"The planet does not need humans."

[VaiFanatic90 360]

This is an article related to the current situation going on at the Discovery TV building.

 

If he really feels that way, somebody please dispatch him. I'm all for preserving the planet and wildlife, but to say that the planet does need humans and then to continue living as one is hypocritical and a bit overboard.

[Juggernaut 11,054]

[BobAsh 582]

...but we need the planet, so there you have it.

[Bean.223 365]

He is nuttier than you think.

 

Here is his sight with full list of demands.

 

http://savetheplanetprotest.com/

Edited September 1, 2010 by Bean.223

[VaiFanatic90 360]

 

Love those shirts!

 

 

...but we need the planet, so there you have it.

 

Exactly, it's not like we can all go die.

 

He is nuttier than you think. Here is his sight with full list of demands.http://savetheplanetprotest.com/

 

What bugs me even more, is that this guy talks about doing stuff. He talks big, but instead of doing anything, he writes a little pansy ass list and goes to a television station to take hostages. I wonder if he drove there? I wonder if knows that gun and explosives he may have were produced and may have caused some kind of pollution.

 

This guy is just like the islamic extremist. They shun the west, yet they insist on wearing clothes, using cell phones, making videos, using guns, etc. All these things created by some genius of the west. He is as hypocritical as they are.

 

ETA: In his well-thought and written list, I just like the "WTF???"

Edited September 1, 2010 by VaiFanatic90

[RobRez 1,895]

His logic that more people =more war.... seems to be that war kinda, gee, I dunno ....KILLS people.????

[Rockina 60]

Problem solved.............

[VaiFanatic90 360]

Problem solved.............

 

I was just about to update. The shot and killed him. Good riddance. But now they'll find a way to glorify him.

[Klassy Kalashnikov 1,393]

Well, he's right about one thing. The earth would be just fine without humans. Sure the eco system may be a little different with or without a given plant/animal, but the planet itself would surely still exist and be just fine. We've only been building anything lasting for about 6,000 years now, give or take. Which is a laughably small number, considering the Earth has been around for billions of years. Once we're gone, it won't take very long at all (on a geological time scale) for it to look like we were never here at all. How long until a modern abandoned city is weathered to nothing? 10,000 years? That's basically a cigarette break on a geological time scale.

 

The guy's clearly a nutcase (I'd say running into a TV studio with a propane tank strapped to your chest is about as nutty as it gets) but I don't get what's so outrageous about this particular statement about the planet "not needing humans", as it's really nothing even controversial. Especially with all the other crazy shit he's said that could be talked about instead. I just don't get what is so outrageous about this statement, or why anyone would feel that the earth somehow needs humans.

 

EDIT: I might add, the other 7 planets in the solar system seem to be doing just fine without humans

Edited September 1, 2010 by Classy Kalashnikov

[rob-cubed 74]

This was all over the news today as it happened not far from me.

 

The guy was a nutbag, but he's right that the planet does not need us and there are way too many people on it already. Environmentalists harp about reducing impact all the time, but not one is willing to take on the issue of population control--which is the main cause of all the other problems. This was the core of his message, including immigration control, even if it was dressed up like a hippie.

 

The poor and uneducated tend to over-procreate. They have multiple kids that aren't given the opportunities to better themselves or those around them. It's a vicious cycle. At the core of this guy's rantings is a grain of truth I wish more politicians were willing to address publicly. But NO ONE except a crazy person is willing to tell someone else that having kids is not only a bad choice for themselves and their children, but the rest of us as well.

 

But he's still a nutbag and anyone who takes hostages deserves to get shot.

Edited September 1, 2010 by rob-cubed

[Klassy Kalashnikov 1,393]

This was all over the news today as it happened not far from me.

 

The guy was a nutbag, but he's right that the planet does not need us and there are way too many people on it already. Environmentalists harp about reducing impact all the time, but not one is willing to take on the issue of population control--which is the main cause of all the other problems.

 

The poor and uneducated tend to over-procreate. They have kids they aren't given the opportunities to better themselves or those around them. It's a vicious cycle. At the core of this guy's rantings is a grain of truth I wish more politicians were willing to address publicly. But NO ONE is willing to tell someone else that having kids is not only a bad choice for themselves and their children, but the rest of us as well.

 

But he's still a nutbag and anyone who takes hostages deserves to get shot.

 

Well said.

[VaiFanatic90 360]

EDIT: I might add, the other 7 planets in the solar system seem to be doing just fine without humans

 

8! Pluto will always be a planet IMHO. That's just what I learned.

[GregM1 241]

i liked reading "no one was believed to have been injured other than the gunman" which is a good thing. So he was not a killer, just crazy.

 

I never trust an extremist of any type. Any time someone is an extremist, they loose the ability to see a diverisfied picture and it is only one way of action to be allowed. That being an extreme action. All others views are pointless hot air to them.

[Casp 119]

Environmentalists harp about reducing impact all the time, but not one is willing to take on the issue of population control--which is the main cause of all the other problems.

 

Most people have a hard time wrapping their head around just how large a number 6.8 billion people is. You could kill one million people a day, every single day (that's about twelve people every second, seven hundred every minute, almost forty-two thousand an hour; a greater death toll than the Jewish holocaust in the period of a week) for eighteen and a half years and you still wouldn't rack up a body count of 6.8 billion dead. I'm not saying I condone such a thing, but it really puts it in perspective for you, number-wise.

 

(Tell me if you see something wrong with my math: 1 million (people) times 365.25 (days in a year) times 18.5 (years) equals 6,757,125,000.0)

 

But he's still a nutbag and anyone who takes hostages deserves to get shot.

 

Seconded.

Edited September 1, 2010 by Caspian Sea Monster

[Bean.223 365]

Overpopulation in the West is not a problem. It's the overpopulation elsewhere. Problem is, people like Mr. Lee believe that WE should stop procreation. And to a certain extinct you can see that happening today. Why else is our leaders making pregnant Mexicans our #1 import these days.

 

I cant understand why we would underpopulated ourselves in order to save the rest of the stupid world that continues to reproduce at crazy rates.

 

Some think the whole overpopulation theory is just that.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZVOU5bfHrM

 

You can see it today with our Social Security system falling apart due to lack of workers vs. retirees.

Edited September 1, 2010 by Bean.223

[Casp 119]

I said nothing about nationality, nor suggested any plan of action to do anything about it. That's not my job, and I don't claim to be smart enough to solve all the world's problems.

 

It's a given that most of that population surge concentration is in India and the PRC, and so you could make an argument that the solution is to nuke the hell out of both countries. Just because you can make an argument doesn't mean you should.

Edited September 1, 2010 by Caspian Sea Monster

[VaiFanatic90 360]

It's been shown that countries that are more technologically advance and more industrious tend to have near-zero birth rates. China is approaching that point, but other countries lack the education or medical technology. Families in who live in places where diseases are common often have multiple kids to ensure at least one lives into adulthood. Sometimes it happens that all 17 kids a couple had survive. However, in a country like ours, we are more comfortable having 1-2 kids, and that's fine, as the death rate and birth rate here in the US are very close to each other.

[rjrivero 50]

The earth has a way of keeping the population in check. It'll take just one pandemic to rectify the overpopulation issue. It wasn't swine flu, but I'm sure it's coming...........

[BuffetDestroyer 969]

This was all over the news today as it happened not far from me.

 

The guy was a nutbag, but he's right that the planet does not need us and there are way too many people on it already. Environmentalists harp about reducing impact all the time, but not one is willing to take on the issue of population control--which is the main cause of all the other problems. This was the core of his message, including immigration control, even if it was dressed up like a hippie.

 

The poor and uneducated tend to over-procreate. They have multiple kids that aren't given the opportunities to better themselves or those around them. It's a vicious cycle. At the core of this guy's rantings is a grain of truth I wish more politicians were willing to address publicly. But NO ONE except a crazy person is willing to tell someone else that having kids is not only a bad choice for themselves and their children, but the rest of us as well.

 

But he's still a nutbag and anyone who takes hostages deserves to get shot.

 

The birth cycle of poorer people is also typically faster than other demographic groups, thus contributing to logarithmic birth rates as subsequent generations repeat the cycle sooner and in Western culture, the average lifespan has been increasing.

 

Teaching birth control goes against a lot of religious and societal beliefs of world and domestic cultures. But deaths of millions by starvation or disease from polluted drinking water is much more horrific to me than teaching someone to use a condom! This is what I think about when seeing those fucking TV commercials asking for $.15 a day and why my wife and I have agreed to adopt if we ever want kids.

 

The unfortunate thing is that ultimately nature finds a way to reduce unsustainable overpopulation of a species. I just hope it doesn't happen in my lifetime.

[BuffetDestroyer 969]

The earth has a way of keeping the population in check. It'll take just one pandemic to rectify the overpopulation issue. It wasn't swine flu, but I'm sure it's coming...........

You beat me to saying it!

 

+1

[rob-cubed 74]

The unfortunate thing is that ultimately nature finds a way to reduce unsustainable overpopulation of a species. I just hope it doesn't happen in my lifetime.

 

I hear ya brother. The world has a way of self-leveling its imbalances, and I too hope that's it's not in my lifetime, or that of my child, or her child.

 

To Bean.223's point, dire warnings of over-population have been circulated as long as anyone can remember, and yet we've always seemed to find ways to make the resources we have stretch farther. The problem with logarithmic growth and Moore's law is that every closed system eventually has a point at which it falls apart. Just because it hasn't happened yet doesn't mean it won't.

[Bean.223 365]

The unfortunate thing is that ultimately nature finds a way to reduce unsustainable overpopulation of a species. I just hope it doesn't happen in my lifetime.

 

I hear ya brother. The world has a way of self-leveling its imbalances, and I too hope that's it's not in my lifetime, or that of my child, or her child.

 

To Bean.223's point, dire warnings of over-population have been circulated as long as anyone can remember, and yet we've always seemed to find ways to make the resources we have stretch farther. The problem with logarithmic growth and Moore's law is that every closed system eventually has a point at which it falls apart. Just because it hasn't happened yet doesn't mean it won't.

 

 

You mean like Social Security??

[Shandlanos 1,470]

The planet doesn't need humans. However, human beings are sentient life, and if there's any kind of point to existence, self-aware life has to be part of it. And we sure as shit need this planet.

 

Environmentalists that want to "save the planet" don't really give a flying fuck about the planet. Like the rest of us, they care about themselves. "Save the planet" really means "keep the planet pleasant and safe for me".

 

If all life disappears, Earth will continue in its orbit about the sun, unperturbed. If human beings successfully "destroy" the planet, to such extant that we no longer exist, even if we take the majority of species with us in the process, the planet, and the remaining life on it, will move on. In a few thousand years a new, stable ecosystem will emerge from the wreckage, and a few million years later (an eyeblink in the life of the universe) the Earth will be just as full of diverse life as it ever was. Even if it was our goal, humanity does not have the power to destroy the Earth. It took the most powerful nation on Earth months to plug a small hole a mile below the surface of the ocean. What chance do we have of reaching, much less destroying, all the life on this Earth? Most of it does not live on land.

 

Mass extinctions have occurred regularly in the life of this planet; the next one will be no more tragic.

 

This guy was an idiot, and his death well-deserved. I am thankful that he was the only one harmed in the course of his demise. Holding people hostage to save something that does not need your help... Not too bright.

 

The Earth is a great blue and green spinning vehicle that we ride around the solar system. I intend to enjoy the ride.

[VaiFanatic90 360]

The planet doesn't need humans. However, human beings are sentient life, and if there's any kind of point to existence, self-aware life has to be part of it. And we sure as shit need this planet.

 

Environmentalists that want to "save the planet" don't really give a flying fuck about the planet. Like the rest of us, they care about themselves. "Save the planet" really means "keep the planet pleasant and safe for me".

 

If all life disappears, Earth will continue in its orbit about the sun, unperturbed. If human beings successfully "destroy" the planet, to such extant that we no longer exist, even if we take the majority of species with us in the process, the planet, and the remaining life on it, will move on. In a few thousand years a new, stable ecosystem will emerge from the wreckage, and a few million years later (an eyeblink in the life of the universe) the Earth will be just as full of diverse life as it ever was. Even if it was our goal, humanity does not have the power to destroy the Earth. It took the most powerful nation on Earth months to plug a small hole a mile below the surface of the ocean. What chance do we have of reaching, much less destroying, all the life on this Earth? Most of it does not live on land.

 

Mass extinctions have occurred regularly in the life of this planet; the next one will be no more tragic.

 

This guy was an idiot, and his death well-deserved. I am thankful that he was the only one harmed in the course of his demise. Holding people hostage to save something that does not need your help... Not too bright.

 

The Earth is a great blue and green spinning vehicle that we ride around the solar system. I intend to enjoy the ride.

 

+1 I couldn't have said it better myself.

[ironhead7544 35]

Hundreds of thousands of species have gone extinct. We are just one species and we could easily be gone too. The life on Earth does need us. We need to get off this planet. The sun will nova someday. That means life will not survive here. We need to get into space to find another planet. Animals can not build spaceships. They need us to take them with us.

[kdbutler 563]

It fascinates me when people like James Lee preach that the world would be a lot better place with fewer humans. People like him are normally just a bunch of talk. If he and others wanted to save the planet through population control, they'd have more of an impact by voluntarily shedding this mortal coil.

 

But no, these types are usually talking about the control of others, and see themselves as the ones who deserve to remain when the rest of we "undesirables" are gone.

 

With all of that said, Lee is doing more now to save the planet than he did when he was breathing. Fucking Moonbat.

Edited September 3, 2010 by Kevin in Texas

[Wolverine 10,360]

Apparently he was saving the medication for someone who will take it on a regular basis. Gone and forgotten!