Shattering the PS myth... Greeks ditching their children

[biffvernon]

Ah, I see what you mean. We just need to destroy ourselves a bit. Hmm... There's a risk with being part of the wrong bit and anyway there may be merit in some, or even all, of the bits that get destroyed, so I'd rather try to live without anything getting destroyed. Tricky, I know, but it's good to have challenging goals. Anyway it seems preferable to letting viruses decide things.

[Little John]

Ah, I see what you mean. We just need to destroy ourselves a bit. Hmm... There's a risk with being part of the wrong bit and anyway there may be merit in some, or even all, of the bits that get destroyed, so I'd rather try to live without anything getting destroyed. Tricky, I know, but it's good to have challenging goals. Anyway it seems preferable to letting viruses decide things.

Not quite Biffernon. We need to not destroy ourselves at all. We need to manage our affairs in an intelligent way.

My contention is that we are incapable of the above and so, in the absence of a significant global pandemic (or some other external brake on our behaviour) we will destroy ourselves totally and cause significant harm to the rest of life into the bargain. Something like a global human pandemic would be horrendous and brutal and unjust and indiscriminate. But, the human-led alternative will be worse (or, rather, is worse) and not just for humans.

[biffvernon]

But for when are you calling down this pandemic? You see, just now I'm rather enjoying life. The strawberries are ripening nicely and the sun has come out. I guess there's over 7 billion people who would rather carry on as we are and have another go at this "manage our affairs in an intelligent way" thing before we call in the viruses.

[UndercoverElephant]

But for when are you calling down this pandemic? You see, just now I'm rather enjoying life. The strawberries are ripening nicely and the sun has come out. I guess there's over 7 billion people who would rather carry on as we are and have another go at this "manage our affairs in an intelligent way" thing before we call in the viruses.

It's far too late for that, Biff. And even if it wasn't, there's absolutely no sign of it happening. You're living in cloud cuckoo land, as normal. Steve is a realist. You aren't. As a result, he's worth listening to, and you aren't. Sorry, but if you want people to take you seriously (about anything important) then you have to deal with reality, not some fluffy idealistic world that nobody recognises as real.

Somewhere underneath all that "optimism", I think you know this is true.

[biffvernon]

Take me seriously or not, it's up to you.

The fact is that I've just eaten a bowl of strawberries, I'm just off to do some gardening in the sunshine and I don't want to die of a virus pandemic. That's my reality and I'll do my best to keep it going for as long as possible.

Do I think that in the long run we're all doomed? Ah, now that's a different matter.

(PS, please try not to be rude, it tends to put people off PowerSwitch.)

[woodburner]

you don't have to worry about a virus (well, not on it's own,but with a little help) Monsanto has it in hand

While Monsanto insists that Roundup is safe and “minimally toxic” to humans, new research argues that glyphosate residues on and in food enhance the damaging effects of other food-borne chemical residues and environmental toxins to disrupt normal body functions and induce disease

[UndercoverElephant]

Take me seriously or not, it's up to you.

The fact is that I've just eaten a bowl of strawberries, I'm just off to do some gardening in the sunshine and I don't want to die of a virus pandemic. That's my reality and I'll do my best to keep it going for as long as possible.

That's rather selfish of you, no?

(PS, please try not to be rude, it tends to put people off PowerSwitch.)

And you think your silly, middle-class idealism doesn't?

[biffvernon]

That's rather selfish of you, no?

I don't think so. Pop over and you can share the strawberries. We've plenty. The sunshine comes ready free for sharing.

Middle-class? I didn't know there was a class divide when it came to soft fruit.

[RenewableCandy]

Oh but there is...

Upper-class: they waste fruit by using it as face masques etc
Middle class: we eat fruit because it's good for us and we can afford it
Lower class: what is "fruit"? I haven't seen any at the Food Bank/on the estate/etc...

[biffvernon]

That made me larf.

[mr brightside]

I feel isolated by all these people just merrily populating the planet. It's like having to silently monitor a disaster waiting to happen wondering if you're living in the same world as them. I envision that they expect the world to continue to improve until we're all living like The Jetsons. No government will ever have the balls to tackle the issue becuase people think they have the god given right to pop out as many as they want, and the backlash would be fierce. I think it would be an idea to cut state support for the 2nd child onwards, that way anyone feeling strongly pat/maternal could fulfil their urges with little ill-effect.

I think we're too technologically advanced to be curtailed by a virus. However, fortunately, Yellowstone is overdue for blowing and i think we're overdue for a major asteroid hit. Sir David Attenborough once talked on TV about his concern for population growth, but i doubt it made headlines dispite his authority on such matters. I think i read something on here once about how people will naturally fight to defend the sort of situation the world is in at the moment, and be unable to see where it's leading and just see any change for the better as being an infringement on civil liberties?? I might be misquoting there.

[RenewableCandy]

I can see your point, but when I found out that just 300 individuals hold the same wealth as (almost) the entire poorer half of the world's population (as per that CommonDreams video), and when you consider that damage is roughly proportional to money spent, I stopped worrying about population and learned to love...well, anyone except those 300 individuals!

[Catweazle]

Call me old fashioned if you like, but how the hell do some of you people think the world will be improved for people by having them die early from virus or natural disaster ?

Or maybe you think the world would be a better place without humans ? If so, I think you are bloody crazy.

Life, of any type, is an amazing thing. Odds of billions to one against have been beaten by time and life is the result, but all life is not equal. A dung beetle does not equal a human. A sheep does not equal a human.

It's time the chattering classes stopped feeling guilty for being alive and started working out how to feed our growing population of feeling, caring, creative, empathic, loving HUMANS.

[Little John]

Call me old fashioned if you like, but how the hell do some of you people think the world will be improved for people by having them die early from virus or natural disaster ?

Or maybe you think the world would be a better place without humans ? If so, I think you are bloody crazy.

Life, of any type, is an amazing thing. Odds of billions to one against have been beaten by time and life is the result, but all life is not equal. A dung beetle does not equal a human. A sheep does not equal a human.

It's time the chattering classes stopped feeling guilty for being alive and started working out how to feed our growing population of feeling, caring, creative, empathic, loving HUMANS.

Dung-beetles do indeed not equal humans. But that is not because dung-beetles are inferior to humans on some kind of singular dimension of "value". It is because they are different to humans. In other words, they are incomparable in the sense you have implied. Each of them simply has a part to play in the web of life. If, however, one feels absolutely compelled to place different organisms on some kind of singular dimension of worthiness, the only objective one to place them on would be where they were compared in terms of their importance in the maintenance of that web. To that extent, we might surmise that dung-beetles are, possibly, more "valuable" than humans. But, I am bound to say, such comparisons are fruitless in the absence of a comprehensive knowledge of all of the effects a particular organism might have on the integrity of the web and we don't have that kind of knowledge. Therefore, it is safer to work on the assumption that all forms of life are equally important to that web (on which all life depends) unless there is incontrovertible evidence to the contrary. In any event, the way in which one might attempt to objectively judge the value of a species is entirely different from how one might subjectively value individual humans or, more generally, human societies. Though, I am bound to note, the greater the dissonance between our own species' goals and the broader needs of the web of life, the more likely it is that we will face our species' end sooner rather than later.

Do I personally think the world would be a better place without humans? No, of course not. I am a human after all. Which is precisely why I would wish upon us some kind of external brake on our self destructive behaviour. Without it there is a fair chance we will not be here in a few centuries. There is also a fair chance we will have made the world uninhabitable for all other forms of similar sized life into the bargain. Given that I am fond of these other forms of life as well as my own, this is merely another reason for wishing to see that brake on the current trajectory of our behaviour I was mentioning.

Do I feel guilty about any of the above? No.

Do I feel fear on behalf of my own species of the above? Yes.

Do I feel sadness about the above?

Yes, I feel an immeasurable sadness.

[vtsnowedin]

[Steve is a realist. .

Perhaps on this issue but on most topics??