Truther 1,579 Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 Not a cull Truther just common sense 2 child policy And respect for flaura and fauna We should be making a worldwide conscientious effort to increase the habitat and numbers of elephants' tigers ' Rhinos ' Lions ' Bears the lot Like I say we a cancer A distructful fooking disease. To late for a 2 child policy to have much effect i think Max? It would work in time i suppose but do we have that much time to let it? I doubt it mate, and people are living longer, still hanging about using resources and polluting 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Born Hunter 17,763 Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 (edited) Ha! Did you cry when you found out the dinosaurs got wiped out? Like I said, in the grand scheme of things, we can't do f**k all that nature can't put right. And in the bigger picture all the critters you see now will most likely be gone and replaced by others in a relatively short time. Nature doesn't give a f**k if one species wipes out another. In fact those are the laws she created! No favourite, no prejudices. What I will find sad is if we destroy ourselves. Because we sure as shit can't destroy nature. Edited February 11, 2015 by Born Hunter 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tiercel 6,986 Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 Most of the problem with over population is caused by modern medicines, people are just not allowed to die any more, they must be kept alive at all costs just as an experiment as to how far they can take medicine. TC 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Accip74 7,112 Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 Most of the problem with over population is caused by modern medicines, people are just not allowed to die any more, they must be kept alive at all costs just as an experiment as to how far they can take medicine. .....it's not just that.....we need more babysitters!!!!........every fcuker has to work now & what with the cost of child care?........keep those grandparents alive!!!! 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tiercel 6,986 Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 Another factor in overpopulation, is that we as a race seem to think that life is sacred, it's not. Previously only the strongest lived and got to breed. Now even the weakest survive and get to breed. That cannot be good for any species, man will eventually kill himself off with kindness. Hard I know, but the truth none the same. TC 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Born Hunter 17,763 Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 Another factor in overpopulation, is that we as a race seem to think that life is sacred, it's not. Previously only the strongest lived and got to breed. Now even the weakest survive and get to breed. That cannot be good for any species, man will eventually kill himself off with kindness. Hard I know, but the truth none the same. TC You reckon tc? I don't know if there is a genetic point of no return but we are still subject to natural selection, just in a new environment. As a species we have great diversity, faced with our old environment natural selection would simply do what is needed. We'd adapt, after shedding all the unsuitable genetics from the gene pool. People should have more faith in us imo. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Truther 1,579 Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 Another factor in overpopulation, is that we as a race seem to think that life is sacred, it's not. Previously only the strongest lived and got to breed. Now even the weakest survive and get to breed. That cannot be good for any species, man will eventually kill himself off with kindness. Hard I know, but the truth none the same. TC You reckon tc? I don't know if there is a genetic point of no return but we are still subject to natural selection, just in a new environment. As a species we have great diversity, faced with our old environment natural selection would simply do what is needed. We'd adapt, after shedding all the unsuitable genetics from the gene pool. People should have more faith in us imo. That can't be true BH, if were subject to natural selection everybody would be useful, you should watch that "benefits Britain" programme mate. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
shepp 2,285 Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 Another factor in overpopulation, is that we as a race seem to think that life is sacred, it's not. Previously only the strongest lived and got to breed. Now even the weakest survive and get to breed. That cannot be good for any species, man will eventually kill himself off with kindness. Hard I know, but the truth none the same. TC You reckon tc? I don't know if there is a genetic point of no return but we are still subject to natural selection, just in a new environment. As a species we have great diversity, faced with our old environment natural selection would simply do what is needed. We'd adapt, after shedding all the unsuitable genetics from the gene pool. People should have more faith in us imo. How do you explain the large families produced by poor examples of humans, being maintained and encoured to reproduce by humans who have smaller families. Not exactly good for the species. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Born Hunter 17,763 Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 Another factor in overpopulation, is that we as a race seem to think that life is sacred, it's not. Previously only the strongest lived and got to breed. Now even the weakest survive and get to breed. That cannot be good for any species, man will eventually kill himself off with kindness. Hard I know, but the truth none the same. TC You reckon tc? I don't know if there is a genetic point of no return but we are still subject to natural selection, just in a new environment. As a species we have great diversity, faced with our old environment natural selection would simply do what is needed. We'd adapt, after shedding all the unsuitable genetics from the gene pool. People should have more faith in us imo. That can't be true BH, if were subject to natural selection everybody would be useful, you should watch that "benefits Britain" programme mate. LOL, id rather pull teeth! So, suddenly the laws of nature don't apply to us.... or people don't understand them and so no longer think they do? The environment has changed and so the selection criteria, but natural selection goes on selecting the 'fittest' to pass on their genetics as it always has and always will. The big misconception in this theory is what is deemed 'fittest'... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tiercel 6,986 Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 You reckon tc? I don't know if there is a genetic point of no return but we are still subject to natural selection, just in a new environment. As a species we have great diversity, faced with our old environment natural selection would simply do what is needed. We'd adapt, after shedding all the unsuitable genetics from the gene pool. People should have more faith in us imo. We are no longer subject to natural selection imo. When babies that would have died through some genetic malfunction, so as not be able to pass it on, are artificially kept alive through modern medicine only to breed and propagate the same genetic malfunction in their children. Is that good for the species? TC Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Born Hunter 17,763 Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 Another factor in overpopulation, is that we as a race seem to think that life is sacred, it's not. Previously only the strongest lived and got to breed. Now even the weakest survive and get to breed. That cannot be good for any species, man will eventually kill himself off with kindness. Hard I know, but the truth none the same. TC You reckon tc? I don't know if there is a genetic point of no return but we are still subject to natural selection, just in a new environment. As a species we have great diversity, faced with our old environment natural selection would simply do what is needed. We'd adapt, after shedding all the unsuitable genetics from the gene pool. People should have more faith in us imo. How do you explain the large families produced by poor examples of humans, being maintained and encoured to reproduce by humans who have smaller families. Not exactly good for the species. In our development of advanced societies with politics and ethics etc we have changed our environment in a very unique way. With that change, as always the criteria for natural selection has changed, the criteria for the fittest is no longer what it was, which is what everybody seems to get hung up on. Don't judge our current selection on old criteria. Look at our new current environment and judge for yourself what some of the new criteria for natural selection are. We are adapting to this new environment, an environment that is completely dependant on us as a species and so a dangerously incestuous environment for natural selection. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
shepp 2,285 Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 Fertility treatment means children that may carry the poor fertility may now exist, when left to nature, it would not be the case. The laws of nature do not apply to us any more. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Born Hunter 17,763 Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 You reckon tc? I don't know if there is a genetic point of no return but we are still subject to natural selection, just in a new environment. As a species we have great diversity, faced with our old environment natural selection would simply do what is needed. We'd adapt, after shedding all the unsuitable genetics from the gene pool. People should have more faith in us imo. We are no longer subject to natural selection imo. When babies that would have died through some genetic malfunction, so as not be able to pass it on, are artificially kept alive through modern medicine only to breed and propagate the same genetic malfunction in their children. Is that good for the species? TC But you're judging us now by old selection criteria. In an environment devoid of medicine, those babies would die. In this new environment they don't. That doesn't defy natural selection, it's still happening. To say we're no longer subject to this natural law is like saying were no longer subject to gravity when in space. The laws of nature don't change, the way they effect us does with a change of environment. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Born Hunter 17,763 Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 Fertility treatment means children that may carry the poor fertility may now exist, when left to nature, it would not be the case. The laws of nature do not apply to us any more. That's just not true. The old criteria for selection no longer apply, the law of natural selection still very much applies. Again, we seem to think we are somehow special and separate to nature. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Born Hunter 17,763 Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 The very fact that we believe we are genetically compromising ourselves as a species proves natural selection is still taking place! Without it there would be no change at all, there couldnt be as its the only mechanism for species level change. Just because we are smart enough to think that we are adapting genetically in a way that poorly suits the world away from modern society/medicine does not mean we are no longer subject to nature's law. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.