[ SECRET POST #1899 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #1899 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.
[The Tempest]


__________________________________________________



03.
[SGA]


__________________________________________________



04.
[Life After People]


__________________________________________________



05.
[Uncharted]


__________________________________________________



06.
[Super]


__________________________________________________



07.
[Japanese voice actors]


__________________________________________________



08.
[Kamen Rider Den-O, Doctor Who ]


__________________________________________________



09.
[Silent Hill 4: The Room]


__________________________________________________



10.
[Tripod]


__________________________________________________



11.
[True Blood]


__________________________________________________



12.
[Cabin Pressure]


__________________________________________________



13.
[How I Met Your Mother]


__________________________________________________



14.
[Buffy the Vampire Slayer]


__________________________________________________



15.
[Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy]


__________________________________________________



16.
[Gossip Girl]


__________________________________________________



17.
[Sense and Sensibility]


__________________________________________________



18.
[FFX]


__________________________________________________



19.
[The Princess and the Goblin]


__________________________________________________



20.
[Code Geass]


__________________________________________________



21.
[Star Trek (2009)]


__________________________________________________



22.
[Tree of Life]


__________________________________________________









Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 042 secrets from Secret Submission Post #271.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 1 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[ariseishirou.livejournal.com]

That.... humans are destroying the planet and that the value of the human race is not greater than that of every other life form on the planet, if it comes to that?

Or what the OP is saying - that humans "deserve" to die because of some "moral" inferiority to animals?

Because the latter, yes, I've never quite seen that one before. But the former? Oh dear, are there ever a lot of evironmentalists - with degrees, working in their fields, well over 40 and with children - that you've apparently never met.

[stella-down.livejournal.com]

what's with all the qualifiers there?

people who say things like "humans are destroying the planet" don't sound like people who have any clue what they're talking about, whether they're "over 40 and with children" or not (whatever that has to do with anything).

[ariseishirou.livejournal.com]

whether they're "over 40 and with children" or not (whatever that has to do with anything).

Well you said that OP's viewpoint was the sole province of college philosophy courses, which isn't even remotely true.

people who say things like "humans are destroying the planet"...

So... all politically active environmentalists? Most environmental biologists?

...don't sound like people who have any clue what they're talking about

"Biologists know (http://www.davidsuzuki.org/issues/wildlife-habitat/science/endangered-species-legislation/protecting-biodiversity/) what is causing this environmental crisis — human impacts from development, deforestation, pollution and climate change are destroying the homes and habitat of wildlife around the world."

You sound like a much more credible source than Dr. David Suzuki. You're probably right.

[fenm.livejournal.com]

That's talking about humans effect on the environment, not the planet, There's a difference.

Wait, is this what you meant by "a lot of environmentalists - with degrees, working in their fields..." hold this viewpoint? Because, yes, environmentalists think humans are having an effect on the environment, which is NOT the same as them thinking we're destroying the planet, as in, the actual Earth itself.

[ariseishirou.livejournal.com]

Really. This is where we're backtracking to. "Humans aren't tearing apart the physical earth on which animals and the ecosystems that sustain them reside - that spinning ball of molten rock is perfectly intact! Ergo, humans are not destroying "the planet"!".

They are, however - and biologists agree - destroying the aforementioned life-forms and the ecosystems that sustain them at an ever-increasing rate, hence the "humans are not worth more than the sum of every other life-form on the planet" claim, and yes, many biologists and environmentalists are of that view, if environmental destruction is left unchecked.

But if you want to pretend that "the environment" and "the planet" were not being used interchangeably because it makes it look like the above poster didn't say something profoundly stupid, by all means. Humans are not (yet) destroying their ball of rock.

Have a lovely evening.

[fenm.livejournal.com]

Really. This is where we're backtracking to. "Humans aren't tearing apart the physical earth on which animals and the ecosystems that sustain them reside - that spinning ball of molten rock is perfectly intact! Ergo, humans are not destroying "the planet"!".

This is what I've been saying the whole time, actually.

[ariseishirou.livejournal.com]

I...

....You know what, fair enough. To each her own views and priorities, then. I was talking about something rather different, but if you weren't, then I respect that.

[stella-down.livejournal.com]

I'm talking about the juvenile level of discourse in this secret and the way you're weirdly coming in and trying to act like this is an actual issue being discussed. the OP isn't talking about "leftist-environmentalist" anything. if you want to swish around and make yourself feel smart, this is a really dumb thread to do it in.

[ariseishirou.livejournal.com]

If that's true, why didn't you stop the first time I pointed out that the OP made their point very badly, if indeed the philosophy I ascribed to it was the point they were trying to make (poorly) at all?

Factual statements about relevant political views = "swishing around and mak(ing) myself feel smart"?

Who's being juvenile, again?

[stella-down.livejournal.com]

you said the OP's secret was a legitimate viewpoint. I said that was silly, because it is.

there are no relevant political views here, just an OP who thinks they're Sephiroth and a bunch of posters trying to out-pontificate each other as if "human beings are terrible and we've done nothing to justify existing and should all just die and thinking about that makes me happy" is a real issue being brought to the floor of the UN.

[ariseishirou.livejournal.com]

Well that's one of the most polite flounces I've read in ages, so I'll take it. Have a lovely evening.

[(Anonymous)]

There's also a difference between killing off a LOT of different species and ending all life on earth. A lot of people are of the opinion that killing off a shit ton of species isn't "destroying the earth" because unless literally all life if killed off new species will eventually arise and take the place of the old.

Mass extinctions have previously happened and will happen again - and the earth will continue on with different species than it had before.

[(Anonymous)]

Um, have you not heard of the Climate Change Conferences? Where world leaders meet to discuss how to stop our environmental devastation?

Either you're trolling, or just that oblivious

[stella-down.livejournal.com]

who's talking about climate change? I thought this was a thread about "humanity" being "wiped out" because of all the "evil things we do to each other". did you even read the secret?

[(Anonymous)]

Different anon.

Basically, this thought process is at the back of every Malthusian panic, every "we must get people to have fewer children", every "the world cannot sustain this many people", every "we must increase sex education and contraceptives in third world countries, because those stupid poor people have too many children", and a good chunk of environmentalism as a whole.

And I say this as someone who believes there is strong evidence of anthropocentric climate change, and as someone who tries hard to reduce my environmental impact. There are creepy undercurrents in mainstream environmentalism, hence why the Green Party in the UK used to propose caps on family size (I don't know if they still do). It's the culture of death, and it's why many third world communities side-eye the Hell out of the scientific 'missionaries' who come to fix them.

But what do you care? Why would it matter to you if, for example, every person on the planet was sterilised so that there was no next generation? I know why I'd care, but I don't think you agree with me in terms of the value of all human life.

[ariseishirou.livejournal.com]

Now, this is the sort of thing I'm more accustomed to hearing in response to statements like the OP's. As opposed to telling them to stop being a speshul snowflake hipster Sephiroth, which is an even more intellectually bankrupt non-argument than the initial one.

[(Anonymous)]

I agree with you so much. I hate how people talk about how poor people are having "too many children" so we need to teach them about contraceptives and sex education.

We need to teach everybody everywhere (I'm not excluding developed countries considering some of the massively incorrect information I've seen people in America and Canada sprout as the truth when it comes to sex ed), and make sure they have access too, since knowledge is useless without the tools about contraceptives so that everyone everywhere (particularly women and trans men since, you know, they actually have to carry the babies to term) can decide how many kids they'd like to have.