It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

How far would you go to save the planet?

page: 1
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 26 2021 @ 08:24 AM
link   
Would you kill to save it? How many would you kill? What if you determined that we needed to kill 70% of the global population to save the Earth? Would anyone be able to do it? How would you get that many people to do something that could kill them willingly?

these are dark times ahead. Best pay attention and look out for each other. make good decisions. The bad man is already planning his next move.



posted on Aug, 26 2021 @ 08:26 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

I would Georgia Guidestone the hell out of all of you. Then I can finally not have to wait on line when the next Apple product launches.



posted on Aug, 26 2021 @ 08:26 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

the planet doesn't need to be saved. Mother Earth was here long before us and will be here long after us. If she wanted us gone, she'd just douche us off into space.



posted on Aug, 26 2021 @ 08:29 AM
link   
Saving the planet at this stage can only be achieved through radical technological development to either mitigate our direct impact allowing the earth to recover or one that directly addresses the components of biosphere that are out of alignment. The former is easier to achieve in my opinion.

Does developing environmentally conscious skynet count as killing?

edit on 26-8-2021 by MDDoxs because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2021 @ 08:37 AM
link   
a reply to: MDDoxs




Saving the planet at this stage can only be achieved through radical technological development





posted on Aug, 26 2021 @ 08:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: MDDoxs
Saving the planet at this stage can only be achieved through radical technological development to either mitigate our direct impact allowing the earth to recover or one that directly addresses the components of biosphere that are out of alignment. The former is easier to achieve in my opinion.

The only thing the planet needs saving from is raving lunatics that actually believe that man is causing global warming (or climate change or whatever the hell they're calling it now).



posted on Aug, 26 2021 @ 08:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: network dude
Would you kill to save it? How many would you kill? What if you determined that we needed to kill 70% of the global population to save the Earth? Would anyone be able to do it? How would you get that many people to do something that could kill them willingly?

these are dark times ahead. Best pay attention and look out for each other. make good decisions. The bad man is already planning his next move.


As a pure thought experiment, knowing I do not associate with people, and actively avoid them...

I would press the big red button.

what remains, remains. but at least I won't be forced to stay indoors or wear a mask. because I'd have all the things available to me, having the big red button in the first place.



posted on Aug, 26 2021 @ 08:46 AM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl

regardless of man's contribution to how the planets environment changes over time, would you agree that one of our goals should be to better control our environment for its and our benefit? We can achieve that through technology.



posted on Aug, 26 2021 @ 08:48 AM
link   
I would develop a virus that requires a vaccination that would kill off humans by the billions.



posted on Aug, 26 2021 @ 08:55 AM
link   
I would fight climate change with more man made climate change and blot out the sun!
Then I would make everyone give up their possessions because they are greedy and don’t know what’s best for them.
Then I would prevent any future genocides by killing everyone.


a reply to: network dude


edit on 26-8-2021 by Athetos because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2021 @ 08:55 AM
link   
I like what George Carlin said and I paraphrase " Maybe earth needs plastic and since Mother Nature could do it herself she invented humans to do it for her"



posted on Aug, 26 2021 @ 08:56 AM
link   
Require 100% vaccination. With a 'vaccine' which requires bi-annual updating to keep you alive.

Then you can select who gets to live and who gets to take the big dirt-nap.

Those who agree with you get to live, and those who don't get a shovel.



posted on Aug, 26 2021 @ 08:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Soloprotocol
I would develop a virus that requires a vaccination that would kill off humans by the billions.


If you are referring to the current virus, those billions are gonna take a while according to the world of meters population triples the deaths this year.



posted on Aug, 26 2021 @ 09:01 AM
link   
The planet is well capable of saving itself.

You believe that the planet is helpless and only YOU, a mere mortal, can somehow save it?
My, oh my, you think much too highly of yourself.

And you speak of the problems like not enough oil to heat and light the world.
Yea, that is your Mother, Mother Earth, killing off the weak.

The ice caps melting and flooding the coasts. That is Mother Earth killing you.

Most of the "problems" caused by over population aren't problems.
They are Mother Earth killing you off to reduce the population.
If the earth becomes uninhabitable . . . problem solved . . . and Mother Earth will go on merrily for another 6 billion years
edit on 26-8-2021 by sraven because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2021 @ 09:09 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

We don't need to kill. There should be enough hidden patents and secret technology out there, that we, if we would work together as humanity, could utilize to make life on this planet flourish.

Yes we would need to cutback on a lot of things but also produce more sturdy and universal designed machines and tools. Stop the throw-away mentality. Come clean with what we have and then implement it but of course that would not be possible with profit oriented companies.



posted on Aug, 26 2021 @ 09:12 AM
link   
a reply to: sraven
Completely agree. We are no more than fleas on a dog that she can shake off whenever she wants.


I do think we need to stop polluting with plastics. Bamboo, glass are fine, reusable options.



posted on Aug, 26 2021 @ 09:12 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

I wouldn't go very far. We are all destined to die anyway, what's the difference if we all go together?



posted on Aug, 26 2021 @ 09:20 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

On the planetary scale I may as well not exist. I am neither a savior or destroyer of worlds. Like everyone else, I hope my dust adds a little color to the air.



posted on Aug, 26 2021 @ 09:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: ThatDamnDuckAgain
a reply to: network dude

We don't need to kill. There should be enough hidden patents and secret technology out there, that we, if we would work together as humanity, could utilize to make life on this planet flourish.

Yes we would need to cutback on a lot of things but also produce more sturdy and universal designed machines and tools. Stop the throw-away mentality. Come clean with what we have and then implement it but of course that would not be possible with profit oriented companies.



My goodness, look around.
The population on the planet has doubled since 1970 from 3.5 billion to over 7 billion.
We are flourishing. The human population has never had it so good.

Just because there are a group of people, we could call them freeloading parasites,
do not feel the need to flourish and are content in living lives of misery
does not mean the population as a whole, the collective, is not flourishing.

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

World hunger has been solved because you can't double the population in 50 years unless everyone is eating.

Wakey, wakey,
eggs and bakey.
Time to wake up sleepy head
edit on 26-8-2021 by sraven because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2021 @ 09:38 AM
link   
a reply to: sraven
Normally I try to avoid feeding disrespectful trolls and your luck this isn't the mudpit. But it's about world hunger, who am I to exclude you.

You call the current situation flourishing? Life on this planet is flourishing? Have you thought outside your horizon for a bit? Like what about the environment? Wouldn't you say that if we're so intelligent and already flourishing, that instead of decimating rare species, we preserve them?

You really think we work together as humanity? You're talking about world hunger, I wrote about a planet with flourishing life.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join