Man, The Dumbest Animal On The Planet

Somebody who is much smarter than we are put us here for a reason. If every one of us committed suicide tomorrow, we would be incarnated somewhere to resume our journey. For each and every person who commits a selfish act, there is somebody who is committing an unselfish one. It balances out.

Do not get suicidal over it. Choose to be one of the good ones.

God does not exist, Darwin as wrong and in our present state we are doomed to failure. Not because we are not capable of better or achieving much more but we are still like children/savages.

For millenia we have fought over the same things even to the present day we fight over resources, we fight over man made religion, we kill off new ideas because of competition etc.

Pehaps its just the materialism perhaps its just religion but what ever it is no matter how big our brains are we are still as dumb as horse dung. Just one example just think of what could have been acheived will all the money spent on war and weapons over the last century. It all comes down to money, we have plenty of money to kill each other but we do not focus on what we could do to make things better.

Maybe we are just an experiment put here by more inteligent lifeforms, maybe Planet Earth is just one big prison, maybe it is aplace of trial and endurance that one has to endure to proceed to the next level?

reply to post by Dorian Soran


Would it have ever occured to you to get him spayed?
Like a responsible pet owner should do?
Maybe by doing that a long time ago, he would have all
his legs now and not be all "jizzy" either!
Are you sure your dog is the dumb one?

Thats the point there are no "good ones" we all share the same traits despite our best efforts to be otherwise when it comes down to the wire we would all kill or do what ever it took to be on top. That is mans legacy a never ending cycle of fear and war murder and mayhem its what we do best.

It would be good if opur minds could be swept clean of all these things that by some miracle we would all wake up in the morning with a new outlook with a common goal to become one whole entity for the benefit of all mankind.

No religion no war, no pestilence no hate or indifference nothing but a common thread that unites us all.

Look on the positive side, no matter how dumb you are, there's always someone whose dumber. Humanity is a product of the environment we live in. Stupidity & ignorance increases exponentially to intelligence. The more intelligent something becomes, the greater it's capacity for stupidity & ignorance. We can't escape this universal law. No one can. We were created by a creator who is well renown for being a cosmic clown. Welcome to the circus. Enjoy the ride!

reply to post by magicmushroom

Where is that thread! That sounds like the one to star and flag,
(in)definately!
Seriously though, I intend no disrespect, only pointing out flaws
in thinking we all can exhibit now and again.
Mine is in the false belief we will get it figured out in time to save ourselves from ourselves! Human nature prevails and it aint pretty.
We always miss the forest for those(burnt)tree thingy's in the way.

Thanks for helping to confirm what is already apparent to some!
Without intervention from somewhere or someone, we face
inevitable extinction at some point, statistically speaking that is.

Some good links from a search I did looking for those statistics.
Scary stuff and should be a wake up call! IMHO
mindprod.com...
www.well.com...

reply to post by kindred

Damn scary stuff, mate! (If I was an aussie that is! It just seems to fit)
We are doing just fine scaring ourselves silly, thank you!

By your excellent extrapolations, would this be considered plausible also?:
With every increase in intelligence, would the capacity to
kill ever greater numbers also increase? Atomic, nuclear, etc, etc.

That doesn't sound to promising for mankind either!

reply to post by magicmushroom

"
Believe me, religions are on the wrong track the moment they moralize and fulminate
commandments. God is not needed to create guilt or to punish. Our fellow men suffice, aided by ourselves. You were speaking of the Last Judgment. Allow me to laugh respectfully. I shall wait for it resolutely, for I have known what is worse, the judgment of men. For them, no extenuating circumstances; even the good intention is ascribed to crime. Have you at least heard of the spitting-cell, which a nation recently thought up to prove itself the greatest on earth? A walled-up box in which the prisoner can stand without moving. The solid door that locks [111] him in his cement shell stops at chin level. Hence only his face is visible, and every passing jailer spits copiously on it.
The prisoner, wedged into his cell, cannot wipe his face, though he is allowed, it is true, to close his eyes. Well, that, mon cher, is a human invention. They didn't need God for that little masterpiece. What of it? Well, God's sole usefulness would be to guarantee innocence, and I am inclined to see religion rather as a huge laundering venture-as it was once but briefly, for exactly three years, and it wasn't called religion. Since then, soap has been lacking, our faces are dirty, and we wipe one another's noses. All dunces, all punished, let's all spit on one another and-hurry! to the little-ease! Each tries to spit first, that's all. I'll tell you a big secret, mon cher. Don't wait for the Last Judgment.
It takes place every day.
"
This quote is from Camus' The Fall.
In my view, only God can save us. Without that basis of truth and, as Camus puts it necessarily, innocence, we're sort of floating through space aimlessly. All attempts to progress/evolve/ascend without the basis of God is rooted in judgment of others and ourselves and the individual is bound to fall in all their prideful idiotic glory. As a society, such a situation follows the path of destruction because it's foundation is weak. I think now we're beginning to recognize this. A recognization that should have started with what Hitler and his monsters showed us about human nature, how the rejection of God in favor of the "superman" ideology, without basis, necessarily leads to inferiority judgments along with the justification to kill for some supposed greater good. The solution? Everyone I’ve read calls it active love…what this means is not easily explained in it’s full significance but the intellectual obscurement of evils, the abstract notions of righteousness, and the very idea of “ascendancy” and ultimate awareness is not it. As we move farther away from the concept of creator, from nature, we slowly reveal how pathetic a species we have become.


[edit on 28-2-2009 by djr33222]

[edit on 28-2-2009 by djr33222]

reply to post by dodadoom


Well we have the capacity to do whatever we want. It doesn't have to bad or negative, but it seems like at this moment in time we are truly lost and it seems that humanity as a whole has a death wish. All the solutions to our problems already exist, but it seems those in power and the ones who follow their example are only interested in bringing out the worst in humanity and are basically willing us all to fail. Where does that leave the rest of us who really do care?

Up s*** creek without a paddle.

I have seen enough.

I know how and what human life was created for. It's part of chaos, it's part of the universal cycle

Beginning, chaos, completion, perfection.
It's a constant cycle, for every new cycle brings new light, new darkness. All this universe want's to do is understand itself.

It wil do so in so many ways.
Human experience is a very phsyical part of this.

Kindred, I think you have hit the nail on the head there. Despite the best efforts of some it would seem that their are those who seek to plot our downfall and bring out the animal that is in us all.

But irredpective of the plotters that human trait needs removing as soon as we get rid of one lot of despots a new batch is being created somewhere.

reply to post by magicmushroom


We certainly are misguided, but I dont think its our faults.
I think we have been takin advantage of from the elites. The few people in this world who are truly evil and all powerful have distorted our morals and views. I think that if you were to ask anyone on the street what theyre utopia is they would tell you that their utopia is peaceful and free and everyone is happy. Only sometimes will you come across a nutjob whos utopia is more of a dystopia.

I think that after years and years of growing up I a world where war and violence and oppression are prominant thats the only thing you know. Whats the best solution for an enemy country, go to war, whats the best solution for violence, police state laws, People hope that these things will solve the problems they dont push for more laws and more war just to make mankind suffer more, they HOPE that it will help solve the problems at hand.

I firmly believe that if it were up to mankind today we would have a utopian society, but sadly it isnt up to us the elites decide what they want us to hear they praise our ignorance and spread fear and hate to keep us ignorant fearful and submissive. Humanity isnt the problem the elites are.

reply to post by magicmushroom


Yeah, it sure seems that way. To be honest while I care, there's not really much I or anyone else can do about the state of things, but we should all just concentrate on being the best we possibly can be. Just let everything else take care of itself, be it for better or worse. There definitely seems like a force in this world that is trying very hard to make us all descend to its level. I for one will continue to laugh in its face.

What world do you wish to live in?

Two Trips To The 21st Century - Take Your Pick

1) Globalist Fascist New World Order
2) UTOPIA - But are you willing to make some sacrifices?



Fullsize Image with text
img220.imageshack.us...

[edit on 2-3-2009 by kindred]

Heh, I think a more appropriate definition of man would be what Agent Smith says rightfully in the Matrix, scene where Morpheus is being held.


Something along the lines,

"You know every animal on earth has it's own equilbrium,
However you humans are different,
You can't rightfully be called a mammal,
Because you spread from place to place and use every viable resource,
Consuming everything around you,
There is one other organism that has the same attributes,
That's a virus,
You humans are a VIRUS"

Lol.... The best I can do off the top of my head, but I'm sure you all remember that scene

Originally posted by AlienGhandi
Heh, I think a more appropriate definition of man would be what Agent Smith says rightfully in the Matrix, scene where Morpheus is being held.


Something along the lines,

"You know every animal on earth has it's own equilbrium,
However you humans are different,
You can't rightfully be called a mammal,
Because you spread from place to place and use every viable resource,
Consuming everything around you,
There is one other organism that has the same attributes,
That's a virus,
You humans are a VIRUS"

Lol.... The best I can do off the top of my head, but I'm sure you all remember that scene

Mankind is not a virus. We are an invasive species. The defining trait of mammals is not some ill-defined equilibrium with the environment. Balance in nature is not voluntary or moral, it is forced by predation, lack of resources, territory, etc. A species, ANY species - be it bacteria, bird, or primate - will selfishly use ALL applicable and available resources to propagate and ensure survival, even unto the extinction of other species. Life is a brutal process of competition, or predator and prey. Selection is a very benign sounding term, but what it really boils down to is death. Conflict, Disease, Famine, Predation, Toxification, etc. It's not morality, it's causality.

Humanity has evolved a unique advantage over other animals, the ability to store and access more information and run simulations of future scenarios and then use our physical bodies to create that future. As such, we have created societies to largely protect us from this natural selection process. Not entirely, of course, but to a large degree. Thus, we have overcome most natural barriers to the spreading of our population. We are ill equipped to survive a Canadian winter, but we have created tools to modify our environments to facilitate our survival - such as shelters, coats, the taming of fire, etc.

We are only doing what all species do. Propagating to the fullest extent our resources will allow. This, of course, is a detriment to native species who share those resources. While we are driving many species to extinction, many species are thriving as either parasites or symbiotically with humanity. Cows, for instance, were brilliantly well adapted for human domestication and as such their survival has been ensured - whereas the Buffalo nearly went extinct. Rats have adapted to co-habitation with humans extremely well - and as a consequence, so has their natural predator the Cat. Crows are found all over the world, but rarely do you find them more than five miles away from human settlements.

We are not out of balance with nature. This is nature.


Also... to mention cats, brings up another point. People like the OP like to say that humanity sucks because we're the only creature that hunts and kills out of sheer pleasure and not necessity. This is just flat out wrong. A domesticated house cat who has plenty to eat will often still go out and hunt mice. Sometimes they eat them, and sometimes they offer them to their owners as a gift. Dogs are known to hunt and kill small game, despite also being more than sufficiently fed by their owners. Dolphins and Bonobo Chimps also have been known to kill for pleasure. So it's not just us, and not just the "dumb" animals either. It's instinct.

I have to wonder... if the OP understands that humans are animals, why the hell would he admonish humanity for acting in accordance to it's nature? Wouldn't any deviation away from this nature by rational thinking or cultural morality put humanity a notch above other animals in intelligence.. because we can sometimes recognize this instinct and subdue it? Wouldn't that still make us the smartest animal, not the dumbest?

I don't really think he's given the subject much serious though, and rather is just trying to troll or justify being emo.

You want a movie quote to think upon, how about this.



"What the body creates is as much an expression of DNA as the body itself."

"But the same applies to Beaver Dams and Spider Webs"

"I'll take the coral reefs as my metaphor, though hardly so beautiful. If the essence of life is information carried in DNA, then society and civilization are just colossal memory systems and a metropolis like this one, simply a sprawling external memory."

[edit on 2-3-2009 by Lasheic]

reply to post by Lasheic


I have to admit what youve said has stuck with me since I first read it, at first I didnt know what to say. By all accounts what you say is true, we are animals and we are only following a survival instinct.

However we are much more than any other animal on this planet, there is no mistaking our vast superiority to every other species on this planet, and being the supier beings we feel a moral duty to protect lesser species from extinction. The logical thing would be to consider ourselves apart of the animal kindom we grew from and act accordingly, but just because it would be logical to take up the enitre earth for the survival of our species doesnt mean its right.

That is why there is the illogic of the universe to balance things out, its not logical for one species to coexsist with an opponent species. But its the right thing to do considering what we are capable of.

We share this planet, we must treat our planet and its numerous species with respect and let them have a chance to evolve alongside us. However we arent treating this planet or our fellow species with any respect, all the power we have and we still act like a group of stupid mokeys fighting over a banana rather than sharing it.

reply to post by caballero

but just because it would be logical to take up the enitre earth for the survival of our species doesnt mean its right.

I didn't expound very far into this subject matter, but I attempted to touch upon it if only to utterly refute the OP's claim that humanity is the dumbest animal - because I recognize that humanity can understand their own behavior and modify it. We are stepping, perhaps not enough for some, away from the concept of the Earth being under the complete dominion of mankind (which is a very biblical view) and closer to the understanding that we are a part of a network of ecology. If we wish to see that ecology preserved, or at least propagated in some form into the future, then we need to take steps and sacrifice some of our expansion or use of resources for that environment.

The level at which we do this, however, is a whole 'nother matter entirely and geared towards a level of discussion that this thread is not suited for.

My only point being, that humanity is not perfect. However, we are not outside of nature - but rather are a bit player in the grand tapestry of life... be it just a passing species or a catalyst for upheaval and change.

its not logical for one species to coexsist with an opponent species.

Oh, I don't know about that. In the big picture, every individual and every species is in competition with each other. However, there's plenty of examples of symbiosis and cooperation between competitors within nature. In many ways, competition in economics mirrors competition in the environment. It's not unheard of for businesses to tag-team a strong competitor, or for one business to slightly alter it's model to draw success off of another competitor's success - the synthesis of the two rivals combined products providing a dynamo effect.

We share this planet, we must treat our planet and its numerous species with respect and let them have a chance to evolve alongside us.

That would depend upon the situation. Should we not kill rats, and instead - respect them as they scurry through our food supplies? Should we not celebrate the fact that the Smilodon is extinct, rather than respect it's right to hunt our family members as prey? The case of the spotted owl might seem as though it's a good and noble pursuit to save their habitat, but what about the mosquito? We banned DDT largely on propaganda that it was causing a thinning of eggshells - but that was at the cost of an impressive jump in the resulting malaria deaths. Sri Lanka once reported nearly three million cases of malaria infection before the spraying of DDT, which dwindled to under a hundred in the years following it's application.

DDT does have un-ignorable environmental and developmental consequences... but how do you weight these against the cost of human life? Thus far, DDT is still in use in some of the most malaria prone nations, but generally banned throughout the world. This is a descent compromise for now, but I think we could do better.

And of course, you have to realize that allowing other species to evolve will ultimately mean they are better are securing resources. Humanity is, in itself, a resource. While I don't think it's likely we'll ever see an apex predator evolve which feeds on mankind again so long as we dominate the intelligence ballgame - we are still under threat of microbial predators, scavengers, and parasites. Their evolution could have disastrous effects for mankind.

Further, though it shouldn't be taken as sort of justification or consolation, human activity has changed the environment quite a bit - and the strain it's put on many of the local species is actually spurring a sort of "Super Evolution". This doesn't mean that life is retaliating against our action, but merely that our actions are increasing the frequency by which genetic drift and other mechanisms for evolution occur. Smaller and more isolated populations make it easier for genetic variability to become segmented and easier to spread over an existing population.

There's also the possibility that we will create a new form of evolution by creating the natural selector for quickly evolving creatures, or those capable of more easily modifying their behaviors. This will come at the detriment of our current biosphere, but in the process create a whole new one. Further, the creation of artificial life which can guide it's evolution over the course of a single generation - or multiple times per generation may give rise to a biosphere which is not purely organic nor synthetic, by a synthesis of both.

More of my thoughts on this process here. However, I will say here that by backing off and respecting the current biosphere too much, we may just be delaying or offsetting a much grander paradigm shift in life and evolution. Humanity may just be the latest in a grand cycle of extinctions/cataclysms that, in the end, work out much more in favor of diversity and evolution than if we all took the OP's advice and collectively ate a .38 caliber Tylenol.


[edit on 4-3-2009 by Lasheic]