Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: In response to your question, Why Breed?

Expand Messages
  • karlawilkins121
    Hi there!! I ve joined the bandwagon again, just under a different name. I will explain further later. Anyhow, this post has interested me deeply. Judgex, I
    Message 1 of 11 , Oct 4, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi there!! I've joined the bandwagon again, just under a different
      name. I will explain further later. Anyhow, this post has interested
      me deeply. Judgex, I think you are right in what you say. But I
      wouldn't call Mother Nature a Nazi...I think Nazis were the people
      trying to be creator gods themselves, without being aware of the
      fact that they can't even "create" dirt!!! We can only manipulate
      the materials at hand...Being a pantheist, i believe that Nature IS
      God, She is to be respected and feared. I am curious, have you
      decided to have children or not??? Are you hoping for a brighter
      future where the world will become like a paved paradise where they
      put up a parking lot??? Where would all the beauty and poetry coem
      from?? Wherein do you see beauty and intricacy?? In planes or
      birds??? In buses or caterpillars??? Say bye bye to luxury silk,fine
      wood,rare creatures....who are you calling a Nazi??? I think the one
      who is for the eradication of weaker species is the Nazi. Stronger
      ones need to be controlled, such as humans. If we go with our basic
      natural instincts and continue to conceive mindlessly, then we are
      the worst Nazis of all. Destructive beasts. We are part of Nature
      and have been blessed with wonderful minds with which to think for a
      reason. It's better when we reason with those intelligent minds.
      Nature loves herself actually-i think you are being extremely
      idealistic when you think that we can survive without her-she takes,
      certainly, but the sun that shines down on you, the water you drink,
      the food you eat-you are taking, taking, taking. How can you give
      back to Mother Earth??? I believe through love,because I believe
      that life, with all it's brutality, injustices, harshness, springs
      from warmth and thrives on love. Take care of yourself. It has taken
      me my life up until now to realise how important this is to find my
      own bliss. Kate (my real name!!!) --- In
      Why_breed@yahoogroups.com, "JudgeX" <jkjudgex@y...> wrote:
      > 3 years have passed since I started this thread and I have just
      now
      > found it again via google. I apologize for the 1,000 day delay on
      > my response, Les. These bulletin boards really should tell people
      > when they have a reply... or... maybe they do now, I don't know...
      > in any event, please shoot me a quick e-mail if you read/reply to
      > this so I'll know.
      >
      >
      > My problem with this whole concept of "biosphere" is that I
      believe
      > we can easily create machines that replace plant and animal
      > functions, given time and better energy resources. Man's
      footprint
      > on mother nature is surprisingly small... at a theoretical super
      > leniant MAXIMUM we've added 3 degrees to the overall temperature
      of
      > the planet, and THAT is still within the natural fluctuation
      > anyway. There's not even solid proof that we've done that much.
      >
      > There is absolutely no need for me to be bitten by mosquitoes on
      my
      > front porch here in suburban wonderland #3,554. They can all
      die.
      > Spiders, they can die too. Birds that chirp outside my windows
      and
      > stuff, while beautiful, are not necessary. The only trees in this
      > particular area are planted by human beings, and maintained by the
      > weather. Man's ability to influence the weather is slim-none.
      Once
      > we can control that, we barely need nature at all.
      >
      > Eradication of other life forms is part of the process of natural
      > selection. We should not play class-order-phylum favoritism in
      any
      > sense. If we find a particular creature annoying, or in the way,
      it
      > should be studied, stored in a maintained biosphere, and
      eliminated
      > from the system. That allows all the medicinal research and eco
      > freaks people to visit the cool bio-domes and be eaten on by
      > mosquitoes 365 days per year, and for me to enjoy my new parking
      > lots, perfect-tasting artificial lemonade, and lack of insects and
      > wild dogs. Domestic animals are very cool, they form
      companionships
      > with us and fill life roles. I propose we keep them forever.
      >
      > Mother nature is the most draconic bitch that has ever existed,
      > period. When mother nature wipes out a population, the suffering
      is
      > often greater or equivalent to that of the Holocaust, but everyone
      > just chalks it up to bad luck. Millions of people starve to death
      > in Africa, floods wash away thousands more, wildfires and volcano
      > eruptions destroy homelands, all throughout history these things
      > happen. Viral plagues wipe out 1/3rd of the population of an
      entire
      > continent... These things kill all the cute little furry animals
      and
      > beautiful green trees, too... and it's not man's fault when a
      > volcano blows 600 miles of land into the sea, or when a meteor
      > flattens 90 miles of populated forest in an instant that would
      have
      > taken humans 10 years to clear.
      >
      > Ice Ages, meteors, volcanoes, earthquakes, diseases, floods,
      > hurricanes, famine... these things have killed more creatures and
      > plants in just a few years than man will EVER be able to kill even
      > if he tries his best. That's just a fact. Mother Nature is a big
      > Nazi and Earth is her favorite death camp. We should just go
      ahead
      > and call Earth Auschwitz II. On top of that, she does the most
      > brutal animal testing... we call it survival of the fittest and
      > genetic diversity, but really it appears in the form of siamese
      > twins and other birth defects that render a being helpless for the
      > duration of its life.
      >
      > But anyway, I digress... go on about trumpetting the beauty of
      > mother nature... if you end up with a still-born relative or lose
      > someone to famine or flood, make sure you give her a proper
      thanks.
      > Otherwise, I welcome you into the walls of my anti-nature
      fortress,
      > complete with artificially controlled air-purification systems,
      > purified water, and genetically modified crops. Trips to the moon
      > for sight seeing are available next fall, and our zero-pest policy
      > has gone without a hitch for 150 years. The child you were about
      to
      > have would have succumbed to parkinson's disease at the age of 25,
      > but we repaired the genetic flaw for you and eliminated it from
      his
      > trait-list. Stop by our beautiful meat market for some freshly
      > grown whale meat... it's a delicacy, but it's damn near free
      thanks
      > to stem cell research.
      >
      > My point: From the first time that a human constructed a wall and
      > made himself a home, he was fighting back against mother nature.
      As
      > intelligent beings, we must realize that coexistence with other
      > natural elements is a waste of our time and foolish. Those that
      can
      > be easily trained to work alongside us or enjoy our progress with
      us
      > are welcome aboard. Those classified as pests, or simply in the
      way
      > at the time need to be bulldozed. We can either let mother nature
      > have it, or we can take it for ourselves, but in the end, only one
      > force will be in control of this rock.... us... or the Natural
      Nazi-
      > Mother.
      >
      > ;)
      >
      > --- In Why_breed@yahoogroups.com, "Les U. Knight" <les@v...> wrote:
      > > JudgeX wrote:
      > > <snip>
      > > >Thus, if someone wishes to breed, and has the resources to do
      so,
      > their will alone should be justification to breed. <
      > >
      > > Resources may be acquired with money, so by this test, the
      richer
      > a
      > > couple is the more easily they can justify breeding.
      > >
      > > Another factor, which is often overlooked, is our "resource"
      > called
      > > habitat. We must live somewhere, so we convert habitat of other
      > > species into our habitat, reducing biodiversity. Even if a
      couple
      > can
      > > afford to breed, Earth's biosphere can't afford for them to do
      so.
      > >
      > > >Why play Class-Order-Phylum favoritism . . . <
      > >
      > > Good question. Why do we do that? Unless a species is of the
      genus
      > > Homo, and we're the only ones left, we don't seem to care much
      > what
      > > happens to it. If fact, it doesn't look as if we care much about
      > our
      > > own kind either.
      > >
      > > >. . . and state that survival of the fittest goes out the
      window?
      > <
      > >
      > > Natural selection by survival of the fittest applies to
      > individuals
      > > within a species rather than species within an ecosystem.
      Whenever
      > > possible, we save human lives which would be lost to genetic
      > defects.
      > > This is fine as long as they don't pass on their genes, however,
      > > couples in over-industrialized regions will breed regardless of
      > their
      > > flaws, and their heirs will be rescued through heroic and
      > expensive
      > > measures. This is throwing survival of the fittest out the
      window
      > with
      > > the bath water.
      > >
      > > >Bacteria and virii have been known to devastate entire crops,
      and
      > kill entire herds of animals, probably even driving many of them
      to
      > extinction.<
      > >
      > > Yes, our attempts to create order by domesticating plants and
      > animals,
      > > and by raising them in monocultures, does leave them vulnerable
      to
      > > disease. However, in natural, established ecosystems, it's
      exotic
      > > invaders such as ourselves which cause extinctions.
      > >
      > > >As a trans-humanist, I must say that I hope that order can be
      > brought to mother nature's system of chaos. This is not to say
      that
      > humanity isn't in a state of chaos, it is, but I think that
      through
      > technology and education, we can eventually overcome that chaos
      and
      > establish firm and blissful order for every newly conceived
      being.<
      > >
      > > This is what we do when we convert a swamp into a parking lot.
      > Since
      > > there are no newly conceived beings there after than, it's true
      > that
      > > there's a firm and blissful order for all of them.
      > >
      > > >So, I suppose the real root of my problem with the responses is
      > that nobody ever paused to ask... why are other animals and plants
      > so important? <
      > >
      > > The strength of Earth's biosphere depends on biodiversity. If
      > other
      > > species have no intrinsic importance, which I think they do,
      they
      > at
      > > least have importance to our own well-being, whether we realize
      it
      > or
      > > not.
      > >
      > > >What's really the matter with wiping every last one of them out
      > and replacing it with a machine that helps maintain the biosphere
      so
      > that we can live here and move to other planets? <
      > >
      > > There would be no biosphere without the bio. May as well go to
      an
      > > existing lifeless rock instead of converting this living planet
      > into
      > > one. Our machines are pretty darn clever, but they don't compare
      > with
      > > the most simple life form.
      > >
      > > >Give humanity about 500 more years, I say, and if we haven't
      > solved the rest of our problems by then... VHEMT is definitely the
      > answer, if not global genocide.<
      > >
      > > Those are the choices I see too: global genocide is what we are
      > > engineering, and it won't take 500 years at the rate we're
      going.
      > > VHEMT is the alternative. If we haven't solved our problems in
      > 10,000
      > > years, another 500 hundred isn't going to be enough.
      > >
      > > >I love your site, by the way, and agree wholeheartedly with
      parts
      > of it. I wish everyone would rationalize the process of bringing a
      > child into the world... (especially where you mention that they
      > don't think about the child becoming an adult in a few years and
      > leaving)... <
      > >
      > > Thanks for the encouragement. Yes, if people would just think
      > before
      > > they breed, birth rates would improve.
      > >
      > > >I think millions of silly girls get enchanted with the raising
      a
      > baby fantasy, and it's helping ruin the world. <
      > >
      > > The baby fantasy is foist upon both males and females. It takes
      an
      > > effort to not become enchanted by the natalist propaganda
      > constantly
      > > bombarding our consciousnesses.
      > >
      > > Les
    • klo_4u
      The duty of human beings on earth is to protect life in all its shapes and forms and never fight it. Dont be violent but love one another instead. The Nazis
      Message 2 of 11 , Oct 5, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        The duty of human beings on earth is to protect life in all its shapes
        and forms and never fight it. Dont be violent but love one another
        instead. The Nazis who massacred all those Jews, homosexuals, and
        gypsies were not fundamentally bad people, they where brought into
        that system without questioning it, they were simply convinced they
        were doing the "right" thing and serving the cause. People need not
        try to be gods, because they are gods. They were created in the image
        of god, and therefore are gods.

        As for judgeX, our world is beautiful and deserves to be saved. It is
        important to replace your hate towards mother nature with "love"
        because the world needs love more than anything. Your violence
        towards her will only accumulate with all other forms of violence, and
        the end of mankind will be terrible. Violence never solves
        anything, Violence leads to violence and once it starts it doesnt stop.

        Stop population growth until humanities conciouss is free and running
        wild. As for now our society is going to fast, is being run by
        serious, and boring people, is walking backwards from creating, and is
        increasingly depressive through its parade of horrors, sufferings,
        obligations, pressure to have, to know, and the information provided
        by the medias which is always emphasizing over how terrible the world
        is (It should be more focused on how terrible people our).

        JudgeX, humanity has killed many, maybe not phisically but conciously.
        Humanity has made robots of people, shutting down their minds from
        creativity and monitoring them to sweat through labor. In the end
        however, we may just wipe out our entire species. Dirty air, will
        clog our lungs. Lack of water will dehydrate us. Lack of color will
        bore us. And the abscence of the infinity of life forms, will who
        know, may just take us with them. The future deserves to live with
        rainbows, butterflies, and pest as you call them. Bugs are just as
        beautiful as birds, and scream just as loud as any other animal when
        being killed. Every form of life was put on Earth for a reason, and
        humanities reason was not to take them out. Be love and share love.
      • Jim Burger
        Brian you wrote: Mother Nature is a big Nazi and Earth is her favorite death camp. But it isnt a nice, cosy little death camp? First, you do realize that
        Message 3 of 11 , Dec 16, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          Brian

          you wrote:
          "Mother Nature is a big Nazi and Earth is her favorite death camp."

          But it isnt a nice, cosy little death camp?

          "First, you do realize that there is no such thing as "mother
          nature," I hope."

          Careful, people might find this derogatory and condescending! But
          you already knew that didnt you?

          "It's just the way things work. Death is necessary for life. If
          nothing ever
          died, the order of life on this planet would still be at the most
          primitive
          level, pre-bacterium."

          Exactly, so keep on breeding. If we wipe ourselves out - who gives a
          damn. we might learn a few things along the way? Another species
          will take our place in the long run. Why accellerate the inevitable?
          Go forth and multiply!!

          Jimbo
        • JudgeX
          I have reviewed my comments. They are all very valid, thanks. You honestly don t believe that machines can replace the functions of animals? That science and
          Message 4 of 11 , Dec 4, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            I have reviewed my comments. They are all very valid, thanks.

            You honestly don't believe that machines can replace the functions
            of animals? That science and genetic engineering can't create the
            necessary plants and animals to survive? One day, it will... maybe
            not 10 years from now, but in 100, or 1000, probably.

            "What if the shoe were on the other foot? Suppose some form of
            life, a race of extraterrestrials or whatever, came along which had
            as much power over the human race as we now have over the other
            forms of life currently living on earth?"

            That's the natural order of things. It's a precedent established by
            nature. The big animal eats the small animal. I am simply saying
            it's alright to follow the natural rules when dealing with ANNOYING
            ELEMENTS of the biosphere... not NECESSARY ONES. All necessary ones
            must be emulated and replaced before being removed. However,
            mosquitoes don't really matter.

            And by the way... We can dominate the earth and wipe out everything
            in our way, and still grow sugar. I never said man should remove
            every organism from the planet but man. Stop putting words into my
            mouth. I just said man should do his best to make life on this
            planet as carefree as possible by crushing natural elements that
            impede healthy life.

            Nature KILLS PEOPLE. Yes, death is wonderfully necessary and
            whatever that big artistic tirade you went on was... sure, sure...
            but is it really necessary for 10 year old kids to starve to death?
            No. And why do they? Because mankind has not yet fully mastered
            nature... Death may have been necessary to advance this far, but, I
            hereby declare, officially, for everyone, that it sucks and it'd be
            great to live as long as you wanted, and if it is within our grasp
            to achieve that... I support it.

            You want to talk about arrogant and short sighted? You're the one
            talking about alien invasions and hypothetical BS about how if
            things didn't die, everything would be pre-bacterium. You should re-
            read your comment and realize YOUR OWN arrogance.

            --- In Why_breed@yahoogroups.com, "Brian A." <phelsumas@y...> wrote:
            >
            > JudgeX <jkjudgex@y...> wrote:
            > My problem with this whole concept of "biosphere" is that I
            believe
            > we can easily create machines that replace plant and animal
            > functions, given time and better energy resources.
            >
            > You can believe that all you want, but it's not true. And that is
            a problem. Plants and animals perform their functions far more
            efficiently than anything we have created, and unlike our machines,
            they are self-replicating and adaptive. For example, the plains
            ecosystem as it existed in the North American midwest produced far
            more functioning biomass than any modern farm.
            >
            > If we find a particular creature annoying, or in the way, it
            > should be studied, stored in a maintained biosphere, and
            eliminated
            > from the system.
            >
            > Wow. What if the shoe were on the other foot? Suppose some form
            of life, a race of extraterrestrials or whatever, came along which
            had as much power over the human race as we now have over the other
            forms of life currently living on earth? Suppose that lifeform
            found us "annoying?" (They probably would, seeing as how we're so
            invasive.) I guess it would be perfectly fine for them to take a
            couple of breeding pairs of humans and put them into a big
            terrarium, then extract the mineral resources of the planet and keep
            the remaining humans as pets or breed them for meat?
            > Humans have been annoying and "in the way," from the perspective
            of practically all other life on this planet, for a long time now.
            >
            > Mother Nature is a big Nazi and Earth is her favorite death camp.
            >
            > First, you do realize that there is no such thing as "mother
            nature," I hope. It's just the way things work. Death is necessary
            for life. If nothing ever died, the order of life on this planet
            would still be at the most primitive level, pre-bacterium.
            >
            > You can't have it both ways. You want humans to completely
            dominate the earth and to wipe out anything that annoys us or gets
            in the way, but you can't even have your "artificial" lemonade
            without sugar. Do you think we make sugar out of sunlight and air?
            No, plants make sugar. Artificial sweeteners are simply processed
            out of various refined substances which were, at some point,
            synthesized from minerals and water by plants. We can't "make"
            anything. Asphalt, of which you seem to be so fond, is basically a
            mixture of dirt and tar, both of which only exist thanks to the
            actions of plants and other organisms. Humans owe their existance
            to the biosphere of which you seem so disdainful.
            >
            > I suggest you review your statements and hope to realize how
            arrogant and short-sighted they are.
            >
            > Sincerely,
            >
            > Brian A.
            >
            > __________________________________________________
            > Do You Yahoo!?
            > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
            > http://mail.yahoo.com
            >
            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >
          • JudgeX
            I appreciate your comments, Kate... However, when I compared Mother Nature to Nazis, I meant it in the sense that nature wipes out hundreds of millions of
            Message 5 of 11 , Dec 5, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              I appreciate your comments, Kate...

              However, when I compared Mother Nature to Nazis, I meant it in the
              sense that nature wipes out hundreds of millions of people every
              decade... in a similar fashion to Nazis.

              The Nazis were all about creating a "master race" by selective
              breeding. Mother nature does a very similar thing called "survival
              of the fittest"... where, if you're born in the wrong place at the
              wrong time, you are executed by the elements in the most torturous
              and horrid fashion imaginable...

              I am proposing that we are already the master race... regardless of
              color, creed, ethnicity, etc. We're at the top of the food-chain...
              and I am saying that we should take full advantage of that. Science
              is the key to our continued survival... and as our own population
              spirals upwards, we will exceed the carrying capacity of the world
              that we live in VERY SOON (some say we have already).

              These things are evident when you see hunger-drives, people warring
              over oil, and tsunamis that wipe out 50 times more people than al-
              qaeda can.

              The elements of nature which sustain man are the only ones that
              should be preserved. I do not mean that since we do not need water
              beetles, that we should go out and kill water beetles. I'm just
              saying that if water beetles were causing survival problems by
              swarming on desalinization plants or clogging up waterways and
              causing floods, that it then becomes necessary to eradicate them.

              I do appreciate the sunlight that shines down on me, and the food,
              and the water. I appreciate all of the blessings that I have been
              given... but I do not appreciate not being able to sit on my own
              porch in the summer because the neighbors have standing pools of
              water in their back yard that harbour mosquitoes by the thousand.

              I do appreciate the companionship of cats and dogs, the taste of
              fruits and vegetables, the sound of song, babbling brooks, and wind
              in trees at night. I fall asleep faster in a thunderstorm than
              anything else, and I even like to read the occasional poem.
              However, I recognize that certain people in our society wish to
              protect nature to such a degree that they would betray their own
              race. Cancelling stem-cell research projects, conserving valuable
              land that is needed for use by an impoverished community, or
              shutting down "ecologically unsafe" factories that provide important
              jobs... or deny contracts to build nuclear power plants, etc...
              and these same people turn around and wage war on other humans in
              iraq so they can secure their gas prices so they can blast more and
              more fumes from their SUVs into the OZONE LAYER?

              I'm just saying... if you're going to attack the ozone layer every
              day on your way to work, I think I'm at least sort of justified in
              saying "gee, maybe we should get rid of all the poisonous snakes and
              mosquitoes and start fighting world hunger with unrestricted
              science" without being called a Nazi.

              Thanks... and btw, Kate's a cute name.

              My brighter future is one where doctors and scientists at the local
              hospital and materials firms can guide you through the process of
              having your child, and say things like:
              "M'am, your baby was born with a slight defect in her left eye which
              would have caused blindness by age 3. However, we repaired it with
              a little gene-therapy and laser surgery, and she will go disease
              free for her whole life. Congratulations."

              AND:

              "Your new 7 bedroom home has been finished at the record low price
              of $45,000. The geo-thermal heating system keeps the house at a
              constant 70 degrees fahrenheit, and there are several extra rooms
              for entertaining guests, etc. Cleaning robots have been installed
              that will take care of the garbage, lawn, sweeping, mopping, and
              tending to the pets... etc"

              Sounds sci-fi... but, I really believe we'd have all that stuff now
              if it wasn't for a bunch of backwards anti-science redneck
              hypocrits... so... maybe in a couple hundred years, we'll see... if
              we can keep the population down -_-.




              --- In Why_breed@yahoogroups.com, "karlawilkins121"
              <karlawilkins121@y...> wrote:
              >
              >
              > Hi there!! I've joined the bandwagon again, just under a different
              > name. I will explain further later. Anyhow, this post has
              interested
              > me deeply. Judgex, I think you are right in what you say. But I
              > wouldn't call Mother Nature a Nazi...I think Nazis were the people
              > trying to be creator gods themselves, without being aware of the
              > fact that they can't even "create" dirt!!! We can only manipulate
              > the materials at hand...Being a pantheist, i believe that Nature
              IS
              > God, She is to be respected and feared. I am curious, have you
              > decided to have children or not??? Are you hoping for a brighter
              > future where the world will become like a paved paradise where
              they
              > put up a parking lot??? Where would all the beauty and poetry coem
              > from?? Wherein do you see beauty and intricacy?? In planes or
              > birds??? In buses or caterpillars??? Say bye bye to luxury
              silk,fine
              > wood,rare creatures....who are you calling a Nazi??? I think the
              one
              > who is for the eradication of weaker species is the Nazi. Stronger
              > ones need to be controlled, such as humans. If we go with our
              basic
              > natural instincts and continue to conceive mindlessly, then we are
              > the worst Nazis of all. Destructive beasts. We are part of Nature
              > and have been blessed with wonderful minds with which to think for
              a
              > reason. It's better when we reason with those intelligent minds.
              > Nature loves herself actually-i think you are being extremely
              > idealistic when you think that we can survive without her-she
              takes,
              > certainly, but the sun that shines down on you, the water you
              drink,
              > the food you eat-you are taking, taking, taking. How can you give
              > back to Mother Earth??? I believe through love,because I believe
              > that life, with all it's brutality, injustices, harshness, springs
              > from warmth and thrives on love. Take care of yourself. It has
              taken
              > me my life up until now to realise how important this is to find
              my
              > own bliss. Kate (my real name!!!) --- In
              > Why_breed@yahoogroups.com, "JudgeX" <jkjudgex@y...> wrote:
              > > 3 years have passed since I started this thread and I have just
              > now
              > > found it again via google. I apologize for the 1,000 day delay
              on
              > > my response, Les. These bulletin boards really should tell
              people
              > > when they have a reply... or... maybe they do now, I don't
              know...
              > > in any event, please shoot me a quick e-mail if you read/reply
              to
              > > this so I'll know.
              > >
              > >
              > > My problem with this whole concept of "biosphere" is that I
              > believe
              > > we can easily create machines that replace plant and animal
              > > functions, given time and better energy resources. Man's
              > footprint
              > > on mother nature is surprisingly small... at a theoretical
              super
              > > leniant MAXIMUM we've added 3 degrees to the overall temperature
              > of
              > > the planet, and THAT is still within the natural fluctuation
              > > anyway. There's not even solid proof that we've done that much.
              > >
              > > There is absolutely no need for me to be bitten by mosquitoes on
              > my
              > > front porch here in suburban wonderland #3,554. They can all
              > die.
              > > Spiders, they can die too. Birds that chirp outside my windows
              > and
              > > stuff, while beautiful, are not necessary. The only trees in
              this
              > > particular area are planted by human beings, and maintained by
              the
              > > weather. Man's ability to influence the weather is slim-none.
              > Once
              > > we can control that, we barely need nature at all.
              > >
              > > Eradication of other life forms is part of the process of
              natural
              > > selection. We should not play class-order-phylum favoritism in
              > any
              > > sense. If we find a particular creature annoying, or in the
              way,
              > it
              > > should be studied, stored in a maintained biosphere, and
              > eliminated
              > > from the system. That allows all the medicinal research and eco
              > > freaks people to visit the cool bio-domes and be eaten on by
              > > mosquitoes 365 days per year, and for me to enjoy my new parking
              > > lots, perfect-tasting artificial lemonade, and lack of insects
              and
              > > wild dogs. Domestic animals are very cool, they form
              > companionships
              > > with us and fill life roles. I propose we keep them forever.
              > >
              > > Mother nature is the most draconic bitch that has ever existed,
              > > period. When mother nature wipes out a population, the
              suffering
              > is
              > > often greater or equivalent to that of the Holocaust, but
              everyone
              > > just chalks it up to bad luck. Millions of people starve to
              death
              > > in Africa, floods wash away thousands more, wildfires and
              volcano
              > > eruptions destroy homelands, all throughout history these things
              > > happen. Viral plagues wipe out 1/3rd of the population of an
              > entire
              > > continent... These things kill all the cute little furry animals
              > and
              > > beautiful green trees, too... and it's not man's fault when a
              > > volcano blows 600 miles of land into the sea, or when a meteor
              > > flattens 90 miles of populated forest in an instant that would
              > have
              > > taken humans 10 years to clear.
              > >
              > > Ice Ages, meteors, volcanoes, earthquakes, diseases, floods,
              > > hurricanes, famine... these things have killed more creatures
              and
              > > plants in just a few years than man will EVER be able to kill
              even
              > > if he tries his best. That's just a fact. Mother Nature is a
              big
              > > Nazi and Earth is her favorite death camp. We should just go
              > ahead
              > > and call Earth Auschwitz II. On top of that, she does the most
              > > brutal animal testing... we call it survival of the fittest and
              > > genetic diversity, but really it appears in the form of siamese
              > > twins and other birth defects that render a being helpless for
              the
              > > duration of its life.
              > >
              > > But anyway, I digress... go on about trumpetting the beauty of
              > > mother nature... if you end up with a still-born relative or
              lose
              > > someone to famine or flood, make sure you give her a proper
              > thanks.
              > > Otherwise, I welcome you into the walls of my anti-nature
              > fortress,
              > > complete with artificially controlled air-purification systems,
              > > purified water, and genetically modified crops. Trips to the
              moon
              > > for sight seeing are available next fall, and our zero-pest
              policy
              > > has gone without a hitch for 150 years. The child you were
              about
              > to
              > > have would have succumbed to parkinson's disease at the age of
              25,
              > > but we repaired the genetic flaw for you and eliminated it from
              > his
              > > trait-list. Stop by our beautiful meat market for some freshly
              > > grown whale meat... it's a delicacy, but it's damn near free
              > thanks
              > > to stem cell research.
              > >
              > > My point: From the first time that a human constructed a wall
              and
              > > made himself a home, he was fighting back against mother
              nature.
              > As
              > > intelligent beings, we must realize that coexistence with other
              > > natural elements is a waste of our time and foolish. Those that
              > can
              > > be easily trained to work alongside us or enjoy our progress
              with
              > us
              > > are welcome aboard. Those classified as pests, or simply in the
              > way
              > > at the time need to be bulldozed. We can either let mother
              nature
              > > have it, or we can take it for ourselves, but in the end, only
              one
              > > force will be in control of this rock.... us... or the Natural
              > Nazi-
              > > Mother.
              > >
              > > ;)
              > >
              > > --- In Why_breed@yahoogroups.com, "Les U. Knight" <les@v...>
              wrote:
              > > > JudgeX wrote:
              > > > <snip>
              > > > >Thus, if someone wishes to breed, and has the resources to do
              > so,
              > > their will alone should be justification to breed. <
              > > >
              > > > Resources may be acquired with money, so by this test, the
              > richer
              > > a
              > > > couple is the more easily they can justify breeding.
              > > >
              > > > Another factor, which is often overlooked, is our "resource"
              > > called
              > > > habitat. We must live somewhere, so we convert habitat of
              other
              > > > species into our habitat, reducing biodiversity. Even if a
              > couple
              > > can
              > > > afford to breed, Earth's biosphere can't afford for them to do
              > so.
              > > >
              > > > >Why play Class-Order-Phylum favoritism . . . <
              > > >
              > > > Good question. Why do we do that? Unless a species is of the
              > genus
              > > > Homo, and we're the only ones left, we don't seem to care much
              > > what
              > > > happens to it. If fact, it doesn't look as if we care much
              about
              > > our
              > > > own kind either.
              > > >
              > > > >. . . and state that survival of the fittest goes out the
              > window?
              > > <
              > > >
              > > > Natural selection by survival of the fittest applies to
              > > individuals
              > > > within a species rather than species within an ecosystem.
              > Whenever
              > > > possible, we save human lives which would be lost to genetic
              > > defects.
              > > > This is fine as long as they don't pass on their genes,
              however,
              > > > couples in over-industrialized regions will breed regardless
              of
              > > their
              > > > flaws, and their heirs will be rescued through heroic and
              > > expensive
              > > > measures. This is throwing survival of the fittest out the
              > window
              > > with
              > > > the bath water.
              > > >
              > > > >Bacteria and virii have been known to devastate entire crops,
              > and
              > > kill entire herds of animals, probably even driving many of them
              > to
              > > extinction.<
              > > >
              > > > Yes, our attempts to create order by domesticating plants and
              > > animals,
              > > > and by raising them in monocultures, does leave them
              vulnerable
              > to
              > > > disease. However, in natural, established ecosystems, it's
              > exotic
              > > > invaders such as ourselves which cause extinctions.
              > > >
              > > > >As a trans-humanist, I must say that I hope that order can be
              > > brought to mother nature's system of chaos. This is not to say
              > that
              > > humanity isn't in a state of chaos, it is, but I think that
              > through
              > > technology and education, we can eventually overcome that chaos
              > and
              > > establish firm and blissful order for every newly conceived
              > being.<
              > > >
              > > > This is what we do when we convert a swamp into a parking lot.
              > > Since
              > > > there are no newly conceived beings there after than, it's
              true
              > > that
              > > > there's a firm and blissful order for all of them.
              > > >
              > > > >So, I suppose the real root of my problem with the responses
              is
              > > that nobody ever paused to ask... why are other animals and
              plants
              > > so important? <
              > > >
              > > > The strength of Earth's biosphere depends on biodiversity. If
              > > other
              > > > species have no intrinsic importance, which I think they do,
              > they
              > > at
              > > > least have importance to our own well-being, whether we
              realize
              > it
              > > or
              > > > not.
              > > >
              > > > >What's really the matter with wiping every last one of them
              out
              > > and replacing it with a machine that helps maintain the
              biosphere
              > so
              > > that we can live here and move to other planets? <
              > > >
              > > > There would be no biosphere without the bio. May as well go to
              > an
              > > > existing lifeless rock instead of converting this living
              planet
              > > into
              > > > one. Our machines are pretty darn clever, but they don't
              compare
              > > with
              > > > the most simple life form.
              > > >
              > > > >Give humanity about 500 more years, I say, and if we haven't
              > > solved the rest of our problems by then... VHEMT is definitely
              the
              > > answer, if not global genocide.<
              > > >
              > > > Those are the choices I see too: global genocide is what we
              are
              > > > engineering, and it won't take 500 years at the rate we're
              > going.
              > > > VHEMT is the alternative. If we haven't solved our problems in
              > > 10,000
              > > > years, another 500 hundred isn't going to be enough.
              > > >
              > > > >I love your site, by the way, and agree wholeheartedly with
              > parts
              > > of it. I wish everyone would rationalize the process of bringing
              a
              > > child into the world... (especially where you mention that they
              > > don't think about the child becoming an adult in a few years and
              > > leaving)... <
              > > >
              > > > Thanks for the encouragement. Yes, if people would just think
              > > before
              > > > they breed, birth rates would improve.
              > > >
              > > > >I think millions of silly girls get enchanted with the
              raising
              > a
              > > baby fantasy, and it's helping ruin the world. <
              > > >
              > > > The baby fantasy is foist upon both males and females. It
              takes
              > an
              > > > effort to not become enchanted by the natalist propaganda
              > > constantly
              > > > bombarding our consciousnesses.
              > > >
              > > > Les
              >
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.