🚀 go-pugleaf

On 3 May 2004 13:04:41 -0700, apocalypse_zero@hotmail.com (Hostman
Brevis) wrote:

>> How large a human population can survive comfortably on this planet
>> without demolishing the planetary ecology? 
>
>How large? I don't know, do you? Off topic.

I think that's one criteria that should be considered when deciding
how damn 'superior' we are. Is a species that fouls it's environment
while overpopulating it superior?

>> How long can our species
>> survive at our present rate of population increase? 
>
>I don't know, do you? Off topic.

ON topic. The yeast in my wine vat multiplies without restraint, eats
all the sugar it can reach, then dies of starvation. If humanity is no
smarter than that, how superior are we?

>> How long can we
>> even maintain our present level of technological advancement and
>> remain the earth's dominant species?
>
>We aren't the dominant species, I thought I told you before that
>bacteria and insects are dominant in terms of population and % earth's
>biomass, we are less. Give 'your definition' of dominant then.

Top of the food chain is dominant.

>> The science fiction writers often forsee a future in which man has
>> invented fusion reactors to supply limitless clean energy and
>> civilizations that mine the asteroids for resources. 
>
>Nice, but WAY off topic, is this supposed to be an argument?

Yes it is. We are rapidly approaching the point where we either get
off this planet or control our population or our consumption of
resources. China and India are already at the limit, and South America
is rapidly approaching it.

>> Maybe that will
>> come true, I sure hope so, but those same writers also write of a
>> future where our civilization has become so populous that it has
>> ruined the earth. 
>
>I was talking about the superiority of mankind, 

So am I. The issue is, what's the criteria to be used when judging
superiority?

>"Man is a 'freak of nature', but this freak, who is a part of nature,
>has awoken from the coma called evolution. Man calls himself free,
>above all and superior. He knows and sees the others who haven't
>awoken and has pity for them though it's not logical."
>
>Hostman Brevis, 2004

Man calls himself superior. But is he? Or is he a plague, a
pestilence. Pity may be the appropriate emotion toward the species who
have to share the earth with us.

## Are you thinking, or just rearranging your prejudices?