What would happen to earth if humans vanished?

[Professor S]

Ah, humanity as a disease... how trite. I'm always shocked how environmentalists seem to forget that human beings are a natural part of Earth's environment. Lower life forms are not "pure" and we do not "taint" them. They use their environment just like we do. Beaver's build dams, carnivores eat other animals, the world turns and goes on.

My favorite part is how nice they assume everyone thinks a world without humans would be wonderful. How is that wonderful? WE DON'T EXIST. Besides, how an Weisman be so sure about how the world would be without us? We have great impact on this planet and on other species. Assuming vrything would simply fall back into balance assumes that the other animals won't assume new power roles in this new humanless world.

We are not on this planet to serve this planet. We are here to thrive and flourish, and the best way towards this goal is to conserve the planets resources for our own uses and survival, not simply because the earth is inherently "better" without us. These idiotic notions of "everyone agree to have one kid, OK? That cool? Great, deal." need to be exposed for what they are: Nonsense.

[Dylflon]

Hey guys, Professor S thinks humanity is A-OK!





What a flippin eco-terrorist!

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by Dylflon

What a flippin eco-terrorist!

I love that term. Such incredible color and hyperbole to describe something that doesn't exist. There are no humans who are trying to get what they want from the world by "terrorizing" it. The planet cannot experience fear. It is not self-aware.

And did you even read what I wrote? I believe in conservation and balance. We need to conserve this planet's resources, and all its resources, including oil, coal, air, water, wood, stone, etc. These are all resources we need to exist. Without this planet humans don't exist, and I apologize if this is policially incorrect, but I like existing. I suppose that makes me some evil, nature hating monger. Earth is not inherently better or worse than we are. It has no idea of good and bad. It is a ball of rock, liquids and gasses that we live on. If we don't conserve it, we die. To me thats the best reason there is to take positive environmental action. Notice I say "positive" action.

This also doesn't translate into the need to "punish" humanity for its sins against mother earth. Thats simply childish nonsense. These anthropomorphic ideas of how pure the world is compared to humanity are rediculous. Listen to how you sound! "Eco-Terrorist"? What does that even mean? Do you know? Or are you just repeating some sound-byte friendly nonsense coined by another babbling fount of self-hatred?

Get past your anger and start thinking of logical, reasonable solutions to pollution. Force has never worked. Make people want to do their part by making it attractive, concevnient and affordable, and the populace will follow you.

Saying "One kid per couple"? That sounds wonderful, but it has the ame downfall as all other fundamentalist based concepts. They require massive amounts of dogamatic kool-aid that no one wants to drink.

I await your next 2-3 line answer that calls me another fictional insult.

[Bond]

Originally Posted by Dylflon

What a flippin eco-terrorist!

Haha.

Anyway, whether or not we're here to serve the Earth or our own selfish endeavors seems up for debate to me, but I do believe we, as humans, are here to help eachother. And perhaps in our efforts to help our own kind we must also help the environment, animals, etc. Really a win-win for everyone involved.

But the insinuation that animals would be better off without us seems ridiculous to me. Didn't these people watch Planet Earth? The majority of all animals (unless they're domesticated... by humans!) live a life of prolonged suffering. They spend their entire time finding food, reproducing and raising their young. Fortunately for us, we were able to break past that mold. Perhaps many humans are still living a life of suffering, but it seems to me the majority of us are not, and that has to be a good thing.

[Teuthida]

The majority of all animals (unless they're domesticated... by humans!) live a life of prolonged suffering. They spend their entire time finding food, reproducing and raising their young.

Er...but that's what life is: suffering.

Many people do exactly that as well. You do a modified version. Though you might not seek out food directly, you work for a paycheck to buy your food to survive, reproduce, and raise young.

Seems foolish to think without humans animals would have it rough. One less thing to worry about for most of them. The ultimate predator would be gone.

[Bond]

Originally Posted by Teuthida

Er...but that's what life is: suffering.

Hmm... I feel as though we are now entering into a moral/religious component of the question. I do not believe the life of a human must be a life of suffering. I do not consider my life to be a life of suffering. I think our ability to have food and shelter readily available to us through our own ingenuity has, in a sense, freed us from a life of suffering. But I suppose, the animal also does not know its life to be a life of suffering, as it knows no better.

[Teuthida]

You, as are most Americans and others in industrialized countries, are pretty lucky. There are far more people who have it bad than have it good. There are also humans who cause needless suffering for other humans...but yeah guess this is getting off topic.

Animals hunt to survive. Many people do the same. People who hunt for fun confuse me. Why do that when food is readily available? For the thrill? Then I have to wonder if animals get a thrill out of catching their prey. Surely they must. Adrenaline flowing, knowing that their stomach will be full.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by Teuthida

You, as are most Americans and others in industrialized countries, are pretty lucky. There are far more people who have it bad than have it good. There are also humans who cause needless suffering for other humans...but yeah guess this is getting off topic.

I think our sense of "having it good" is kind of skewed by our affluence. In natural terms it doesn't mean that Africans have it bad because they don't have a plasma screen TV. Compared to animals, most humans do "have it good". Not because of the luxury of technological conveniences, oir even a normal healthy diet, but because of the biological luxuries of love, friendship, other emotions and recreational sex (we share that trait only with dolphins). These are luxuries that were brought on by convenience, really. Agriculture allowed us to develop in this way.

Compared to many animals, even the most oppressed Africans "have it good". You'll know when they don't anymore when multiple children are the norm with each pregnancy. Then humans will be reproducing just to keep numbers up.

By the way, I'm in no way defending the oppression of African people. Lets not take that assinine leap of logic, thank you.

Animals hunt to survive. Many people do the same. People who hunt for fun confuse me. Why do that when food is readily available? For the thrill? Then I have to wonder if animals get a thrill out of catching their prey. Surely they must. Adrenaline flowing, knowing that their stomach will be full.

I'm a former hunter, and I have to say that unless you've hunted, killed, gutted and ate what you hunted... you'll never understand. There is something very... natural about the whole process. If I could describe it, I would say it was the only time I truly understood my place in the world; the only time I took ownership of my nature and what it is we truly are.

We are, by nature, omnivores. We eat meat and are genetically predisposed to eating meat. If you don't agree with me, just look at your teeth, especially the pointy ones. Plus most experts think our appendix was originally used to help digest raw meat, and cooking made it obsolete.

Hunting helped me understand out place in nature. You're not buying prepackaged chicken or cow parts... you're killing the animal, gutting it, skinning it and butchering it before you every see it in a state reminiscent of a supermarket value pack. You are taking ownership of your carnivorous nature. Not only that, you better understand that these animals are not simply foodstuffs, but living breathing parts of the world, and by killing them for your meal, you gain appreciation for them and their role in it, as well as yours.

But once again, I am a former hunter. I have nothing against it, but like Ron White said:

"Its early, its cold, and I don't wanna fuckin' go."

But I feel better for having hunted.