Enviromental Destruction

Animal and oceanic Environments are being destroyed for us to flourish better. Do you think this is a good thing? i.e. mangrove forests being destroyed for shrimp farms. or something like destroying the rainforest.

I think most of us university scholartians [i think] agree that that's a bad thing.

well think about it this way, Shrimps are a large part of the food that people depend upon. Also, to make most of the cornfields you see today, people destroy large amounts of forest. Think about what wildlife lived in that forest? Was it more worth it for us to get corn and be fed or let the squirrels and little animals keep their homes? Close to the same thing in the shrimp farms

I think we should just eat what the forest gives us, instead of cutting it down to make our own.

how much does the forest actually give us? birds eggs... acorns (poisonous) wild berries (most poisonous) Poison Ivy... Trees and lumber... I think it is much more beneficial to us to take down the forest... the question is how will that effect the world in the long run?

You raise an interesting question.

I would have to agree with you, Ben, but I would also steady the pace we're producing. We are getting more and more people, and the demands for crops is growing more and more high. We're sort of bringing this doom upon ourselves. The more of us there are, the more beings will have to sacrifice.

However, there's still a lot of land for us to use, to grow, to plant trees.. so many countries. We just need more cooperation amongst the world.

We need to find a resolution for this crop demand. And while Jay's point, imo, seems to a bit of an extreme at the moment. I guess what I'm trying to say is, though as difficult as this might be:

We need to slow down. (Which might seem a contradiction to my point up there (and it is), however, we need to find ways to produce more without consuming vasts amount of land.. as difficult a task as this seems!)

remember, we have a constantly growing population and many MANY hungry people, we cannot afford to slow down. Either we produce more food and attempt to remake our economy and do some damage to Wildlife or millions more people die then if we fed more people. The question is the damage to the environment reversible is we do it?

The problem with this is that we have messed up the world so much we now cannot fix it without hurting something else

This is the problem with our world, us humans are power hungry by nature. Therefore we try to act good but things go bad. The best and most fit survive. If we actually did what our nature told us to, we would just forget about the others. In the wild the strongest survive. As for the environment, the only reason we really preserve it is because it feeds us with meet and fish and things.

we are such a stupid race, why cant we all be more like cats...

you see, we are bad people. We feed cats which keeps them from killing rodents which makes more abundant rodents. The world will become overflown with rodents. The rodents will eat almost all the food they have and then start dying. The population will lower and then come back as the food does. I think the human race will drastically lose its number and then come back again gradually (but i'm not sure the environment of these animals will) If we let the population do what it normally does with natural food chains, it should all be good

so the moral is stop feeding cats?

you're kind of straying off topic: no straying off topic by Griff's rules

alright, back on topic, we are messed up

the thing about cats shows how nature works in its interesting ways and that if we mess up the environment to save human kind it'll just die again and then it will repopulate

nature is amazing, especially how it regrows

yup, many things in nature that have the ability to neutralize itself.. bad on topic, could polluted environment rejuvenate?

it can, but it would take a while. damage from pollution is worse than most things that can be nature-caused. plus, it's going to be even more slowed if humans just continue. :/

the only unfortunate thing is, the world likes to think it is good and will attempt to feed everyone and would let what i said happen. Maybe the corrupt Chinese would, but America would probably have riots if we didn't XD (China already has riots so it doesn't change much)

Here's also the issue:

We're speaking of the human race and the world as a completely bad thing, which is very hypocritical. You eat everyday from super markets, which take their meat, produce, etc. from farms which use nature.

You use plastic ware and other such things in your home. You use electrical appliances, gas oil in your cars, etc. It's not like we're doing nothing to fix our mistakes. We're trying alternative ways to use energy, we're trying alternative ways to build things. We're trying new materials, new ideas.

We have learned this from experience. Humans are a good deal more dominant, and we have become that way upon ourselves. We are a very good deal intelligent and have survived and thrived off of the gifts whoever made us, gave us.

We aren't dumb, we can fix this. It'll just take a bit. Using alternative energy can be helpful and can consume less of nature for oil plants. Recycling plastic, aluminum, etc. makes less animals and their habitats become infected with crap. Using more innovative ideas to build things--take a look at Macs with their 8 hour battery life--helps save energy and conserve more of it.

All of these seemingly small ways are things we can do to help our environment, to help it regrow and for us to live in harmony. It's not just what the world wants us to think, it's really what's happening. The very fact that you're becoming involved in this discussion goes to show you know the problem--so does a lot of mankind at the moment. There are so many young people and adults alike getting involved in this issue.. and it's spreading. Everywhere and everyday. We are REALLY trying to make a step. It might take a bit, but we'll get there.

This thread hasn't seen resolution, it's just seen, to me, how stupid humanity is. Humanity can be pretty stupid, but humanity can also be pretty smart, too.

We have still got a GREAT deal of nature out there that's reproducing, rejuvenating. Ben, they way you sounded this question was misleading: "do you think it's better for us to destroy nature for us to flourish."

Man is of course going to adapt its environment. We just need to be more friendly and delicate.

That's my opinion. Cheers.

well even if we do all that stuff and use less energy somewhere, it does not mean we're not destroying. Yes we are trying to do something. Here is one thing, we are constantly making new houses and expanding because of our constant population. We are smart, but history has shown nothing runs smoothly. I think that this will happen then we'll run into a problem. I'm afraid we might destroy to much natural habitat like the rain forest before this happens. We need the rain forest for many things. do you know how many uses we get from it? It would be interesting if pollution mutated some animals...

Well, you've established the overpopulation problem that we've been seeing for years and years. This is more so a form of the overpopulation problem, one of the results.

We've got millions of people homeless. Thousands being born this very day. What is your resolution?

this is the problem i was addressing earlier, in wild the strongest and most fit survive. Many people are trying to help the homeless but we can't them all. We all know how communism works. Honestly i don't think we can help all the homeless. So why some instead of others? Honestly i think that either we stop caring about the poor and hungry and homeless (its funny how most of them are drug addicts and will die shortly from it anyway) or have a law that you can only have like 2 children per family like in Ender's game.

Ben, most of them are NOT drug addicts that will die anyway. We try to help people, we don't just kill them off. They're homeless because they don't have money, because they're sick, because they didn't have a choice. Some of them are drug addicts, yes, sure. But we try to help them too.

How do you think a law enforcing two children will go over? Communism doesn't work and probably never will. You've seen History, right? There will be revolutions, revolts, .. this is sort of chilling when you think about it. History will be just as bloody. '

You say this from your perspective, Ben. You have a home, a place to live, a loving family, something to eat. It's a lot worse than you think it is, these homeless people. Letting them die off.. do you know what that would do to us, morally, as a race?

Just some thoughts..

have a law that you can only have like 2 children per family like in Ender's game.

sounds like communism to me..

Now, in all fairness, you're just trying to find a point and a resolution. But I really do think us doing these small things to help the environment will conserve a lot. Ben, I understand the importance of the environment and animals, but this is the human race here. It is not totally destroying the environment, it is doing things to help while damaging the environment, yes. But we still have a chance to really fix this mistake, I think.

That proposition is extreme. The people would revolt, the people would fight for their rights, they are human, Ben. They are human. Homeless people are like us. And yet we develop this hostile view towards them. It's unfair.

i know. I wouldn't want to be in their shoes and have some one say that. But honestly, how can we feed them? the population is growing more than it is shrinking. How can we feed them all? (if you look in history, leaders generally were not to good moralled, some were, but most became corrupt or were bad)