Dubstepforum.com

parson wrote:

hackman wrote:i can't believe some of the complete bullshit in this thread
this thread is evidence that humanity is not worth saving

If you two weren't so rude and got rid of this "Ohh everyone else is a moron, open your eyes to real picture, your all so brainwashed and i'm perfect." thing then people would take you more seriously. Calm down, have a peaceful convosation.

two things are infinite. the universe, and human stupidity. and i'm not sure about the universe.

parson wrote:with no humans here, earth would be a perfectly functioning singular organism with no aspect requiring fulfillment of desires because every creature would belong.

its true that quite possibly every creature on the planet would benefit from the extinction of humanity, the world would most likely flourish for even longer if we were out of the equation. Still i think the world would be a much shittier place for the fact that nothing else will be achieved on the planet except for maybe the further evolution of other species

how the fuck is it shitty for a planet to evolve naturally???

The majority of life on Earth is microscopic and benefits rather nicely from human existance. These little buggers are currently living very healthily in your eyelashes:



Mammals are newcomers as far as the Earth is concerned.

This whole "humans are aliens" thing really seems to fall down for me when you look at humans in their place within the animal kingdom - why are we so well adapted to Earth if we didn't evolve here, Parson?

parson wrote:how the fuck is it shitty for a planet to evolve naturally???

It's not. "Shitty" is a human concept. The planet can only be "shitty" whilst humans are present.

MAGMA YOU FUCKING IDIOT WE'RE WIPING OUT THE UNSEEN WORLD FASTER THAN THE CUTE AND CUDDLY WORLD YOU FUCKING IDIOT

why do i click on this moron's posts?

never ceases to amaze me how people think the most ridiculous half-assed logic is sound. it is not sound. you're not smart.

have you ever been diagnosed with autism or anything like that?

i'm going to feel bad if you have an actual recognized cognitive dysfunction beyond common human stupidity

the funny part about all this is the social programming that perpetuates this situation.

people learn to shut down when called brainwashed. it's a vicious cycle.

it's like people being hypnotized to get super offended when you tell them they have a booger hanging out their nose. you want to tell them, but they'll get pissed off at you and not believe you if you tell them.

some people should have a look into the correlation between the decline in religious belief and the increase in ufo sightings

strange how they always target the usa as well.

that was one of the most uninformed and irrelevant speculations i've ever encountered. congratulations on taking having your head up your own ass to new heights. at this rate, you're going to end up vomiting yourself.

parson wrote:have you ever been diagnosed with autism or anything like that?

i'm going to feel bad if you have an actual recognized cognitive dysfunction beyond common human stupidity

Wow, bit much isn't it? I thought you were the ok 'alternative thought' guy. Apparently not.

obviously not.

see im a serious believer that the human race that we have today is a hybrid of an alien race. they bred with the homos, this brings about the creation of half the dickheads we have in the world. the book of enoch teaches about this. have alook at people from around the middle east & compare them to the oldest pure human race...the abos of oz. maybe if i used big words & forced it down ya throats ya might believe me even. but fuk that... i am made from all these little things spinning around eachother, these things spin around other things & then blah blah, its all a perception. really.... im made of pure energy, im a being of vibrations, shit like this doesnt matter. fact is.... i like touching ma cock, i like it when others touch it.... it feels good, i like tittys.. they are great to nibble & suck on. without humans i cant get off!! FUCKING IS THE TRUE MEANING OF LIFE!!!!!!
ahahahahahhhahhahahhahhahhahahhahhahahh

magma wrote:

parson wrote:how the fuck is it shitty for a planet to evolve naturally???

It's not. "Shitty" is a human concept. The planet can only be "shitty" whilst humans are present.

so on an unpopulated island it will be the same for an ant to meet or not the anteater, huh? they needed the humans to grow and explain ants the anteater is boo-boo? aka shitty aka bad...
are the zebras running from lions because they don't have "the concept" of good and bad?
smart humans, save all of them! but i bet it won't happen, they're so fucked up they don't understand the concepts of good and bad, despite inventing them

parson wrote:and if you're a gullible idiot, you think millions of people are just wanting to see things so they see them

No, that's just psychology and neurology - the need for some people to belief in something other. The proof lies in the fact that there even more people who believe in a deity of some sort. Also probably more who believe they can see ghosts.

After so many pages of quite a lot of inane drivel (though not all) and displays of modeltheism, I still don't see why humanity needs saving. Humanity doesn't need saving! They should be allowed to sort themselves out for better or worse. If humanity survives, great. If humanity doesn't survive, well, that's its failure. Why should anything need to save humanity? And why should anything think themselves worthy of judging whether humanity is worth saving? Humanity should survive or die on its own merits.

Also, this thread seems to have a preponderance on humanity and the environment/planet. Even if the worthiness of humanity came into question, there are other aspects to base judgement on as well besides the environment. What about the way we treat each other? Can we work together? Are we sufficiently mystically attuned and logically inclined? What about our morality? Are we sufficiently creative? There are lots and lots of possible measures, and practically everyone in this thread has considered only a single measure after over 10 pages. The environment might be a pretty big thing, but it isn't the only thing. And I put forward that if humanity improves its standing in some of these ignored categories, the environmental issues will be resolved as a matter of course. Because environmental issues are a symptom, not an underlying cause. Fix the cause, fix the symptom.

alien pimp wrote:

magma wrote:

parson wrote:how the fuck is it shitty for a planet to evolve naturally???

It's not. "Shitty" is a human concept. The planet can only be "shitty" whilst humans are present.

so on an unpopulated island it will be the same for an ant to meet or not the anteater, huh? they needed the humans to grow and explain ants the anteater is boo-boo? aka shitty aka bad...
are the zebras running from lions because they don't have "the concept" of good and bad?
smart humans, save all of them! but i bet it won't happen, they're so fucked up they don't understand the concepts of good and bad, despite inventing them

You're assuming that death or 'killing' is 'inherently bad'. It's not, it's apart of nature.

Sooo if zebras dying at the hand of lions is 'inherently bad', what about lion cubs starving to death because they can't eat?

The reason zebras run from lions is simple. Natural selection selects the organism that is more likely to breed to gets its genes into the next generation and selects animals that are less likely to breed to not get their genes into the next generation.

Natural selection picked zebras, or zebras' ancestors that naturally shy away from other animals because these were less likely to get killed in the process.

That's all there is to it. Natural selection does not work on the human construct of 'good or bad', but on the basis of 'what's more likely to breed'. In the zebra's case, the zebra more likely to run away from predators gets to breed more than the zebra less likely to run away from a predator. With time, zebras that didn't shy away from predators were weeded out of the gene pool, what's left is zebras who do run away from predators. This behavior fully nestled itself into the zebra's instict. It's an instinct call, not a judgement call (like it is in humans). The only reason they do this is to get their genes into the next generation.

Does this mean that 'getting your genes into the next generation' is good? Well, to me it is, but that's my personal judgement as a human. The reason we think that 'death is bad' and 'life is good' is because we as humans feel complex emotions that we associate with basic instincts. But if you take humans out of the picture, there is no such thing as 'bad' or 'good'. Hence why whiping out creatures and habitats, from a purely natural and evolutionary standpoint, isn't a bad thing. It's not 'worse', nor is it 'better', since nature does not deal in subjective judgement. It is however, 'different', and 'different' means new selection pressures and new habitats that OTHER organisms may benefit from or the same organisms may adapt to.

Just like I said, our landfills are a haven for seagulls hundreds of miles removed from the ocean, our houses are a walhalla for cockroaches, even in North America and Europe, where cockroaches would not be able to survive without humans.. etc.
From a completely natural standpoint, we're not making nature 'worse', merely different. The only ones who judge whether that is 'good' or 'bad' is humans, but from a purely natural standpoint, it's just 'different'.

Genevieve wrote:

alien pimp wrote:

magma wrote:

parson wrote:how the fuck is it shitty for a planet to evolve naturally???

It's not. "Shitty" is a human concept. The planet can only be "shitty" whilst humans are present.

so on an unpopulated island it will be the same for an ant to meet or not the anteater, huh? they needed the humans to grow and explain ants the anteater is boo-boo? aka shitty aka bad...
are the zebras running from lions because they don't have "the concept" of good and bad?
smart humans, save all of them! but i bet it won't happen, they're so fucked up they don't understand the concepts of good and bad, despite inventing them

You're assuming that death or 'killing' is 'inherently bad'. It's not, it's apart of nature.

Sooo if zebras dying at the hand of lions is 'inherently bad', what about lion cubs starving to death because they can't eat?

The reason zebras run from lions is simple. Natural selection selects the organism that is more likely to breed to gets its genes into the next generation and selects animals that are less likely to breed to not get their genes into the next generation.

Natural selection picked zebras, or zebras' ancestors that naturally shy away from other animals because these were less likely to get killed in the process.

That's all there is to it. Natural selection does not work on the human construct of 'good or bad', but on the basis of 'what's more likely to breed'. In the zebra's case, the zebra more likely to run away from predators gets to breed more than the zebra less likely to run away from a predator. With time, zebras that didn't shy away from predators were weeded out of the gene pool, what's left is zebras who do run away from predators. This behavior fully nestled itself into the zebra's instict. It's an instinct call, not a judgement call (like it is in humans). The only reason they do this is to get their genes into the next generation.

Does this mean that 'getting your genes into the next generation' is good? Well, to me it is, but that's my personal judgement as a human. The reason we think that 'death is bad' and 'life is good' is because we as humans feel complex emotions that we associate with basic instincts. But if you take humans out of the picture, there is no such thing as 'bad' or 'good'. Hence why whiping out creatures and habitats, from a purely natural and evolutionary standpoint, isn't a bad thing. It's not 'worse', nor is it 'better', since nature does not deal in absolutely judgement. It is however, 'different', and 'different' means new selection pressures and new habitats that OTHER organisms may benefit from.

Just like I said, our landfills are a haven for seagulls hundreds of miles removed from the ocean, our houses are a walhalla for cockroaches, even in North America and Europe, where cockroaches would not be able to survive without humans.. etc.
From a completely natural standpoint, we're not making nature 'worse', merely different. The only ones who judge whether that is 'good' or 'bad' is humans, but from a purely natural standpoint, it's just 'different'.

change the predator for fire or a falling tree, animals perceive the negative aka shitty potential of that. and nature taught them to run from it, but also to run for food and sex. is there any more need to prove nature/universe make a distinction between the poles and doesn't let animals sit apathetic in front of extinction for example?!
a part of nature is also the need to live longer to multiply more. whatever contradicts this need is shitty for the one who's goal is survival, no matter what other details you might feel the need to bore yourself with.
life is the balance between the opposites on the axis of will/need/intention, just english speaking people happen to call them good/bad, but the intrinsic idea of good/bad doesn't need people to "conceptualize" it, it just is