LordIlthari t1_j0fqzc6 wrote
Reply to comment by Zeniphyre in We should dismantle Mars, not colonize it. by [deleted]
Partially correct. We need quadrillions of quadrillions, every star in the galaxy surrounded by a K2 civilization, forming an incomprehensible number of sapient minds.
Zeniphyre t1_j0fr0mc wrote
I really hope this is sarcasm
LordIlthari t1_j0fr1vg wrote
Why? Do you not consider sapient life valuable?
Zeniphyre t1_j0fr79p wrote
I consider you a moron for thinking that value comes from simply exploding a population to unreasonable limits for no reason at all. Not to mention the idiotic thinking of "if a resource exists we should deplete it to have more people". The severe level of brain rot behind this logic is incredible.
LordIlthari t1_j0fritc wrote
Yes. Human life is valuable. Therefore we should act to maximize human life and also to ensure the highest quality possible of that human life. This is not possible if we remain confined to earth. The maximization of human life on earth alone will result in irreversible damage to the planet, resulting in human extinction. This is unacceptable. For earth to be preserved, human-compatible environments must exist away from earth so that the human population may grow sustainably via the exhaustion of resources which currently support no life.
Zeniphyre t1_j0frqwd wrote
Earth can be preserved by not having 8 billion people. We don't need to "maximize" our population. This is such a stupid answer to a problem that we already face. "Yeah we have environmental and societal issues now due to overpopulation. The answer is to have more people on a different planet rather than not overpopulating in the first place"
LordIlthari t1_j0fs6uy wrote
Overpopulation is a problem for animals that cannot control their environments and construct new ones. We do not need to be limited to the pathetic existences of hairless apes. We are the pinnacle of Darwin’s ladder but will not remain as such if we content ourselves with stagnation. Remaining on a singular planet and limiting our population is a recipe for inevitable extinction.
Also, sentient life is inherently the most valuable thing in the universe. This means to make the universe as valuable as possible it should have as much sentient life as possible.
Zeniphyre t1_j0fscrb wrote
Yeah imma stop you right there at that first sentence because it is entirely incorrect. Our extinction is coming BECAUSE of overpopulation. If you have to make other species extinct and you are causing the destruction of your planet to meet the lifestyle needs, you are overpopulated.
It baffles me how deep you all think you are when it is extremely clear that you have little to no foresight on how anything actually works.
LordIlthari t1_j0ft2t7 wrote
Correct, our current existence is not supportable by the earth. Your solution is to end our existence. Mine is to expand our horizons to permit abundance we cannot currently conceive of.
I am unwilling to roll over and die. I will not accept extinction as the destiny of my species.
Zeniphyre t1_j0ftd2n wrote
How the fuck is saying "don't have 8 billion people" "ending our existence? I value the preservation of the natural world far more than inflating a population for no reason other than to have more people. No, I don't value population numbers more than the environment. That's an idiotic line of thinking.
I don't know who needs to tell you this, but you will not have any impact on the future of humanity. It's not up to you. You can be "unwilling to roll over and die" but that is literally all you can do, and all you will do. You don't want humanity to go extinct but you refuse to even acknowledge the reason we are heading in that direction in the first place.
LordIlthari t1_j0ftshn wrote
I do acknowledge the reasons. Two. The first is we have grown beyond our cradle and evolutionary pressures demand we become an interplanetary species or perish. The second is that more than a few of us haven’t figured out that human life is in and of itself valuable, but that’s a sociological problem.
Zeniphyre t1_j0fumrj wrote
No, human life existing as a number is not valuable, and no, you do not acknowledge the reasons. We cannot even secure a stable existence for a large part of the population that we already have due to shortages in food, housing, power, etc. You cannot even fundamentally begin to grasp how our current population is obliterating other species and our environment and your argument is "dismantle Mars for resources".
You're going to live and die on this rock with no impact on the future. Throwing a hail mary at some nonsensical "we should have even more people but we should dismantle Mars" theory benefits nobody and refuses to address actual problems that are already here and at our doorstep.
There's nothing else to argue here. Your ideas benefit nobody and are entirely tone deaf to reality. They're entirely unfeasible and have zero grounding in reality. Your "I value life" grandstanding makes no sense when your argument is to expand a population that already cannot keep up with itself. You don't care for life. We have already obliterated countless species in the process of expanding. They do not matter because you care about numbers.
Here's a number for you. Your impact on the future of humanity is 0. Have fun with reality.
LordIlthari t1_j0fuu2m wrote
Your impact is negative. Enjoy being an evolutionary dead end and coming up with the lists of what kinds of people we need to start killing or castrating in order to produce your desired cull of our species.
Tell me, how many people do you need to kill before we’re not overpopulated any longer?
Zeniphyre t1_j0fv1my wrote
"Evolutionary dead end"
Buddy, I do not believe for one second, after seeing all of your comments here, that you are going to be spreading your gene pool to the future lmao. You're melodramatic and entirely self obsessed with your arguments. I doubt your social interactions are much different.
LordIlthari t1_j0fvnzr wrote
I was referring more to your self-destructive ideology. You say we’re a plague in another comment, one which indicates your illiteracy on our potential I might add. Look up what a K2 civilization’s population numbers could be if you want nightmares about 10^20 humans in one solar system alone. That is our destiny if fools like you don’t drag us down and shackle us to this insignificant mudball.
Zeniphyre t1_j0h6ysc wrote
Can you stop typing like you're some genius because it's just goofy looking. Also again, you have no impact on this and I have the highest doubts you're ever procreating, so you're going out on this mud ball as a nobody.
ILoveOnline t1_j0g1092 wrote
You have a severe misunderstanding of biology if you think we are the “pinnacle of Darwin’s ladder”
rileyoneill t1_j0frbs6 wrote
Why would that be sarcasm? If we colonize 500 earth like planets over the next million years and each one of them has a population of 8 billion that would be 4 trillion humans (or whatever our descendants identify as). There are probably a hundred billion habitable worlds in our galaxy.
Zeniphyre t1_j0fri32 wrote
Other than the obvious fact that we do not need to plague every single planet with our existence, trillions and "quadrillions of quadrillions" are not even remotely comparable.
rileyoneill t1_j0fxw3v wrote
Well, give it a few tens of millions of years and maybe we can get those numbers up to the quadrillions.
And yes. We do need to plague every other planet we can with our existence.
SuperRette t1_j0g399h wrote
Why? Why can't you simply be satisfied with living comfortably?
To spread unchecked throughout the galaxy, well, it will take time, but we will consume the galaxy. Quadrillions of humans in a dying galaxy fighting for scraps, until the last, usable materials, are exhausted. You would have an entire galaxy be sterilized.
Zeniphyre t1_j0h6q2a wrote
Yeah that's just fucking dumb. No other way to say it.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments