Recent Posts5326
Living Room / Re: How will the Earth end?
« Last post by 4wd on December 16, 2008, 11:06 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)
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)
That may be so but........
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)
Your analogy about nature with respect to the human population is also flawed. Animals generally don't overuse a resource just because "it's there". A wolf will kill a deer and eat what it needs to survive, any remaining carcass will itself be consumed by other predators, vermin, insects, etc, with the remains rotting down thereby furnishing the plants upon which the deer feed with nutrients. ie. A reasonably self-supporting closed
The only humans that could possibly be in balance with nature are those that are living in sync with their environment such that their population of an area has become virtually static, eg. the Kalahari bushmen before they were "discovered".
Current "civilised" human beings just spread and consume and in that respect they are closer to virii than mammals.
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.
Oh, and in case it's not quite clear, I side with Agent Smith
, and
