It was about the time he said this, along with his completely erroneous statements about "anthropogenic global warming", that I decided that despite all his marvellous videos, he was actually what he looks like; a complete f*****g imbecile.
Why is this code for "reduce the white population" in the west, which is like 1.6 or 1.8 children per couple (which isn't even "replacement level") and doesn't apply to the Middle East and Africa, where it would be deemed "racist," even though those are the areas overpopulating. The Middle East is even sending "refugees" (mostly young men, not families) to practically colonize the west. Let's start with reducing the population of THEM!
If that's uncomfortable to hear, just who do you think we should reduce the population of?
lol the way i look at it if the environment be it animals plants etc cannot survive with the addition of humans nearby then that is mother natures way of saying your obsolete.
you avoided the question i asked and I did not say to destroy all the plants and animals i simply said that if an animal for example begins to go extinct due to the rising population spreading to its natural hunting region than i really could not care less to save it due to it not being able to adapt to a changing world
I'm from the US as well. But judging from these maps https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_density it's not US that has an overpopulation problem. My region enjoys a pop density below 200/sq mile. Those new *shudders* subdivisions are jacking those numbers up. Europeans and Asians can discuss population control all they want, leave us out of it.
@trashmanrevival
How is a wild animal supposed to adapt to humans cutting down trees and vegetation, putting up houses, and paving roads and walkways?? Especially animals that hunt...birds, rodents, bugs, and the like can adapt because they'll eat our garbage(which still isn't good). A mountain lion for example will not. Well, they might but it wouldn't be their first choice. We take over their hunting grounds and they start targeting our pets, livestock and children. People freakout whenever one comes around then authorities go on a big hunt and end up shooting the poor thing. Same with coyotes and bears. They can shift hunting grounds but the more we build the less land there is for them to move to.
well the wolfs cousin better known as dogs adapted very well, deer do not fear humans anymore and in fact come into our cities and elephants are being born without tusk to prevent poaching on them. Humans are an animal and in the past if one animal is beating out another it didnt matter the one animal died off because it could not adapt to go around the obstacle. In russia their was this predatory cat which took a huge area of untouched hunting ground to survive. it started dying off because the more people expanded the more it attacked them. In my mind it is an animal which just got beat out because it cant figure out how to change. Also where I come from the land is vast and expansive with no signs of humans developing it anytime soon. The idea that we will over expand is a joke we are not even close to it.
Dogs didn't adapt. We domesticated them. Deer are pretty docile creatures as it is. As for not fearing humans I think you're wrong. I live way out in the country and they're pretty scared of us. Granted deer are hunted out here..not so much in the city. But deer don't hunt they forage and it's easier for them to find food. ANIMALS don't cause other animals to go extinct by developing land. When one animal takes over anothers area it doesn't call the animal police to hunt it down and kill it. As for this Russian cat dying off...that's too bad but THAT is natural. Were humans taking over the land?
humans were moving in on the russian cats territory which consisted a miles of untouched land and it would attack them leading them to shoot and kill it. I really could not care less if it went extinct then. And dogs did get domesticated but they also then adapted to rely on humans and went from predators to a nice pet. Also where im from we live near mountains and deer come down and are relatively friendly my dad nearly ran one over because it did not want to move from the car
i didnt say all should be like dogs im saying that animals need to learn to work with humans and not against them. They should learn to not take up so much space or to attack us when they feel we have encroached on their space.
You could say the same about humans though. Humans need to learn not to take up so much space. WE need to learn to work with nature. You really think a wild animal is going to stop and think "maybe I should work with this other animal taking over my space..maybe I shouldn't take up so much space myself." I don't think animals think that way. They react on the basic level of survival. I don't think when they attack humans they're being malicious. They feel threatened or they're hungry. Food sources are limited for them. Humans attack certain animals when they come around us. Why is it ok for humans to do this but not an animal? As for elephants being born without tusks..how are they going to defend themselves in the wild? And that russian cat story just furthers my point. It wouldn't have killed people if they weren't moving in on the land it resided on. They didn't have to hunt it to extinction. Humans are indeed an animal but we're expanding at an alarming rate.
alright well first off who that tiger yet again takes MILES OF LAND TO ITSELF if it takes up that much space f that tiger i could care less if it died. Now passed that im curious on what basis do you think animals would have a right to attack us? My absolute priority is the further development of humans my race animals can survive live on and do what they want but if the preservation of an animal such as the panda which has absolutely no means of self defense cost us money and resources i could care less if it died. Humans are constantly expanding and growing we need more land and things which could be an animals home but if they cant defend it then i dont really see that as an issue. We being the superior species are allowed to take what we want when we want.
Tigers don't take miles of land to themselves...they share it with other creatures while also eating other creatures. They don't kill off a bunch of plants and animals to build a house and a yard. And they have multiple hunting grounds for the same reason farmers shift crops..so they don't drain the land of any one thing. Animals have a right to attack us when they feel threatened. Anything has the right to attack anything when it feels threatened...that's nature. Humans don't need to develop any further. We're already overpopulating the earth. And if we do as you say and take more land so we can expand and kill off all these animals in the process that will f*uck up the ecosystem. If we mess up the ecosystem everything will start dying off including humans. How is an animal supposed to defend itself against people with ridiculous guns and traps and poisons??
we are superior we can kill any animal we want we are far more intelligent than any animal and sure disease does kill us and it affects other animals too. Also if you have ever seen the west you should know we are not anywhere near overpopulation. You are right though Animals can attack us but the consequence of that is their death. By the way im pretty sure when they build a house they dont go in kill every animal in the area. I think they just displace them to the millions of other uninhabited miles. I also dont think we just go kill what we want when we want I think if we need to make a decision where a few animals might lose their home or die to permanently benefit us I would pick us.
Yes, we can kill any animal we want because we have the weapons to do so but that doesn't make it right. I mean the world as a whole is overpopulated with people. Not only in terms of land but resources. No, you're right they don't kill all the animals to build a house. That was a bad example of what I'm trying to say. If we keep spreading and displacing all these animals eventually they will have nowhere to go. They will die off or humans will kill them and that will mess up the ecosystem which will in turn eventually kill humans.
Well me and you obviously think of right in a different way. I mean what is right can vary all the way from a hunter to an activist but neither opinion on right can ever trump another. I think that we are justified in the case where it benefits us which in my mind is greater priority you im guessing believe that it is not justified in any way. But the fact is only %10 percent of all the land in the world in inhabited by humans and another %10 have no human activity at all. I think we have a long ways to go before over population and also far away from your global disaster.
Oh, I wasn't trying to trump your idea of right or wrong(not that I think I could)..I was just having fun arguing with you haha I think killing an animal is justified if you are hunting it for food and intend on using every usable part of the animal or if it threatens you or your children. Like if it attacks your person. I don't think it's right to hunt them down and kill them because they possibly pose a threat which happens a lot around my area. I guess I just don't think we're any better or more significant than any other animal on this planet. This might piss you off but I kind of look down on humans. But if you include agricultural land which also displaces animals isn't it closer to 40%? I think I read that somewhere. I'll have to look :/
I cant find it so I retract that last statement
Haha, yeah that's exactly what I was looking for. I guess I can see where you're coming from. I'm just a sucker for cute animals and I think ALL animals are cute on some level lol Especially pandas! But I guess that raises the question should humans spend money, time and resources helping an endangered species just because it's cute? A species we didn't cause to be endangered. Part of me says yes, the other part no. I do care for humans enough to feel that we need to take better care of our own. I guess pandas are pretty helpless but part of the reason they're enndangered is because of poaching and humans cutting down thier forests and food supply for agricultural crops. I look down on humans because of what we've done to the earth but more so because of what we do to eachother and how lost and disconnected I feel we've become.
If that's uncomfortable to hear, just who do you think we should reduce the population of?
How is a wild animal supposed to adapt to humans cutting down trees and vegetation, putting up houses, and paving roads and walkways?? Especially animals that hunt...birds, rodents, bugs, and the like can adapt because they'll eat our garbage(which still isn't good). A mountain lion for example will not. Well, they might but it wouldn't be their first choice. We take over their hunting grounds and they start targeting our pets, livestock and children. People freakout whenever one comes around then authorities go on a big hunt and end up shooting the poor thing. Same with coyotes and bears. They can shift hunting grounds but the more we build the less land there is for them to move to.
I cant find it so I retract that last statement