even though he's the winner of the debate, it wont change a damn thing.

Diokatsu

Quote from: LurkerKoetsu on June 25, 2009, 03:36:50 pm
In OP's defense. People agree with him, and he has a point.

Even though he's the winner of the debate, it wont change a damn thing.

Go kill yourself if you feel like it. More room for me and less consumption.

Blizzard

No, he doesn't have a point. All he did is to take 1 fact and 1 argument and stretch it through the entire topic while everybody else was bombarding him with different arguments. How can he be the winner if he didn't successfully defend his point?
Check out Daygames and our games:

King of Booze 2      King of Booze: Never Ever
Drinking Game for Android      Never have I ever for Android
Drinking Game for iOS      Never have I ever for iOS


Quote from: winkioI do not speak to bricks, either as individuals or in wall form.

Quote from: Barney StinsonWhen I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

Diokatsu

Atone for our sins lmao. You act as if everyone really cares. Truth is, more people worry about surviving the next day with less food than they really need. I honestly care more about helping my fellow humans than animals.

You act like we even matter. Sorry, we don't. Tough break. There are plenty of other planets out there with plenty of other animals and possibly intelligent life such as ourselves.

The goal of life is survival, simple. That's what causes animals to hunt and breed. We are animals at our base. It's not bullshit, it's science.

Being selfish of life and wanting to sustain it are different things. We aren't a "long term satisfaction" kind of people. We like our instant gratification. We're being incredibly selfish because we want to experience all those emotions that seperate us from animals: joy, love, and freedom.

And what makes you think we CAN change for the better? We DO repeat the past, it's inevitable and not worth my time to worry about.

Sure kid, I'll recycle and do my part. I'll be kind and petition to stop animal cruelty. Hell, I'll even spend time in Africa helping them with their horrible lives. But, in the end, we will eventually kill off everything in this world. We aren't a people that can fix such a mistake. We're greedy and ambitious. For every push I make forward, someone will take two back. We're doomed, but that's how life works. nothing lasts forever, especially life. Things die and wither and end.

Blizzard

June 26, 2009, 04:09:51 am #62 Last Edit: June 26, 2009, 04:12:05 am by Blizzard
You didn't seem to have read this thread, Lurker. We already proved the point that Global Warming isn't humanity's fault. Now please reread the topic before you make an idiot out of yourself. ._.

As for extinction... Seriously. The dinosaurs died out. Is it the humans' fault? No. You can't pin something on humanity just because it happens. Old species die out, new species are born. That's a natural cycle. Sure, humans probably speeded it up in a few cases, but that doesn't make them solely responsible for a species' extinction.

We are not at the point of no return yet. It is still possible to reverse the damage done to the planet. (Zeitgeist Addendum, anyone?)
But that won't happen as long as capitalism is around.
Also, if we "kill ourselves", who will reverse the damage we have done so far? Nobody.
Check out Daygames and our games:

King of Booze 2      King of Booze: Never Ever
Drinking Game for Android      Never have I ever for Android
Drinking Game for iOS      Never have I ever for iOS


Quote from: winkioI do not speak to bricks, either as individuals or in wall form.

Quote from: Barney StinsonWhen I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

Blizzard

June 26, 2009, 08:05:58 am #63 Last Edit: June 26, 2009, 08:09:43 am by Blizzard
Quote from: LurkerKoetsu on June 26, 2009, 05:10:20 am
I could read opinions, but, I would rather read studies.

You know, reliable sources.  Facts, studies, research, whatever.


It's funny that you say that because...

Quote from: LurkerKoetsu on June 26, 2009, 05:10:20 am
http://sustainablog.org/2009/05/18/prevention-of-global-warming-understanding-the-main-causes/
http://sustainablog.org/2009/06/18/the-top-causes-of-global-warming-natural-or-human/


...blogs are based on opinions and not regarded as scientific articles.

Wikipedia isn't close to being a collection of scientific articles either, but it has some valid metafacts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming

Quote from: WikiIn addition to human-caused emissions, some models also include a simulation of the carbon cycle; this generally shows a positive feedback, though this response is uncertain. Some observational studies also show a positive feedback.


Sure, there are studies that show that human do affect global warming significantly, but there are also studies that show that this isn't the case. Here is a counter article: http://www.john-daly.com/cause/cause.htm
Here's a very nice quote from that article.

QuoteThe evidence is overwhelming that temperature records from places remote from human habitation show no evidence of warming. These remote places include forests, ice cores and other proxy measurements, measurements by weather balloons, measurements by satellite (the only truly global measurements) and surface measurements in places where human influence is minimal. It only remains, therefore to characterise the human influence around weather stations in more detail;.


Funny that people call it "global warming" while it's clearly "local warming". How typical for humans to assume the are the (center of the) existing world.

Also:

Quote from: LurkerKoetsu on June 26, 2009, 05:10:20 amhttp://ecobridge.org/content/g_cse.htm


This is a nice article about a few facts. But for some reason I can't find any mentioning that this is the major cause of global warming except for the misleading title saying "Causes of global warming". Just putting a label on something doesn't turn it into what the label represents.

Spoiler: ShowHide
QuoteFigure 6 goes back much further, more than 2000 years, and shows a slight recent warming which cannot be considered as exceptional. A slight increase in tree-ring thickness recently is to be expected because of the increased atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide



This is so typical for people to assume that a short-term change will cause or will not cause a long term change.

Quote from: LurkerKoetsu on June 26, 2009, 05:10:20 am
While natural causes are a small part of global warming. You'll be ignorant or in your words "an idiot" to not admit that humans are a much bigger part of the global warming picture. I really don't talk or debate without reading up on something before I enter a debate.


Your first response didn't make the impression that you read it. That's all I am saying. I didn't call you an idiot, I said that it could make your look like one if you think you can burst in an into a debate and shake the foundations of one side with one single sentence. Putting words in my mouth isn't nice.

Quote from: LurkerKoetsu on June 26, 2009, 05:10:20 am
Underestimating me even in the slightest will not be beneficial to your argument.


Then I hope to see some facts and not opinions, some proofs and not biased studies.

Quote from: LurkerKoetsu on June 26, 2009, 05:10:20 am
Humans, are responsible even for some of the natural elements of GW. Such as chopping down trees/forests for lumber. Any elementary student can tell you that Trees/ plants convert Carbon Dioxide to Oxygen. The less trees there are, the more Carbon Dioxide there will be.. and as time progresses I think you could put two and two together.


That's true. But humans have been chopping down woods for quite some time now. And other people have been complaining about it for the same period of time. I'm not saying that it's a good thing to do and I'm not saying that it doesn't affect the life on the planet at all, but if you read this you will see that currently about 0.2% of forests disappear every year. It was about 0.4% per year several years earlier. What that means? Well, that means that we could fairly say that 10%-20% of all forests have disappeared in the last 100 years. How much did the temperature go up (that includes other factors as pollution)? Not that much. So how much do you think was caused by the disappearance of forests?
ALSO, forests are not the only vegetation on the planet. In case you didn't know, there are many algae under sea. Are you saying that they don't produce any oxygen? Especially since algae are quite a consumer of CO2.

Quote from: LurkerKoetsu on June 26, 2009, 05:10:20 am
Resources isn't infinite on this earth and almost everything has a complex relationship.


Hence it is wrong to assume that the change of one single factor as humans creating more gashouse effect gases is the major cause of a climate change.

Quote from: LurkerKoetsu on June 26, 2009, 05:10:20 am
(I.E. One time the US tried to rid Africa of harmful mosquitoes in Borneo. They succeeded, but then they failed. They got rid of the diseases that mosquitoes caused but.. a butterfly effect was triggered. That was a doozy.
Read here: http://www.cdra.org.za/creativity/Parachuting%20cats%20into%20Borneo.htm)


That shows how the most noble intentions can turn out quite ugly. What makes you think it can't work the other way around?

Quote from: LurkerKoetsu on June 26, 2009, 05:10:20 am
Humans are more influential than you may think.


I am not saying they aren't and I never said that. But to think that humans are a major factor in some things is very arrogant. How are people supposed to take such exagarations seriously when you come across articles like this one?
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2387203.ece

Quote from: LurkerKoetsu on June 26, 2009, 05:10:20 am
Here are a few more good reads.
http://www.livescience.com/environment/070419_earth_timeline.html
http://solveclimate.com/blog/20090218/usda-census-part-ii-destroying-land-destroying-planet


Yet again no scientific articles but media and media can be influenced.

Quote from: LurkerKoetsu on June 26, 2009, 05:10:20 am
Finally, of course the last reason that I could not believe you.
http://www.examiner.com/x-5266-Seattle-Environmental-Policy-Examiner~y2009m6d16-White-House-report-global-warming-is-real-and-caused-by-human-activity


Very nice article about what might happen. But somehow I can't find the part where we have some valid statistics about how this is solely humanity's fault.

Quote from: LurkerKoetsu on June 26, 2009, 05:10:20 am
^The white house reports it to be true. Both Obama's and Bush's.


Nobody said it wasn't true. The article describes a possible scenario after all. Probability is always true.

Quote from: LurkerKoetsu on June 26, 2009, 05:10:20 am
Of course if you could show me your degree in the study of Global Warming I'll take back my words. I'll Apologize, hell I'll even say that I'm a moron. Of course, if you can even show me any studies you read that are from a reliable source which source their sources.. I'll think it over.


I don't have a degree in Global Warming studies, but neither have you. But I am not questioning global warming here, I am questioning the scientific methods used to achieve results. As we all know it is possible to simply ignore various factors that seem irrelevant. Just because they seem to be irrelevant doesn't make them irrelevant.
And what makes you think that human knowledge is absolute? Humans once thought the Earth was flat and it was accepted common knowledge. It is hard to prove a theory on a large scale because (as you said yourself) of many factors that affect the result. Hence it is foolish to believe it unless a majority of studies show or a minority of studies actually PROVE that humans are a major factor in global warming.
Again, I am not saying that we shouldn't act pre-emptively and supress possible causes. But just because a few people (remember, humans are biased creatures) decide to make a study to "prove" (those terms are exclusive, you can't prove anything with a study) that humans are the major cause of global warming, doesn't mean they are right.

Besides, you are going off topic here. It's about why humanity should kill itself, not if there is global warming. If you want to discuss global warming, please make a new thread.
Check out Daygames and our games:

King of Booze 2      King of Booze: Never Ever
Drinking Game for Android      Never have I ever for Android
Drinking Game for iOS      Never have I ever for iOS


Quote from: winkioI do not speak to bricks, either as individuals or in wall form.

Quote from: Barney StinsonWhen I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

fugibo

Quote from: LurkerKoetsu on June 26, 2009, 03:13:16 pm
AHahah.. HAHAHAHAHA Did you really pull a Sun Newstory out on me?
HAHAHAHA!?!
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/sun-we-made-false-allegations-against-muslim
http://the-sun-lies.blogspot.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sun (Scroll down to Controversy)

The Sun who has a history of running fake news stories? *Wipes tear from eye*

Oh man.. dude.. no. That's like bringing up Limbaugh in the cause of why Sanford cheated on his wife.
http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2009/06/26/limbaugh_sanford/index.html. We all knows that Obama has some sort of Jedi mind trick, that can mystically go back in time to 2008 when the emails just started and make Sanford lose all hope.. he's moving those chess pieces mang, moving those chess pieces.

Hehe. *sighs* Oh yeah, that's also like siting Fox News as a reference. Literally. TheSun being owned by Murdoch and all... and we all knows how they feel about Global Warming.
http://hinessight.blogs.com/hinessight/2009/01/fox-news-still-denies-reality-of-global-warming.html
http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2009/01/27/gainor_gore/

I'll ignore that TheSun comment though, I like ya. You didn't know.

Since you don't trust the blog of a professor.. fine I guess I'll have to go to do this.
Funny, huh?: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/12/1206_041206_global_warming_2.html

.. Maybe if that doesn't convince you. How about a professor majoring on this subject?
http://globalwarming.sdsu.edu/


Hmm. Nice fail there. Let's just scream "I'M A LIBERAL WITH NOTHING BETTER TO DO THAN INSULT CONSERVATIVES TO COMPENSATE FOR MY OBVIOUS LACK OF OPINION ON MORALS AND PHILOSOPHY," why dunn we? Oh yeah, because it makes you out to be a self-righteous prick. Take note. It's better to seem a fool than to open your mouth and prove it.

Also, you misspelled "cite."

On the subject, the roots of global warming are impossible to discern. Those "studies" you cite fail to mention that there is no control group involved. Therefore, the entire thing is pointless. It's impossible to prove it one way or the other.

Blizzard

June 26, 2009, 04:31:42 pm #65 Last Edit: June 26, 2009, 04:34:19 pm by Blizzard
Longfellow's just being a dick.

Quote from: LurkerKoetsu on June 26, 2009, 03:13:16 pm
AHahah.. HAHAHAHAHA Did you really pull a Sun Newstory out on me?
HAHAHAHA!?!
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/sun-we-made-false-allegations-against-muslim
http://the-sun-lies.blogspot.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sun (Scroll down to Controversy)

The Sun who has a history of running fake news stories? *Wipes tear from eye*


Yes, I did. ^_^ Who knows what else is there that was made up, that's my point. Not all scientists are trying to get famous the ethical way.

Quote from: LurkerKoetsu on June 26, 2009, 03:13:16 pm
Oh man.. dude.. no. That's like bringing up Limbaugh in the cause of why Sanford cheated on his wife.
http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2009/06/26/limbaugh_sanford/index.html. We all knows that Obama has some sort of Jedi mind trick, that can mystically go back in time to 2008 when the emails just started and make Sanford lose all hope.. he's moving those chess pieces mang, moving those chess pieces.


My point here was also that you put loads of text somewhere and there will be some truth in there. Especially since an assumption is always truthful. It's an assumption after all. It doesn't matter if it was right or wrong it the end, it wasn't a lie. Except, of course, somebody lied about the assumption. xD

Quote from: LurkerKoetsu on June 26, 2009, 03:13:16 pm
Hehe. *sighs* Oh yeah, that's also like siting Fox News as a reference. Literally. TheSun being owned by Murdoch and all... and we all knows how they feel about Global Warming.
http://hinessight.blogs.com/hinessight/2009/01/fox-news-still-denies-reality-of-global-warming.html
http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2009/01/27/gainor_gore/

I'll ignore that TheSun comment though, I like ya. You didn't know.


Eh, my point was that it was made up. I actually said something along that:

Quote from: Blizzard on June 26, 2009, 08:05:58 am
How are people supposed to take such exagarations seriously when you come across articles like this one?
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2387203.ece


Radical people tend to go farther than a joke like this.

Quote from: LurkerKoetsu on June 26, 2009, 03:13:16 pm
Since you don't trust the blog of a professor.. fine I guess I'll have to go to do this.
Funny, huh?: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/12/1206_041206_global_warming_2.html


Sure, those are quite some undeniable facts. But yet again, labeling something the major cause of global warming doesn't make it one.

Quote from: LurkerKoetsu on June 26, 2009, 03:13:16 pm
.. Maybe if that doesn't convince you. How about a professor majoring on this subject?
http://globalwarming.sdsu.edu/
http://globalwarming.sdsu.edu/global_warming_predicament.html


My point is still valid. Those are some well-known facts. And I'm not going to argue them because they are facts.
But where is the proof that this is the major cause of global warming? All I see here are two series of events corelated with an unknown factor that happen at the same time.
Imagine that I get an injection with a toxic substance. 1 hour later I die. After the obduction it turns out that I swallow a metal spikey ring that teared me up from within and I died from internal bleeding. The poison wasn't enough to kill me, the quantity wasn't enough. Just because I got a toxic injection that could have killed me doesn't automatically make it the cause if I really die.
Check out Daygames and our games:

King of Booze 2      King of Booze: Never Ever
Drinking Game for Android      Never have I ever for Android
Drinking Game for iOS      Never have I ever for iOS


Quote from: winkioI do not speak to bricks, either as individuals or in wall form.

Quote from: Barney StinsonWhen I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

fugibo

Quote from: LurkerKoetsu on June 26, 2009, 04:53:47 pm
*sniffles* I'm trying not to debate. I just cant help myself.


Here's a hint: Don't click the link that says "Intelligent Debate"

Blizzard

Quote from: LurkerKoetsu on June 26, 2009, 04:53:47 pm
(Edit: Actually I did say that Global Warming was humanity's fault. Eh, well.. I guess we're both at fault.)


Yeah. :/
Also, proving a point doesn't require a scientist. The point was that global warming isn't proved to be humanity's fault. Proving a theory like "global warming is humanity's fault" does require a scientist.

Quote from: LurkerKoetsu on June 26, 2009, 05:05:41 pm
@Blizzard.

I'll end this here. By my own admission, I see this debate as a stalemate. Neither of us can prove with certainty the true cause of Global Warming. Though I'm slightly irritated that I couldn't arise the victor and basically everything I said was void. From lack of a more intimate view of this I retire.


Lol, ok. This entire debate is more or less pointless as we pretty much concluded earlier.
Check out Daygames and our games:

King of Booze 2      King of Booze: Never Ever
Drinking Game for Android      Never have I ever for Android
Drinking Game for iOS      Never have I ever for iOS


Quote from: winkioI do not speak to bricks, either as individuals or in wall form.

Quote from: Barney StinsonWhen I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

Blizzard

Yes, that's what I said. I agreed with you there. xD
Check out Daygames and our games:

King of Booze 2      King of Booze: Never Ever
Drinking Game for Android      Never have I ever for Android
Drinking Game for iOS      Never have I ever for iOS


Quote from: winkioI do not speak to bricks, either as individuals or in wall form.

Quote from: Barney StinsonWhen I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

fugibo

*ends with this*

"there is no constant"

Because logic and common sense need fancy URL strings to be proven X_X

Blizzard

No, it needs valid facts to be proven. Valid facts don't come from the media or the internet, they come from research. And nobody of us has really posted any scientific articles. I didn't post any because most publishers of scientific magazines don't give their magazines for free (i.e. IEEE).
It was common sense once that the Earth was flat. You can't trust on common sense.
Check out Daygames and our games:

King of Booze 2      King of Booze: Never Ever
Drinking Game for Android      Never have I ever for Android
Drinking Game for iOS      Never have I ever for iOS


Quote from: winkioI do not speak to bricks, either as individuals or in wall form.

Quote from: Barney StinsonWhen I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

fugibo

Quote from: Blizzard on June 26, 2009, 05:59:53 pm
No, it needs valid facts to be proven. Valid facts don't come from the media or the internet, they come from research. And nobody of us has really posted any scientific articles. I didn't post any because most publishers of scientific magazines don't give their magazines for free (i.e. IEEE).
It was common sense once that the Earth was flat. You can't trust on common sense.


Well, that was really more of a hyperbolic observation. By saying "there is no constant, and therefore we have no idea what the results mean," I'm stating that observations are pointless in regards to the topic. Unless, of course, we had a time machine, but all the fancy-pants scientists are too busy nay-saying to get any work done on that.

Blizzard

Quote from: Blizzard on June 26, 2009, 04:31:42 pm
My point is still valid. Those are some well-known facts. And I'm not going to argue them because they are facts.
But where is the proof that this is the major cause of global warming? All I see here are two series of events corelated with an unknown factor that happen at the same time.
Imagine that I get an injection with a toxic substance. 1 hour later I die. After the obduction it turns out that I swallow a metal spikey ring that teared me up from within and I died from internal bleeding. The poison wasn't enough to kill me, the quantity wasn't enough. Just because I got a toxic injection that could have killed me doesn't automatically make it the cause if I really die.
Check out Daygames and our games:

King of Booze 2      King of Booze: Never Ever
Drinking Game for Android      Never have I ever for Android
Drinking Game for iOS      Never have I ever for iOS


Quote from: winkioI do not speak to bricks, either as individuals or in wall form.

Quote from: Barney StinsonWhen I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

fugibo

I'm not arguing with you, I'm defending myself. (and my last post was referring to the "earth was flat" part)

Blizzard

Quote from: Longfellow on June 26, 2009, 05:57:40 pm
Because logic and common sense need fancy URL strings to be proven X_X


That was an attack on our way of debating. You have nothing to defend.
Check out Daygames and our games:

King of Booze 2      King of Booze: Never Ever
Drinking Game for Android      Never have I ever for Android
Drinking Game for iOS      Never have I ever for iOS


Quote from: winkioI do not speak to bricks, either as individuals or in wall form.

Quote from: Barney StinsonWhen I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

fugibo

Quote from: Blizzard on June 26, 2009, 06:13:13 pm
Quote from: Longfellow on June 26, 2009, 05:57:40 pm
Because logic and common sense need fancy URL strings to be proven X_X


That was an attack on our way of debating. You have nothing to defend.


No, I was defending my last point: "It's impossible to prove or disprove global warming, since we have no control group." Lurker then said that I just use one-liners while you have forever long posts full of URLs; I responded saying that my point didn't need any references because it was just common sense.

*ends off-topicness*

Pokol DaErran

This probably has nothing to do with the current topic of discussion, strangely enough, but;
How exactly did this conversation change from "Humanity should kill itself" to "PROVE/DISPROVE GLOHBAHL WAHMING!!!!!!!!!" 

Seems like all the Intelligent Debate threads become something entirely different after two or three pages.
"...Sometimes, the impossible can become possible- if you're awesome!"
--Bolt

fugibo

Ick. Technically, as Ulta said a while back, we can't really prove Global Warming (since there's only circumstantial evidence that the cold -> warm isn't a bicentennial cycle or something), but I meant to say "prove global warming is caused by humans," which is what you'll read if you look at the actual post I was referring to >_<

LurkerKoetsu

I have to opt out *deletes posts*.

Blizzard

June 27, 2009, 03:10:10 am #79 Last Edit: June 27, 2009, 03:11:23 am by Blizzard
Quote from: Longfellow on June 26, 2009, 06:19:03 pm
"It's impossible to prove or disprove global warming, since we have no control group."


Just saying that it's impossible doesn't make it impossible.
You assume that you are right here and base your entire argumentation on this which ends up as circular logic.

Also, global warming is real. It's happening. But nobody said anything about it being humanity's fault.

Eh, I'm too lazy to split this topic.
Check out Daygames and our games:

King of Booze 2      King of Booze: Never Ever
Drinking Game for Android      Never have I ever for Android
Drinking Game for iOS      Never have I ever for iOS


Quote from: winkioI do not speak to bricks, either as individuals or in wall form.

Quote from: Barney StinsonWhen I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

Magus

Quote from: Daxisheart on May 31, 2009, 03:22:41 pm
Wow. I must really be behind. I mean, I didn't realize that we'd already started colonizing or even have the freaking technology for that kind of s***.
1: It'll take dozens, if not hundreds, of years for a ship to reach those kinds of planets.
2: We don't have the techonology for that. Even then, the smallest error and then the ship would just fly by that planet that's freaking lightyears away
3: How many people can possibly go to these planets? How large can a spaceship be? By saying we can do that...
4: that means that only a smalll, smalll, small, miniscule portion of humanity can go to these planets, and by the time we reach them...
5: It would be hundreds of years later and earth would have already been destroyed by selfish people like you.


I know this is old but I must reply to it. Can't resist. @Daxistheart. Stfu n00b. I don't see you buiding any technology. YOu're not doing shit. It's people like you that make the world a bad place to live in. YOu're worse than a tree hugger. You're worse than a faggot. Calling you shit is too nice of a name for you.
LEVEL ME DOWN. THE ANTI-BLIZZ GROUP IS AMONG YOU... Do it for the chick below...She watches..<br />

fugibo

Quote from: Nawm on October 12, 2009, 10:30:02 am
Quote from: Daxisheart on May 31, 2009, 03:22:41 pm
Wow. I must really be behind. I mean, I didn't realize that we'd already started colonizing or even have the freaking technology for that kind of s***.
1: It'll take dozens, if not hundreds, of years for a ship to reach those kinds of planets.
2: We don't have the techonology for that. Even then, the smallest error and then the ship would just fly by that planet that's freaking lightyears away
3: How many people can possibly go to these planets? How large can a spaceship be? By saying we can do that...
4: that means that only a smalll, smalll, small, miniscule portion of humanity can go to these planets, and by the time we reach them...
5: It would be hundreds of years later and earth would have already been destroyed by selfish people like you.


I know this is old but I must reply to it. Can't resist. @Daxistheart. Stfu n00b. I don't see you buiding any technology. YOu're not doing shit. It's people like you that make the world a bad place to live in. YOu're worse than a tree hugger. You're worse than a faggot. Calling you shit is too nice of a name for you.



So, yay for ad hominem. It'd be even better if you'd thrown in the word "nigger," then I think we might just be able to legally kill you.

Blizzard

Locked due to gravedigging to spam. *points at Nawm*
Check out Daygames and our games:

King of Booze 2      King of Booze: Never Ever
Drinking Game for Android      Never have I ever for Android
Drinking Game for iOS      Never have I ever for iOS


Quote from: winkioI do not speak to bricks, either as individuals or in wall form.

Quote from: Barney StinsonWhen I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.