It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Is Everything we invent harmfull

page: 1

log in


posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 08:59 AM
i have seen allot of twilight zones and outer limits its always our fault

why when humans invent stuff is it always harmful in some way

i mean were smart enough to think it up and create it why would it cause damage why would the process to create it cause harm to the environment

is there really anything that doesn't in some way cause harm to something in someway

someone invented a car why would it need to use gasoline such a destructive liquid

is it always because it is cheaper to do it that way is it so much harder to come up with a different non harmful way

or is it impossible is it our own natural instinct to somehow just destroy earth

nothing else in nature has such a detrimental effect as us humans are we doing it intentionally or is there no other way

another example one of the first ways we got electricity was from coal why did we think of coal why not wind or solar

posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 09:06 AM

Originally posted by dean007

another example one of the first ways we got electricity was from coal why did we think of coal why not wind or solar

Perhaps because the technologies needed for them to be viable sources of energy weren't yet available. (solar panels, high-efficiency generators)

Using coal to create the steam required to turn generators was the most sensible and feasible approach, at the time.

posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 09:10 AM
Its just how you use the technology you have. For example a computer can be used to research medicines and cures for new diseases, or can be used to make nuclear weapons. Its up to the user and makers, not the technology itself.

posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 09:11 AM
The thing is that the military usually invent stuff first so, you find they use it for harmful purposes.

There are already threads like this here, if you did a search you would of found them.

posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 09:38 AM
Your funny, don't you think the manufacturing process for solar panels is destructive, how about the process of making a wind turbine. Oh yeah we exported all those really nasty processes to China so we look good (green). But to your main subject I agree 100% as a living being everything we do is destructive in some way or another. It all about growth and jobs, keeping us busy so we have no time to think. And all that power we make is to run other destructive processes.

I just did a job in the port of Long Beach and i must say that it opened my eyes as to the amount of stuff we are making. Wallgreen gets 10,000 containers every 2 weeks. Now that is just Wallgreen, palaces like Costco, Sams, Home depot, Lowes, must truly dwarf this figure. But I stood in the container shipping and receiving and I felt sad for us. The sheer amount of things we buy is staggering.

posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 10:13 AM
It all depends on your definition of what is 'harmful' and what is 'benevolent'. Somewhere along the line we as a species and a society have decided that anything that causes any change to anything is harmful somehow.

You cause a change to the atmosphere every time you breath. You are removing oxygen from the air and replacing it with carbon dioxide. Every time you eat food you are responsible for the death of some life-form. That includes vegetarians; plants are alive too. Every home you inhabit was built at the expense of thousands of trees. Every time you try to stay warm, you burn something, or release wasted heat into the atmosphere.

The computer you typed your post on is using electricity, which is produced by moving huge magnets inside wire coils. Something has to be used to power that, removing energy from the environment. All those cables which connect the Internet are composed of plastics and tars (for weatherproofing) buried in the ground, in direct contact with groundwater. The silicon chips are manufactured with acids that eat away the metallic layers to form connective circuits. Even some of the silicon semiconductive elements are manufactured using an etching process. Do you think that acid simply goes away after it is used up (filled with metal/silicon impurities)?

Face it: we will change our environment, just like every life form on the planet does. All will eat, respire, and grow. Trees, those harmless wonderful trees, fight to the death for every ray of sunlight, regularly strangling out smaller trees and other flora. Those marvelous polar bears everyone seems so concerned about lately are carnivores who eat little baby seals with those big innocent eyes. Oh, sure, they're 'humane' about it, simply ripping them apart while they are alive and biting off large chunks of flesh as the baby seal screams in agonizing death throes.

My point is simply that we will all, you, me, everyone, change our surroundings in some way. That is not necessarily a bad thing. Nature is very accommodating and very flexible within limits. Perhaps we should stop worrying about every action we take and concern ourselves more with understanding this fantastic world we live on. Perhaps we should stop worrying that someone will change something and start to try and understand that we are all different people with different needs and desires.

Perhaps we should get back to the true meaning of being 'human'... it once meant compassionate, instead of the present connotation of cruel and uncaring.


posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 10:28 AM
I think Henry David Thoreau would agree with you in his idea that "We do not ride upon the railroad, it rides upon us." In that, he thinks that every development and movement away from nature is essentially a step backwards in man's development.

In my own opinion, I think that ingenuity and invention propel mankind forward. However, there does need to be some forms of responsibility in the development of these advances. Just off the top of my head, embryonic stem cell research comes to mind. Whether the end is good or not, there is still a very controversial moral argument to be made against it.

It's certainly essential that we have the discussion that there must be responsibility in development.

posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 06:01 PM
another example is i bought a yamaha stereo the other day it was made in Malaysia that is probably farther than i will ever travel

does it make sence to produce it in Malaysia then ship it half way around the world wouldn't it be cheaper to build a factory here and make it here instead of all the money it takes to ship it

im 36 now and in my 36 years i have bought at least 7 home stereos
none of them were cheap stereos yet only 2 of them still work

should manufactures make there products last longer thus not having to make so many

i mean if i live to 60 does that mean i will buy another 6-7 stereos if i live to 90 does that mean i buy another 12-14 stereos

why dont they make them to last longer is it just the profit if it lasted longer i think they would earn allot of respect and loyalty from me

im not even talking about the real cheap stuff made in china that only last a year or 2 if your lucky

posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 06:05 PM
The true intention of an invention is to help us or aid us in some way. This concept becomes distorted by the human concept of good and evil.

The possibilities are endless. Especially when in the hands of irresponsible individuals, or zealots who are deluded.

It is the human paradox. I believe that as long as evolution is based on trial and error, we will face this challenge. But we must also remember that challenges were meant to be overcome. If they overcome us, then that is not progress.

And without progress there is stagnation. Stagnation leads to death.

posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 06:21 PM
i remember a story my shop class teacher told me about 20 years ago how when he was a kid he and his friends would hang out at the rail yard and play around and cause trouble

so one day when they were there the foreman needed some extra labor and asked them if they wanted to make a few dollars helping them for the day they were just fooling around anyways and figured they might as well make some beer money

the rail yard foreman asked them to unload an entire rail cart full of light bulbs and throw them all out no problem they started emptying it and throwing them all out

so about half way thru they got curious and opened a box to see if they could tell what was wrong with them and why they were throwing them all out they looked at the bulbs and they sure didnt look like anything was wrong with them and there seemed to be no reason to throw them out

they finished there days work and decided to take a couple boxes home since they were just being thrown out anyways he tried a bulb when he got home and it worked just fine

he didnt understand why they were throwing them all in the garbage they seemed to work just fine so he made a little device to overpower the bulb to see how long its lifespan would be

it turned out that the bulbs were lasting 15-20 years
a lifespan of 20 times a regular bulb
so the company that made the bulbs would rather throw out bulbs that they made to a higher standard than sell them to the public
he told me that some of the bulbs from 20 years ago were still working just fine and that they had still not burned out

should we force company's to make better products ?

[edit on 11-4-2009 by dean007]

posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 06:50 PM
reply to post by dean007

wow that is a fascinating story. i dont think you can fake a story like that!

I think many companies do and have done this for a long time. If they make products too good, you won't need to go buy more from them!

Its like those gum commercials, where supposedly the gum lasts soooo long they have to pressure the people to spit it out and chew a new piece. Funny commercials to be sure, but really from a business standpoint, if you want people to come back and buy more from you, make your product break automatically after a certain amount of use.

Take, for example, older televisions. Primitive when compared to modern LCD and plasmas, yet they lasted for 30 years (at least)

my plasma dies after 2 years and the part i need to fix it costs like 500 bucks!? what the heck!!

posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 08:04 PM
reply to post by dean007

I'm not surprised at all.
I bet those bulbs were made in the USA.

If I can do my best Andy Rooney:
You ever wonder why an electronic device always breaks down just after the warranty expires?

posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 10:46 PM
i think thats the wrong way for companies to think
if they made a product that was high quality did everything you needed it to and had a nice 20 -30 year lifespan
they would earn my trust and the next time i needed something i would defiantly be interested in there other products

i mean theres always advances and such so i would want to buy a new one anyways but at least you could give your old one to your sons or daughters and they could still get good use out of it

now when the product breaks in a couple years you don't really want to buy the same brand name because they haven't earned any respect or trust so i try another brand in the hopes for a superior product

so yes i am making a new purchase but there not going to be the company i choose next time

another thing they probably don't think of is bragging rights if this new yamaha stereo is still working in 20 years im going to make sure that i tell all my friends that this stereo has been working for 20 years and be proud of that

no offense to yamaha they make a dam good stereo just using there name as an example

posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 10:48 PM
and for sure those bulbs were either made in canada or the U.S
considering it was like 40-50 years ago timespan and basically everything was made in north America still

top topics


log in