The gorilla

emmodg

emmodg

Well-known member
Apr 17, 2006
4,273
1
Mike_Rupp said:
So because there are 7B people, the value of a single life is reduced? This is all wonderful until that one person happens to be someone close to you. You think like Stalin & Mao. Who gives a fuck if we kill off a few million people? We'll have plenty left.
Click to expand...

Your argument invariably leads to a solipsism and a skewed view of the world.

You are choosing to destroy a whole species of animal who we share OVER 95% of our DNA with out of some kind of species-centric "survival of the fittest" theory. We - the human race - have been on this planet a mere 100-250 thousand years (jury is still out on exact numbers) and, along with every other animal living on this little rock, have been quite lucky to still be around considering 99.8 or so % of the animals EVER living on this planet have become extinct. There is a reason we and other animals have survived nature's culling. To suddenly deem our species more important than all others is folly and utterly foolish. I can assure you - and so will the great majority of biologists and paleontologists - we're here at the grace of other arguably more important species. Take a bee for instance - they don't need us for their existence but we'd have a VERY hard time existing without them. Again - my views don't come from some kind of PETA, Greenpeace, "liberal" blind love of all "beings"- it comes from common sense and a sense for the FUTURE of our little species.
 
D Chapman

D Chapman

1
Jan 3, 2005
11,746
73
On Kennith's private island
emmodg said:
Your argument invariably leads to a solipsism and a skewed view of the world.

You are choosing to destroy a whole species of animal who we share OVER 95% of our DNA with out of some kind of species-centric "survival of the fittest" theory. We - the human race - have been on this planet a mere 100-250 thousand years (jury is still out on exact numbers) and, along with every other animal living on this little rock, have been quite lucky to still be around considering 99.8 or so % of the animals EVER living on this planet have become extinct. There is a reason we and other animals have survived nature's culling. To suddenly deem our species more important than all others is folly and utterly foolish. I can assure you - and so will the great majority of biologists and paleontologists - we're here at the grace of other arguably more important species. Take a bee for instance - they don't need us for their existence but we'd have a VERY hard time existing without them. Again - my views don't come from some kind of PETA, Greenpeace, "liberal" blind love of all "beings"- it comes from common sense and a sense for the FUTURE of our little species.
Click to expand...

I would have to agree that our species more important than all others.
 
p m

p m

Administrator
Staff member
Apr 19, 2004
15,642
867
58
La Jolla, CA
www.3rj.org
emmodg said:
Your argument invariably leads to a solipsism and a skewed view of the world.

You are choosing to destroy a whole species of animal who we share OVER 95% of our DNA with out of some kind of species-centric "survival of the fittest" theory. We - the human race - have been on this planet a mere 100-250 thousand years (jury is still out on exact numbers) and, along with every other animal living on this little rock, have been quite lucky to still be around considering 99.8 or so % of the animals EVER living on this planet have become extinct. There is a reason we and other animals have survived nature's culling. To suddenly deem our species more important than all others is folly and utterly foolish. I can assure you - and so will the great majority of biologists and paleontologists - we're here at the grace of other arguably more important species. Take a bee for instance - they don't need us for their existence but we'd have a VERY hard time existing without them. Again - my views don't come from some kind of PETA, Greenpeace, "liberal" blind love of all "beings"- it comes from common sense and a sense for the FUTURE of our little species.
Click to expand...
I am almost there with you.
Almost means that Mike Rupp is not choosing to destroy a while species of an animal, he is just arguing for justification of killing of a single specimen.
 
Mike_Rupp

Mike_Rupp

Well-known member
Mar 26, 2004
3,604
0
Mercer Island, WA
emmodg said:
Your argument invariably leads to a solipsism and a skewed view of the world.

You are choosing to destroy a whole species of animal who we share OVER 95% of our DNA with out of some kind of species-centric "survival of the fittest" theory. We - the human race - have been on this planet a mere 100-250 thousand years (jury is still out on exact numbers) and, along with every other animal living on this little rock, have been quite lucky to still be around considering 99.8 or so % of the animals EVER living on this planet have become extinct. There is a reason we and other animals have survived nature's culling. To suddenly deem our species more important than all others is folly and utterly foolish. I can assure you - and so will the great majority of biologists and paleontologists - we're here at the grace of other arguably more important species. Take a bee for instance - they don't need us for their existence but we'd have a VERY hard time existing without them. Again - my views don't come from some kind of PETA, Greenpeace, "liberal" blind love of all "beings"- it comes from common sense and a sense for the FUTURE of our little species.
Click to expand...

As you state, certain animals carry out essential functions and are critical to the survival of other species of animals, such as bees, salmon, etc. The simple fact is that if every gorilla was killed today, nothing would change. It wouldn't create some sort of ripple effect that would compromise other animals. Kill them or don't. Nothing will change.

How many animal species have gone extinct since this thread started? Does anybody give a fuck? No. They are animals that aren't cute & furry like a dumb ass gorilla.
 
p m

p m

Administrator
Staff member
Apr 19, 2004
15,642
867
58
La Jolla, CA
www.3rj.org
Mike_Rupp said:
As you state, certain animals carry out essential functions and are critical to the survival of other species of animals, such as bees, salmon, etc. The simple fact is that if every gorilla was killed today, nothing would change. It wouldn't create some sort of ripple effect that would compromise other animals. Kill them or don't. Nothing will change.
Click to expand...
That applies to humans equally, unless you're entirely into the creationist thing.
EDIT:
Mike, this is wrong on so many levels. How much of what we do in life is not essential for survival?
 
emmodg

emmodg

Well-known member
Apr 17, 2006
4,273
1
Mike_Rupp said:
The simple fact is that if every gorilla was killed today, nothing would change. It wouldn't create some sort of ripple effect that would compromise other animals. Kill them or don't. Nothing will change.

And you know this how? There are a lot of paleontologists, theologians, theoretical theorists and physicists that would love to hear your miraculous conclusion

How many animal species have gone extinct since this thread started? Does anybody give a fuck? No. They are animals that aren't cute & furry like a dumb ass gorilla.
Click to expand...

I think gorillas are ugly as sin but that doesn't negate their importance.
 
az_max

az_max

1
Apr 22, 2005
7,463
2
Devildog01 said:
Surprising it didn't work for the people that created the rub and tug.
Click to expand...

The problem is everyone wanted boys to continue their name. (no one really figured out what happens when there's only boys being born). The girls who were born were killed, abandoned or mistreated. The Chinese did everything they could to get around the one baby limit. I'm sure a lot of wasn't legal or ethical.
 
kennith

kennith

Well-known member
Apr 22, 2004
10,891
172
North Carolina
emmodg said:
Creationism = mythology.

Vox Populi Vox Dei
Click to expand...

Reason itself must be accepted in faith.

Don't take that to mean I am any less than a man of science and philosophy, though.

It is simply a matter of fact, whether or not I like it.

Cheers,

Kennith
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom