21 8

I believe humanity doesn't so much inhabit the earth as it infests it. I believe someday the earth will get sick of us and we'll succumb to another flood, volcano, polar shift, caldera, whatever and we'll be history, albeit unrecorded. We, of course, cannot conceive of this! The supremely arrogant humans think, 1. Humanity will go on forever, 2. We're the only intelligent beings in the Universe, and 3. If we're NOT the only intelligent beings in the Universe, we are certainly smarter than THEM! Out arrogance had us believe we can not only save the earth, but that we can reconfigure another planet to become hospitable when we can't even clean our disgusting pollution here! Humans are really so stupid...the more people I encounter, the more I love dogs!

REParker 4 Apr 23

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.

Create your free account


Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.


I agree with your statement about the more people I encounter, the more I love dogs. Not so much everything else. Good post!


We are marvels of evolutionary success. Yes, we have both the capacity of be nehilistic or molevelant and doing atrocious things..... and we are capable of great charity, caring, love, art, and selfless giving. We are a part of the animal kingdom and just like other mammals, we will need to adapt in the future.... or yes, an extinction event could wipe us out. I don't see that as a good thing. Life finds a way.
Are we the smartest life in the universe? Probably not. There is always the possibility of a more evolved species to come in.
I find it arrogant to believe we can "destroy" the planet. We can't create or stop a hurricane, a tornado, volcano, or any major force of nature.... but we can change planetary climate? Maybe but I'm skeptical.
Yes, we are animals with a natural capacity for violence. We are also tribal. These were developed for survival. How long will we survive as a species? Not forever but as long as we are able to adapt and keep our survival instincts, we have a chance.
Forgive me if I don't share your pessimism or dislike for us as a species.

I wonder just exactly how many nukes would be required to change the planetary climate...


I ain’t apologising for my existence.


I believe humanity doesn't so much inhabit the earth as it infests it -self loathing and unfounded shame are signs of serious mental illness- I believe someday the earth will get sick of us- do you often attribute sentience to inanimate objects? That is another symptom of mental illness - arrogant humans think, 1 Humanity will go on forever- speak for yourself- 2. We're the only intelligent beings in the Universe -again, speak for yourself- 3. If we're NOT the only intelligent beings in the Universe, we are certainly smarter than THEM! -you are projecting- believe we can not only save the earth, but that we can reconfigure another planet to become hospitable- you are conflating hubris with arrogance- Humans are really so stupid- there’s that self loathing projection thing again. - the more people I encounter, the more I love dogs! I am in complete agreement with you on this one!


First, of course a natural disaster or astronomic event can and probably eventually will wipe humanity from the face of the earth but, it won't be because the earth was sick of us. It's just the nature of things. The earth didn't hate the dinosaurs did it?

Any speculation about intelligent life elsewhere is just that speculation and not really a statement about us. Also, most of that speculation doesn't say we're smarter.

You probably don't believe it but, more primitive societies generate more pollution per person than modern ones do. We just have more people. If you're on here, you enjoy many of the benefits of modern society. In other words, you are not an innocent bystander. You are an active participant in the pollution you're complaining about. What will you personally give up to do something about that?

Global cataclysms I believe can not be solved just by the individual. Collectives of common wealth must be established via symbiotic values. Oil is obsolete and is the crudest form of energy on this planet.

How as a species can we travel without using combustion engines?

@4p3k I think you're a bit of a hypocrite. You blame the whole species for doing what you are doing yet you admit no blame.

Sailing ships and horses worked in the past. There are nuclear powered submarines and aircraft carriers. So, nuclear could power commercial ships. Theoretically nuclear could work for dirigibles as well. That would be very costly and if you're that worried about pollution, you probably aren't a fan of nuclear. There are steam engines, wankel engines, turbine engines and probably some others I'm not naming but, they are ultimately powered by the combustion of something.

You can dream of electric cars but, that would require some innovations in battery design. It's being worked on but, it's probably a decade or two off. Besides, something has to generate the electricity. That tales you back to combustion or nuclear. Wind and solar won't get there anytime soon. Also to move even a fraction of the cars we have now to electric would require a complete revamp of the electrical infrastructure.

I seem to remember a hydrogen powered car. That would be interesting because the exhaust would be water vapor. However, the most practical way to get the hydrogen is electrolysis and that has the same issues as electric cars.

There's always the possibility of a breakthrough in fusion technology or some energy technology we haven't discovered yet but, not any time soon. If we were to attempt to go back to horses and sailing ships, the result would be millions of deaths and millions more living in abject poverty.

@4p3k, @MickeyRat

Wikipedia: NS Savannah: []

NS Savannah Virtual Tour: []

@jwhitten I didn't know there was such a beast but, it's an obvious possibility. I'm not really surprised. There is a proof of concept anyway. I haven't heard of any nuclear powered dirigibles though. 🙂

@MickeyRat I only found out about it by accident myself this past weekend. It seemed like the perfect opportunity to flaunt my newfound knowledge! 😉


According to the Bible, the next big (like, REALLY BIG) event won't be water, but fire. All consuming, global (maybe even universal) fire. Just saying. (oh, and yes, we really are staggeringly arrogant)


Most of the comments on this thread belong on Twitter, not here. I, and I'm sure many others, abandoned Twitter for this platform specifically to get away from the unthinking posts like. "I don't agree, therefore kill yourself," or "you're dumb, therefore you shouldn't have an opinion."

I personally don't agree with the statements made, but I also recognize that this person's right to that opinion is just as valid as my right to disagree. We need to be better people, that's why we came to the IDW.

This is a place for discourse. Like many of you have done, give your thoughts on the subject. Maybe it can start a conversation. But the vitriolic hate bombs do nothing but achieve what we don't shuts down free speech. I mean, the guy straight up said he's not going to talk about this anymore. What a sad thing to read on this platform. Sadder still is when it makes you feel good to hear that he's going to stop using his basic right to freely speak to, and associate with, people who should be defending his right to have that opinion.

Also, who could hate on a guys that loves dogs? I mean, if you don't like his view about anything else, we can agree that the dog thing is great. Right?

I didn't tell you to "off yourself" because I didn't like you or your post. I thought about what you said and it was the only reasonable, rational and logical response. If you sincerely believe that humans are an infestation, then you are morally bound to kill yourself in order to save the planet. If you do not then you are either a hypocrite or else are just posting for the giggles. Don't worry, though, after you go the rest of us will be along shortly...

@jwhitten, CalebBaeten wasn't the op. And, eat a snickers, you know you're grumpy when you're hungry. Haha, your suicide post was a bit direct, even though I got what you were saying.

I don't think viruses kill themselves off for the good of other organisms. Their purpose is survival--that happens to be at odds with our purpose, which is survival. We're the only species that thinks about the planet that we know of. That alone makes us somehow different than a virus. We make moral judgments about the way we survive. That's really an incredible quality--amazing--one I think the OP didn't consider. We ain't perfect for sure, but there is enough good to avoid utter nihilism (utter nihilism--wait, we need utters)...Yep, it's like that this morning.

@chuckpo Oh boy did you just open up a great big can-o-worms... you could find yourself hopelessly wrapped around the axle when you drop 'morality' into the same sentence as 'survival'... 🙂

I really enjoy your comments btw. I hope you know that.

@jwhitten, well now I'm intrigued. Don't tease me!

Yeah, I like reading you too. You disappeared for a week there, I think. I was wondering if you'd left. In one of the threads someone was talking about a system of administration like you were suggesting. Did you run across it?

@jwhitten it's nice to read that I was somewhat mistaken in what you were trying to convey. It's good to know that the entire message isn't what I read.

I will say this to expand upon my previous comment. Since this is a platform that allows for long form dialogue, the use of short form communication takes on a more direct meaning. That is to say, if someone is able to expound upon their opinion in an unlimited format, and chooses to use a short statement, the words they use carry a greater weight. That is the among the greatest differences between this and Twitter in my opinion. And it makes word choice that much more important.

@chuckpo Yup. Sorry, Spring Break and the kiddos out of school. And I come and go anyway. I have many interests and only so much time 😉

I did see the thread you're referring to and added a link to the original discussion in case anybody has an interest in pursuing it further. Thanks for the mention, btw.

@chuckpo >> "well now I'm intrigued. Don't tease me!"

I was mainly just referring to the point that 'morality' is generally the 'ethical' way of 'doing unto others' before they do unto you. I guess that, and combined with the seeming never-ending obnoxious hand-wringing and signalling of virtue from obsequious sycophants to those in power in an effort to shore up and assure one's own survival within the colony... you know, see which silver-backs need to be assuaged and all of that.

@jwhitten, I don't have much to add to that. I will instead just throw another log on the fire. I believe we're able to transcend mere survival, and we transcend it with morality. It seems unique to our species that we know of (who knows the structure on other worlds). I know everything can always be mapped back to Darwin, but I think sometimes the effort to squeeze things into that frame is evidence that there could be other explanations. Don't get me wrong. I believe in a lot of evolution stuff--just not as one all-encompassing explanation for humanity. Okay, that should be a couple of revolutions on the axle...

@chuckpo Unfortunately I don't think we're really able to 'transcend our survival'. We can dither about it, put it out of mind for awhile, bandy it about and occasionally even consume ourselves making questionable points. But-- so far at least-- we have been unable to actually transcend it. Sooner or later it pops round again and we're faced with what it entails. In my view, in our human culture, the best we've been able to come up with is to contract it out so that we don't have to deal with the unpleasantries directly ourselves. And while I don't like dealing with it any more than the next guy-- in reality most of what we do is disguise it and try to hide what it is that we're doing and abstract it away with some culinary hand-waving-- and butter.

I would personally be quite happy not having to eat anything that's been alive in the same way that I've been alive-- that has a face, so to speak. And if you think about it too long you realize that there's some bit of really deep, elemental sadness that goes along with the realization of it. Or if not sadness, perhaps solemnity in the understanding that something else had to die in order that I might live. Or depending on what's on the menu, perhaps thanks or even celebration in the vein of "but for the grace of god..."

And I think it is in that particular thought that the true underlying concept of 'morality' is revealed as a side-effect and emergent property of-- or even an inherent property of-- consequence of the need and action of survival. We have a thousand terms for it-- 'Dog eat dog', 'Kill or be killed', 'Us or them' and... well, we have at least three terms for it. In that sober understanding that underneath all of our protocols and platitudes there is an underlying savagery to our nature that we cannot deny about ourselves. Not if we're really being honest.

I think most people are okay with the notion of 'live and let live' as long as other people don't get in the way and that a large portion of our society-- and especially our 'morality'-- is constructed around the understanding and desire to not have to come to blows, but that we could-- if we had to. Ultimately, at the end of the day, all of our 'laws' and 'ethics' and 'morality' really only amount to 'affordances' granted by the most powerful to the less powerful as a means of appeasement to avoid the inconvenience of constant conflict and struggle for dominance.

So the upshot is that 'morality' is fluid and is essentially a tacit agreement among the members of the community not to do things which piss off the 'big guy' and thus upset the apple cart for everyone. More or less. That at least pencils in the big branches, and all the rest is colored in from there.

IMO, anyway.

@jwhitten, well thought out as usual, and there's a lot of truth in what you write in my own opinion--useful in all kinds of conversations. BUT (you knew that was coming), we can reason that not surviving is better than surviving. We can consciously choose--not by instinct--to end our lives and cease living. I don't know that another species does that in the same way. We can also choose to starve ourselves for a period of time up to or to death. We can choose to divide with or give up our food to another. We can choose for a stranger to survive when we won't. I don't know that I believe in altruism in its pure form, but we do seem to make decisions that aren't based on some need to serve self. There are lot of topics in your post that are worthy of their own thread. I'm tempted to respond to them, but I think it pulls us off of this topic.

@chuckpo Altrusim. Yeah, that's an interesting one. And one that is not solely human either. There are documented cases of animals caring for / adopting other animals-- even animals of differing species-- and even in some cases, animals who would otherwise be natural enemies / predator-prey.

Certainly I also agree that people possess a degree of moral faculties that aren't available to animals.

@CalebBaeten I like the ability to say what I want to say with however many words I feel like I need to say it. Sometimes that's a lot, and if you've followed any of my posts you'll no doubt agree that I can get rather long-winded 🙂

I'm not sure that I would try to read more or less into 'long-form' or 'short-form' responses since there is no (reasonable) limit here all responses would seem (to me) to be about equally-weighted in that regard.

In any case, it's nice to know that perhaps you are reconsidering your imminent demise and might perhaps stick around awhile. 😉


Humanity is a pimple on the butt of Mother Earth!

Misanthropes of the world unite! You have nothing to lose but yourselves!

Sorry, but I'll have to drink something a lot stronger than coffee before I slap those slogans on my bumper.


I think humans when they apply themselves really show intelligence and initiative. Occasionally, they lose sight of what's important and the overall big picture. People, focused on their own little problems and wanting the rest of the world to pay attention to them, sometimes distract everyone. An example would be....ooh.....I don't know....umm..ah, here's one - Trump colluded with the Russians to win the election.


I love my dogs a lot and I treat them like family but I am the Alpha leader of this pack. If the roles were reversed I would be squat in the food chain fighting everyday for a rotten peice of meat from a kill. And since I can't lick my own ass I a dogs life could be rough! Pride is the first mistake man made and it lives on today. had to go there.


Humans are brilliant, clever, funny and totally immoral, i don’t think the earth itself “thinks” so doesn’t make a conscious decision to kill us off, we can do that ourselves. Maybe we are still evolving?


So do the earth a favor and off yourself. The fact that you haven't simply indicates that you're either a hypocrite or playing for laughs...

This to me is reactive hate speech. Reacting to some valud points, then pointing out exceptions is how I view IDW here.

@2FollowHim Then you didn't actually read what he wrote, consider its implications and are simply knee-jerking based on your simplistic interpretation of what I wrote. I invite you to try again.


True.. I'm Christian, but sola scriptura, based on Gr., Hebrew where necessary, but I am not fluent as some.
The bible indicates God will REDO, somehow, both but seemingly using some of it. I'm FE, since have we EVER been lied to!! Finally, scientific types spend their OWN money to disprove. Make NO MONEY. Many do as you say, not ALL!! I feel GREAT responsibility for all that's here!! Plants, animals, birds. When I go on holidays to beautiful places, I bless everything. Everything has essence, and I feel it. I believe others can learn this.
The bible says,nthe earth GROANS for redemption. Some of the WORST offenders to earth are some Chinese dumping toxinx, selling fake meat, eating babies. Very corrupt. No, I NEVER give up to find wonderful people, and dogs are great too!! Best!!


I believe your perspective on the environment is wrong. Much has been improved since the early 1900s. As for this rock floating around a star, why would anyone care about it unless people inhabited it?


I don't know. Is claiming us humans "the only intelligent beings in the Universe" any less enlightened than claiming we are not? It's certainly no more informed.

It is however true that if the planet be saved by our demise not even the most intellectual among us will be able to take credit.


I don't believe that. I believe the Earth is here for humanity too use.


Yeah give me a dog I'm with you on this somewhat I believe in God so our time will run out and I'm looking forward to it that will be one step closer to God


If there were to be a massive flood do you think entire peninsulas will be submerged?


You sound like you have some frustrations. I think we all get frustrated with humanity sometimes. Sounds like you might have some interest in philosophy as well 🙂 When I was frustrated, I read an unusual book: Viktor Frankl’s Man’s Search for Meaning. If anyone has a reason to dislike humanity, he does. It’s an old book, but his insight took my breath away. He is, in my opinion, the best of humanity.


So, we are all but a fungus?

Sad, really sad


You think quite low of yourself.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:33539
Slug does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.