SA: "Humans are doomed to go extinct"

I do not put much stock in the Ehrlichs and Gores of this world. They make dire predictions, go on Carson, make a lot of money, and never admit when their predictions do not come true. I have a real problem with them when they make predictions by extending the present slope of a jagged line out into the future as a straight line.
 
I use to believe that evolution was necessary for a species to survive BUT if the “evolving” is like the past couple decades in general are an indication of what direction homo sapiens are heading I can believe extinction is very possible. IQ’s have been shown to be dropping much less common sense. Quite a few medical variables increasing be it lifestyle choices that lead to co-morbidities like diabetes, high blood pressure/tension, etc to crazy “vaccines” that we really don’t know the full dangers of. Then throw in the overall variables like shortages of resources because of “green” crappy ideas, gender & race divisions continuing, etc. I evolution continues down the current “enlighten”, “woke” or whatever path the new world leadership wants to go down extinction is not farfetched.
 
frakncylons said:
Click to expand...


I wonder whether that knight riding the ostrich is a sort of understated homage to Taarna the Tarakian?

PS Add artwork

Taarna_from_the_Heavy_Metal_Movie.jpg
 
Last edited:
"death is swallowed up in victory"

there is nothing so stupid, arrogant and silly as the assumption that a hairless biped who believes his very neural tube is the result of sheer random chance can accurately foretell the future of the universe.
 
yard mongrel said:
Of course humans will end. We're a fleshy, petty evolutionary niche. Nothing on this planet will be exempt from eventual extinction, no matter how self-important their sentience.
Click to expand...
please, tell me more (giggle)

And you arrive at this conclusion by applying that random mechanical set of electrical impulses which arose by chance and meaningless activity, and you have been able to ascertain that 1) it has an accurate ability to correlate perceptions with the true nature of the universe and 2) your logical laws which govern the use of that neural ganglia are universally true, even though they arose individually from each person and not from some universal law of rationality.... because that would require a law giver.

Damn! That is some trick! You should go on Penn and Teller or something.
 
tanstaafl72555 said:
please, tell me more (giggle)

And you arrive at this conclusion by applying that random mechanical set of electrical impulses which arose by chance and meaningless activity, and you have been able to ascertain that 1) it has an accurate ability to correlate perceptions with the true nature of the universe and 2) your logical laws which govern the use of that neural ganglia are universally true, even though they arose individually from each person and not from some universal law of rationality.... because that would require a law giver.

Damn! That is some trick! You should go on Penn and Teller or something.
Click to expand...

One could argue that there is nothing random, meaningless, or "by chance" about evolution and that it could possibly be guided by a great arbiter of some sort, and that my statement could go hand in hand with said arbiter's gospel about a human's only chance at immortality being the surrendering of said corporeal husk.

One could argue that humans are merely a finite microcosm of something greater, and to worry about the inevitable entropy of a somatic being is a fool's errand, and as such, said hairless ape should concentrate their efforts and thoughts into the realm of the spiritual, metaphysical, or any other conception of a greater whole beyond their own imposed neural ghetto.

But what do I know? I've no greater understanding of the world I occupy than the cells that compose my organs.
 
Nothing in the universe lasts forever. Earth and the sun both have expiration dates. The only ticket to avoid extinction is to colonize the stars.

Personally, I'm not even sure humanity will make it that far. We're really good at screwing ourselves over for our own good.
 
This planet has been through multiple documented cycles of "climate change" ice-age, the great thaw, etc. For us to think that we have the ultimate capacity to change our climate is self-centered at best. Its happened a million plus years ago without us mucking it up.
 
tanstaafl72555 said:
Murray Eden did.
Click to expand...

Good for Murray Eden?

I find the idea of evolution to be a beautiful, well planned piece of machinery, a spindle in a greater mechanism that isn't for my mind to understand. I'm not opposed to the allegory of a greater hand than can be comprehended winding said machine.

I also believe humans will have their literal time in the sun.

I'm merely navigating through the many facets of this world and beyond, same as you. I question and query and find my own way. I love your fervence and insights regardless of the vitriolic barbs that are frequently embedded. I sincerely hope you are doing well, friend.
 
We are a self-centered, egotistical lot who thinks we can somehow control the vast, infinite universe. I for one, find infinite humor in that.
 
yard mongrel said:
Good for Murray Eden?

I find the idea of evolution to be a beautiful, well planned piece of machinery, a spindle in a greater mechanism that isn't for my mind to understand. I'm not opposed to the allegory of a greater hand than can be comprehended winding said machine.

I also believe humans will have their literal time in the sun.

I'm merely navigating through the many facets of this world and beyond, same as you. I question and query and find my own way. I love your fervence and insights regardless of the vitriolic barbs that are frequently embedded. I sincerely hope you are doing well, friend
Click to expand...
Evolutionary theory is beautiful. If only it were science.........

Evolutionary theory is not "science" really. It is a philosophical theory of origins and has almost nothing to do with "science" which by definition deals with activity which is controllable, repeatable, observable, testable and reproducible. Biological evolution as a theory is not science at all. It is a philosophy of life and origins, or a religion, if you will. Fanatical religionists have been known to simply ignore (or deny) empirical data sets which argue against their belief system, and it is certainly no different for evolutionists, theistic or otherwise.

For example, if one had transitional species evidence in the fossil record, genetic probabilities that were not off the charts impossible, a time sequence which is frankly impossible, any records anytime ever anywhere of any beneficial mutations, geological dating methods which are not wildly inconsistent with each other, geological strata ANYWHERE on the earth which are compatible with their supposed ages of deposition that is, one layer after another in the order of the eras in which they were formed), and fossil records which are not wildly incompatible with their supposed time eras........ that is, if there were only EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE which backs up this theory, it might be argued that principles of science had been applied to flesh out a philosophical theory of origins..... IF.......,

Truth matters, and when it encounters error, especially deliberate irrational error, it will be barbed, because sloppy thinking cannot be anything other than sloppy thinking. I don't mean it to be hateful when I say so, but mechanistic theories of origin simply have no reasonable grounds for predicting anything, anytime, ever. Barbed or not, that is just how it is. Further, the theory itself flies in the face of the empirical method which assumes ordered events leading to greater entropy, not less (quantum arguments are NOT a rebuttal to this).

The entire worldview that states humanity is "doomed" or likely to go extinct, or poisoning the planet, or heating the planet to death, or other such nonsense, is entirely predicated on a mechanistic view of the universe. Besides thinking such fears outrageously silly (meaningless blobs of protoplasm fear they will cease to exist! Really?), they are founded entirely on a view that this whole shebang begins and ends with us. When I am not laughing at the absurdity of why it would even matter if this were the case, I do think such "ossity" bubbles are pseudoacademic puffery looking for a pin. Sometimes I can find one.

Do not imagine the barbs are directed at you. However, I find no reason to call sloppy thinking anything other than that. God knows I have seen enough of it in myself to know it when I see it! lol

Belief or disbelief in "evolution" is, however, NOT a matter of simply sitting down and examining empirical data and formulating (or accepting) this theory. I have had many discussions with people over the years around this but almost never have I had a chance to discuss this issue with anyone and found that they looked at the real problems with graduated complexity. Most of them were not even aware of them and thought that if they mocked a Ken Ham video or something they knew all they needed to know about "the other view." I maintain that a mechanistic worldview -which is the basis for the kind of hysterical fears about men rendering the planet uninhabitable, or going extinct- is a chosen world view which does not rely on evidence but rather avoids it.

Anyway, I still maintain that "evolution" (time + chance .. maybe you can add "plus energy" but even that is sloppy thinking) = greater complexity is hardly a basis for postulating on the future of the universe or the future of mankind.

I am sure you yourself are a nice person and my critique here has zero to do with that. First beer is on me.
 
Last edited:
Charlie said:
I do not put much stock in the Ehrlichs and Gores of this world.
Click to expand...
Gore was after my time ( did inconveniently read his book... much later). I read Ehrlich when I was a sophomore in college. Thank God I had already been introduced to Malthus and could recognize the tune, even if the words were different.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom