Are Americans less-evolved?

[Moonstruck888]

But you said;
‘…we’ve made 2 billion people our victims, and that is totally un-Christlike.’
Are’nt you assuming that Christians have made the 2 billion people our victims. Europe and the USA, the first world continents, are by no means exclusively Christian. First world continents are also funded by China and the middle east, - areas which are variously described but never really as first world countries, I think. Indeed China is a communist atheist country.

You could have a point there… Christianity is in big trouble where I live, in the UK. At least 40% of the clergy here are atheists…

 

[redhen]

It’s not about how many people can live in what physical space, it’s about what resources are needed to keep these people alive… You also need space to grow enough food for all the people to eat and to provide enough energy to keep them warm.

It’s not just depleting resources, it’s the quality as well. The earth has a closed water system, we’re not losing water, we’re losing clean, unpolluted water.

And as humans population expands, it’s always at the expense of non-human animals, in the way of extinction.

Lack of biodiversity is not a good thing. It’s like sawing off the limb you’re sitting on.

 

[Moonstruck888]

It’s not just depleting resources, it’s the quality as well. The earth has a closed water system, we’re not losing water, we’re losing clean, unpolluted water.

And as humans population expands, it’s always at the expense of non-human animals, in the way of extinction.

Lack of biodiversity is not a good thing. It’s like sawing off the limb you’re sitting on.

Agreed on all counts…

 

[redhen]

So there’s this early-morning infomercial, at a time when every other infomercial is telling you how to have a smaller butt or whiter teeth.

This infomercial is different. It’s called Green Planet or something like it—it starts out with syrupy music and lush cinematography and some Deep Announcer Voice goes, “NATURE provides us with all we need, blah blah, the PLANET gives humans everything we need to blah blah—”

You object? Our planet sustains many species, including ours.

(Dramatic sinister music)

“BUT,” it goes on, “With pollution and OVERPOPULATION…”

That’s all you need to hear to understand you are listening to the latest in scientism, fascism: Green Marxism. There is no God in this equation, no question of who actually created ‘the planet’ and who gave us dominion over it.

Actually, according to many Catholic theologians, God** is **in this equation.There is also a growing number of the laity that support environmental proposals. Actually, there’s a few group forums here to discuss these critical matters.

None of that is addressed. We are just hammered with the mantra: “We gotta save the PLANET.”

Marshall McLuhan, a Catholic theolgian, said years ago that “There are no passengers on spaceship earth. We are all crew”. Something about stewardship I think.

What is this, the 70s?

No, and it’s not all Marxist propaganda. There are many conservatives who would label themselves environmentalists, or crunchy (as in cranola) Con’s.

Save the planet from whom?

The exponentially growing human overpopulation of the planet?

For whom?

For the sake of all the other species. “we are a communion of subjects, not a collection of objects” - Fr. Thomas Berry, C.P.

What are the answers to those questions? If you follow the money and dig deep enough, the answer is always 'Save the planet from Undesirables. Like human babies, races we don’t like, and old sick people."

Look up Margaret Sanger and her poisonous philosophy.

So now its; scientism, fascism, Green Marxism, eugenicists, racists, and senior citizen haters? Hmm? There is a growing Catholic response to environmental issues. If you choose to be unreasonable and dismiss it a priori, then that’s bad logic.

‘Save the planet FOR people like us: the elite, the progressives, the scientists, the utilitarian bioethicists, those of us who CARE. And the mosquitoes. Let’s not forget them.’

Noted.

Peter Singer, ladies and gentlemen.

How many Africans have died from malaria since the banning of DDT?

Fear mongering again.

Who made ‘the planet,’ and all else? Who gave us souls to be saved and sent His Son to save them?

dunno, but it’s irrelevant. We need biodiversity and a healthy planet to survive.

Was it Peter Singer? Margaret Sanger? The current regime? Captain Planet?

More appeal to fear and name calling. Nyah, nyah. Maybe it was Rachel Carson? Oooh?

If you get the answer, they can’t fool you again.

 

[redhen]

Save the planet from whom?

For whom?

What are the answers to those questions? If you follow the money and dig deep enough, the answer is always 'Save the planet from Undesirables. Like human babies, races we don’t like, and old sick people."

For whom? I forgot to add, though JP II took a more narrow view than mine (all species), he wrote;

“natural resources are limited; some are not, as it is said, renewable. Using them as if they were inexhaustible, with absolute dominion, seriously endangers their availability not only for the present generation but above all for generations to come.” Sollicitudo rei socialis 1987

emphasis mine.

Five years later, the Union of Concerned Scientists gave this warning;

“The earth is finite. Its ability to absorb wastes and destructive effluent is finite. Its ability to provide food and energy is finite. Its ability to provide for growing numbers of people is finite. And we are fast approaching many of the earth’s limits. “[UCS, 1992]

Faith and reason together again, I’m lovin’ it.

 

[mark_a]

If by evolved we mean survival of the “species,” then are American’s less-evolved than other nations?

America is further down the path of the same “evolution” that most of the rest of the world is headed.

We have dipped below replacement.

So, if Muslims are more true to their teachings on contraception than Catholics have been, we will become a Muslim nation.

Allah have mercy.

 

[Andy_III]

It’s not about how many people can live in what physical space, it’s about what resources are needed to keep these people alive… You also need space to grow enough food for all the people to eat and to provide enough energy to keep them warm.

Are you seriously saying that the entire land mass of the Earth except for Texas is not enough room to produce food for 6-7 billion people?

Consider that humans are producing more food per land area than we were a few decades years ago. Also, we have technologies that can produce food without land. One of them is called fishing. Others can be done from space, which is a really big place!

That would free up the entire land of the world for living space. Room for everyone, all we need is for people to love each other and live in community. Don’t worry, Jesus is working that issue (1 billion+ strong).

Also, don’t forget that the ocean can be used for dwellings also, especially with advances in technology. I don’t see any practical population “limits” in the near future. God has given us the tools we need to survive and thrive.

 

[Andy_III]

For whom? I forgot to add, though JP II took a more narrow view than mine (all species), he wrote;

“natural resources are limited; some are not, as it is said, renewable. Using them as if they were inexhaustible, with absolute dominion, seriously endangers their availability not only for the present generation but above all for generations to come.” Sollicitudo rei socialis 1987

emphasis mine.

Five years later, the Union of Concerned Scientists gave this warning;

“The earth is finite. Its ability to absorb wastes and destructive effluent is finite. Its ability to provide food and energy is finite. Its ability to provide for growing numbers of people is finite. And we are fast approaching many of the earth’s limits. “[UCS, 1992]

Faith and reason together again, I’m lovin’ it.

Certainly, faith and reason go well together. That’s where science came from. Luckily imagination is not limited to the possibilities of Earth alone. We should care for the planet and the resources it contains (biodiversity, etc.), but that does not mean that we should kill people to reduce the population. Also if I run at 30 miles an hour toward China, I’d be “fast approaching” China. Doesn’t mean I’ll get there any time soon. I’d also need some technological help along the way, because I can’t swim that far!

 

[mark_a]

It’s not about how many people can live in what physical space, it’s about what resources are needed to keep these people alive… You also need space to grow enough food for all the people to eat and to provide enough energy to keep them warm.

So how many people will the Earth support? Surely someone has some info.

By the way, starvation is not a productivity problem, its a distribution problem.

 

[Moonstruck888]

Are you seriously saying that the entire land mass of the Earth except for Texas is not enough room to produce food for 6-7 billion people?

Consider that humans are producing more food per land area than we were a few decades years ago. Also, we have technologies that can produce food without land. One of them is called fishing. Others can be done from space, which is a really big place!

That would free up the entire land of the world for living space. Room for everyone, all we need is for people to love each other and live in community. Don’t worry, Jesus is working that issue (1 billion+ strong).

Also, don’t forget that the ocean can be used for dwellings also, especially with advances in technology. I don’t see any practical population “limits” in the near future. God has given us the tools we need to survive and thrive.

It’s this kind of complacency that is the very root of the problem we’re facing. There’s no point in worrying about the fact that the oxygen level on this planet is depleting, that the air is being polluted with toxins and that global weather patterns are destabilizing because we can all go and live in a brave new world under the sea.

I find your imagination commendable, but at the moment this is utopian science fiction. As for Jesus working on the issue, given the, to say the least, high handed way his gospel of love has been spread in the past, I’m afraid I don’t find that very reassuring.

 

[Moonstruck888]

So how many people will the Earth support? Surely someone has some info.

That would depend on a number of factors. For example, do we plan to keep supporting billionaires rather than portioning wealth out evenly?

By the way, starvation is not a productivity problem, its a distribution problem.

Actually, at the moment it’s mainly because of greed. Like I said though, now that China and India are becoming manufacturing powerhouses, what happens when everyone over there decides they want two car homes?

 

[mark_a]

That would depend on a number of factors. For example, do we plan to keep supporting billionaires rather than portioning wealth out evenly?

I vote no!!

Actually, at the moment it’s mainly because of greed.

I’d disagree if I could.

Like I said though, now that China and India are becoming manufacturing powerhouses, what happens when everyone over there decides they want two car homes?

We’ll have a re-distribution of wealth, which is already under way. I’m not so sure I want to look to China or India for a new model, though.

 

[donsnow]

If by evolved we mean survival of the “species,” then are American’s less-evolved than other nations?

Procreation here is less than many other, particularly 3rd world countries. We contracept and even advertise methods in magazines, radio, etc… We abort. Many American men look for consequence-free sex. Porn doesn’t reproduce. Women commit to professional work far more than raising children than in decades past. The Europeans could fall under this umbrella too with the Pope a few years ago urging them to reproduce more.

Sticking to your first paragraph, I would answer first, we are more economically evolved, or were, until Socialism blossomed in D.C. last year.

Second, we are more governmentally evolved, as long as our 1792 Constitution remains the law of the land.

Thirdly, we are more militarily evolved, since other countries military try to get our technology.

I think we’re as technologically evolved as any other country, with generally more compassionate use of technology than China, for one, and the Netherlands, for another.

All in all, yeah I think we’re more evolved than the rest of the world. However, I also think that that’s soon to end. :sad_yes:

 

[Moonstruck888]

Sticking to your first paragraph, I would answer first, we are more economically evolved, or were, until Socialism blossomed in D.C. last year.

Second, we are more governmentally evolved, as long as our 1792 Constitution remains the law of the land.

Thirdly, we are more militarily evolved, since other countries military try to get our technology.

I think we’re as technologically evolved as any other country, with generally more compassionate use of technology than China, for one, and the Netherlands, for another.

All in all, yeah I think we’re more evolved than the rest of the world. However, I also think that that’s soon to end. :sad_yes:

You leave me with the unpleasant taste in my mouth that you’ve never read a single word on Evolution.

Given that there are no longer any geographical barriers that would isolate the US population from the rest of the world, Americans are, and will be for the foreseable future, a part of the same species as other human beings around the globe.

The simple answer to the simple question in the OP is that Americans can be no less nor no more evolved than any other human being.

Incidentally, as a representative of a religion that claims to be of peace and love, I shouldn’t be too proud of the technological terrors that you’ve invented.

 

[Moonstruck888]

I vote no!!

I’d disagree if I could.

We’ll have a re-distribution of wealth, which is already under way. I’m not so sure I want to look to China or India for a new model, though.

Agreed on all counts. Well said Sir.

 

[Andy_III]

You leave me with the unpleasant taste in my mouth that you’ve never read a single word on Evolution.

Given that there are no longer any geographical barriers that would isolate the US population from the rest of the world, Americans are, and will be for the foreseable future, a part of the same species as other human beings around the globe.

There is a sense in which various countries can be compared using some of the principles of evolution, even if it stretches the connotation of the term a bit. Survival of the fittest, for example, can provide a measure (fitness) with which to compare. Using terms (a little sloppily, like the OP did), a more fit individual could be called “more-evolved” if it is more likely to survive (i.e., fitter). This doesn’t mean that the individual can’t get hit by a meteor and die sooner. Also, the same terms applied to individuals or species can be applied to ideas (memes) and organizations (like countries). The tone for this forum topic, set by the OP, was not one of rigid definitions and scientific study, so please refrain from dismissing others who are keeping the same tone as the OP.

Incidentally, as a representative of a religion that claims to be of peace and love, I shouldn’t be too proud of the technological terrors that you’ve invented.

What technological terrors are you referring to, and who are you claiming invented them?

 

[Andy_III]

It’s this kind of complacency that is the very root of the problem we’re facing. There’s no point in worrying about the fact that the oxygen level on this planet is depleting, that the air is being polluted with toxins and that global weather patterns are destabilizing because we can all go and live in a brave new world under the sea.

I find your imagination commendable, but at the moment this is utopian science fiction. As for Jesus working on the issue, given the, to say the least, high handed way his gospel of love has been spread in the past, I’m afraid I don’t find that very reassuring.

I was not speaking from an attitude of complacency, I was saying that we have lots of work to do! Certainly pollution is an issue and needs to be addressed, but I did not say anything about pollution since that was not the issue at hand. The issue, I thought, was the physical space necessary to house the people of the world and to produce enough food to sustain them. There are many other factors invovled (such as food distribution) that are also necessary to support a larger population.

I apologize if anyone (including me) has given the gospel to you in a high handed way. You can rest assured that the person or persons who did so will be held accountable for their actions. Those actions, however, do not reduce the truth of the message.

 

[Moonstruck888]

What technological terrors are you referring to, and who are you claiming invented them?

Here’s a short video I made up from stock footage that will explain what I’m referring to…

youtube.com/watch?v=lLrmEh5VRXM

America is thus far the only country to actually use these weapons. Something tells me that, man or God, Jesus of Nazareth is not the kind of man who would approve.

 

[Moonstruck888]

The tone for this forum topic, set by the OP, was not one of rigid definitions and scientific study, so please refrain from dismissing others who are keeping the same tone as the OP.

I dismissed no one, I merely pointed out that he was engaged in mendacity.

 

[donsnow]

You leave me with the unpleasant taste in my mouth that you’ve never read a single word on Evolution.

Given that there are no longer any geographical barriers that would isolate the US population from the rest of the world, Americans are, and will be for the foreseable future, a part of the same species as other human beings around the globe.

The simple answer to the simple question in the OP is that Americans can be no less nor no more evolved than any other human being.

Incidentally, as a representative of a religion that claims to be of peace and love, I shouldn’t be too proud of the technological terrors that you’ve invented.

I’ve read different author’s articles on evolution. And, a few books by different contemporary writers. Only, I didn’t read the OP in terms of Darwinism, but in the more liberal view of evolution in many things.

The same geographical barriers separating America from the rest of the world still exist, it’s the technology that spans them which could be very temporary. We’ve always been and always will be the same species as those in Europe, Eurasia, Asia, Africa, Australia and the Pacific islands, etc. Our only difference is we threw out kings and forbid nobility to hold office in our government. The rest of the world seems to resent that, I think.

Some of our people fail to love God above all things. That’s the fault of those inventors, not of the teachings of Jesus Christ.
And, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with our technology terrorizing terrorists.