Microsoft goes Open Source :tellme:Ooohhh... *shivers* :o :o yep, that would break the thermostat in hell, wouldn't it?-Carol Haynes (December 09, 2008, 07:54 PM)
[f0dder]: If the question is to be interpreted as Earth, not humanity, I vote for being wiped out by aliens in order to build an intergalactic highway.
While this is occurring, Carol Haynes will be attacking Microsoft for their poor OS quality while zaine ridling is attacking the OOXML department. At this time, mouser's college will attack him in an effort to have their one student, whom has taken the longest amount of time to get a PhD, actually complete the degree.
Oh, and scancode will be attacking motorola for not making their phones more hacker friendly.
Carol Haynes will be attacking Microsoft for their poor OS quality-Josh (December 10, 2008, 08:45 AM)
Shit - have I got to do that for eternity-Carol Haynes (December 10, 2008, 09:10 AM)
These statements are meant in good fun and are not intended as an attack on anyone. I ask those mentioned to reply in a similar manner which might further the attempt at humor found above.
Some say the end is near. Some say we'll see Armageddon soon. I certainly hope we will.I recognised but couldn't place it till the credit at the end :D
I sure could use a vacation from this... bullshit three ring circus sideshow of freaks. Some say a comet will fall from the sky, followed by meteor showers and tidal waves. Followed by faultlines that cannot sit still, followed by millions of dumbfounded dipshits. One great big festering neon distraction...
Tool - Ænima - Ænima :-*-f0dder (December 10, 2008, 10:53 AM)
but ultimately the only real hope for the planet and all other lifeforms is the extinction of the human cancer-Carol Haynes (December 11, 2008, 04:06 AM)
but ultimately the only real hope for the planet and all other lifeforms is the extinction of the human cancer.-Carol Haynes (December 11, 2008, 04:06 AM)
Why is it bull-Carol Haynes (December 14, 2008, 08:18 PM)
I stand by my comment - the only real hope for most other species on this planet is human extinction-Carol Haynes (December 14, 2008, 08:18 PM)
"I'd like to share a revelation that I've had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species. I realized that you're not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment, but you humans do not. You move to an area, and you multiply, and multiply, until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet, you are a plague, and we are the cure."
- Agent Smith: The Matrix.-mahesh2k (December 15, 2008, 03:13 AM)
Thanks mahesh2k that is a very good summary of my feelings.-Carol Haynes (December 15, 2008, 05:44 AM)
It is all very well to say that humans are basically good. Most people I meet are kind, considerate, helpful in the extreme and thoroughly moral. There are very few people who seem not to be concerned with the destruction of the rainforest, mass extinctions and the awful pollution and physical devastation of the world.
The trouble is these sentiments don't inform the way people actually live (me included). Just as an example of where I live: I live in a beautiful oasis of apparent nature set aside as a National Park on a very crowded island (Britain). It all looks idyllic and everyone that comes here is impressed. What very few people realise is that the landscape as we see it today is wholly man made and is very little to do with nature. Gone are the forests, diverted are rivers and streams (which incidentally are polluted with chemical fertilizers and in some cases lead from a romanticised industrial past where children were forced to work in all weathers 14 hour shifts from the age of about 10). Every inch of the area is farmed in one form or another - even the wild open moorland (which impresses visitors with its wild bleakness) is farmed so that rich people can bring their shotguns and shoot grouse that have been especially reared for the privilege. Visible nature has suffered enormously (or to many eyes improved!) but there is a far more insidious effect on nature and that is that practically every wild animal is butchered to protect farming - badgers are gassed, foxes exterminated, rabbits infected with myxomatosis, stoats and weezles are trapped, moles are killed and strung along barbed wire fences, jackdaws are shot from the skies (and their carcasses hung in gardens to dissuade other jackdaws from coming near) ... the litany goes on and it is all purely to protect sheep farming. The moorlands are even worse treated. Practically anything that competes with the mega-buck grouse industry is exterminated - even birds of prey that have protected status, having been reintroduced by conservation groups, are deliberately poisoned.
As I say every single person (almost without exception) that do these truly awful things love where they live and would hate to see it 'spoiled', they love and care for their families, are good friends and neighbours and are thoroughly nice people.-Carol Haynes (December 15, 2008, 05:44 AM)
The rate at which humans are consuming resources, breeding and destroying natural resource that we depend on (such as bees which are rapidly becoming extinct world wide and without which we don't get any food) means that humanity will be extinct or extremely impoverished leading to extinction in the foreseeable future. We have no one to blame but ourselves and the problem is intractable because there are simply too many vested interests who won't allow change - and generally they consume the most anyway.-Carol Haynes (December 15, 2008, 05:44 AM)
As for the rest of the natural world it will recover, things will change. New species will emerge, the will be a geological remnant in 400 million years that a future species will dig up and ponder over as they find pockets of plastic - now that will be a challenge for any future species interested in geology to decode! I'd like to be there to see that.-Carol Haynes (December 15, 2008, 05:44 AM)
I find it difficult to understand how it is so easy for you to deem human beings worthy of extinction while at the same time defending pests that, without keeping their population in control, will damage nature even more.
The overwhelming fact in Carol's argument is this: the rate of human population growth over the past 200 years. Sure, many developed countries have long scaled back their birth rates, but how many religions on earth preach that its followers should have an "annual baby" come hell or high water? Sustainability is not possible without the energy sources needed for a decent human life.-zridling (December 15, 2008, 10:36 AM)
Which just reiterates my point: People who think they know what's best for the world are causing bigger problems.-Deozaan (December 15, 2008, 10:53 AM)
We are not excluded from nature - extinction for almost all species is part of nature.
I suppose the main difference with humans is that technology has distorted nature - and ultimately wars will occur when food/fuel availability drops. We can see that happening already in the world and we can see the human tragedy in Dafur.-Carol Haynes (December 15, 2008, 10:47 AM)
I think that ultimately when things get really bad for the western world, ie. poverty and starvation, not to mention malaria creeping to northern latitudes (as it is already), war will become a bigger fact as the consuming western society go out to grab what they can from other countries. At some point someone will get nuclear capability and some sort of apocalyptic end will happen.-Carol Haynes (December 15, 2008, 10:47 AM)
Incidentally I do see humans as evolved from primates (no problem there - I like bananas) but when you say:I find it difficult to understand how it is so easy for you to deem human beings worthy of extinction while at the same time defending pests that, without keeping their population in control, will damage nature even more.
I think you miss my point in two ways:
First, I don't deem humanity worthy of distinction, it is just an inevitability in the natural course of events.-Carol Haynes (December 15, 2008, 10:47 AM)
Second, how do 'pests', as you call them, damage nature? They are part of nature - the only thing that they do 'wrong' is to damage human interests.-Carol Haynes (December 15, 2008, 10:47 AM)
If you want to take a religious view of this issue (personally I don't because I can't see how religion is relevant to life)-Carol Haynes (December 15, 2008, 10:47 AM)
Overpopulation is a myth?
Have a look at these:-Carol Haynes (December 15, 2008, 11:06 AM)
Which just reiterates my point: People who think they know what's best for the world are causing bigger problems.-Deozaan (December 15, 2008, 10:53 AM)
Would you agree that ecology has both intrinsic and instrumental value for our species; therefore, not destroying the ozone layer is a good thing; not polluting the oceans, the water table, etc. are valuable behaviors in and of themselves? Come to the south side of St. Louis, Missouri, to Times Beach, and see an entire city that is abandoned like Chernobyl all because one guy wanted to save money by dumping dioxin in the ground. It's eery!-zridling (December 15, 2008, 11:25 AM)
Of course there is intrinsic value for our species to have water we can drink and land that we can live on and grow food from. I don't know anybody who wants another Chernobyl in the world. I don't know anybody who really just wants to cut down all the trees, dump toxic waste into the ground, and kill all the animals.-Deozaan (December 15, 2008, 11:44 AM)
A couple of charts showing an increase in the population means nothing except that population is increasing. Just because population has increased that does not mean it has become unsustainable given the Earth's natural resources and our ability to provide for ourselves. Even if the earth has never had this many human beings alive on it at the same time, that doesn't mean we've reached or surpassed capacity! It only means that it's more than it's ever been.-Deozaan (December 15, 2008, 11:36 AM)
Yes that is what they show - but if you look at the first graph the population growth rates are (approximately):
11% in the first 50 years
29% in the next 50 years
31%
44%
139%
So in the last 50 years the population has increased by more than 139%-Carol Haynes (December 15, 2008, 01:17 PM)
If population continues to grow and the desertification continues in the way it is at the moment where is the food growing to be grown. It is all very well saying that the world's population could fit into Utah - but if they all moved there what would they eat and drink - I hope they like cactus stew!-Carol Haynes (December 15, 2008, 01:17 PM)
Phasing out the human race by voluntarily ceasing to breed will allow Earth's biosphere to return to good health. Crowded conditions and resource shortages will improve as we become less dense.-the website
Here's the answer.
The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement (http://www.vhemt.org/)Phasing out the human race by voluntarily ceasing to breed will allow Earth's biosphere to return to good health. Crowded conditions and resource shortages will improve as we become less dense.-the website-Cpilot (December 16, 2008, 04:12 PM)
Hehe :DHere's the answer.
The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement (http://www.vhemt.org/)Phasing out the human race by voluntarily ceasing to breed will allow Earth's biosphere to return to good health. Crowded conditions and resource shortages will improve as we become less dense.-the website-Cpilot (December 16, 2008, 04:12 PM)
;D :P-Deozaan (December 16, 2008, 08:48 PM)
"Having children is selfish. It's all about maintaining your genetic line at the expense of the planet," says Toni, 35.Consider that, then reread this thread.
Sounds funny don't it?
I'm old enough to remember when "animal rights" and "PETA" were considered fringe, nutty, out there ideas.
Now they're pretty much mainstream, nearly all states have laws on the books defining animal cruelty with penalties for the transgressors.
Cock fighting and dog fights (remember Michael Vick (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hDsEKkbHNcP7laksDZz0oHhhHOwAD9546PT00)?) haven't always been illegal........hard to fathom isn't it?
There are already some people out there who won't have children because of the "environment".
Meet the women who won't have babies - because they're not eco friendly (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-495495/Meet-women-wont-babies--theyre-eco-friendly.html)"Having children is selfish. It's all about maintaining your genetic line at the expense of the planet," says Toni, 35.Consider that, then reread this thread.
It may take a few decades but The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement doesn't seem so far out there, does it?-Cpilot (December 16, 2008, 09:46 PM)
It will always seems "far out there" to me, much like PETA and other animal rights activists who are more humane to animals than humans, but I wouldn't be surprised to see it become more widely adopted as the social norm in the not-too-distant future.Yup, humanity will die out eventually but it won't be some dramatic event where we have a chance to show our nobility (and we are a noble species, contrary to what the naysayers want us to believe), we'll go out on a pathetic little whimper....all for the sake of the "planet".
"I'd like to share a revelation that I've had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species. I realized that you're not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment, but you humans do not. You move to an area, and you multiply, and multiply, until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet, you are a plague, and we are the cure."
- Agent Smith: The Matrix.-mahesh2k (December 15, 2008, 03:13 AM)
There's a fundamental flaw in that quote. The fictional character of Agent Smith categorizes human beings as a cancerous virus while proclaiming his own "race" of machines as the cure for that cancer. Yet it is the machines who are enslaving, killing, and leeching off of the humans for their survival. That was not a symbiotic relationship. And I'm sure the machines had no need for rain forests, animals or natural beauty. Isn't that ironic?-Deozaan (December 15, 2008, 09:25 AM)
The funny thing about nature that you seem to think doesn't apply to humans is that it has a way of balancing itself out eventually. Whenever the wolf population gets too large and kills too many deer, there is a lack of food and the wolves die of starvation. It may take many years for the deer population to recuperate, but it will, and then the wolves will be back to start the cycle again. Are wolves any more restrained in their consuming of natural resources than humans are? And it's not just wolves. Even an overpopulation of deer could wipe out certain flora in the area.-Deozaan (December 15, 2008, 09:25 AM)
The only way nature could balance out on this planet is to arbitrarily wipe out 90%of human beings but even then there would be enough remaining idiots who didn't get the message and just proceed as if they were kids let loose in a candy store.But of course you're not one of the "90%" are you, being smarter than the rest of us idiots?
Yes that is what they show - but if you look at the first graph the population growth rates are (approximately):
11% in the first 50 years
29% in the next 50 years
31%
44%
139%
So in the last 50 years the population has increased by more than 139%
If the curve continues (and there is no reason to assume that it won't) how many people are going to be on the planet in 2050, 2100, 2150 ?
Currently deforestation is on a massive scale because people in the rainforest regions need to fight poverty by growing crops and there is a shortage of land able to support crops.
The rainforests supply a huge proportion of oxygen into the atmosphere and clean out CO2 - what is going to do that when all the trees have gone?
If population continues to grow and the desertification continues in the way it is at the moment where is the food growing to be grown. It is all very well saying that the world's population could fit into Utah - but if they all moved there what would they eat and drink - I hope they like cactus stew!-Carol Haynes (December 15, 2008, 01:17 PM)
To solve the over population problem countries need to start bring in one child policies-Davidtheo (December 17, 2008, 02:12 AM)
There is no overpopulation problem. There is a lot of room for all of us.No there isn't - and there definitely isn't resources enough for all of us, which is the major problem.-Deozaan (December 17, 2008, 03:23 AM)
There is no overpopulation problem. There is a lot of room for all of us.No there isn't - and there definitely isn't resources enough for all of us, which is the major problem.-Deozaan (December 17, 2008, 03:23 AM)-f0dder (December 17, 2008, 03:29 AM)
David, you live in China, a country where they actually do enforce a one-child policy--to the extent of killing any child unfortunate enough to come after the first.
That's called genocide.
There is no overpopulation problem. There is a lot of room for all of us.-Deozaan (December 17, 2008, 03:23 AM)
The only way nature could balance out on this planet is to arbitrarily wipe out 90%of human beings but even then there would be enough remaining idiots who didn't get the message and just proceed as if they were kids let loose in a candy store.But of course you're not one of the "90%" are you, being smarter than the rest of us idiots?
Because you're too enlightened to be wiped out with the other virii.-Cpilot (December 16, 2008, 11:46 PM)
There are already some people out there who won't have children because of the "environment".
Meet the women who won't have babies - because they're not eco friendly (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-495495/Meet-women-wont-babies--theyre-eco-friendly.html)-Cpilot (December 16, 2008, 09:46 PM)
Oil production has pretty much reached it's peak, and will start to go downhill from now - and demands are going up (and remember that oil isn't just used for gasoline, but also for plastic materials etc).-f0dder (December 17, 2008, 03:49 AM)
So I seriously do believe that we're going to see some serious resource problems within long. [...] Perhaps disaster won't strike during my lifetime, at least in this part of the world, but we live in a globalized world... if things in Africa or China or India become too bad, there's a chance it's going to affect my sorry ass as well.-f0dder (December 17, 2008, 03:49 AM)
Deozaan please get your facts right, They do not kill the child they fine the parents 10,000 RMB, Killing a child in China is call murder and anyone doing it goes to jail.-Davidtheo (December 17, 2008, 03:57 AM)
I wonder how short the walk will be from controlling reproduction to actively euthanizing those who drain the resources of the planet this time?-Cpilot (December 17, 2008, 08:20 AM)
This is not discrimination. A disability in itself is not grounds for failing the health requirement — it is a question of the cost implications to the community.-http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/10/31/international/i011200D20.DTL
Deozaan please get your facts right, They do not kill the child they fine the parents 10,000 RMB, Killing a child in China is call murder and anyone doing it goes to jail.-Davidtheo (December 17, 2008, 03:57 AM)
Well, I have to admit that I haven't witnessed it firsthand, but I have heard secondhand that it has indeed happened. I also am left wondering whether or not you truly know for sure, since the Chinese government won't even let its citizens know what happened at Tiananmen Square 20 years ago.-Deozaan (December 17, 2008, 09:55 PM)
Oil production has pretty much reached it's peak, and will start to go downhill from now - and demands are going up (and remember that oil isn't just used for gasoline, but also for plastic materials etc).-f0dder (December 17, 2008, 03:49 AM)
There's lots of untapped oil in Alaska. And OPEC just made drastic cuts to their oil production (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D954KDNO0&show_article=1).-Deozaan (December 17, 2008, 09:55 PM)
Heaven help us all when the oil runs out ... that is when WWI and WWII will look like local skirmishes!-Carol Haynes (December 18, 2008, 03:36 AM)
Deozaan I really think you need to stop getting second hand information-Davidtheo (December 17, 2008, 11:38 PM)
Those points may be true BUT it doesn't mean that the resource isn't limited and dwindling. There may even be undiscovered reserves of fossil fuel but there are a number of things that follow:
- Whether or not new reserves are found they are finite. Coal, oil and natural gas are the bedrock of modern society and few people in the world would disagree that at best recovering these resources is getting harder and harder as time goes on to the poijnt where some resources are deemed economically unviable. Ultimately people may find cheaper ways of tapping these resources but ultimately limited.
- The fact that new resources are found doesn't necessarily mean that it is morally acceptable to exploit them to the detriment of rare landscape and other species.
- Political games to maintain high profits (as currently exists in OPEC) is not an argument that resources are unlimited. OPEC ONLY exists to maximize profit for a cartel of producers. In any other sphere of international trade this behaviour would be considered illegal in most countries but because the countries have oil reserves they get away with it.
The final point also works in terms of international agricultural agreements. Back in the 80s the EU had policies to maintain high food prices. Basically they built food surpluses that were ultimately destroyed rather than sell them at a lower price to the starving millions in Africa. It wasn't that we really had excess food it was just profit orientated manipulation.
OPEC knows that their oil reserves are limited and use that fact to blackmail the world into giving them the maximum amount of money. Heaven help us all when the oil runs out ... that is when WWI and WWII will look like local skirmishes!-Carol Haynes (December 18, 2008, 03:36 AM)
The fact that new resources are found doesn't necessarily mean that it is morally acceptable to exploit them to the detriment of rare landscape and other species.
@ allen:
Well, I think there is still an old student chemical box in the attic somewhere...so you won't mind me setting up a new corporation called: Parasol over here?-Shades (December 20, 2008, 11:14 AM)
Ah, perhaps the best solution to please Carol and allen is: cannibals.
For Carol the dwindling numbers of human kind should sound excellent while allen gets his fantasy fulfilled (pun intended) ;D
@ Carol Haynes:
Mostly I agree with you, but after my continent switch I have to admit to some of the points Deozaan makes as well.
Brazil, it is a beautiful country with ingenuous people. They adapted a car engine to run on petrol, diesel and alcohol.
On the border between Brazil, Argentina and Paraguay lies a place called Iguazu (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iguazu_Falls). The link leads to the Wikipedia page dedicated to this place but forgets to mention the fact that there is also a huge installation there to generate electricity that powers Paraguay and big parts of Brazil and Argentina.
Where is your plane landing, if I may boldly ask?-Shades (December 21, 2008, 01:21 AM)
[Going way OT]
We're flying Buenos Aires to Lima on a extreme whistle-stop tour of Peru before catching an Antartic cruise ship at Santiago.
[/Going way OT]-4wd (December 21, 2008, 04:10 AM)
[Going way OT]
We're flying Buenos Aires to Lima on a extreme whistle-stop tour of Peru before catching an Antartic cruise ship at Santiago.
[/Going way OT]-4wd (December 21, 2008, 04:10 AM)
[Staying way OT]
Hey! How long will you stay in BA? Drop by and say hi while you're here if you want :)
[/Staying way OT]-city_zen (December 23, 2008, 10:15 AM)
Fascinating that a thread entitled "How will the Earth end?" becomes a travelogue (and how appropriate;))-Carol Haynes (December 24, 2008, 03:31 AM)
Have a great time - sounds like great fun. Try and be brave about the waterfall!
I wonder if the travel insurance covers the whole of Antartica spontaneously melting and the resultant tidal waves wiping out all mankind below an altitude of 6000 meters?-4wd (December 24, 2008, 05:19 AM)
Upon seeing Iguazu, the United States' First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt reportedly exclaimed "Poor Niagara!"
so it'll possibly end up being: fly in to EZE, transfer to AEP, fly to IGR, stay 2 nights and watch gravity at work, fly to AEP, stay o/n at EZE and then out the next day.-4wd (December 23, 2008, 09:28 PM)
for that privilege I get to pay for a US$100 visa on arrival - you may be able to pick up on the fact I'm not particularly thrilled with that idea-4wd (December 23, 2008, 09:28 PM)
Australian citizens, who are going to Argentina for up to 90 days, do not require a visa when they travel for tourism, business or investment purposes.
However, as of 1st January 2009 Australian citizens will need to pay an entry fee upon arrival in Argentina which is equivalent to the amount Argentine citizens have to pay when applying for an Australian visa (roughly USD100).
Fascinating that a thread entitled "How will the Earth end?" becomes a travelogue (and how appropriate;))-Carol Haynes (December 24, 2008, 03:31 AM)
Just when this thread was seeming to go back on track, I'm back here to help stray it a bit more ... :D
Nice trip/cruise, 4wd! :Thmbsup:-city_zen (December 25, 2008, 11:20 PM)
I hope you and your wife enjoy it. And I'm glad that those officials at the Brazilian Consulate were bored enough to grant you your visa in record time ;D Hopefully you'll enjoy the visit to the Iguazú Falls more than you think. Yes, it's just "gravity at work" :P, but let me warn you that it's gravity at work BIG TIME (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iguazu_Falls#Comparisons_to_other_famous_falls):
By the way, sorry about those U$S 100 entrance fee. I didn't know that was applicable to Australians. Apparently they're stating with it on January 2009 :(
From your cruise's brochure it seems that you'll be spending a whole day (Feb 8th) in Buenos Aires. I hope you are able (and willing) to get off the ship and do some tourism here. If those end up being your plans, just let me know and I'll be happy to help you. I'm sending you a PM with my info.
Oh, and about that "End of the Earth" thing ...Fascinating that a thread entitled "How will the Earth end?" becomes a travelogue (and how appropriate;))-Carol Haynes (December 24, 2008, 03:31 AM)
It is particularly appropriate since Antarctica has been called "The end of the Earth" many times (http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/antarctica/) (but maybe that's what you meant and I'm simply "over-explaining" it ... :-\)