Geoengineering ...

[Anomalocaris]

Yeah lets all state our opinions and leave it at that, what a great "discussion" forum that would be.

---

I have nothing left to say that would be of any meaning to you, VOID. Topics like this are complex and you see it as black and white.

"We gon' die!"
"Quick! Fuck the birds! We need to live!"
"OK! Release the chemicals... now!"

Wheres the rationality? I see none.

If when we are about to die, and fucking the birds might save us, and you are inclined to stop us fucking the birds knowing that it will endanger our survival, then I am inclined to kill you first.

[ib.me.ub]

If you cannot see the moral justification with living in harmony with the Planet and other Species, then you are morally inept. The eco-system is not fragmented, it is one system that works in conjunction with all its parts to form a whole. One part cannot survive without the other parts. Too think humans can survive alone shows immense arrogance and a seperation from the environment, in which you live.
An environment which is now approaching the brink.

Here lies the problem. Seperation from our environment is not only arrogant, unsightful and immature, it has led us to the present point in time. A pont in time where we are starting to think about 'geo enigineering' as a solution. Carry on as we are and try to manipulate the environment to suit ourselves, will not end in a happy ending. As you maybe aware, humans will never fully control the environment. See sense and live within the ecological boundries set out by a system that is much more powerful than any one species.

To think other wise will be at our own peril.

[Anomalocaris]

Living in harmony with the planet as a tactic is fine. Living in harmony with the planet as the overarching strategic goal is beneath contempt.

[ib.me.ub]

Consider living in harmony with the Planet ensures the survival of the species, I see no other strategy. To think otherwise is significantly inept.

[theVOID]

If you cannot see the moral justification with living in harmony with the Planet and other Species, then you are morally inept.

According to some moral framework or your intuitions?

There is no such thing as true harmony in nature, there is just as much conflict, between forces and organisms.

The eco-system is not fragmented, it is one system that works in conjunction with all its parts to form a whole. One part cannot survive without the other parts.

Not true, parts of the ecosystem wipe each other out all the time. 99.9% of all biological systems in the ecosystem have gone extinct, nature kills us all the time, we kill parts of nature, it's still all here and it's still all functioning. Parts are contingent upon some parts not all parts and we can survive just fine without a great deal of it.

Too think humans can survive alone shows immense arrogance and a seperation from the environment, in which you live. An environment which is now approaching the brink.

Agreed we can't survive alone, we are contingent beings. That doesn't mean we can't survive without a great deal of it.

Here lies the problem. Seperation from our environment is not only arrogant, unsightful and immature, it has led us to the present point in time.

It should be "here lies my straw man" because nobody is saying we are separate from the environment. Our ability to manipulate the environment is what got us to where we are today, it is likely the only reason why we haven't already gone extinct, it may also be our downfall.

A pont in time where we are starting to think about 'geo enigineering' as a solution.

As a last resort more specifically. If we cannot manage to curb our habits we may be forced to take action to prevent ourselves and the mast majority of other species from dying.

Carry on as we are and try to manipulate the environment to suit ourselves,

That's why we're not still picking carcasses in the desert.

will not end in a happy ending.

Maybe not, but without it we'd already be dead.

As you maybe aware, humans will never fully control the environment. See sense and live within the ecological boundries set out by a system that is much more powerful than any one species.

We are living within the boundaries, we are completely contingent upon them. Anything we can change is necessarily not a boundary.

To think other wise will be at our own peril.

And to not have done so in the first place would have lead to our destruction a long time ago. We will continue to manipulate the environment, we just have to be wise about it now that we know the risks.

[ib.me.ub]

If you cannot see the moral justification with living in harmony with the Planet and other Species, then you are morally inept.

According to some moral framework or your intuitions?

There is no such thing as true harmony in nature, there is just as much conflict, between forces and organisms.

A basic morall framework that is simple to see & even easier to understand.

The harmony is also easy to see. It may not be so nice sometimes, but it is there.

The eco-system is not fragmented, it is one system that works in conjunction with all its parts to form a whole. One part cannot survive without the other parts.

Not true, parts of the ecosystem wipe each other out all the time. 99.9% of all biological systems in the ecosystem have gone extinct, nature kills us all the time, we kill parts of nature, it's still all here and it's still all functioning. Parts are contingent upon some parts not all parts and we can survive just fine without a great deal of it.

Over time, this maybe true, but for the present it is not. The Planet as a whole will live longer than any one species, but the species that live here at the present, rely upon one another, and a stable environment to survive.

Can anything survive without a heathy Ocean?

Too think humans can survive alone shows immense arrogance and a seperation from the environment, in which you live. An environment which is now approaching the brink.

Agreed we can't survive alone, we are contingent beings. That doesn't mean we can't survive without a great deal of it.

This is extremly arrogant and immoral.

Here lies the problem. Seperation from our environment is not only arrogant, unsightful and immature, it has led us to the present point in time.

It should be "here lies my straw man" because nobody is saying we are separate from the environment. Our ability to manipulate the environment is what got us to where we are today, it is likely the only reason why we haven't already gone extinct, it may also be our downfall.

I am saying you are seperated from the environment because of the contemp you hold for it.

And where are we exactly? A good or bad place in time?

A pont in time where we are starting to think about 'geo enigineering' as a solution.

As a last resort more specifically. If we cannot manage to curb our habits we may be forced to take action to prevent ourselves and the mast majority of other species from dying.

hmm, interesting. Maybe, maybe not.

As you maybe aware, humans will never fully control the environment. See sense and live within the ecological boundries set out by a system that is much more powerful than any one species.

We are living within the boundaries, we are completely contingent upon them. Anything we can change is necessarily not a boundary.

We are far outside the carrying capacity of the Planet. Therefore, well outside the natural boundries that are set for us.

To think other wise will be at our own peril.

And to not have done so in the first place would have lead to our destruction a long time ago. We will continue to manipulate the environment, we just have to be wise about it now that we know the risks.

You say long ago, humans have lived in harmony with the Planet for the vast majority of history. Only recently with the onset of the industrial age and modern medicine have we begun to push the limits.

We have reached a point in history, a point where we will change and adapt to a clean future, or we will suffer by our own hand.

[theVOID]

A basic morall framework that is simple to see & even easier to understand.

Want to present it? Then we can see if it's sound and valid. It seems like you're just using your intuitions though.

The harmony is also easy to see. It may not be so nice sometimes, but it is there.

There is some harmony, bees and flowers etc, there is also one hell of a lot of chaos, to say that it's only harmony is plainly false.

Over time, this maybe true, but for the present it is not. The Planet as a whole will live longer than any one species, but the species that live here at the present, rely upon one another, and a stable environment to survive

Again only true to an extent, we don't depend on Kittens to exist, Lions don't depend on parrots etc. We need not a stable environment but one that we can survive, stable or not. Stability helps long term, so does the ability to manipulate the environment, for a time we had both, so did Neanderthals, instability killed them, we got lucky, things are stable again for now, if things ever become unstable again hopefully we either get lucky or we are sufficiently able to manipulate the environment to suit.

All that matters in those situations is our survival, If our only option kills another species then so be it, I won't think twice.

Can anything survive without a heathy Ocean?

Fuck all can, but life is resilient and if some life can survive and reproduce then there is still the opportunity for natural selection. We're better off not getting to that point (pragmatically by preventing it from getting any worse but we might not be able to) and if that involves large scale manipulation of the environment then we'll do it.

This is extremly arrogant and immoral.

No it's factual

Kill all the cats on the planet, we can survive, kill all the marsupials and we can also survive. That is not to say we should do it, there is no reason to, and if it doesn't assist our survival there is little point in doing so, but it's neither arrogant or immoral to point out that we could get by fine without them.

I am saying you are serperated from the environment because of the contemp you hold for it.

And that's just plain false, I'm of the opinion that we should try and sustain a stable environment as best we can, it's in our best interest to do so, my point was that if we are forced to do something drastic to prevent catastrophe and that is going to kill some species then i'll do it.

hmm, interesting. Maybe, maybe not.

Any environmental threat to our lives is just as likely to kill any other mammal that gets in it's way.

We are far outside the carrying capacity of the Planet. Therefore, well outside the natural boundries that are set for us.

No we aren't, the planet will be fine, some species may die. The only boundaries we are confined to are the ones that allow us to survive, that's a small portion of possible conditions.

You say long ago, humans have lived in harmony with the Planet for the vast majority of history. Only recently with the onset of the industrial age and modern medicine have we begun to push the limits.

Not true, we've struggled against the environment more often than not, deserts that can kill you from exhaustion during the day or freezing during the night, an ice age, floods, earthquakes, we nearly all got wiped out by the mount toba volcano.

The same things that are responsible for the vast majority of species that have exited now being extinct are the things we overcome to survive.

Our technology and medicine is beneficial to our survivial, not detrimental, without it we would stand fuck all of a chance of surviving long term, but wiht it we stand a chance.

We have reached a point in history, a point where we will change and adapt to a clean future, or we will suffer by our own hand.

We might suffer, we might be able to manipulate the environment. I agree being efficient is the first response, but things can rapidly get out of our control, all it would take is a natural heat cycle to accelerate our c02 caused warming and we're going to have to resort to the last resorts.

[KichigaiNeko]

err ...wasn't SO2 the problem with 'Acid Rain'?

[ib.me.ub]

@theVOID. Plainly you are wrong & deluded.

Who are you to judge my moral framework, when obviously your own is questionable. Your points are so full of loop holes and monkey would have no trouble jumping trough them.

Although id like to indulge you in this mental masterbation, I have much better things to do with my time, obviously you don't. I still coclude that you are morally corrupt and intrisically seperated from your environment and reality.

You can use your well rehearsed and time consuming internet debating to try and debunk any argument put forward. All you do in reality is run around in circles, put forward paper thin arguments and persist in repeating yourself. This basically allows you to break people down through time consumption.

Kill all the cats. Kill all the mammals. Well lets kill all the humans while we are at it.

You seem to think that everything your little mind establishes is the gospel truth, well I have some news for you.

[KichigaiNeko]

Totally non-Politically correct

---

[attachment=451]

---