A Human Tragedy

My Recent Posts

Professor Todd May (a professor of philosophy at Clemson University) recently penned an editorial for the New York Times titled "Would Human Extinction Be a Tragedy?"  It piqued my interest enough to go read it.  I found it raising a very profound question.

 

♦ Is this what passes for a "professor" of philosophy pondering human existence?

 

The piece was pretty well the underwhelming drivel I expected; a humanity-loathing leftist opining that humanity deserves to die (as in all of us) because we don't do what is right.  "Humanity-loathing" for these leftist is to hate humanity in terms of all the ignorant little people not falling in line.  The enlightened are not to be so loathed since it is embarrassing to them to even be of the same species.

 

Anyway, read the editorial if you want, but here's the gist.

 

A tragic character (in theater) is someone who does something bad and it costs them (usually their lives and the lives of those they love); BUT we (the audience) sympathize with them.  Fair enough, on this I can agree.

 

 

May continues… Humanity is the protagonist in a play currently progressing on this little globe/stage of ours.  Humanity is committing the following somethings, according to Mr. May, that may cause extinction or at least justify it.

♦ Climate Change

♦ Overpopulation

♦ Factory Farming

This list of somethings should sound familiar to any casual WB reader.  Several WB participants would heartedly agree.

 

For the benefit of space and time, it is not my intent to debate the validity of each something listed.  I want to address the same subject as the editorialists concerning if human extinction would be a tragedy.

 

So, assuming those "facts", would it be a tragedy if we (humanity) simply ceased to exist?  I think the key question, Mr. May implies must be answered, is would we deserve the sympathy from whoever the audience is… and I agree... to a point.  While Mr. May would concentrate on the validity of the sympathy, I would concentrate on the audience (or lack thereof) in answering that question. (See below).

 

Mr. May doesn't really answer the question, but you can tell where his sympathies lie; and it’s not with humanity.  It's exactly where I see many secular leftists coming down on the question.  This beautiful world and its animals would be so much better off without humanity.  Without us, they would return to a Disneyesque utopian circle of life.  <cue the music>

 

From my non-humanity-loathing point of view; I would answer the question this way.  It can only be a tragedy if there is a conscious sentient audience to make that determination after the curtain closes (space aliens or God for example making the call).  The animals, and plants, and the earth itself will never know we're gone; will never contemplate if things are better or worse.  They'll just continue to spin, and kill, and eat, and procreate until they don’t; for whatever reason fate decides.

 

Secularly, if our demise is a tragedy, then it will only be one for a blink of an eye since all existence would be finite.  Compared to infinity, a day, a year, or a billion years are all close to nothing.  So, humanity's little time would equal the significance of 1) the whole existence and death of a fruit fly; and also 2) the whole existence and death of the planet Earth or our solar system... meaning zero significance, NONE.

 

Religiously, if our demise is a tragedy or not depends on the nature of God and his relationship with humanity.  Does He "so love the world" or is he a pimp for homicidal nut-jobs?

 

So, seek and find; or eat, drink and be merry… tragedy, comedy, or farce.  Someday we’ll know… or not. :)

Comments

The Burghal Hidage Added Dec 19, 2018 - 9:00pm
You know Tex one time there was a convention of a bunch of these hand-wringing types. Think it was out in California somewhere. As it was an event of some days there were some recreational diversions between their intense sessions discussing the crucial issues facing the human race. One of those was the human impact on toenail fungus in Rhesus Monkeys, or some such nonsense, but anyway.... There is a bunch of them in a tour bus and long story short the bus goes off of the road down into a deep canyon and KABOOM. Whole thing goes up in flames, not a single survivor. Horrible, horrible accident. What made it a tragedy, however, was that there was one empty seat on that bus.
Thomas Sutrina Added Dec 19, 2018 - 9:25pm
Professor Todd May is a socialist, a believer in a class society with him in the governing and wealth class.  All other classes are collective, not made up of individuals.  Prof. Todd May is telling us that it would not be tragic to kill off a lot of the collective lower classes.  We have see this many times.  Fascist socialist Hitler kill off his lower classes.  Communist socialist Stalin created a famine to kill millions of his lower class.  Communist socialist Moe killed millions of his lower class and his predecessor have no qualms in do it again, Tiananmen Square, June 1989, the 27 army division murdered 10,000 in the square and many others looking at the square and other that agreed with those in the square.  They pulverized the bodies with the tracks of their vehicles, scraped up the mush and washed the rest down the street drains.  
 
It would only be a tragedy if the upper class were murdered in mass.
Bill H. Added Dec 19, 2018 - 9:53pm
 
I may be just one of those you are referring to, TL. !
I don't in anyway look forward to the extinction of humanity, but I believe that the track we are on will set us up for extinction much quicker than originally intended.
It is the way that the machine of the Earth works, and has worked in the past. Mistakes in evolution are corrected in relatively short time. Then there are events that occur at much longer intervals that pretty much flush all life, only to start over again.
Yes there is, and always has been an asteroid out there with our name on it. The ETA will be dependent on how we treat our planet.
There are many different beliefs that cover this fact in many ways.
Call it what you want, or believe what you want, but we are on the hit list.
Mustafa Kemal Added Dec 19, 2018 - 9:54pm
TexasLynn,
Interesting post,
 
I  agree the article has plenthy of drivel in it. I found it extremely uninteresting.  
 
Regarding
" I found it raising a very profound question.
 
♦ Is this what passes for a "professor" of philosophy pondering human existence?""
 
I dont see the profoundness of that question at all. I would call it a good question.
 
As for the answer to that question though, i would have to do research into the field of  " pondering human existence"
which I find about as interesting as Day's article. So, I wont.
 
But it is this statement of yours I found interesting:
"This beautiful world and its animals would be so much better off without humanity.  Without us, they would return to a Disneyesque utopian circle of life.  <cue the music>?"

If we accept the assumption that the humans are destroying the planet ( I, like you, are not trying to support or deny that here),
then the first statement in the sentence surely would correct. If that is true, then it fails as sarcasm, which I am certain is your intent. As for the second, that is an ingenious representation, especially when you cue the music. The sarcasm, as usual with you, confuses and dilutes whatever is valid in your argument. It would surely go back to the law of the wild, certainly not Disney. I maintain even a libtard philosophy professor would know that.
 
Finally, as for
"The animals, and plants, and the earth itself will never know we're gone; will never contemplate if things are better or worse.  "
 
The first part i strongly disagree with. Every bird will know when and where the water and the air clears up.   They will not have to avoid those cities of lights that cause them blindness and death while they flly. Of course, they will not contemplate anything, but they will certainly know, IMO. 
 
They will also quickly know that my wife's bird feeders are empty.
 
At least for a short while. And then they will forget we ever were here.
 
Mustafa
 
Cullen Writes Added Dec 19, 2018 - 10:58pm
It boils down to your personal convictions. Is human life sacred? Or are people just animals who are getting out of control? 
 
It's interesting that when Leftists speak, they seem never include themselves. They want a large, all powerful government governing over the little people. But only if they are in charge of it (since they are not one of the little people).
 
They want to limit the number of human beings in the world (humanist manifesto) or simply want human beings to go extinct, but I'd have to imagine that the implication is they don't include themselves in that either. They want everyone ELSE to die off. 
 
Having said all of that, the reality is that we're beginning to see the earth's resources under strain to support all the human beings in the world. The oceans are running out of fish. We're having to set aside more and more reserves and wildland or else numerous species will go extinct around the world. That's a fact. How to deal with that is the difficult question. Kill all the human beings (or wish them all dead) doesn't seem to be a good way to deal with it. 
TexasLynn Added Dec 20, 2018 - 12:29am
TBH >> What made it a tragedy, however, was that there was one empty seat on that bus.
 
%$#@!  I should have seen that coming from the first sentence, but you caught me completely off guard.  I seem to have lost a step in my old age. :)
 
TBH >> ... a bunch of these hand-wringing types...
 
I can philosophize with the best of them... but I've never been much on hand-wringing.  I think that's biblical; works and all that.
 
You need a decision made, I'm your guy.  You need the right decision made... well... :)
TexasLynn Added Dec 20, 2018 - 12:29am
Thomas S >> Professor Todd May is a socialist, a believer in a class society with him in the governing and wealth class.
 
Do you know this as a fact, or is this educated conjecture?  Not saying that you're wrong.
 
Thomas S >> Prof. Todd May is telling us that it would not be tragic to kill off a lot of the collective lower classes.
 
In his defense, he never really says that point blank.  If pressed I think May would acknowledge that it is the "deplorable" class that is making such drastic measures necessary.  At least he advocates for all of humanity deserving to pay the price... for now.
TexasLynn Added Dec 20, 2018 - 12:30am
Bill H >> I may be just one of those you are referring to, TL. !
 
I don't know Bill.  It's not for me to say.
 
Bill H >> I don't in anyway look forward to the extinction of humanity...
 
Not looking forward to it is not within the scope of the post, nor the NYT editorial it addresses.  The better questions would be:
 
1) Do we deserve extinction for our "sins"?
 
2) Would the planet and animals be better off without us?
 
3) And mainly… Would our extinction be a tragedy?
 
Bill H >> ... but I believe that the track we are on will set us up for extinction much quicker than originally intended.
 
Interesting.  And this is a sincere question.   Who or what set us on the original, slower, and intended track to extinction?
 
Bill H >> It is the way that the machine of the Earth works, and has worked in the past. Mistakes in evolution are corrected in relatively short time. Then there are events that occur at much longer intervals that pretty much flush all life, only to start over again.
 
Well, I find this interesting as well.  I was under the impression that evolution always worked very slowly... that was kinda the whole point of the theory.  But, maybe you're more versed in it than I am.
 
Can you give me an example of such a "flush [of] all life" caused by evolution?  Maybe that would help.
 
Bill H >> Yes there is, and always has been an asteroid out there with our name on it. The ETA will be dependent on how we treat our planet.
 
Huh?  There are sentient asteroids keeping tabs on how we treat our planet? 
 
Bill H >> There are many different beliefs that cover this fact in many ways. Call it what you want, or believe what you want, but we are on the hit list.
 
Karma, perhaps.  But never let me say, you are not a man of intense faith.
TexasLynn Added Dec 20, 2018 - 12:30am
Mustafa K >> I  agree the article has plenthy of drivel in it. I found it extremely uninteresting.
 
Well, despite all my sarcasm, I do have the legitimate question of how does one live a lifetime, acquire all the knowledge that comes with it and reach a point to believe as the good professor does?  That really does confound me.
 
The above may be a better wording of my profound question than "Is this what passes for a "professor" of philosophy pondering human existence?".
 
Mustafa K >> If we accept the assumption that the humans are destroying the planet, then the first statement in the sentence surely would correct.
 
I see your point... and I admit I use the tools I'm best at; sarcasm being one of my best hammers.
 
But don't forget that I'm not trying to refute the actions of the protagonist in the play (climate change, overpopulation, or factory farming) ... but neither am I trying to refute if the animals and planet would be better off.  Would all pray be better off without predictors.  Maybe not, with overpopulation, overgrazing, starvation, disease... Nature is not kind or squeamish as we both seen to know.
 
So, with the sentence in question, I simply want to help each of us visualize what I think Professor May's closing scene would look like in his mind's eye.  The tale is told, the protagonist (humanity) is dead and without question everything else is better off.  The curtain closes.  Now... I want to address the answer to the direct question in the title.  Would it be a tragedy?
 
Mustafa K >> I maintain even a libtard philosophy professor would know that.
 
I maintain it is very possible that such a professor would not know that.  I try to never underestimate a man’s capacity for ignorance.  It's like a lot of "environmentalists" out there.  Few have ever taken a %$#@ in the woods and most, if they had to, would end up with %$#@ all over them.  Yet, they presume to understand nature and environment.
 
Mustafa K >> The first part i strongly disagree with. Every bird will know when and where the water and the air clears up.   They will not have to avoid those cities of lights that cause them blindness and death while they flly. Of course, they will not contemplate anything, but they will certainly know, IMO.
 
I agree with every statement in the paragraph above; but it does not disprove anything I wrote.  Every bird will know that water and air is better... does this equate to them knowing men are gone?  The city lights dim... same question... do they also know it's because men are gone?  No.  IMHO...
 
Which again brings me to the main gist.  Are animals then capable of determining the answer of "Was Human Extinction a Tragedy?"
 
No... so for the tragedy to exist.  Someone else must be around... Karma?  Aliens?  A sentient asteroid?  Something...
 
Thanks for the analytical comment.
TexasLynn Added Dec 20, 2018 - 12:30am
Cullen K >> It boils down to your personal convictions. Is human life sacred? Or are people just animals who are getting out of control?
 
That is indeed a large part of the equation as is one's outlook on collectivism vs individualism.
 
I've always thought that the collectivists always see themselves as the leaders and not the workers.  The guys whose job it is to direct and come up with the great ideas everybody else will implement (for the good of the collective).  I heard a story of Bernie Sanders being thrown out of a commune during his younger days.  Someone there said, he was thrown out for not doing his share of the work.
 
Socialism in Cuba and Venezuela was a great idea, the only problem was that the right people weren't the ones implementing it.  Had it been them, things would have worked out so much better.
 
Cullen K >> Having said all of that, the reality is that we're beginning to see the earth's resources under strain
 
I never have said humanity is blameless in some of the world’s problems.  I do say this though; collectivism and globalism will never be the solution.
Lindsay Wheeler Added Dec 20, 2018 - 2:33am
Thomas Sutrina writes: "It would only be a tragedy if the upper class were murdered in mass".
 
They were in the French and Russian Revolutions! All politics today are a continuation of the American and French Revolutions. 
 
But back to the topic at hand, what passes for "philosophy" today is nothing more than Marxism. 
Thomas Sutrina Added Dec 20, 2018 - 8:41am
Lindsay Wheeler, revolutions do that.  Now isn't the point of a revolution to replace the governing class.  And if they do not escape then death is the usual end results.   Revolutions have a lot of blood on both sides and the lower classes number wise I bet usually have a higher death total.    Also many revolutions fail.  
Dino Manalis Added Dec 20, 2018 - 8:53am
 Stop the hatred and preserve humanity!
TexasLynn Added Dec 20, 2018 - 10:20am
Dino >> Stop the hatred and preserve humanity!
 
"Be excellent to each other."
TexasLynn Added Dec 20, 2018 - 10:26am
Lindsay W >> They (the upper class) were (murdered in mass) in the French and Russian Revolutions!
 
Interesting observation.  Those Revolutions were unique in their time; before that you had rulers fighting rulers and using the lower class as pawns.
 
The American Revolution I say was even more unique in that it was the ruling class (in the colonies) throwing off the higher ruling class (in England) and rewarding the lower class for their assistance.
 
Thomas S >> Revolutions have a lot of blood on both sides and the lower classes number wise I bet usually have a higher death total.
 
Total?  Yes.  Percentage?  No
 
Lindsay W >> All politics today are a continuation of the American and French Revolutions.
 
I can see that argument.
 
Lindsay W >> But back to the topic at hand, what passes for "philosophy" today is nothing more than Marxism.
 
At least in some circles.  It seems that professors in general lean left and I would suspect "philosophy" professors, in particular, even more so.
 
In deplorable circles they are considered "educated idiots"; lots of book smarts, with no common sense or application.
TexasLynn Added Dec 20, 2018 - 10:27am
Mogg Tsur >> Texas Lynn, doesn't the answer depend on who is asking?
 
Yes... because their world view would influence the answer.  BUT... before that you have to get past the question of, “Is anybody asking at all”?  If what's left doesn't have the capacity to understand "tragedy", how can there be a tragedy?
 
From a secular point of view, there must be something beyond humanity that can make the call.  I assert animals and the planet are not that something.  A very few animals (percentage wise) may miss us; but it will be in relation to themselves, not the philosophical question of "tragedy".
 
So, I move on and further assert that aliens, artificial intelligence, and/or God might fit that bill.  Maybe there are a few possibilities I've missed.
 
Once we're past that then it does depend on who is asking and how they ask it (sentimental or logical).
 
Mogg Tsur >> Still, we find great comfort in knowing that everything is planned out for us... as we are convinced that this has been provided to us.
 
Some of us indeed find that comfort; some not.  This particular scenario simply concludes the question will be answered by one of the entities who could.  God.
 
We (you and I) subscribe to the idea that mankind will go extinct (though we cheat a bit) no matter if the secularist are right, or the religious are right.
 
From a secular perspective, it's a no brainer.  Given infinity, it will eventually happen.
 
From a religious perspective, God has ordained an end of this world.  Our physical extinction is a final step towards His final plan for us. 
 
Mogg Tsur >> This allows us to live our lives and reap the profit of living responsibly in temporal and spiritual endeavors...
 
Yes... and be resolved that we are but pilgrims passing through this world to the next... to our real home.
 
Mogg Tsur >> ... to earn our rewards on layaway.
 
Forgive the nitpicking... I would rephrase that as "to receive our rewards on layaway."  A key tenet of Christ is that He earned the reward and gives it to us as a gift.  Our part in that equation is to accept it from Him.
 
Now... how that works in other religions, I will leave to others.
 
Side Note: A cartoonist I follow once depicted Good and Evil as corporations and came up with slogans for each.
"Evil: It's a Growth Industry"
"Good: Compensation Mostly Deferred"
 
Mogg Tsur >> That being the case any answer is reduced to a matter of Faith.
 
If the answer is "Yes, somebody will make the call", then yes... faith in that somebody existing is essential.  You and I simply touched on one of those possibilities. 
 
Did Bill H touch on another, or just an offshoot of the same one (a different god)?  Some even see the Earth itself as sentient enough to make the call... but again there we find faith; unless the Earth is literally talking to them.
 
Mogg Tsur >> And the Logical have Faith.
 
I don't know.  Some of the most faith filled people I know have been ... women.  :) 
 
Just kidding ladies.  It was a joke!  A JOKE! :)
Steel Breeze Added Dec 20, 2018 - 10:38am
i dont know bout all the rest,but, the dogs will know we are gone....they'll haveta find some others to watch over...
Bill H. Added Dec 20, 2018 - 11:24am
 
I have always believed we are part of a large experiment by superior beings, or as I put it, some alien kid's science fair project.
This may be what somebody way back when tried to interpret in the Bible. Maybe some of what is written is an early interpretation of this.
As an example, we know how early man described phenomena such as thunder, lightning, and volcanic eruptions.
TexasLynn Added Dec 20, 2018 - 11:26am
Steel B,
Yes, dogs will know; and if there is any animal on the planet who could rise to the occasion and see our demise as a tragedy, they are it.
 
Dogs are one of the greatest earthly blessings from God. He gave us dogs to show us a glimpse of the unconditional love He has for us.
Dave Volek Added Dec 20, 2018 - 11:29am
Lynn
 
Your article must be good philosophy. It took me three reads to make sense of it.
 
This is sort of like if tree falls over in the woods and there is no one to hear it, is there really a sound?
 
I'm just going to ramble a bit here, not too sure where this is going to go.
 
But I am recalling a Dr. Seuss book called "Horton hears a Who?", where an elephant is protecting a speck of dust that happens to have a whole vibrant civilization of "whos" living on it. It may very well be that we earthlings are just a speck of dust on some other entity's much bigger world. Maybe we are just lab rats learning how to master someone else's maze. Maybe Earth is just an electron in another atom, with the Sun as the nucleus.
 
As a science teacher, I am often amazed at how the various complicated compounds in the human body (and animals and plants) work together to create an organism that is capable of reproducing itself. Then we add in how you and I use our neurons to create electrical signals such that things like this are discussed. This just does not happen "spontaneously" in the physical world, and hence, there must be a Master Engineer out there that had, at least in the past, created these compounds to do all these high level functions.  
 
I don't think we'll ever figure this out--at least in this world. If the underlying message from all religions seems to "be good to other people", then maybe that is the direction we should take from our Master Engineer. 
 
 
 
 
FacePalm Added Dec 20, 2018 - 11:34am
Tex-
First, the pedantic spelling/punctuation police mode(or editor, take your pick):
It's "piqued" your curiosity.
"Humanity deserve(s)"(should be plural)
It's "Factor(y)" farming(i pondered on what in the world "factor" farming could be until the possibility of a typo occurred to me).
There should be a question mark at the end of "would it be a tragedy if we (humanity) simply ceased to exist."
"there-of": thereof is a word, no hyphen needed.
"humanities" should be "humanity's."
"or is he a pimp for homicidal nut-jobs." add question mark.
(hopefully, you'll take the foregoing as constructive criticism rather than pretentious snark.)
 
Now, my conspiracy theory concerning the reason for Todd May's opinion piece.
i would presume that he's being paid to write the article, probably via some foundation owned by globalists.  The intent of this downer article may well be to induce suicides or the guilt/depression/hopelessness that leads there.
 
If one is familiar with the Georgia Guidestones, the first paragraph on the first one concerns "maintaining the earth's population at no more than 500 million."  Consider the implication in re: the OTHER 7 billion on this planet.
 
Reflect on the idea that the VERY wealthy PtB have decided to create an Artificial Intelligence computer into which their memories - even all they have experienced - might be uploaded, so that a simulacrum of themselves could be maintained, an "interactive hologram" with whom their friends and relatives can literally converse post-mortem.  They intend to worship this device as god, and to merge with it, pretending to themselves that by uploading themselves to this, they will have eternal life without facing the consequences of their words and deeds.
 
Now, the hard part.
 
It has recently been revealed that there is a plan - called the SAI, or Stratospheric Aerosol Injection plan - to have 100 planes make 4 thousand flights/yr., spraying sulfur dioxide into the upper atmosphere every year for the next ten years, ostensibly to "dim the sun" to save us from "global warming."
 
Sulfur dioxide is the main ingredient in smog.  Covering the earth with it will indeed dim the sun - and simultaneously cause acid rain.  Plants will either have their ability to photosynthesize CO2 into O2 diminished, at best - or they will die.  Reducing the O2 levels - which is a side-effect of sulfur dioxide mixing with water vapor - on earth will kill all mammalian life, eventually, by asphyxiation.  Acid level rise in the oceans, lakes, etc., will kill most aquatic life.
 
In the meantime, glyphosate - a known carcinogen - is being sprayed on the vast majority of the food supply, most of which is also being replaced by frankenfoods, aka "genetically modified." In addition to this, consider the rapid expansion of 5G cell towers - which also have been tied to increases in cancer - and suspicions should be raised to shrill alarm-bell levels.
 
Add all the foregoing together, and it becomes somewhat clear that the extinction of the human race has been planned and it's implementation has begun.
 
Now, some links:
Georgia Guidestones
AI god
SAI
Effects of sulfur dioxide
Glyphosate cancers
5G cell cancer
 
i know that minds will recoil, and many will be inclined to laugh and point, and complain of tin-foil hats and conspiracy theories.  The Truth is more important than being held up to ridicule, imo, so chortle to your hearts delight - for now...while you can still breathe...
 
"There is no safety for honest men," said Edmund Burke, "but by believing all possible evil of evil men."
 
Women, too.
TexasLynn Added Dec 20, 2018 - 11:37am
Bill H >> I have always believed we are part of a large experiment by superior beings...
 
Fair enough, Bill.  I appreciate the clarification.  So, (and I mean this) you really are a man of faith and believe in a higher power.  And you obviously believe that higher power watches and judges and acts.
 
So, here we are... a modicum of agreement; before diverging on the nature of this agreed upon god.
 
May, I assume then that we agree that a god (or several) will indeed answer the tragedy question when all is said and done?  Be that God (Christian/Jewish), Allah, Vishnu, or AKSFP (Alien Kid with Science Fair Project)?
TexasLynn Added Dec 20, 2018 - 12:09pm
Dave >> Your article must be good philosophy. It took me three reads to make sense of it.
 
LMAO... :)... is that the test for "good philosophy"?
 
Dave >> This is sort of like if tree falls over in the woods and there is no one to hear it, is there really a sound?
 
At risk of exposing myself to TBH... this is a "belly button" contemplation kind of post. :)
 
Dave >> I'm just going to ramble a bit here...
 
I liked the direction.
 
Contemplating the why's and how's that we can't prove or disprove seems to be in our nature.  Some of us say it was put there for a reason... so that we would seek and maybe find.
 
You've hit upon a couple of things I thought about in my logical path to faith in Christ.  First, looking at the wonders you describe in this creation; like the human body, physics, math, beauty, art... I came to the conclusion that "this just does not happen ‘spontaneously’ in the physical world, and hence, there must be a Master Engineer"
 
Step Two... if such an Engineer exists I asked, would He just create and then just let 'er rip (deism) OR would he actually tell his creation about who He is and what we are to Him.  Personally, I concluded the latter to be infinitely more likely.
 
Step Three... so if that is the case then He has probably already done that.  So, one would then look about in search for the most perfect and logical revelation from God... and... I arrived at Jesus Christ. :)
 
Dave >> I don't think we'll ever figure this out--at least in this world.
 
We won't.  God values faith.  We're not going to receive a literal burning bush moment in this life.
 
Dave >> If the underlying message from all religions seems to "be good to other people",
 
It's not.  At least not for ALL religions.
 
Even for Christianity, in which it is a main component, it is not THE underlying message.
 
Dave >> then maybe that is the direction we should take from our Master Engineer.
 
My Master Engineer does say I can't understand who HE is without knowing and acting upon this basic truth (Love and treat others as you do yourself).  So, I’ll try to do that…
 
Good comments... thanks.
opher goodwin Added Dec 20, 2018 - 12:27pm
Hi Tex - well I certainly agree with Todd May on the terrible damage we are presently doing to the planet. I'd put the list like this:
Overpopulation
Global Warming
Species extinctions
Extreme pollution
 
We are in grave danger of totally upsetting the ecological balance of the planet and doing permanent damage.
 
Would the planet be better off without us? That is debateable and I take your point on sentience.
Well certainly the richness of life and abundance would be better without us. And certainly there are a number of other creatures who are sentient (and intelligent) who might well prosper without us (gorillas, chimps, elephants, whales to name four).
I certainly appreciate nature and have a great love for animals and plants. I would like to see them flourish and it distresses me to see them treated so badly and suffering so much.
Then, of course, evolution would work to fill in the gaps. There could well be a new highly intelligent species that would eventually replace us and prove to be more compassionate and a better manager of the planet. So that could be good.
But I have a fondness for humanity. I think we are a bit Jekyll and Hyde. Perhaps there is hope for us? Perhaps we can learn to care for the other life we share the planet with? Perhaps we will learn to be less cruel? Perhaps we will learn to manage the natural world a lot better and learn from our mistakes?
I'd like to think so.
You don't value what you've got until its gone, do you?
And the cruel, vicious side of our nature is really our worst side!
But there are many people who do care for nature. That gives me hope!
George N Romey Added Dec 20, 2018 - 12:39pm
I believe ultimately Mother Nature will take over if we continue to massively populate the Earth.  Those that will go will be the poor lacking modern sanitation and medicine.  We forget how frequently period died pre 1900 when there was no modern plumbing and sanitation nor the medicine to cure the diseases and viruses that resulted. 
 
Something like over 50% of Indians do not own a modern toilet and use local waterways for "waste disposal."  As these areas continue to grow in population eventually they will start to die off quickly.
TexasLynn Added Dec 20, 2018 - 3:07pm
FP >> First, the pedantic spelling/punctuation police mode
 
Uggg... Not again.  You grammar/spelling Nazi's are killin' me.
 
Plus... upon review... I fail to find a single occurrence of any of your documented mistakes.
 
How I took it, I leave you to decide.
 
FP >> Now, my conspiracy theory ...
 
I don't know why we would assume Professor May is being paid.  I would think the honor alone (Published in the NYT) would be reason enough to write.
 
As for the purpose of the editorial being to induce suicide, his logic would be flawed.  Those most likely to take such action would be those who most agree with his premise (snowflakes) and thus after the act be a detriment to his cause.
 
I'm not familiar "Georgia Guidestones" but the mantra of overpopulation has been around for a while, as has that of Climate Change and Factory Farming.  These, IMO are just the latest flavor of doomsday scenarios to try and push humanity towards collectivism and globalism.  May never mentions a specific number he would like to see the population at.  Few who hold these ideas ever do; not how they envision us getting there.
 
You're losing me when it comes to taking seriously a computer into which one can transfer memories or consciousness.  We've progressed quite a bit, but I doubt we are anywhere near that.  It sounds a lot like the search for eternal life the rich have pursued for ages.  If this quest is real, it will end the same.
 
Side Note: This does remind me of an old manga (comic book) series titled "Galaxy Express 999" by Leiji Matsumoto.  The plot centered around the rich transferring the consciousness into immortal androids.  The problem was, their souls were lost in the process.  What remained hunted the less fortunate of humanity for sport.
 
I find the SAI theory more plausible than the memory transfer one.  At least this is technologically possible.  And it would not surprise me that there are men that stupid.  But surely their intent would simply be to reverse what they see as climate change... and not to destroy humanity, much less an even greater level of life on earth.
 
Finally, I would have to chalk up the carcinogens and 5G signals to greed, not organized annihilation.
 
So, call be extremely skeptical at best.  (Just calling them like I see ‘em) But if what you say is true... if we have reached that level of hubris and stupidity, then we never had a chance.
 
Edmund Burke got it right, but he needed to add stupidity to the mix.  (Not a reference to you, but to men who would be evil (and dumb) enough to try what you describe).
TexasLynn Added Dec 20, 2018 - 3:10pm
Opher G >> Well I certainly agree with Todd May on the terrible damage...
 
Really?  :)  Don't call me surprised.
 
I didn't really address the validity of any of his/your contentions.  Suffice it to say we do disagree as to the delicate nature of the planet, the level of danger we face, and the best solutions to said danger.
 
All that said... do we as things stand now and assuming we do not turn things around deserve extinction?  Would an alien (since you don't believe in a higher power) look at that say... "what a tragedy" or "good riddance"?
 
Sorry, but the gorillas and chimps, and elephants, and whales... are not going to ever contemplate that question.  It is beyond them.
 
Stepping into secular shoes and assuming humanity took a dirt nap... I could see "evolution" coming up with something new.  But I fail to see any logic or evidence to suggest that something new would do any better or worse that we have.
TexasLynn Added Dec 20, 2018 - 3:10pm
George N R >> I believe ultimately Mother Nature will take over if we continue to massively populate the Earth.
 
Nature has a habit of doing that.  So, do you see "mother nature" as a sentient force... or just a set of laws, like physics?
 
George N R >> Something like over 50% of Indians do not own a modern toilet...
 
I envision more an "Idiocracy" scenario... :)
FacePalm Added Dec 20, 2018 - 3:57pm
Tex-
Plus... upon review... I fail to find a single occurrence of any of your documented mistakes...
...he said, tongue firmly planted in cheek...
(thanks for taking it well.)
 
I'm not familiar "Georgia Guidestones"
Which is why i put links in the post, to - if not prove up the allegations - at least provide a starting point to show that i'm not in the "MSU" camp (the clean version would be "Make Stuff Up" form of argumentation/debate/evidence).
 
But thanks for not laughing, even if you don't (yet) believe.  i'd suggest taking rain samples and testing the Ph now - then compare the results at least once a year subsequent to now.
TexasLynn Added Dec 20, 2018 - 4:48pm
FP >> Which is why i put links in the post...
 
And I did follow your links and scan through the material.  Now I'm more aware and watchful... but yes, skeptical too.
 
Your "AI god" link is broken by the way... but that's one I read somewhere before.  And like I said, there are quite a few of these projects the super-rich are throwing their money at.  It's a hubris thing, a fountain of youth thing ... and the results will be the same, IMO.
 
I remember years ago a man on the street interview in which they were asking “How much would you pay for immortality?”  I remember one guy answering with the question “Why would I pay good money for something I already have?”
 
FP >> i'd suggest taking rain samples and testing the Ph now
 
Well, I already do that with my lake; but way too many factors upstream could affect that.
 
I've been wanting to invest in one of those little weather stations.  This could be an add on project.
TexasLynn Added Dec 20, 2018 - 4:48pm
Mogg T >> Thanks for the reply and we seem to be on the same journey if not on slightly different paths.
 
Sure... I recognize that.
 
Mogg T >> On the matter of Bill H., IMO he sees a smaller portion of the picture.
 
Yep... so there is some common ground we can explore.
 
One thing I note is the number of people who envision the Earth as some delicate, fragile, flower-like thing that can so easily be thrown out of balance or knocked to it's knees.  Nothing in nature is like that; so why would I assume the Earth is?
 
Logic, tells me the Earth is likely very robust, and corrective.  I see a lot of this hand-wringing as hubris to think we're that big an influence or threat.
 
Mogg T >> Is anybody asking at all? Oh well, I have to say, Yes!
 
My point, is that there has to be someone around to ask after the fact, after the extinction... which precludes us (since we be dead). :)
 
Mogg T >> You say receive, I say, earn...
 
Yes... I did say I was nitpicking and I was.
 
Mogg T >> Thanks, Texas Lynn for taking the time and Merry Christmas to you and yours!
 
My pleasure, same to you and yours.
FacePalm Added Dec 20, 2018 - 5:09pm
My grandfather took twice-daily precipitation and temperature samples for 50 years or more, carefully logging them in his book, later to be turned over to State weather officials.
 
This may have fixed the AI god link.  Thanks for at least taking a look.
 
Like a T-shirt a guy was wearing at a Moose lodge picnic: "I'm not a gynecologist, but i'm willin' to take a look..."
John Minehan Added Dec 20, 2018 - 5:16pm
Was the extinction of the Non-Avian Dinosaurs a "tragedy?"
 
How about the Eocene and Miocene mega-fauna?
 
How about Permian Synapsids  (what used to be called "Mammal Like Reptiles")?
 
We are the arbiter of that question and we have no skin in the game.  There is no real memory of these creatures (although we did co-exist with some of the Miocene mega-fauna and may have helped drive them to extinction, at least in some places).
 
It will be the same for us,when our time comes. 
Neil Lock Added Dec 20, 2018 - 5:54pm
Lynn: Your take is a lot saner than the professor’s, I’m pleased to say. But I apologize in advance for my reply being a bit of a diatribe. And somewhat flowery towards the end :-)
 
I agree with your suggestion that Todd May (not to mention Theresa May!) is, at best, a very poor example of a human being. As you rightly point out, these Mays and their kind hate and castigate human beings, yet consider themselves above reproach. Which raises the question, are they human, or not? You yourself, indeed, say: it is embarrassing to them to even be of the same species. If they are human, then they are fouling our nest (that is, the human nest – our physical and mental atmosphere) with the emissions from their pens and mouths. So, are they not renegade members of humanity – a.k.a. criminals? Alternatively, if they are not human… let that idea sink in.
 
The idea of a coming species split, like Neanderthals versus Cro-Magnons, is one I’ve been hearing more and more of lately. (I first heard of it from a renegade “philosopher” friend, almost 30 years ago now). Which side is which, of course, is currently a matter of opinion. I plan to say more about that issue; but not this year.
 
But I don’t think “would human extinction be a tragedy?” is the right question. The question I would ask is: If human extinction were to happen in the fairly near future, would it be an injustice or not? Injustice is always tragedy, most of all for those who suffer it. But tragedy is not always injustice. Indeed, if thoroughly deserved by the sufferers, tragedy becomes comedy.
 
There are a number of characteristics, which the professor and his kindred (including Theresa of that ilk) share. Failing to recognize that everyone is different. Putting the collective above the individual; using “we” rather than “I.” Lack of a sense of objective right and wrong. Setting themselves up on a moral pedestal above others. Failing to accept personal responsibility for what they do to others. Lack of empathy for human beings. Refusing to make sacrifices that they demand of others. Putting their agendas above the rights and freedoms of human beings. Willingness to embark on policies and projects that may, or even probably will, cause great harm to innocent people. Willingness to lie, obfuscate and mislead in support of those agendas. Unwillingness to accept facts, or even that there is such a thing as truth. Castigating and insulting those who deny their narratives. Many of them also radiate pessimism, scarifying and hype.
 
These are not necessarily hallmarks of those with “left-wing” views. Indeed, they are shared by many commonly judged as being on the “right,” like white supremacists and theocrats (including Islamists). Understand that, and you won’t worry again about minutiae like whether fascism is “right” or “left.” For me, those that behave in these ways are psychopaths. Or, maybe, sociopaths – that is, psychopaths that can disguise themselves sufficiently well to be respected and even liked, for a time.
 
There are a few on both sides on this site, aren’t there?
 
But for me, the only way forward is to live your life. Be human; be yourself. Trade with others as they trade with you. Always be yourself; cut out your own path in life. Do what you can, and don’t worry about what you can’t. Accept responsibility for what you as an individual do (unless coerced), but never accept any of the collective responsibility crap like “we’re destroying the planet.”
 
Homily over. Now, after these messages from your local stations, I’ll return you to your scheduled programming on WBTV.
The Owl Added Dec 20, 2018 - 7:03pm
George, reasonably, brought "nature" into the discussion.  It remains a force far greater than humans and far more complex than humans will ever likely understand.  Nature is one of those "god" formulations that we inevitably assume to answer the questions that are beyond our abilities to parse.
 
I often find myself wherein does it say that "humans" are exempt or capable of exempting themselves from nature or evolution?
 
I'll accept the answer that faith has put that idea in our minds...
 
But that gets us back to the whole discussion about having to assume an "engineer capable of construction of the world as it is to explain where we are, where we came from, and where we are going. The operative term to describe this is having "faith" as a means of explaining that which we do not know.
 
Is having faith so wrong?
 
 
p.s. For the pedantic spelling/punctuation policeman.
 
As I recall from the readings of my style manual, the letter i when used in reference to oneself is to be capitalized.
 
 
 
 
 
 
FacePalm Added Dec 20, 2018 - 7:24pm
The Owl-
As I recall from the readings of my style manual, the letter i when used in reference to oneself is to be capitalized.
 
This is an exercise in self-discipline, Owl.  The lack of capitalization is quite intentional, and is intended to remind me to practice humility.  Not always successfully.
Bill H. Added Dec 20, 2018 - 7:38pm
Whatever (who, it, entity, force, mechanism??) will make sure the Earth goes on. It has in the past, and will continue to "fine tune" the machine. Mistakes in evolution, or species that over-evolve and create negative effects will be eliminated. That includes humans.
The Owl Added Dec 20, 2018 - 8:22pm
Silly me.  And, here I thought you were posting from your iPhone...
 
But that would take us off in a totally different direction...
Doug Plumb Added Dec 20, 2018 - 8:34pm
I dont see any evidence of an overpopulated planet at any time in the near futire. Its just something that gets repeated. If you take a flight over North America, even over the heaviest populated ares, its plain to see that there is lots of room for lots more people. A lot of land isn't habitable in the States, not even cute butterflies can live there, but humans can live anywhere.
TexasLynn Added Dec 20, 2018 - 11:32pm
John M >> It will be the same for us,when our time comes.
 
A totally valid conclusion from the secular point of view.  I think the post implies that.
TexasLynn Added Dec 20, 2018 - 11:33pm
Neil,
Welcome to the discussion however late.
 
I think there is an arrogance apparent in the original editorial.  It's almost as if a nanny (or profession) tsk, tsk, tksing the students or children.  The very argument that "you are so loathsome it would be better if you had never been born or would just die" really says something about the person who comes to that conclusion (or agrees with it).
 
I think you and I see very eye to eye on this.  I agree so much with (and appreciate) your comments... especially "There are a few on both sides on this site, aren’t there?"
 
This evil, (some call it fascism) isn't a left or right thing.  It's a collective thing.  An enveloping and assimilating thing; built always on a malevolent hatred.  It is a simply a chosen vehicle.
 
"never accept any of the collective responsibility crap like 'we’re destroying the planet.'"
 
Amen...  Thanks for the comment.  Stay strong and defiant.
TexasLynn Added Dec 20, 2018 - 11:34pm
Owl >> George, reasonably, brought "nature" into the discussion.
 
Yes, he did in the context of nature being deity.  If nature is conscious of itself and us, that deity could make a judgment after our demise.  Tragedy, or farce.
 
But... if nature is simply law (like physics); then no.
 
Owl >> Nature is one of those "god" formulations that we inevitably assume to answer the questions that are beyond our abilities to parse.
 
Men have worshiped nature and the Earth as a god for thousands of years.  Many still do today, but deny it.  I'm not one of them... but it's a fact.
 
For me, nature is creation, not creator... not sentient. 
 
Owl >> I often find myself wherein does it say that "humans" are exempt or capable of exempting themselves from nature or evolution?
 
I understand.  It is a very common question and conclusion.
 
Ow; >> I'll accept the answer that faith has put that idea in our minds...
 
I'm sorry, I'm not following... "faith" is now the entity directing and/or teaching us?  I've always seen faith as the thing to be taught?
 
Own >> Is having faith so wrong?
 
Not from my perspective; but the atheists here on WB would probably disagree.
 
Faith, IMO, is as good or bad as the thing you apply it to.
 
Thanks for the comment.
 
Bill H >> Whatever (who, it, entity, force, mechanism??) will make sure the Earth goes on.
 
If (who, it, entity, force, mechanism??) values the Earth over all else, including man.
 
Bill H >> It has in the past, and will continue to "fine tune" the machine. Mistakes in evolution, or species that over-evolve and create negative effects will be eliminated. That includes humans.
 
Bill, an example of this a past occurrence would be helpful.  I just don't see a random rock hitting the planet as proof of that.
Neil Lock Added Dec 21, 2018 - 4:43am
Lynn: Thank you for your kind words. It's clear that you understand what I'm trying to get at. But I worry that (however well expressed, and I'm trying hard) it zings past many here.
 
For me, the great divide is - as I said in one of my articles here - Uppers versus Downers. Uppers think bottom up: from facts to understandings, from simple ideas of justice to ethics, from the individual to the society. Downers go the other way: from agendas to politics, from politics to bad laws, from narratives and hype to passive, blind "faith" and the use of force to control others. And you're right that malevolent hatred is a major component of the Downer world view. Though you shouldn't neglect the other side of that coin: greed!
 
I suspect that Professor May is going to get quite a bit of blowback from his article, once it has sunk in what he's saying. Hopefully, that will end up being a very good thing.
Leroy Added Dec 21, 2018 - 7:25am
Lynn, I'm late to the party.  It's another fine article. 
 
What is it about you that attracts the grammar queens?  LOL. I bet they would not appreciate it if you started throwing stones back. 
 
The professor is a disgrace to a fine Southern university.  I hide my head in shame.  As long as they play good football, I suppose the good citizens will put up with his likes.  Sad.
 
"Huh?  There are sentient asteroids keeping tabs on how we treat our planet?"
 
The Russians control the asteroids.  They are responsible for everything bad (anti-progressivism) that happens.
 
My thoughts are that if we screw the planet up too much, it will take care of itself.  I don't think we are.  I would bet my life and the entire planet on Climate Change being a hoax.  Ultimately, we are the last great hope for escaping this dustball along with other life forms before the flame burns out or the earth meets a high kinetic impact.
opher goodwin Added Dec 21, 2018 - 7:52am
Tex - what on earth makes you think that chimps, gorillas and whales aren't capable of appreciating the wonders of the planet and universe?
You are probably right though - evolution is blind - it won't necessarily throw up anything better.
Stephen Hunter Added Dec 21, 2018 - 8:14am
Texas, I do agree. If there are no human observers, as would be the case when/if extinction happens, then the event did NOT happen. (from a human perspective) 
The Owl Added Dec 21, 2018 - 10:09am
Mogg, you are correct.  It's all in the mind of the humans.
 
But the larger answer is that, like a sailing vessel on a lee shore in a hurricane, the prospects of eventual survival are somewhat reduced no matter what is done.
The Owl Added Dec 21, 2018 - 10:22am
Leroy...I have no doubt that our climate is changing...just as it has over the billions of years of the earth's existence and just as it will over the billions of years of earth's future.
 
Does man have a hand in what is going on?  Of course, he is.  But he is just one of the thousands, if not billions, of factors that go to influence how our planet's weather changes day-to-day, year-to-year, millennium-to-millennium.
 
It's absolute arrogance that man thinks he can do anything but nibble around the edges to correct the problem even though there are truly catastrophic things...like nuclear war...that man can do to make things much, much worse.
 
The chances that "government" can be the catalyst for an extinction event are just far too great to give them that sort of power.
 
Leroy Added Dec 21, 2018 - 10:37am
Owl, I capitalized Climate Change.  I was referring to the political movement known as Climate Change, not actually climate change.
 
I agree with what you said.  To add to it, we certainly aren't going to fix a nonexistent problem by redistributing wealth.
TexasLynn Added Dec 21, 2018 - 12:26pm
Mogg T >> Short answer is in our minds...
 
Yes... as in our minds and what they are capable of is far different from that of animals.  Some say this is by design, other chance/evolution.  Either way, it's there.
 
I think that's what you meant... correct me if I'm wrong.
 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 
Owl >> Mogg, you are correct.  It's all in the mind of the humans.
 
You're writing style eludes me a bit (that's on me, not you).  I inferred that MT meant our brains worked different.  Did you get the same or are you thinking... "it's imagined"?
 
Owl >> But he is just one of the thousands, if not billions of factors... It's absolute arrogance that man thinks he can do anything but nibble around the edges to correct the problem.
 
I agree, but would it also not be logical then to conclude that man is arrogant in thinking he can do anything but nibble around the edges in causing the problem?
 
Leroy >> we certainly aren't going to fix a nonexistent problem by redistributing wealth.
 
Which always coincidentally seems to be the solution to whatever is plaguing mankind (including overpopulation).  One would almost think THAT is always the end sought that justifies the given (false) reason.
 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 
OG >> Tex - what on earth makes you think that chimps, gorillas and whales aren't capable of appreciating the wonders of the planet and universe?
 
Because the last time I asked one about what they thought about anything... they just played with a pile of %$#@.
 
Opher - what on earth makes you think that chimps, gorillas, and whales even know that they live on a "planet" or exist in a "universe"?  They may all be wonderful, intelligent (by animal standards), creatures.  To pretend they have evolved to the level of understanding you propose is just naive at best.
 
I don't mean that as a slight, just a self-evident issue of fact.
 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 
Stephen H >> Texas, I do agree. If there are no human observers, as would be the case when/if extinction happens, then the event did NOT happen. (from a human perspective)
 
Wow... some agreement!  Thanks for reading my naval gazing and contemplating post.
 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 
Neil >> But I worry that (however well expressed, and I'm trying hard) it zings past many here.
 
You can't worry about such a thing that you cannot control.  Holy ground, a burning bush, and a sea split in half wouldn't register with many here.
 
Neil >> I suspect that Professor May is going to get quite a bit of blowback...
 
We'll see.  A lot of these guys exists in bubbles.  He's more likely to just be more fawned over at cocktail parties.
opher goodwin Added Dec 21, 2018 - 12:40pm
Tex - LOL - how do you know they aren't saying the same things about you. BTW - they really don't spend their time playing with poop. They have language and a complex social interaction.
Whales brains are much bigger than ours (by many times in some instances) and their behaviour is complex.
The Owl Added Dec 21, 2018 - 1:40pm
Man has any number of ways of solving the overpopulation issue, but a couple of them are bound to offend a LOT of people.  We certainly have birth control and sex education.  Abortion is available,  too, but now we are getting towards the controversial.  Most effective is just lining hordes of people up and machine gunning them...but that was tried in the 1940's with limited success, a great deal of tragedy, and a giant heap of controversy.  We could even just stop messing around with medicines and fertilizer and just let disease and starvation to the job, but that would just give the left another arrow for their quiver of self-righteous outrage.
 
It's appearing that the bottom line is that no matter what happens, someone is going to be unhappy.
 
A side note, if I may, if we follow the wealth redistribution method of problem resolution, aren't we just creating another billion or so consumers who are going to demand the latest cell phones, the cool stoves and kitchen appliances that Top Chef and Masterchef use, fuel-burning cars, and all the energy-consuming activities in which "woke" people engage as part of their normal day-to-day existence.
 
Come to think about it, lining a whole bunch of people up for a shooting or a kool-aid party might not be the worst solution  I'll polish up my AR-15 and get in a big stock of ammunition.  Opher and his friends can fly over and line up on our town green, and I'll get the process started and even help clean up the mess.  (There are a couple of cemeteries nearby that could be useful.)
 
As for whales, they also have a fairly complex way of communicating and can be heard for miles.  It is a joy to listen to them even though I can't understand a word that they say.
Rick W. Added Dec 21, 2018 - 5:50pm
No one -- not even a college professor -- can conceive of human extinction. It's too big to grasp, and so it makes for an unpersuasive place to start an argument. We're just not built to worry about such things. We worry about being fat after the heart attack. We worry about smoking after cancer. This is human nature. (He should know this.)
 
The more engaging question: With all its cruelties and ugliness and shame, is life worth it? That's what Hamlet is going on about -- not the idiocies of an entire human species -- and that's where tragedy lies. One good man fighting and failing is a tragedy. An entire species dying out? That's a statistic for some other species to bemoan (or ignore).
 
The answer to overpopulation and climate change and animal cruelty is not "let's be better Earthlings." It's "let's get off this rock." The dinosaurs didn't die because of a meteor. They died because they didn't have a space program. (And we probably won't be taking the pigs and cows with us.)
TexasLynn Added Dec 21, 2018 - 6:32pm
RW, interesting take...
 
RW >> so it makes for an unpersuasive place to start an argument
 
You're right.  I think it's actually just a screen in front of the real argument.  That being, "Are you bastards so deplorable as to deserve to be gone/dead."
 
RW >> We're just not built to worry about such things.
 
With the current state of society, I might disagree with you IF I thought the primary purpose of all this hand wringing (overpopulation and climate change) was the climate/earth.  It's not.  It's wealth redistribution.
 
RW >> The more engaging question: With all its cruelties and ugliness and shame, is life worth it?
 
That assumes self-inspection of which there was none whatsoever on the part of Professor May.
 
RW >> ... that's where tragedy lies. One good man fighting and failing is a tragedy.
 
Mmmmm... I can't really agree.  Yes, one man deciding to kill his murderous uncle and ending up killing everybody else (including himself) is a tragedy; but surely so is an entire village destroyed in a mud slide, and a city destroyed by a volcano.
 
Mankind destroyed by hubris might be a tragedy... but I submit somebody other than mankind has to eventually know the facts and have the capacity to make that determination.  Otherwise... it's nothing.
 
RW >> The answer to overpopulation and climate change and animal cruelty is not "let's be better Earthlings." It's "let's get off this rock." The dinosaurs didn't die because of a meteor. They died because they didn't have a space program.
 
LMAO... I like that.  Stupid dinosaurs...
 
RW >> (And we probably won't be taking the pigs and cows with us.)
 
Ohhhh... I don't know about that.  I would hate to live on a world without pigs and cows... and ... BBQ sauce. :)
 
Thanks for the comments... Merry Christmas. :)
Jeff Michka Added Dec 21, 2018 - 7:49pm
I see you've decided to self identify, TraitorLynn, I 've always envisioned you as one of "the little ignorant people,' a mindless Xtain follower among other worthless things, much like your new good buddy, Mogg Turd.  Mogg is just mindless.  Shitty Xmas, to you and yours, TraitoLynn...
TexasLynn Added Dec 21, 2018 - 9:12pm
Jeff M >> Shitty Xmas, to you and yours, TraitoLynn...
 
LMAO... Are you still here?  Go to Italy already...
 
Merry Christmas you little troll.
The Owl Added Dec 22, 2018 - 2:06pm
Jeff, how unnecessary your remarks are...
 
Do they make you feel better?
A. Jones Added Dec 23, 2018 - 3:48pm
but I believe that the track we are on will set us up for extinction much quicker than originally intended.
 
Every lefty has made the same claim. George Wald (a lefty professor of biology at Harvard) claimed in 1970 that human would be extinct by 2000. Did that happen? No. He was wrong. Humanity has grown AND much of the extreme poverty in the world has vanished because of encroaching capitalism: increased investment in better technologies that have increased productivity. 
 
Seems Wald was wrong.
 
Paul Erlich made similar claims about the "population bomb." Seems he was wrong, too. A growing population is a resource for even greater productivity, not a "sink" for pure consumption.
 
Schumacher made similar claims in his "Small Is Beautiful." He was wrong.
 
Fat, wealthy, Al Gore made similar claims not too long ago about cities "being under water" if we didn't adopt his program of social and economic change. He was wrong. Cities are not under water . . . and, by the way, while CO2 continues to increase in the atmosphere, the slight warming trend has been in hiatus for almost 2 decades. Will he debate any climate scientists on this issue? No.
 
You are wrong, too, and for the same reasons: 1) The facts you start off with in your predictions are either outright incorrect, or they were cherry-picked from an array of other facts that contradict your initial bias; and 2) You then try to draw a straight-line between the incorrect starting point and some point in the future — a practice known as extrapolation. Most extrapolations are WRONG because they assume tomorrow will be like today, and the day after tomorrow will be like tomorrow, etc. 
 
You're like the scaremongers in the 19th century who were worried that if horse-drawn traffic kept increasing from a growing commercial society, the streets and sidewalks in large cities would be piled high with horse manure, causing health problems to the public. Whoops!!! They didn't see the advent and popularity of the automobile, which quickly abolished the claims of such extrapolations.