ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags cancer

Closed Thread
Old 22nd April 2015, 03:56 AM   #241
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 29,308
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Let me finally ask:

Can modern introductions, which can be harmful to us, decrease age of live beings and of non living things on earth? One by direct damage other is chain reactions or cascading effects.

I am not asking about beneficial modern introductions.

"Modern introductions, which can be harmful to us" can be harmful, simply because that is how you have defined them.

This does not mean that "modern introductions" are necessarily harmful, and neither does it mean that "modern introductions" that are harmful are harmful because they are "modern introductions". Neither does it mean that things that are not "modern introductions" are beneficial or harmless. All your question really asks is whether harmful things are harmful.

By specifically asking about "modern introductions, which can be harmful to us" and excluding "beneficial modern introductions" you are introducing an obvious bias.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky

Last edited by Mojo; 22nd April 2015 at 03:59 AM.
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2015, 05:44 AM   #242
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 9,483
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Ok thanks. Noted, as per you unnatural prevails over natural. Ok?
No, that is not what I said.
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2015, 06:21 AM   #243
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,702
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post
No, that is not what I said.
Then what you are saying?
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2015, 06:51 AM   #244
Lukraak_Sisser
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,959
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Actually, in my sense, I gave more weghtage to 1/2 positive. even older medicines can not be called as natural.
Unatural: to which no inharent sense of right and wrong is there.

So anything not human then? Because only humans have a sense of right and wrong, literally nothing else in the known universe does.

Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Or which is abnormal in quantity or quality.

As defined by?

Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Which we can not process with pre-informed sense etc.
No clue what you mean here.
Lukraak_Sisser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2015, 06:55 AM   #245
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 29,308
Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser View Post
As defined by?

Kumar.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2015, 07:21 AM   #246
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 9,483
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Then what you are saying?
I said it clearly, but I'll say it again: So far what you call "unnatural" interventions have increased average life expectancy, but there is no way of knowing whether that will continue to be the case in the future.
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2015, 07:29 AM   #247
Mashuna
Ovis ex Machina
 
Mashuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,854
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Ok thanks. Mine is language and term problem may not be sense problem.

Let me finally ask:

Can modern introductions, which can be harmful to us, decrease age of live beings and of non living things on earth? One by direct damage other is chain reactions or cascading effects.

I am not asking about beneficial modern introductions.
I'm sorry, but if you're only asking about harmful modern introductions then I'm afraid you're not asking for an equanimous calculation considering both or all sides, so I can't comply.
__________________
I’d rather be a rising ape than a falling angel. - Sir Terry Pratchett
Mashuna is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2015, 07:40 AM   #248
Porpoise of Life
Illuminator
 
Porpoise of Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,056
Absolutely nothing has been discussed here. The OP keeps rephrasing a meaningless question and ignoring the answers.
I'm getting the feeling that the OP is preparing some kind of 'gotcha', but that his tenuous grasp of the English language is preventing him from steering the other posters in the desired direction.
Porpoise of Life is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2015, 10:40 AM   #249
Daylightstar
Philosopher
 
Daylightstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: hic.
Posts: 8,035
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Ok thanks. Mine is language and term problem may not be sense problem.
...
It's clearly both, Kumar.
__________________
homeopathy homicidium
Daylightstar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2015, 10:41 AM   #250
ferd burfle
Graduate Poster
 
ferd burfle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Just short of Zeta II Reticuli
Posts: 1,212
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
No I use it to give equal weightage on both sides.

No, if you want to give equial weight to your argument you need to provide evidence rather than resort to an intellectyually dishonest ruse. By your "logic" anything and everything is possible, such as all disease being distributed annually by Santa Claus as he delivers the Christmas toys.

Did the dinosaurs build Stonehenge? We dont know, we just don't know.
__________________
Chicken is a vegetable-James May, vegetarian
A target doesn't need to be preselected-Jabba

Last edited by ferd burfle; 22nd April 2015 at 10:51 AM. Reason: typo
ferd burfle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2015, 10:45 AM   #251
Daylightstar
Philosopher
 
Daylightstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: hic.
Posts: 8,035
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
No I use it to give equal weightage on both sides.
Not at all. You want to remove 'weightage' from what you think is one side and add 'weightage' to what you think is the other side ..... your side.
__________________
homeopathy homicidium
Daylightstar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2015, 11:06 AM   #252
sackett
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Detroit
Posts: 5,001
TTTT! TTTT!

Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
...Yuga....
Yuga was being very bad stinky little automobile. Broke alongside road pretty always often, left malfortunate driver pushing it by hand and feet to near garage with much swearing and Goddamn. Servian people no longer making it anymore, and that is absolute and final.

I am thinking you are not knowing this.

You are funny man.
__________________
Fill the seats of justice with good men; not so absolute in goodness as to forget what human frailty is. -- Thomas Jefferson

What region of the earth is not filled with our calamities? -- Virgil
sackett is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2015, 07:58 PM   #253
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,702
Originally Posted by Mashuna View Post
I'm sorry, but if you're only asking about harmful modern introductions then I'm afraid you're not asking for an equanimous calculation considering both or all sides, so I can't comply.
Yes, but I am not advocating or opposing one side but just evaluating possible damages from one side unnaturalities--i.e. negative side.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2015, 08:39 PM   #254
fromdownunder
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 5,724
Nah...forget it.
__________________
Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in Vain



Last edited by fromdownunder; 22nd April 2015 at 08:43 PM.
fromdownunder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2015, 08:49 PM   #255
Little 10 Toes
Graduate Poster
 
Little 10 Toes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,820
But based off your "definitions", the question makes no sense. I can say that sunlight is unnatural because it has no " inharent [sic] sense of right and wrong". HIV, insulin, my computer, animals in the zoo, money, neon gas, the Bible, Koran/Quran, methane, heroin, Microsoft Windows, firearms, nuclear weapons, video games, coffee, bacon, penicillin, and the universe are all unnatural.

(See http://www.internationalskeptics.com...0#post10601130 for your "definition")


Edit:
Any reason why aren't you looking at possible benefits from the "unnaturalities"?

Last edited by Little 10 Toes; 22nd April 2015 at 08:54 PM.
Little 10 Toes is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2015, 08:52 PM   #256
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,702
I think, I need to conclude this topic:-

Lastly; Can abnormal (or unnatural), nuclear and non-nuclear, modern negative introductions reduce longevity of things and beings existing on earth by direct and indirect damages?
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2015, 08:58 PM   #257
fromdownunder
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 5,724
Originally Posted by Little 10 Toes View Post
coffee, bacon, ...are all unnatural
Now you have gone too far.

Norm
__________________
Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in Vain


fromdownunder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2015, 09:49 PM   #258
Loss Leader
Would Be Ringing (if a bell)
Moderator
 
Loss Leader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 23,552
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
I think, I need to conclude this topic:-

Lastly; Can abnormal (or unnatural), nuclear and non-nuclear, modern negative introductions reduce longevity of things and beings existing on earth by direct and indirect damages?

I'm sure if you detonate a nuclear device close enough to somebody, you'll see some direct damage.

If you're asking if chemotherapy is always the wrong treatment because of its risks, the answer is no. Medically, it is the best treatment available for certain illnesses.
__________________
I have the honor to be
Your Obdt. St

L. Leader
Loss Leader is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2015, 10:29 PM   #259
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,702
Originally Posted by Loss Leader View Post
I'm sure if you detonate a nuclear device close enough to somebody, you'll see some direct damage.

If you're asking if chemotherapy is always the wrong treatment because of its risks, the answer is no. Medically, it is the best treatment available for certain illnesses.
No I am not asking it. I am asking about global damages.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2015, 10:31 PM   #260
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,702
Originally Posted by fromdownunder View Post
Now you have gone too far.

Norm
To understand global damages due to modern negative introductions was my main intention in OP. Sorry, if I misinterpreted or you people couldn't rightly understand my intention.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2015, 10:45 PM   #261
fuelair
Cythraul Enfys
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 54,923
New info : Average heartbeats during a human's life is 2.5 billion reported (with other neat data) in recent/most recent Scientific American (also transmission times of nerve signals in brain and body).....
__________________
There is no problem so great that it cannot be fixed by small explosives carefully placed.

Wash this space!

We fight for the Lady Babylon!!!
fuelair is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2015, 11:28 PM   #262
fromdownunder
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 5,724
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
To understand global damages due to modern negative introductions was my main intention in OP. Sorry, if I misinterpreted or you people couldn't rightly understand my intention.
If you actually read my post, I was not talking to you in this response. Do you really think that everything is about you?

You really ought to stop thinking that you should bow when thunder claps, or expect the air to part in front of you when you enter a room.

Have you ever heard of a word known as "humour"? Read the quote I cited, then my post and you might learn something. Although I doubt it.

Norm
__________________
Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in Vain



Last edited by fromdownunder; 22nd April 2015 at 11:36 PM.
fromdownunder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2015, 01:13 AM   #263
The Don
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Cymru
Posts: 22,590
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
To understand global damages due to modern negative introductions was my main intention in OP. Sorry, if I misinterpreted or you people couldn't rightly understand my intention.
Any action will have some kind of effect, however minor. Whether this results in damage is a matter of perspective (though in some cases it's more difficult to see the benefits than others). For example, large parts of the British countryside are renowned for their beauty and their biodiversity and vigorous efforts are made to preserve it and yet it was only formed by the clearance of the original wild wood. The British countryside is the result of ecological "damage" on a huge scale.
The Don is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2015, 01:56 AM   #264
Daylightstar
Philosopher
 
Daylightstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: hic.
Posts: 8,035
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
I think, I need to conclude this topic:-
...
If you actually do, please state what you have learned in this thread.
__________________
homeopathy homicidium
Daylightstar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2015, 03:27 AM   #265
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 29,308
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
To understand global damages due to modern negative introductions was my main intention in OP.

But you need to define "global damages", and you haven't really done that.

For example, you keep mentioning global warming. That is considered a problem because the resulting climate changes impact upon human populations in various ways. If you want to ignore humans, then on a global scale it can really only be considered to be change rather than damage, because the Earth itself is not capable of forming an opinion about whether it is good or bad. It just is. If you want to introduce the concept of "damages" from a global perspective, you need to consider something like the "Gaia hypothesis" that Gord introduced to the discussion. Note that that hypothesis proposes that global warming is a positive change, not damage.

With global warming, some habitats may change in extent or location, and this may result in reduced population, or even extinction, for some species, but it will also open up new opportunities for other species.

As other posters have noted, the only entities we know of that are capable on having a "sense of right and wrong" are humans. If you want to consider change as bad, you can only do this from the perspective of your own species, so there is no reason to exclude the positive aspects of "modern introductions" as far as humans are concerned.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2015, 03:46 AM   #266
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,702
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
But you need to define "global damages", and you haven't really done that.

For example, you keep mentioning global warming. That is considered a problem because the resulting climate changes impact upon human populations in various ways. If you want to ignore humans, then on a global scale it can really only be considered to be change rather than damage, because the Earth itself is not capable of forming an opinion about whether it is good or bad. It just is. If you want to introduce the concept of "damages" from a global perspective, you need to consider something like the "Gaia hypothesis" that Gord introduced to the discussion. Note that that hypothesis proposes that global warming is a positive change, not damage.

With global warming, some habitats may change in extent or location, and this may result in reduced population, or even extinction, for some species, but it will also open up new opportunities for other species.

As other posters have noted, the only entities we know of that are capable on having a "sense of right and wrong" are humans. If you want to consider change as bad, you can only do this from the perspective of your own species, so there is no reason to exclude the positive aspects of "modern introductions" as far as humans are concerned.
I think, you are suggesting there can not be any negative impact by modern introductions which can reduce our longevity.

Are you also suggesting that Body's physiological and Body's defence mechanisms of other species do not work on pre informed basis i.e by understanding by their inharent sense of right or wrong?

Bu Global damages, I mean any type of abnormal/unnatural damages to and on earth of beings and things decreasing their longevity.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2015, 03:48 AM   #267
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,702
Originally Posted by The Don View Post
Any action will have some kind of effect, however minor. Whether this results in damage is a matter of perspective (though in some cases it's more difficult to see the benefits than others). For example, large parts of the British countryside are renowned for their beauty and their biodiversity and vigorous efforts are made to preserve it and yet it was only formed by the clearance of the original wild wood. The British countryside is the result of ecological "damage" on a huge scale.
Yes, then?
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2015, 03:59 AM   #268
The Don
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Cymru
Posts: 22,590
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Yes, then?
Then damage is in the eye of the beholder, you said:

Quote:
To understand global damages due to modern negative introductions was my main intention in OP.
What you may consider "damages", someone else may consider neutral or benefits.

You're going to have a hard time discussing damages when there is no consensus on the nature of those damages or even if they have occurred.
The Don is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2015, 04:20 AM   #269
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,702
World Population, human's life expectancy and abnormal/unnatural odds on negative sides are increasing. How "nature balances itself" will be taken care??
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2015, 04:20 AM   #270
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 29,308
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
I think, you are suggesting there can not be any negative impact by modern introductions which can reduce our longevity.

No, I am not suggesting that. I am suggesting that in discussing "impact by modern introductions" it is dishonest to only consider the aspects you consider to be negative, just as it is dishonest, when discussing medicines, to focus only on their side-effects.

Quote:
Are you also suggesting that Body's physiological and Body's defence mechanisms of other species do not work on pre informed basis i.e by understanding by their inharent sense of right or wrong?

No, I am saying that "right or wrong" are purely human concepts. "Body's physiological and Body's defence mechanisms" do not work "on pre informed basis" or "by understanding by their inharent sense of right or wrong" in any species, including humans. Metabolism and defence mechanisms are the result of evolution, not any kind of plan.

Quote:
Bu Global damages, I mean any type of abnormal/unnatural damages to and on earth of beings and things decreasing their longevity.

Then you are back to your problem with increased life expectancy in those beings that are able to use "modern interventions".
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky

Last edited by Mojo; 23rd April 2015 at 04:24 AM.
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2015, 04:25 AM   #271
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 29,308
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
World Population, human's life expectancy and abnormal/unnatural odds on negative sides are increasing. How "nature balances itself" will be taken care??

I don't think retreating into unintelligibility will do it.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2015, 06:42 AM   #272
The Don
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Cymru
Posts: 22,590
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
World Population, human's life expectancy and abnormal/unnatural odds on negative sides are increasing. How "nature balances itself" will be taken care??
As Mojo points out, this post is very difficult to parse and understand.

The human population of the Earth is increasing and life expectancy is increasing largely in response to the greater availability of resources (food, shelter, water, healthcare and so on). Providing these resources has had an impact on the Earth and its ecosystems but then again there are ecosystems that are only there because of the action of man or other animals. Whether this impact is positive, negative or neutral is often a matter of point of view or opinion.

For example, the introduction of grey squirrels into the UK has had a devastating impact on native red squirrel population (though habitat loss is another major factor). Whether this is a negative thing depends on whether or not you are a grey squirrel.

The idea that human action = artificial = bad is simply to broad an assumption to have any real merit.
The Don is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2015, 06:53 AM   #273
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,702
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
No, I am not suggesting that. I am suggesting that in discussing "impact by modern introductions" it is dishonest to only consider the aspects you consider to be negative, just as it is dishonest, when discussing medicines, to focus only on their side-effects.




No, I am saying that "right or wrong" are purely human concepts. "Body's physiological and Body's defence mechanisms" do not work "on pre informed basis" or "by understanding by their inharent sense of right or wrong" in any species, including humans. Metabolism and defence mechanisms are the result of evolution, not any kind of plan.




Then you are back to your problem with increased life expectancy in those beings that are able to use "modern interventions".
Ok thanks for whatever you posted. I do not understand, what you say. Bye.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2015, 06:56 AM   #274
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,702
Originally Posted by The Don View Post
As Mojo points out, this post is very difficult to parse and understand.

The human population of the Earth is increasing and life expectancy is increasing largely in response to the greater availability of resources (food, shelter, water, healthcare and so on). Providing these resources has had an impact on the Earth and its ecosystems but then again there are ecosystems that are only there because of the action of man or other animals. Whether this impact is positive, negative or neutral is often a matter of point of view or opinion.

For example, the introduction of grey squirrels into the UK has had a devastating impact on native red squirrel population (though habitat loss is another major factor). Whether this is a negative thing depends on whether or not you are a grey squirrel.

The idea that human action = artificial = bad is simply to broad an assumption to have any real merit.
Ok thanks. Science agree or not but I do agree, nature balances itself, so whatever is and will be odd on either side will be balanced.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2015, 06:56 AM   #275
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 29,308
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
MRC told if all nuclear weapons are unsed in 3rd world war, probably we all may wipe out.

But this might not be a bad thing for cockroaches, even if none of us will be around to welcome our new insect overlords.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2015, 06:59 AM   #276
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 29,308
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
I do not understand, what you say.

This does not come as a surprise.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2015, 10:53 PM   #277
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,702
Passive and Active system prevail in nature to balance & imbalace, the things and beings. Passive, I mean unintentional acts without consiciousness & Active mean intentional acts done by consious beings.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 24th April 2015, 12:27 AM   #278
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 9,483
You still haven't told us what you mean by balanced and unbalanced. How do you tell one state from the other?

Were the natural events which caused the mass extinctions which occured before intelligent life evolved balancing or unbalancing?
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 24th April 2015, 12:35 AM   #279
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 29,308
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Passive and Active system prevail in nature to balance & imbalace, the things and beings. Passive, I mean unintentional acts without consiciousness & Active mean intentional acts done by consious beings.

Which category would you put global warming in, "Passive" or "Active"?
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 24th April 2015, 12:38 AM   #280
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 29,308
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Passive and Active system prevail in nature to balance & imbalace, the things and beings. Passive, I mean unintentional acts without consiciousness & Active mean intentional acts done by consious beings.

By the way, there are not the usual meanings of the terms "passive" and "active"; you seem merely to have substituted two new terms for your own peculiar meanings of "natural" and "unnatural".
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Closed Thread

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:30 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.