Subject:
|
Re: what do you think of editorals regarding the environment?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 30 May 2001 13:24:31 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
121 times
|
| |
|
|
Tom Stangl, VFAQman wrote:
Tom, what kind of science fiction universe do you live in? ;)
> <dons flameproof underwear>
> I agree with much of the article, just not the way he stated it. I am all for
> People First. If you want me to weigh people against a subspecies of some
> fish/bird/frog/whatever, people win hands down for me. Just make sure to get
> genetic samples from the species/subspecies in question if the conflict will
> truly wipe them out (reason why explained farther below).
How many samples would you need from each species? What is a species,
for that matter? Would you need samples through time or would just a
single period be enough. ?
> Granted, if you are in a thirdworld country where you may actually need more
> kids to simply support the family through growing crops (or jobs, whatever),
> you MIGHT have more of an excuse. But not much. We are burying our planet in
> people, and it's simply not necessary.
true. in part.
> <dons heavyduty flamesuit overcoat>
> What is scariest is that (in general) the more intelligent the couples
> involved, the LESS likely they are to have kids, or have fewer kids. So over
> time, unless we curtail population explosion, the average intelligence of the
> planet will continue to decrease (while the average IQ would still be 100, the
> actual intelligence level denoted by that 100 will drop - i.e. someone with an
> IQ of 100 in 2100AD might test as 80 in 2001AD). Not what we as a species
> should desire.
Can you provide a citation for this? If true, is it due solely to
population growth or is tied with other yet unnamed factors. Is IQ (at
least how we measure it) an adaptive trait?
> I think the best thing that could happen to Earth right now is a plague that
> kills half the population off over a period of a year or so (the survivors
> would need time to burn/bury all the bodies for sanitary reasons) and then
> disappears, only to reappear if we're stupid enough to let our planetary
> population get so large again. Something that ONLY kills humans, of course.
> (Either that, or someone discovers a way to fold space tomorrow, so we can
> emigrate to new planets almost instantaneously, relieving pressure here.)
>
> Then we can pull out all the genetic stores and bring back the species we've
> wiped out from overrunning the planet.
Do we have the ability to do this yet?
> <ducks behind the blast shield>
> And that plague can start in India and China, since they're irresponsible
> enough as to have over ONE THIRD of the world population right now.
What about the extreme consumption of resources by the first world
nations and the push to get third world nations into "our" lifestyle?
THat's probably a bigger strain on our resources.
-c
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
29 Messages in This Thread:
  
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
