A World Without People 16

The show is named, “Life After People“.

I don’t know what possesses a television network to run programs based on this idea. Just what does a world without people mean? Why would anybody be interested in a world without people? What’s the point?

Certainly, embedded in this meme is the thought that humans are bad for “nature”. People are not “natural”. Mankind is destroying the earth.

Who cares? Logically, if humans are suddenly gone from the face of the earth, why should anyone care what things would happen? If we are dead, let us stay dead. The earth can take care of itself.

For some unfathomable reason, certain people firmly believe that humans are bad for the earth, and everything we do is not natural. How does anyone come to the conclusion that humans are not natural?

picture of beaver dam

Natural Beaver Home

People are as natural as ants, beavers, bears, lions, tigers, and sloths. Our houses and high-rises are just as natural as beaver dams and ant hills. Have you seen the damage beavers can do to the environment? Those are tough little buggers.

People who believe humans are not natural are the same people who firmly believe that mankind is the result of millions of years of very natural evolution. If we evolved alongside other predators and prey, why are we not considered natural?  I have imported a couple of pictures from Wikipedia. One is of a beaver dam, and one is of the tallest skyscraper in the world, the Burj Khalifa in Dubai.

wikipedia picture of skyscraper

Very Tall Skyscraper – A Natural Human Construction

Beavers cut down valuable trees along the banks of creeks and rivers. Mankind mixes concrete and manufactures steel beams to build magnificent buildings. Some people buildings are beautiful, and some look like beaver dams which are hard to differentiate from accident locations.

Those who complain about forests being cut down may have a point about the degradation of rain forests, but don’t forget how much land is damaged every year by fire ants in the American Southwest and Southeast. If people were to disappear from the earth another species will become dominant, and will do its part in changing its environment to suit.

Come on, people. What’s the point of all this humans-are-bad stuff?

 

Advertisements

16 comments

  1. Thanks, Angel. I haven’t thought about the concept of self-hate, but I guess it is there. It may be the most explanatory idea about this “humans must die” attitude of many of our environmentalists. Have a great weekend!

  2. Why’s Renee Descarte’s name keep dancin’ through my mind as I read your opening paragraphs!?

    Honesty, Bob…it almost seems like there IS some kind of push to rid the world of PEOPLE to make way for ………trees that, if they fall in the forest, will not only make no sound but WHO CARES?

    Who CARES (about ANYTHING) if there are no humans? Actually, I found this an astonishing apologetic. Why would there be an earth if GOD didn’t want someplace to plant us? VERY COOL concept. Maybe I’ve just been obtuse all these years (no surprise) but I never quite thought of it exactly like that!

  3. I have seen the program and, like you, have never figured out its point. I suppose it only makes sense that the abandoned and degraded creations of engineers will one day crumble. The evidence of this is overwhelming as it applies to ancient civilizations. This is a production of A&E Network, jointly owned by Hearst and Disney. This is about as entertaining as that disgusting program appearing (of all channels) on The Learning Channel, “Here Comes Honey Boo Boo.” Watch one of those, and you will beg the Lord to send us a life-ending meteor. Of course, I am not sure why the left thinks this is “entertainment.” Maybe they don’t think that at all. Maybe they think it is a means to an end.

    Nevertheless, I did watch one segment of the program and learned that all the cute little kitties and Pekinese will be warm meat for larger animals. I wondered, “After people, who cares?”

  4. It does make you wonder though if something apocalyptic happened, if Democrats would revert to being apes and such …

  5. Bob, I believe that things like this are put forth to make people feel guilty. When people feel guilty, they do stupid things like vote a no nothing, done nothing into the white house. And a lot more. They guy into about every environmental scam that comes along. Ozone, Next ice age, Next flooding of the Earth and it is all directed at getting your money and gaining more control over you. and/or
    liberals being unable to come to sensible conclusions about anything, come up with this stuff and those who can gain from it -politicians-out of work scientists-socialist countries out of money-etc- hop on it and take the obvious advantage.

  6. Z: I had to Google Descartes to understand your comment. You see, I have never read philosophy. It was one of those things I didn’t have to study in my engineering curriculum. I studied other social sciences, like psychology, anthropology, gym and card playing. Descartes idea of “I exist” does indeed sound kinda like my “humans are natural” theme. My main problem is that philosophy gives me a headache. I will defer the reading and studying of such until medical marijuana becomes the sensible substitution for elder care withheld by Obama Care. Something tells me that the great philosophers were doing some kind of weed, anyway.

  7. Z: “Why would there be an earth if GOD didn’t want someplace to plant us? VERY COOL concept. Maybe I’ve just been obtuse all these years (no surprise) but I never quite thought of it exactly like that!”

    Don’t we get the same message from Genesis? I am sure there is a classification or name for this kind of idea. If there were no mankind, why would there be an earth? This is a perfectly legitimately viewpoint from a human perspective. If humans are not around, some other species would be dominant, and they would be destroying the planet like the darned dinosaurs did by eating all those trees and trampling all those ant hills and grass meadows. There was nobody around to shovel the poop..Ugg! Who would want a planet dominated by dinosaurs? What’s the point? Either we humans matter, or nothing matters. See how easy this philosophy stuff is?

  8. Mustang: ” “Here Comes Honey Boo Boo.” Watch one of those, and you will beg the Lord to send us a life-ending meteor.”

    I almost gagged on that one. Honey Boo Boo makes me gag, period. What were the producers thinking when they came up with this idea?

    Great comments and ideas. Thanks.

  9. Kid;: I think you are more than a little bit right. Combining Angel’s comment of liberal self-hate with yours of making people feel guilt are right on. For the most part, I think liberals believe this crap. They feel guilty for being a human being and exhaling CO2, and they cannot imagine others not feeling the same. Anti-science zealots are running the Democrat Party. They now have their religion, and their church is the Democrat Party.Thanks.

  10. Bob, Thanks.

    One more thought regards the macro evolution meme. WHY are humans SO different from every other species on Earth?
    Man can build and ants can build but Humans went to the fricken Moon for God’s sake. I’m not buying the macro evolution thing. I’m just not.

  11. Kid: I gotta tell you, I don’t really get macro-evolution. From the net, I learn, “Macroevolution generally refers to evolution above the species level.” So, it encompasses multiple species doing stuff in the same direction. It seems to me that that would be what macroevolution would be all about, one species would have many of the same stressors as other species, and would evolve in some of the same directions. I may have it all wrong, but I am not steeped in evolutionary theory, anyway.

    As to how mankind has fared in this evolutionary scheme, I can’t plug humans into the same pattern. If the macroevolution stuff is accurate, it would seem that more human-caliber species would be around building bigger ant-like hills, bigger hornet-like nests, with tv and internet included as standard options in each wasp nest. Where are the other intelligent species? Is that what you mean?

    First, there was Z with her Descartes philosophy. Now, you are throwing evolution at me. Man, you guys make my head ache!!!

    Have a good weekend.

  12. Bob, Yea, that’s exactly what I mean. The vast separation between humans and any other species is immense.
    My main point in this context is that they’ve never found a single missing link. They’ve found 1 or 2 things that the radicals point to and say, here’s you missing link, but to go all the way from ape to man, you’ve got to have as many missing link fossils as you have dinosaurs or anything else. It’s not there. In every other fossilized species development you’ve got millions of years of development. Humans? Plop, here we are in the fossil record a couple hundred thousand years ago.

    One could argue alien implantation if they want to avoid the Creator explanation, but they can’t argue macro evolution.
    We did not evolve from pond scum. I triple guarantee it.

  13. Kid:

    The PLOP theory. I love it.

    It has always seemed to me that those who advocate the “Ancient Alien” implantation thing are really arguing a subset of the Creator argument.

    One of the points made in the article that explained macroevolution was that we don’t have a real feel as to how long this stuff has been going on. A million years is a LONG time! If a continent drifts only 1 cm per year, in one million years it will have traveled about 10 kilometers, and a billion year drift is 10,000 kilometers. Lots of bugs and animals will change an awful lot while that is going on. I am drinking wine, now, so somebody needs to check my arithmetic. If the earth was formed about 3.8 billion years ago, it is not possible for me to imagine that kind of time span. The article says this time span would allow the macroevolution thing to work. Even at that, it still sounds like “plop, plop” to me.

    I understand what you mean about connecting fossil records. So-called scientists have not been able to convincingly connect the dots, so they use the “missing link” idea. There are not missing links, there are entire missing trees! The only evolutionary science that might have any relevance is genetics. It is awesome what they are learning, and they claim to be able to track and figure the age of genetic mutations. Since this is the only part of evolutionary science that uses mathematics, I am more prone to pay attention.

    I don’t understand genetic theory nor have I studied it. It is one of those things I intend to study, someday, but I have been doing other things. Perhaps you have information or opinions about this stuff..

  14. Bob, Thanks 🙂 – I have not studied genetic theory. And I don’t have the exact number but the Earth spent I think a couple billion of those years being bombarded by asteroids, comets, meteors and for the crust to even harden.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s