While I would agree that we shouldn’t just expect other people to change for us and not think we have to change at all- asking people to sign a petition doesn’t mean that you haven’t made whatever changes one can alone. Many changes are just too big or involve too many people to change one self- and in a representative government you generally can’t make policy change yourself. You have to petition ballots or politicians to show them their constituents want to see a particular change, so your representative will go advocate that change. You can’t just walk in to Congress and say: “listen up, I’ve got this new law and starting tomorrow we aren’t dumping chemicals into the ocean...”
And of course- sometimes it isn’t you that needs to change. If my neighbor is dumping toxic chemicals in the ground on their property- it’s poisoning ground water I drink, killing wild life on public (shared) land, and causing me cancer- what’s my change? Deal with it or move? They need to change right? And I can ask them to- but I can’t make them can I? So the law is there to determine when the actions of one effect another- what to do. We share the world. Even if you believe private land is sovereign soil- public spaces like oceans and such are shared by all and when we have a problem with what someone is doing with OUR shared land- and we can’t resolve it with them- we need s third party and that party is the systems of government and law- the petition being the way we show that it isn’t just us who feels that way but that OUR fellow owners of public space agree that a change is needed.
Lol. “Humans are a virus” has been a popular trope in fiction and even in reality. The fact is however that it simply doesn’t hold water. We know for a fact that other creatures are environmentally destructive and don’t live in equilibrium with their ecosystems- invasive species (which often are spread by humans but not always) are a clear example, as are aggressive species that humans often use “population control” on to maintain ecosystems and prevent these species from causing their own extinction or the extinction of others.
The fact is that ecosystems change, weather patterns change and things happen in nature to disrupt ecology. Most organisms adapt to their environment and between the tenacity of life and the fact that these things often happen slowly or rarely over long periods generally buffers things. But really the main difference between humans and most animals in the sense of our destructiveness is that we have technology. If you have monkeys bull dozers they could easily be more or as destructive with them as us- especially if they figured out a way to use them to their advantage. All that said- id have to agree humans are probably the most damaging species on earth with possible exception of insects or micro organisms.
Yeah there are parasites in nature. But besides organisms like that as a species, most of them, they might just used what they really need to survive. Most humans probably take more, specially depending on culture and lifestyle.
@cakelover I'm a super empathetic person and feel for everyone, everything and every animal, with that daid, I think thanos is one of the most understood villains honestly imo
I hope you don’t take this as seemingly sarcastic or aggressive, or an attack- I’m just discussing the logic from my POV- but I don’t know I can agree that humans are the only animal that takes more than we need. You’ll find plenty of “fat” animals as examples- usually in nature the supply of food and predation and other realities of living in nature- make it very difficult to become “fat.” Humans in history didn’t really get “fat” when we were chasing prey and not eating every day and having to do manual labor and such. Conversely- wen non domestic animals like raccoons and squirrels and birds in nature can be seen “fat” when they live near a source of abundant food that’s easy to get- usually from humans of course, like our garbage and waste.
But it’s pretty much the mark of most life and of evolution to try and do the minimum amount of effort to get results. Many parasites- they feed until their bodies just literally cannot physically hold more- that’s all that stops them. Humans have developed technology to be sedentary and to have easy access to calories.
But we can see from animals that if you present them the means- most will prefer it- use it. Wether that is a rat or cat being given a choice between a bowl of food or pushing a button for food, and going to forage; or animals that take scraps or even “steal” food directly from humans- the “easy way” usually wins- it’s just most animals don’t have the technology, or the means to invent the technology- to have the ability to do it themselves without humans. At least yet.
Wild animals even get diabetes or die from over feeding. So I don’t think it’s a philosophical question or something inherent to humans or human nature- living organisms on the whole tend to be “lazy” and “glutinous” if not regulated by an outside force or self control over instinct and drive. Cats being used again- often hunt even when not hungry. It helps keep their skills tuned and practiced but also- near as we can tell- is something they enjoy or have a strong drive to do. Monkeys and birds and elephants and other animals often get drunk off fermented items or utilize compounds with pharmacological effects for the only reason we can see- because they like it, not in any way needed for survival or function.
I guess misunderstood. (Depends on who you ask lol) And I meant that in the movie scenario. I wouldn't be ok with half of the wold dying either obviously
@guest_ no I don't take is as an attack. I understand your pov. I just get really depressed when I think what humans do to nature compared to animals. We have been here for a short period of time and have destroyed a lot for things that are not THAT (or sometimes not at all) necessary and it affevts other humans and other species. But thats just me. I know it's a very negative POV but sometimes can't help to get down about it.
Oh no. I certainly can’t fault you that- what I see as the true downer isn’t that humans can do these things when other animals can too- it’s that of all organisms on earth- as far as we know, we are the only ones who can understand what we are doing and the consequences. Simply being a way by our natures isn’t so bad- but when you (at least appear to) have the intelligence to grasp what you are doing is destructive, how, and how to not be destructive but you choose not to... when unlike most animals humans seem best suited to be able to act better than our natures make us and we don’t- that’s where I see the downer, and why I make the important distinction.
Because a virus near as we can tell- doesn’t intend any harm- most viruses actually adapt over time to be less deadly- it’s easier for them to thrive in a live host than dead. It’s easier for them to spread to new hosts generally if they don’t harm their host so much other animals stay away instinctually because of signs of sickness. A squirrel that gets diabetes from eating too many discarded burgers and what not- likely had no idea that would happen. No way to know. We do. We are one of if not the only species we know that could choose to be less horrible, but many decide not to bother.
That's very true too. An animal can over eat, can affect another species notnreally knowing. They just want to eat, but we can affect many at once, understand it, and just don't care. And sometimes for things like minetal mining, for gold that is probably for jewelry? Anyways I know it is way out of topic and didn't mean to make it so depressing lol
Lol. Nah. We are all here to meme and post and talk. It’s all good. That was my sad thought- here is my happy thought: while it often doesn’t feel that way- humans, many, perhaps most- are working towards being better all the time, and in many ways- we are. It’s a slow process and there are steps back here and there- but it’s easy to get depressed when we look at how far there is left to go- but lol how far we’ve come in so many ways- many of them in a relatively short time too!
It’s also easy to think things are really bad- because we hear about the bad more. 100 Tripp’s to school or work and the story that gets told is seldom when things just flow- it’s when there are bad delays and all that. A water heater or a roof do their job well every day for decades- the day they do not is the day that gets recognized and talked about and remembered. Same with everything else. We hear so much less about the things that are doing well- and in some ways that is a good thing! News is generally news because it’s somewhat out of the ordinary. So if you hear about bad things it often means that “good” is still the thing we can take for granted because there’s a surplus- it’s the “norm.”
But the crowning thought to brighten the darkness of humanity- even with our advanced technology it is still almost impossible for us to screw up the world so bad that nothing can live here. We may no longer be able to live on earth, or thrive in numbers. But other creatures will live, new creatures will come and evolution will change those here to the “new” world. You’ve got fungus and such that thrive on radiation or petroleum- you’ve got a never before seen Covid 19 to show us that new life is always being made. With or without us things will be ok.
True words. We are a part of the world even if our technology has allowed us to choose to isolate ourselves from aspects we find unpleasant. I’d like to see is try to adopt technology and methods more synergistic with nature- to create a “technological ecosystem” that could mirror and or compliment natures ability to regulate and renew. Here’s to hoping- some day.
Sign the petition
Get others to change
Don't change yourself
Even if he is misunderstood, wiping out half of all life seems immoral to me