03-23-2012 at 8:48 AM

Also, they got it wrong with the dolphin being the only marine mammal to kill for fun - orcas do so, too.. though you could argue that they're dolphins.

03-20-2012 at 8:40 PM

"Animals eat each other, but they don't kill each other off for some stupid reason."<br /> <br /> Well, they do kill each other <a href="http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/bizarre/news-bottle-nosed-dolphins-only-animal-kills-fun">for the heck of it</a> and for <a href="http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/06/100621-science-chimpanzees-chimp-gangs-kill-mitani/">more/better territory</a>, which humans are known for.

03-17-2012 at 5:57 PM

I would have to agree with you 100%. No one could have said it better, not even me.<br /> And I can get into a whole rant on this...

03-12-2012 at 8:22 PM

I was not trying to say people with disablities shouldnt reproduce, sorry if it sounded like that. <br /> <br /> I would agree to the whole parenting liscence idea, but it IS a human's biological right to procreate. As it is for every organism. But in today's day and age with so many unfit parents and people having children without knowing the first thing about parenting, it isn't a terrible idea. But completely unreasonable to imagine it being put in place anyway. <br /> <br /> If I ever do decide to have a kid (which is highly unlikely) It will definitely be adopted. Not only do I dislike 99% of kids under the age of 5, but I do not feel I have anything to contribute that would improve the gene pool. I have terrible eyesight, photophobia, bad hips, a high risk of melanoma and probably many other things wrong with me, but why would I add to the overpopulation when there is a child that is neglected and needing love and a real home out there already, and since I think I would be a very unfit choice to reproduce. <br /> <br /> Once again, do not get me wrong, I do not mean to say no one should have children, if no one did then we would go extinct entirely. That is just my opinion on myself having children.

03-12-2012 at 2:41 PM

I would completely support something like a parenting licence, where a couple who want to have and raise a kid have to prove they are fit for the task, psychologically (to prevent abuse), physically (to prevent unessesary suffering from hereditary diseases), and financially(to guarantee the kid(s) will never be without nesessities.), before they could bring a new life into the world. Sadly, I doubt this will ever happen, because a great many people think its their right to have any number of children they like, and this would be impossible to enforce properly, because we can't even keep teenagers from accidentally procreating. <br /> (also, I'm not against people with genetic diseases raising kids, I'm only against causing unessesary suffering. They could still adopt, something I wish a lot more people who want kids would consider.)

03-11-2012 at 7:01 PM

I understand completely. =P And I get what you're trying to say. If we hadn't advanced this far, then perhaps we'd be balanced out. But because of these big brains of ours, we're gonna end up killing the world. XP

03-11-2012 at 6:49 PM

Natural selection in other species, like if a whitetail deer was born a platinum blonde color as a mutation, it would likely not survive long enough to reproduce, therefore taking that mutation from the gene pool. But with humans, a trait that would normally inhibit a persons' survival is completely irrelevant in todays world. People born with disabilities can survive and live perfectly normal lives and reproduce and that disability has the chance to occur in offspring, and they can live normal lives too. But if a deer is born with a disability it likely wouldnt survive to reproduce more with that disability. <br /> <br /> Do you understand, or was that all just random babble to everyone?

03-11-2012 at 9:11 AM

Oh its fine! ^^;;. It was more like just forgetting its 2 people to make a person I think. I would have messed that up if I didn't remember a talk my science teacher gave us about population growth. <br /> <br /> What do you mean natural selection like in the wild?

03-10-2012 at 9:50 PM

Oh sorry for the math error there I suck at math :P And yeah the lifespans are definitely a factor in and people having numerous kids. I personally dont care for most children under kindergarten age, so I never plan on having any :P <br /> <br /> The human population may be more reasonable if we were affected by natural selection the way other animals are. Any ideas on that? It hasnt been brought up here yet

03-10-2012 at 1:56 PM

I think part of what keeps China's population going up is all the familes durring the time when they could only have 1 kid, having multiple kids and abandoning the girls until they have a boy. And now there are so many more young boys and very few girls who weren't abandoned to an orphanage and grew up neglected...

03-9-2012 at 6:42 PM

I'm never going to jump right in and have kids. If I even have any, I'm only having one. But before that, I'm going to think for a long time as to why I'd want to bring a child into this war zone of a world.

03-9-2012 at 6:40 PM

Casie your math is a little off. It takes 2 people to make 1 person. So 1mil people wouldn't make 2mil if they each had 2 kids ^^;.<br /> <br /> What I think is driving their numbers up is the older living longer along with kids still being brought in. The life span of humans has really jumped since the beginning of our existence. <br /> <br /> Something I don't understand is why people who obviously don't have enough money will have 3+ kids. It doesn't make any sense. If you can barely provide for the kids you have, why would you get more? <br /> <br /> I'm not sure if I even want kids but if I do, I wouldn't want many. I find that it would be better to have 1-2 where I can provide fully for them and know I could send them to college or anything else. (slight deviation from topic)

03-9-2012 at 6:16 PM

Well in China , they have a limit on the number of children you can have and their popluation is still growing rapidly. But I guess if you have a population of 1 million and everyone can have two kids, then the next generation is likely to be 2 million. <br /> <br /> Also Im not sure if anyone here knows this, but there was a car invented that could run on sugarcane fuel and compost type fuel, but the person who made it sold the patent for x amount of money to a big company and they destroyed the car so the invention would not be a threat to the oil industry =/

03-9-2012 at 8:39 AM

<i>"However, humans are not a wild species such as tigers and wolves, and we have no historical evidence to help predict what would happen."</i><br /> <br /> My guess is something like when there are natural disasters. "Bands" of people would probably form in order to protect their dwindling resources. Looting, violence, etc. <br /> <br /> <i>"I think the population is getting too large. I know some places already are limiting the number of children you can have. I'm not sure if there's stats somewhere to suggest if this works or not? Either way you will have people that will be mad if it was ever imposed. "</i><br /> <br /> I also wonder if this works. People just don't need to be having two+ children right now. Everyone seems to have the mentality that you can't be a family or "whole" without one or more. In fact people get upset and will even ridicule you if you say you don't want them. I'd rather have food in my belly and gas in my car than to have something taking that away from already existing people.<br /> <br /> <i>"I'm not sure how to really comment on this to be honest. There are a lot of things wrong but a huge chunk are those in power that have the option to try and change them but are under all these bribes and agendas."</i><br /> <br /> Agreed! It's obvious to anyone who looks that the government is highly corrupt. I've got lots of documentaries about how that has affected the natural environment. Examples. Fracking (oil drilling) has a hundred and one health hazards, but because the government is paid off, it continues full steam ahead instead of seeking alternative methods. Large scale farming is another one as the way they do that isn't natural or healthy at ALL. If I remember right 93% of large scale farming is owned by one corporation, so guess who has most of the say about that? <br /> <br /> This is why I like the occupy protestors, they raise public awareness to these things. Hopefully at some point the government will listen to it's people.... if it stops trying to silence them first.<br /> <br /> I also have to agree with Kaitie on the fact that not all people are bad. There are lots and lots of people and groups out there who are doing everything in their power to make things better. Plus you have people who are doing self sustaining houses, communes, etc.

03-9-2012 at 7:24 AM

Religion and money cause the most wars and fights. They have been pretty much since the beginning of humans. <br /> <br /> Very rarely it seems that people kill for nothing. I'm not sure why that was mentioned by someone? I also don't see too many killings out of revenge of someone they love? I see it as it happening to promote religion and to bash those that do not believe in the same things. <br /> <br /> I think the population is getting too large. I know some places already are limiting the number of children you can have. I'm not sure if there's stats somewhere to suggest if this works or not? Either way you will have people that will be mad if it was ever imposed. <br /> <br /> I'm not sure how to really comment on this to be honest. There are a lot of things wrong but a huge chunk are those in power that have the option to try and change them but are under all these bribes and agendas. <br /> <br /> Not everyone is bad or horrible. It's amazing what some individuals can and have done. It sort of reminds me when my school was under national fire because only a small group of students (1-5) made bad decisions. Everyone was saying that everyone that went to that school was bad (3000 students). It's a little saddening to give up on those that do well for the few that don't care. ^^;

03-8-2012 at 1:27 PM

Hippie, we can hope it never comes to that, that hopefully the population will even out as it does in the wild. Right now we are growing at an exponential rate and when a wild population is growing like that, there is a breaking point where the ecosysytem just cant support the population, and the number will drop, then rise, then drop and sort of bounce back and forth over this metaphorical line. <br /> <br /> However, humans are not a wild species such as tigers and wolves, and we have no historical evidence to help predict what would happen.

03-8-2012 at 8:58 AM

<i>"It's because of us that the world is being ruined."</i><br /> <br /> I think it was projected that by year 2050 there would be 10 billion+ people on the planet. My question is, what happens when we run out of natural resources? (gas, healthy food, etc.)

03-8-2012 at 7:24 AM

Kit, you can't compare to behaviors of a domesticated animal and a captive wild animal to those of the truly wild animals still out there. In the wild that kitten either wouldn't have been in that "strangers" territory it would have still been with mom to defend it or if it was old enough to be on its own it would have ran away, but it was trapped in a house with nowhere to go.<br /> <br /> Tigers in the wild do kill humans from time to time, but humans have also encroached on their terratory to the point where they have nowhere to go to really get away from humans. And also tigers don't go out of their way to find humans and kill them like humans are with Rhinos, Elephants and many other species they are hunting for ONE part of their body for supposed holistic properties among other reasons.

03-7-2012 at 9:49 PM

*populations of other large mammals* fixing the typo in the third paragraph

03-7-2012 at 9:48 PM

Perhaps the cat killed the kitten not because it wasn't "fond" of it, but because it saw it as an invader in its territory. Like you said previously, we and other animals are territorial and protective. <br /> <br /> Also, I understand that other animals will kill and not eat it, but it doesnt mean they have no reason. Some examples may be a fight over resources, or a territorial dispute. But humans routinely kill, not just other humans, but other animals for pelts or a specific part of the animal - generally for fashion. <br /> <br /> Humans would be a fine species on this planet, but look at our population. Millions and millions of us, compared to the populations of large mammals. There are way too many of us competing for the same finite resources, and there are not enough to support all of us.<br /> <br /> Perhaps if the population was balanced with other species there would be far less of this competition and more room so there would be less disputes, then some if not most of the issues would be solved. There would be less need to fight and kill for money or food.<br /> <br />