Human Beings...Mammals or Virus?

[CharmedSlayer85]

Okay I was thinking about the Matrix and a mini-monologue that Agent Smith was saying to Morpheus got me thinking, here's the monologue:

"I'd like to share a revelation that I've had, during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species and I realized that you aren't actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with its surrounding environment, but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply, and multiply until every natural resource is consumed and the only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? "“A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet. You are a plague, and we... are the cure."

And I was basically thinking could this actually be true? Because I mean think about it, I personally do believe that if the human race were to become extinct it would be because of our own doing. We chop down our natural resources like trees, and dont' always re-plant new ones, use up the planet's fossil fuels, pollute the water, have wars that use up natural resources and also destroy plant and animal life, we're releasing tons of trash on the planet with many landfills, we release so much pollution into the air, destroy animal habitat, kill other animals simply for sport which causes some animals to go into near extinction, we abuse other animals like dogs, cats, horses, and even the meat that we eat get abused and loaded up with all these drugs that in turn affect and kill us, we create more and more powerful weapons and nuclear devices and create genetically engineered diseases that never existed before (i.e HIV/AIDS), we continue to kill each other, rob from each other, let greed take over our lives, etc, etc.

So again I ask are we truly a virus to this planet, and is nature one day gonna send it's "white blood cells" to remove its sickness permanently in the form of global warming? Because the global warming campaign isn't truly about saving the planet, the planet will be fine it's about saving our own asses cause we're the ones that won't survive.

 

[Perny]

I think we are a virus to the earth. We use all the goods it has, and throws all the trash back. We are not as careful, and protective about it as we should be. Nearly no one cares for the future generations, because we aren't there. Someone else is, and it's their problem, not ours.
We are the mammals who evolved, and became a virus

 

[Edmund Blackadder]

Yeah, you're a virus, I'm the mammal.
You're obviously the disease and I have the cure. :Axesmilie

Jesus H. Christ, seriously!

All this hippy bullshit written by ultra liberal movie writers who think they're philosophers but manage to work on the young and/or naive just to make money.

We chop down our natural resources like trees, and dont' always re-plant new ones,

Nor do beavers!

use up the planet's fossil fuels

Hmmmm so what purpose DO fossil fuels have to the world then, other than to be used?

pollute the water,

Other animals 'pollute' their habitats. They may not have plastic but anything that is not natural in an environment is a pollutant, bring back the humble beaver!

have wars that use up natural resources

Other animal species fight, Ants for example 'war' with other colonies of Ants over territory.
As for natural resources - natural resources are used by animals!

and also destroy plant and animal life

Animals, other than human' have caused the destruction of animals and plans long before we arrived!.

we're releasing tons of trash on the planet with many landfills

You're basically saying the same things over and over.
All animals create waste of some kind.
Yes, some of ours isn't biodegradeable, unlike the beaver, but the amount of non-biodegradeble stuff isn't that bad and is disposed of. Landfills are actually feeding grounds for alot of other animals so we've helped!

we release so much pollution into the air

The combined worlds termite population releases more CO2 into the atmosphere than Man and Cow combined - thats the pollutant that causes bad things to happen.
Maybe we should eradicate the termite!

destroy animal habitat

The way survival of the fittest works is this.
The dominant species grows, taking over other areas causing the animals in that area to become smaller. This has been going on since creatures began.

kill other animals simply for sport which causes some animals to go into near extinction,

Have you seen The Lion King?
Timon and Pumba were making a sport of those vultures!
Seriously though, your argument is getting tired because you're spouting hippy bollocks without knowing anything.
Other animals do hunt/kill without a reason.
Also, wanna know an interesting fact?
95% of species died out before man even set foot on Earth.
In fact, animals that should have long since died (Panda anyone) have survived because of our intervention.
Granted a large portion of the life died out because a big rock hit the Earth, but that only totals about 45% of all species to have ever existed!

I can't even be bothered with the rest of your comment!

 

[itsxpaperdoll]

That is an interesting point you have there. I have been saying time and again that humans are forgetting they're just animals like apes, elephants and frogs. In our arrogance that came with conquering the planet (in the sense that we are everywhere, only ants and flies and stuff are more widespread) we sort of assumed that because we were luckier, we were also better. And that because we think we are the best, and the smartest, we supposedly can use everything we want or think we need.
So yeah, I think we are swarming over this planet like a pandemic, or a virus. But a virus with brains (because, let's face it, ours is the biggest)

So again I ask are we truly a virus to this planet, and is nature one day gonna send it's "white blood cells" to remove its sickness permanently in the form of global warming? Because the global warming campaign isn't truly about saving the planet, the planet will be fine it's about saving our own asses cause we're the ones that won't survive.

I think you are being a bit too optimistic about the planet's ability to help itself, here. The past couple of 'white blood cell attacks' didn't really have any influence on us. The Black Death in the long run only helped Europe to become one of the most crowded places in the world, and the flu-thing in the early 20th century hardly had any long run effects at all. The last ice age in fact sort of allowed us (or at least the people who lived around where there was a lot of ice and snow) to become the coolest (haha) living creatures in town. Some global warming ain't gonna hurt us. In the end, the planet might just go for the only truly effective way to get rid of us, namely, self destruction (in 10, 9, 8...)


That is not to say that a) I think all people are evil, because they aren't, and b) that I'm a closet hippy. I'm just not very hopeful about human nature. We have more or less proven by now that we're, as a collective, are very good at killing bunches of animals (and people), and all that just for fun, or because want to have great sex (you can't believe how many animal's testicles are considered a natural alternative for Viagra). Even if 99% of all humans would suddenly change their mind and don't eat meat anymore and start hugging trees on a sunday afternoon, there will always be some to f**k it up for the rest. That's what human nature has changed into. The 'apocalypse' that might or might not be coming our way can't be stopped by separating thrash or planting trees. Either every single human being on Earth would have to decide to go back to living in clay huts in the forest, eating berries and already dead animals like we did before, or we'd just have to kill ourselves. Or, and that's my alternative, we just enjoy all the beauty this Earth provides us with, and and the things having a nice big brain allows us to do before it is too late.

 

[Flannen]

Other animal species fight, Ants for example 'war' with other colonies of Ants over territory.

...

The way survival of the fittest works is this.
The dominant species grows, taking over other areas causing the animals in that area to become smaller. This has been going on since creatures began.

...

Other animals do hunt/kill without a reason.

Ants war of territory is hardly comparable to human war. The destruction caused is on a completely different scale and to compare the war going on in the world right now to that of ants, is simply an injustice to those who have lost their lives.

The 'theory' of the survival of the fittest (don't forget it is just a theory; a very justified and apt one, that I don't disagree with, but a theory all the same) is a natural evolution, and some of the things that cause animal extinction are in no way natural, such as hunting and the removal of their natural habitat. Personally, I don't think it is entirely what Darwin meant by 'survival of the fittest.'

I may be incorrect, but most animals do only kill for a reason, such as to feed or protect their territory/families. Recently, a report showed that the only other animal who has been known to experience rage and kill from anger is the ape.


I don't like to think of the human race as a 'virus' as such but I do think that the state of the world is down to humankind and all else that follows will be at our own hands, thankfully the worst will not occur in our lifetimes. I agree with William Blake's philosophy that nature lives harmoniously, and as humans we think we are above animals, sometimes I think we could learn a lot 🙂

 

[Silum]

I think we 'resemble' a virus sure, but only by making obscure parallels. A virus may consume and consume until it has nothing left, but this is true for MANY animals...especially those at the very top of the food chain. We happen to be intelligent enough to maintain this level of consumption by increases in technology and changing the way we live...something many animals cant do and end up going extinct. Human interaction isn't the sole reason for extinction btw, every animal lives in its own habitat and is forced to 'survive' in it.

This idea that 'humans' are this evil creature that needs to be stunted is a very dangerous one. Maybe thats not what your saying...but what do you suggest is the cure to this 'virus'? I only see mass human death.

Luckily, things are simpler than this. We are better than animals Flannen. In the words of EB, maybe your too hippie to admit it... but thats where we are...the top. That doesnt mean we destroy the environment around us, but unlike a virus, we have the ability to control and adapt like no other creature. Virus' of course also have an immense ability to adapt, but only to grow and consume more.... we have the ability to create a sustainable environment for ourselves.

 

[Flannen]

But only at the cost of other species, and even our own.

What's with the stereotype that any person who has a slight interest in the world is a hippy?! Stereotype much? Unfortunately the condition of our world; environmentally, economically and politically means that we should be taking an interest in it, but then I again I guess we only live it, right?!

Do you seriously think that the way we treat this world is simply down to us being an ever-evolving and adapting species, and can honestly see nothing wrong with the condition the world is currently in?

 

[Edmund Blackadder]

Ants war of territory is hardly comparable to human war. The destruction caused is on a completely different scale and to compare the war going on in the world right now to that of ants, is simply an injustice to those who have lost their lives.

Of course its comparable because its war.
They may not have nuclear weapons BUT it shows that war is something that isn't just 'human'.
And what a stupid comment 'is an injustice to those who have lost their lives' what the frick are you on!?!?
I am stating a fact that war is something that happens in many species so to use it as a means to say we are a 'virus' is stupid.

This place makes me laugh sometimes!

The 'theory' of the survival of the fittest (don't forget it is just a theory; a very justified and apt one, that I don't disagree with, but a theory all the same) is a natural evolution, and some of the things that cause animal extinction are in no way natural, such as hunting and the removal of their natural habitat. Personally, I don't think it is entirely what Darwin meant by 'survival of the fittest.'

Hmmm so when the 'Palorchestes azael' was hunted to extinction 40,000 years ago in an area where nothing resembling homosapien lived, what would you call that?

Its a theory in name only, except for the few fruitloops who believe that God created life 5000 years ago, this is all but proven. And here is a little lesson for you, Herbert Spencer was the one who applied the term to fit in with Darwins theory, not Charles Darwin.

Also, in the wild, when an animal colony grows, it inevitably takes over more land, running out other species until that species is gone - that is natural selection.

I may be incorrect, but most animals do only kill for a reason, such as to feed or protect their territory/families. Recently, a report showed that the only other animal who has been known to experience rage and kill from anger is the ape.

Or to gain what another animal has.
Because its a fuzzy little animal doesn't mean that it doesn't murder to take something.
I have watched enough David Attenbrough to see the wolf, the lion, the ape etc stalk then kill an alpha male to aquire his domain.
As for the 'rage' there are many primates that kill for whatever reason.
There is a species of Monkey that in a group take pleasure in the murder of a fellow monkey.
Now, these have been seen in the in the deepest rain forests, where their human interaction is, well, limited.
If this is natural to them, then that means its not unnatural in us, which further examples how we're not a 'virus' but an animal like others.

Oh and FYI - there was an interesting Discovery Channel show on once called Dolphin Murders - guess what that was about, yup Dolphins that went around killing dolphins for no reason.

I don't like to think of the human race as a 'virus' as such but I do think that the state of the world is down to humankind and all else that follows will be at our own hands, thankfully the worst will not occur in our lifetimes. I agree with William Blake's philosophy that nature lives harmoniously, and as humans we think we are above animals, sometimes I think we could learn a lot 🙂

And sometimes I think philosophers need to find a proper job.

All animals don't live harmoniously. They survive along side, but they don't do it harmoniously, they fight, they kill, they devour.

We are the dominant species on the planet, we have our part to play in the devastating things that are happening, but nature itself can and does cause more devastation than we ever could.

We can pollute the air, but as I said, termites cause more CO2 and methane pollution than we ever could.
In 1980, the single eruption of Mt St Helens left upto 11 states with Ash and debris that caused the death and destruction of many animals, including the extinction of some species.

As I say, we have our part to play, but we are not wholly to blame for the 'state' of the planet.

I hate hippies!

 

[Silum]

What's with the stereotype that any person who has a slight interest in the world is a hippy?! Stereotype much?

Yes, but thats beside the point. Besides, as a dirtbag stoner climber, im about as hippie as they come anyway

Unfortunately the condition of our world; environmentally, economically and politically means that we should be taking an interest in it, but then I again I guess we only live it, right?!

It may take you a while to argue the political and economic links we have with a 'virus' but ill let ya have it

Do you seriously think that the way we treat this world is simply down to us being an ever-evolving and adapting species, and can honestly see nothing wrong with the condition the world is currently in?

No, but that's just another thing that seperates us from viruses isn't it?

 

[Flannen]

FYI - William Blake was a poet, not a philosopher.

I still really can't believe that you are going to categorise anyone who isn't arrogant enough to think that as humans we are therefore right about everything we do, as a hippy.

And don't start religious bashing. As someone who considers themselves to be so intelligent (yes, that would be you) I would expect to you have some kind of respect for what others believe and not be narrow minded and bigoted about something you probably don't know anything about or have any experience of.

 

[Silum]

And don't start religious bashing. As someone who considers themselves to be so intelligent (yes, that would be you) I would expect to you have some kind of respect for what others believe and not be narrow minded and bigoted about something you probably don't know anything about or have any experience of.

Actually, your coming off as fairly narrow minded when your start explaining how natural selection (Survival of the fittest) is only a theory. Even if you believe in it. Natural selection is an observable scientific fact. Its used in maths and physics as well as biology, and especially in economics.

Evolution by natural selection is the 'theory'. But again, only in the same way that gravity is a 'theory'. The reason the word theory is used is because science doesnt presume to be so arrogant to be 100% correct. If it did, it would never have advanced as far as it has and we would all be trying to figure out what makes the seasons change.

Btw, I am a Christian and study plenty of theology before you presume me to be religious bashing.

 

[Edmund Blackadder]

FYI - William Blake was a poet, not a philosopher.

I still really can't believe that you are going to categorise anyone who isn't arrogant enough to think that as humans we are therefore right about everything we do, as a hippy.

And don't start religious bashing. As someone who considers themselves to be so intelligent (yes, that would be you) I would expect to you have some kind of respect for what others believe and not be narrow minded and bigoted about something you probably don't know anything about or have any experience of.

I will start with whatever I bloody well like.
If I want to call someone who thinks the world was created by some omnipotent being 5000 years ago, when actual science proves different, a fruitloop, then I will.
Just like I will call Tom Cruise a fruitloop for his Scientology belief.
I don't actually respect people who believe any of that because it is utter stupidity - when you weigh up the scientific fact that trounces it into the ground.
Its ignorance bordering retardation and why should anyone respect that?

Have a good one, hippie!

 

[JenniferAlice]

I respect retardation. Just though I'd add that.

 

[Silum]

Flannen agrees: I'm really not agreeing with the 'virus' analogy, I don't like it at all. I'm just of the opinion that a lot of the problems in the world are down to humans.

Yea OK. I agree that things are worse off than where we started. But its more of a fact of life, a product of nature's/God's ability for one species to take control. The problem I have is you seem to be trying to make people feel guilty for it.

 

[Mazikeen]

Re:

You and me baby aint' nothin' but mammals, so lets do it like they do it on the Discovery channel.....



LMAO.

 

[Edmund Blackadder]

Silum agrees: Not that im gonna go into it here, but you realize not all christians believe in a young earth right? I consider myself a scientist and you do come off as an arrogant prick when you say you have no respect for people who think differently than you 😉

I am a Catholic and I don't particularly care how I come off (you should know that by now).

If someone said to me that there was a small amount of evidence that the world started 5000 years ago or that there is a possibility of intelligent design, I would relent, but this is just not the case.

See we'll take magic. I have seen things that seem bizarre (and I'm not talking about David Copperfield making the Statue of Liberty disappear) that I cannot explain. I give it benefit of doubt because no one has super strong evidence to prove it doesn't exist.

Where as, science has super strong evidence that the Earth is billions of years old.

Now, I haven't once said 'all Christians believe', I have purposefully said anyone who believes that the Earth was created 5000 years ago, I have no respect for.

I was watching a show on BBC1 where this was actually discussed and a religious man called a scientist arrogant.

The scientist said 'Being arrogant doesn't make me wrong, just makes me an ass'.

I can live with that.

 

[Silum]

See we'll take magic. I have seen things that seem bizarre (and I'm not talking about David Copperfield making the Statue of Liberty disappear) that I cannot explain. I give it benefit of doubt because no one has super strong evidence to prove it doesn't exist.

Well with magic you give the benefit of doubt because you cant explain it, but scientology you mock as 'ignorance bordering retardation'. I am sure Scientology can throw some wierd stuff at you that you wont be able explain, I hear they have some strange spiritual gadets that could do the trick.

Now, I haven't once said 'all Christians believe', I have purposefully said anyone who believes that the Earth was created 5000 years ago, I have no respect for.

If I want to call someone who thinks the world was created by some omnipotent being 5000 years ago, when actual science proves different, a fruitloop, then I will.

Ok, well it was the believing in omnipotent that caught my eye, but fair enough.

I was watching a show on BBC1 where this was actually discussed and a religious man called a scientist arrogant.

Ahh yes, what infallible documentary even vaguly related to christianity wouldnt be complete without the 'religious nut!' Well im gonna make my own documentary...staring this dude...

😀

 

[JenniferAlice]

Guys, you could cut the sexual tension in here with a spoon.

 

[Flannen]

I will start with whatever I bloody well like.
If I want to call someone who thinks the world was created by some omnipotent being 5000 years ago, when actual science proves different, a fruitloop, then I will.
Just like I will call Tom Cruise a fruitloop for his Scientology belief.
I don't actually respect people who believe any of that because it is utter stupidity - when you weigh up the scientific fact that trounces it into the ground.
Its ignorance bordering retardation and why should anyone respect that?

Have a good one, hippie!

Ignorance bordering retardation would be assuming that all Christians ignore science completely (as Silum says) which they really don't, and basing their argument on a constructed and somewhat prejudiced image of what a Christian does and doesn't believe.
And if science or religion could 100% prove anything then this type of argument wouldn't exist would it?
It is simply a matter of personal belief, which is something that should be shown respect. I don't deny scientific advancement or consider you're belief in it to be 'ignorant bordering on retardation' (even if does come across that way, its not what I intend) because I respect that people believe differently to me, but it won't stop me defending my own beliefs.

And Silum, I didn't intend to come off as narrow-minded, like you said not all Christians believe in a 'young earth' and I didn't mean to use the word 'theory' to belittle natural selection/evolution in any way, but I see how it came across as doing just that. In the same way, I'm not trying to make people feel guilty for it (which would label a hippie 🙂). If I was then I'd be a complete hypocrite as I'm fully aware that if I did feel that strongly I would be a lot 'greener' than I am 🙂

*********

Apologies if I just responded to anything you guys have already cleared up. I was typing and didn't see! 🙂

 

[white avenger]

To get back to the original statement, virus might not be the most accurate alternative to mammal. I've always thought that humans were more like parasites than anything else, or at the very best symbiotes.