• 🏆 Texturing Contest #33 is OPEN! Contestants must re-texture a SD unit model found in-game (Warcraft 3 Classic), recreating the unit into a peaceful NPC version. 🔗Click here to enter!
  • It's time for the first HD Modeling Contest of 2024. Join the theme discussion for Hive's HD Modeling Contest #6! Click here to post your idea!

Make You Think

Status
Not open for further replies.
Level 21
Joined
Jan 5, 2005
Messages
3,515
you know WW2, what country would you guess had the most civilian casualties? Britain, France, Germany, Russia, mabey Japan with the A-bomb and all that? well actually it was china wiht over 10,000,000! closely followed by russia with 7,000,000. these two countries had more civilian casualties than the rest of the world put together X4. and in russia, if you were conscripted, you had a 3/4 chance of death...thats scary.
 
Level 21
Joined
Jan 5, 2005
Messages
3,515
personally i dont think so. there are alot of things you have to consider. first of you say to happen to this planet. well we havent dont very much, alright global warming and what not but recent evidence has started to show that what is happening could just be a part of a regular cycle when the planet comes out of an ice age, because believe it or not we have barely left the ice age, a matter of 100s of thousands of years, not exactly millions. and right now is only the earth re-heating and re-balancing. if you were talking about nature and the world around us you would be more on the right lines but considering mass extinctions and naturual cycles and recent trends (ie large extinctions caused by humans only recent) we arent to bad on a global scale.

however, if you were to say "humans are the worst things to happen to each other" well then i guess you would be right, or at least half way there...
 
Level 12
Joined
Jan 13, 2005
Messages
1,138
Wars happen, it is a fact of life. The shear fact that we still fight after the "War to end all wars" should sy something. That does not make them pointless, nor trivial, nor something that should be forgotten. The fact is that wars cannot ever be fully appreciated until one experiances them first hand, only then are they real, and then it is too late. That is why pasifiscm will never work and humans will always fight, but that does not demean their significance in the slightest.
 
Level 4
Joined
Jun 26, 2005
Messages
89
I presonally think we are waaay too many people on earth.
I mean, were 6 billion for crying out loud. (5 or 6 cant remember)
In the 13th century we were like....1 billion..
After that its been a MASSIVE baby-boom
What the hell happened in the 13th century?
 
Level 12
Joined
Jan 13, 2005
Messages
1,138
Yeah it was about 1875 that the population boom began and it has been increasing due to the fact that the life expectancy is increased and infant mortality is decreased.
 
Level 4
Joined
Jun 26, 2005
Messages
89
You can see "mother nature's" pathetic apptempts to reduce our number from time to time.. Anyone remember SARS? And now the "bird flu".
Its just not working...
Maybe we need another world war? :?
 
Level 21
Joined
Jan 5, 2005
Messages
3,515
lol i dont think sars or h5n1 were invented as a crude form of population controll. there are conspiracies about hiv and population controll but they are probably lies. have you seen battle royale? that is a film about a deserted island where they put aload of chinese kids to battle to the deaths because there was too many of them.
 
Level 4
Joined
Jun 26, 2005
Messages
89
Im not saying any of it was man made....
I dont believe in god or "higher powers" (If you do, thats cool. I dont want to offend anyone)
but I do believe things happen for a reason.
If you get SARS or H5N1 then you were apparently to weak to survive.. There you have it.
The strongest survive, the weaker dont
On the other hand, if you ,say, get hit by a bus... thats another story.
Nature is all about balance.. We, mankind, are rocking this balance out of place, thus nature will do all in its power to re-balance.
If this makes no sense, I accept that.
I know what I mean but its hard to express yourself to 100% on a internet forum devoted to Warcraft 3 :p
 
Level 21
Joined
Jan 5, 2005
Messages
3,515
is see what ur getting at, like how rats have florished in our sewers because they can live there, while other species are dying all the time. so we help one creature but destroy another. but we hate rats, we havent said "rats yo yo live here" they have adapted themselves to live there, thats nature surviving more because of us, yet when we cut down forrests we kill many things. we dont think "lets go kill those things" we cut down the wood and that is what happens because of it.
 
Level 4
Joined
Jun 26, 2005
Messages
89
I personally think that the biggest threat to the planet, not to mention mankind is... mankind.

Like I said; we are unbalancing the VERY fragile ecosystem(spellcheck?)
of Earth.

Also, did you know the 2 things that separate Homo Sapiens Sapiens from all other animals are
1. We know that we are going to die sooner or later

2. We are the only species that posess the ability to wipe everything including ourselves off the face of the planet

Edit: I like your way of thinking too.. that thing with the rats ^^
 
Level 21
Joined
Jan 5, 2005
Messages
3,515
**everything here i cannot prove, just what i have read elsewhere**

3. we are the only creature consiously aware of our existence (this info fact as of 7 years ago, any update?) because we think about our existance in a "meaningful" way.

4. we are the only creature to kill each other for reasons beyond survival/mating...i think even creatures fighting for mates dont kill each other, but i dont know.

5. we are the only creature to wear clothes.
 
Level 4
Joined
Jun 26, 2005
Messages
89
Id have to object to nr.5
Chimps are known to (in the wild) take a big leaf and wrap around their bodies when its raining. This counts as primitive clothing in my humble opinion. :p
 
Level 21
Joined
Jan 5, 2005
Messages
3,515
6. i heard something about homosexuality which i believe has been proved wrong, but it was believed there were so homosexual female animals. but im 80% sure that is wrong.

7. something else im not sure about (im not sure about much am i?^^) is that only humans have sex for pleasure, animals dont.
 
Level 12
Joined
Jan 13, 2005
Messages
1,138
Here is my question to you about the belief that animals and plants do not think of themselves in a "meaningful way": Did you ever talk toythem? Do you think the "researchers" did? How do you (generic) know what is going on in their heads? Maybe that squirrel is looking at you because it knows how and when you will die and it feels sorry for you. Ever think of that?

Ants kill other ants and leave the bodies to rot, as do many boars.

As for the crack about the female homosexuality: it has been estimated that about 75% of all female squirrels are lesbians and roughly 90% of dragonflies are as well. These are the leading numbers, but many animals are, not just the human animal.

Aquatic mamals and most avians have sex for fun, that has been known for decades but is not commonly passed around for fear of "upsetting" people I guess.

Not all humans wear clothing, there are still cultures out there today who do not, so I do not buy that crap at all.

Did you know that pre 18th century it was claimed that man-kind is superior to animals because you use tools and no other animal does? Then chimps were discovered and it was said that humans are unique because of their brain sizes. Then in the 1950s humans learned they were from the cromags, not neanderthals which had the superor brains and that some gorrilas have comperable sized noggans. Then they said it was pleasureable sex, which was disproved in the 60s. After that it was mitochondrial chromosomes, which are present in ants as well. My question is why do humans have to think they are above animals?

 
Level 4
Joined
Jun 26, 2005
Messages
89
The main reason we think of ourselves as higher is all the stuff we've made. I mean look around you. 80% of everything you see is man made.
Also, like stated before, we have the power to destroy everything on this planet. (Which might make us lower than animals but you get my point I hope)
 
Level 12
Joined
Jan 13, 2005
Messages
1,138
Humans can alter local conditions, you do not change the environment.

As for all of the "stuff" you see have you ever studied termites in africa? Most of the "tribes" there can create structures which, if made to our relative sizes, are well over 100 miles tall and 20 miles wide. On top of that there is no heat at all inside of it (remember, this is freaking the middle of africa where daily temeratures are 40-60) and they support literally billions of lives.

How is that for amazing?

Sure humans create some pretty cool inorganic structures, but how often do they create new life forms? How many times have you seen a new species originate? How about a mountain? Nature is amazing, the power in it is beyond belief if you think about it for even a fraction of a second in true contemplation.
 
Level 3
Joined
Aug 14, 2005
Messages
46
The word human comes from the Greek word humanus, meaning earth-borne dweller.

Hum|Dirt
Anus|...

The actual, no joke translation for what we are is dirty anus. Now, the way you have to look at it, from a mature perspective, please (I'm not saying what I'm saying to get banned or in trouble, I'm reiterating what one of my professors told me), the anus is connected directly to the mouth; so in translation, we are all dirty, dirty creatures.

Therefore, we can observe the element of disease; we are all diseased. Some of us are sick, some of us take disease in a form of corruption of mind, others of spirit, some with addiction. But we are all diseased, and we spread our disease amongst each other in our society as though it mattered not.

The only reason we think we are superior to others is because we learned to harness nature first. We really aren't that great; scale other creatures to our size:

Termites and ants, though generally mindless, are so incredibly hardy and resilient to all things that nature can throw at them; humans get sunburns, frostbite, exhausted easily, can hardly lift their own weight without first being a labourer with no physical ailments whatsoever or otherwise being one with 'strength training' of some kind.

Humans are the only real creatures who base their selection of a mate on aesthetics beyond just looks (regarding that animals note scent above all else), including wealth, cars, luxuries....... we are such social creatures that we've overpopulated, overdone our technology, become slaves to machines and have begun playing God.

God.

God was a real thing once. Yes, he still is. Miracles happen every day. But once there were grand miracles. The church used to rule in government. The church was overrun by drama, of all things - humans valued entertainment that dramatic plays based upon bible tales. Eventually, the church lost control and regular government was enacted; and henceforth, humans believed in 'self-sufficiency'. Just a theory.

We are slaves to our creations. We think we have power, but we do not - no, animals will never revolt, never conquer us; but eventually, nature will. Through mighty acts of God or mighty floods, volcanoes or hurricanes, cause-and-effect of our industrial-commercial disruption of the Earth's delicate balance, this world as we know it will end.

Man discovered fire, and man sealed his fate.
 
Level 4
Joined
Jun 26, 2005
Messages
89
Well said.
I had a hard time trying to understanding that thing with dirty anuses but the rest was good :p

I like that part with "man discovered fire and man sealed his fate".
 
Level 3
Joined
Aug 14, 2005
Messages
46
All it means is that the very root word defining our species clarifies as as being foul creatures... look at the garbage and pollution we create... how we've spread and corrupted pretty well everything...
 
Level 3
Joined
Aug 14, 2005
Messages
46
lol, no problem.. I'm in college for broadcasting, but it was either that, english teaching or philosophy :wink: it's my forte.
 
Level 18
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Messages
1,938
Chaotica, I refuse to beleive humanity will devour itself on the basis that as humankind has the power of conscious thought, we can choose to pollute or not to, we have the power to destroy this planet and yet we have not. I suspect that despite all the dire warnings to the contrary, we will not destroy ourselves. We have the power of choice and while that is possibly the greatest threat to ourselves and the planet, it is also our salvation. Humanity will not destroy the planet or ourselves by any means, pollution included, we have already seen the consequences our reckless use of fossil fuels has had on he world and there are measures being taken against it, the problem is that our protective bodies and safeguards are flawed. The UN has done many good things but the US government has blocked much, much more with their veto power, NO country should have a veto power within the UN.
 
Level 3
Joined
Aug 14, 2005
Messages
46
With you 99% Shados. I agree that the whole global warming thing is, aherm, fraudulent, in most degrees, all I'm saying is that humans haven't done more good than evil; Nemesis, you say humans have done alot of good things, and I must ask, what have we done for nature? Everything humans do is selfish.

You say we cure disease, but what does that entail? That we live longer.
In places like America, that we live longer for a price. There is a price to sustain human life, through buying food, medicine, shelter....

Do animals have it right, where they piss themselves a line to say 'anyone crossing this dies?' I don't think humans could ever be so primitive again as we once were.

Every species has wars, some over territories, some over mates.
Humans have wars, some over territories, some fight over their women.
Sometimes we fight for money, power, in Bush's case, pride.

But on the whole, we aren't all that great... as a species. Yes, we were the first creatures on the earth to truly appreciate things like art and we have some fascinating paintings, structures and monuments to honour that. But the destruction upon which we built that monument and those structures, and the waste we dump into the water and the waste we fling into the atmosphere surely wouldn't have been caused by animals...

Without a doubt in my mind, though, we need everything we have. Not because we 'need' it, per se, but because we believe we do - we need cars to get around, we need planes to get even farther around, we need computers to talk to one another at any distance and cell phones to talk to each other much nearer. And every day, we learn another fatal flaw in our biological programming, and scientists discover that "eating too much celery can cause neural dystophymacy in your unborn child"...

We are the superpower race. But the fact that we are a race that doesn't cooperate, and that operates so independantly of itself, means no true good can ever be found.... I wish I could say that the world won't ever crumble down around itself, but hey, water level's rising, Greenland's turning into a puddle, and all in all I just don't see a reason not to be as optimistic as ever and toddle about my life until something cataclysmic happens.

I STRONGLY agree about your UN statement. Vetoing kind of defeats teh purpose of calling it "United Nations".
 
Level 21
Joined
Jan 5, 2005
Messages
3,515
what has any animal ever done for nature, we are nature, just different. animals, including ourselfs, do everything for themselves. you local squirrel doesnt take acorns so u dont get an annoying tree in your garden. i mean sure we dont need technology or civilisation, but it is the fact we want it and the fact we can have it that i like.
 
Level 12
Joined
Jan 13, 2005
Messages
1,138
Bush's war is not about pride, but that is a matter discussed elsewhere. Something you, of all people should know, is how overly dramatic the media is. As you alluded to in one of your earlier posts, Chaotica, humans like drama and your need for it governs much of your own existance and beliefs.

I have talked to many soldiers that have gone there, american and coalition. They say it is going well and most of the people there support and like them. Also take the american social security scandal going on right now, if the media was believed then america would have no retirment fund very shortly. However, they are using old estimates and according to the ones taken just three years ago shows it is fine for at least 50 years and even if that one fund dried up the most difference it would have is -10% of the income.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top