Will Science kill all life on planet earth?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lost_Found
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Knowledge is simply a fact. It is morally neutral. Science is simply the discovery of knowledge.

Wisdom is learning to use that knowledge for the greater good. For example, dynamite was one of the most powerful inventions of the last half of the nineteenth century. However, that invention was simply the product of knowledge. With wisdom, I can use it to save the lives of many miners by using it to blast rock, rather than send dozens of men underground to use hand picks. It can be used to excavate gravel for use in cement or in roads. It can even be used to save time and money in demolition. However, used unwisely, it can be used in warfare or in terrorist acts.

The scientific knowledge is NOT the problem. The problem is our flawed human nature, which can CHOOSE to do unwise or evil things because of our free will. Science simply reveals the how in God’s plan.

Remember, science also taught us how to massively increase crop yields, to build cathedrals, to have modern communication, to paint the Sistine Chapel, and many other things that have enriched the human race greatly.
thank you for this

man has been making poor moral choices for thousands of years
but it has not resulted in the recent and upcoming mass destruction of life on earth.
modern science is resulting in that

cathedrals do not fit my definition of modern science

“communication” is subject to definition. with modern science the only thing we will have in “common” with the person you are communicating with is mutual self-destruction
 
No I think quite the opposite. I think only though science can we save Earth.
but we have not needed modern science to “save the earth” in our past history, why now?

because modern science has created a need to save the earth, by destroying it

but modern science will continue to destroy the earth

modern science has traded short-term life, for complete and long-term death
 
Earth will survive. It is a matter of how much, if any, life survives on Earth.

rossum
like a few radiation-resistent and poison-resistent micro-organisms. and this is good news?
Science is a tool. Some of what it does is helpful, some of what it does is not.

rossum
when we misused tools in the past
(also substitute tools for “vices, bad decisions, etc”)
it did not result in a culture of death, the mass destruction of life on earth

we have always misused our tools and gifts
until we make it to heaven we will not be perfected
we will continue to misuse our tools and gifts
 
modern science and technology are bringing life on earth to an end
nuclear disasters, oil spills, abortion and much more
scientists tell us life on earth has lasted billions of years
but with modern science, common life on earth may last only another hundred years
is there anyone who honestly makes a case that science will not end human life within a hundred years
is science a scourge
Why is everyone talking about “modern science” as the thing that is “killing” us? This is the same argument the gun control crowd uses. Behind the nuclear disasters is nuclear energy that gives us clean electrical power; trying to save money results in building the containment structures to the minimum requirements which may not be the best. Behind the oil spills is the oil that is present in almost every product we use–take out everything in your home that has plastic in it and you’ll be sitting in your yard; trying to save money results in overworking oil-rig workers so that safety standards slack. Behind abortion is modern medicine which has given us so much, as has already been mentioned before in this thread (my own infant daughter wouldn’t be with us if not for modern medicine); trying to make money results in evil medical procedures.

Science is just a thing… Man is the user and actor. If we live our lives as Christ instucted us, science could be a truly wonderful thing that could make life better for each and every man, woman, and child on the planet.
 
in conclusion modern science is in over its head
it feeds on the tree of life at the centre/center of the garden
it fits modern science’s definition of a “psychopath”
before modern science, man was not massively destroying life on earth
modern science is the difference, resulting in that
 
in conclusion modern science is in over its head
it feeds on the tree of life at the centre/center of the garden
it fits modern science’s definition of a “psychopath”
before modern science, man was not massively destroying life on earth
modern science is the difference, resulting in that
When, precisely in your opinion, does “modern science” start? 1900? 1800? The ancient Romans? The Pyramids?
 
When, precisely in your opinion, does “modern science” start? 1900? 1800? The ancient Romans? The Pyramids?
there’s no exact “d-day” as to when “modern science” began
others have already posed this question, you should check the response as to dates I’ve suggested
modern science began when our tools became powerful enough to cause mass-destruction to life on earth
tools we never had before, which, like any tools, would be misused, but to much greater effect

seriously i am a faithful person. In God, not people. I agree human life likely will be around in a hundred years but at current rates of immediate gratification and the power of modern scientific “tools” we are making an awful mess of things for generations to come
we forget the Lord’s Prayer “give us this day our daily bread” (emphasis on each word)
i strongly felt the discussion needed to be provoked and I wanted to check the pulse out there - hence the “do you seriously think life will be around in 100 years” provocation
wanting to show there is a cost to our current comfort level. suffering appears to be something which we shift from ourselves to those who do not have a say. modern science facilitates this greatly
 
Science will not kill all life on earth. Human decision making, on the other hand, will indeed determine where life on earth goes to from here…

You may as well have asked: Will politics (politicians) kill all life on planet earth? I’d suggest politicians do a lot more damage than science… 😉
 
Lost, you must be a hoot to have a party!

Science is the knowledge of something.

People make choices - good and bad. Some choose to good with science; others choose to do evil. The science itself is neutral.

You seem to think the society “before science” was utopian. I disagree. The cure for diseases was not available or known, so many people died at younger ages of now curable or treatable diseases.

Before electricity, there was coal and wood to heat and light our homes…no thanks. I’ll take my electric lights, my computer, my TV, and my centrally heated home.

I will choose to look for the GOOD and POSITIVES. You can be negative if you want, but that is soooo tiring and wearing (and do you think God is happy if we are negative all the time?).

Have a fantastic, fabulous day! I know I will! 👍
 
As a professional historian, I completely agree with Catholic90. The idea that the earth was some kind of utopia that was incapable of catastrophic damage before modern science is just false. Many of the tools that we’ve had since the beginning of time have had unimaginably devastating consequences. Even something as simple as the “scientific” discovery of fire has caused millions of deaths globally, but of course has also caused great good. The fire of Rome killed hundreds of thousands of people, and left almost 900,000 homeless. Slash and burn agriculture around the Yellow River in China almost 5,000 years ago caused such erosion, that the river silted up and devastating floods now occur on average twice a decade. Five thousand years later, three of those floods in the twentieth century killed 300,000 people or more! To this day, the river is so full of silt that there is almost no life in the river.

Of course, the scientific discovery of the domestication of animals helped end our nomadic existence. However, horses were turned into cavalries, and untold millions died in battle. Does that mean that the discovery of horse breeding has doomed our species?

The load-bearing properties of the arch was one of the most important scientific discoveries of the Romans. With it, aqueducts were constructed that could bring water to millions of people. They also used it to construct the Colosseum of Rome, where tens of thousands died in the arena. Is the arch responsible for those deaths, or was it the decisions of people?

The science of ship building allowed the Spanish and Portuguese to explore the world. New lands were discovered, new foods and animals were brought to Europe, and the life expectancy of Europeans rose by almost ten years overnight just due to better nutrition. However, within one hundred years of the discovery of America, 90% of all Native Americans were dead from European diseases that they had no immunity to. Even worse, the Caribbean remains the only region of the world in which an entire race of humans became extinct. The last Carib, Taino, and Arawak Indians in the Caribbean were dead by 1600.
modern science began when our tools became powerful enough to cause mass-destruction to life on earth
tools we never had before, which, like any tools, would be misused, but to much greater effect
Well, the very first tools man ever made, which were hunting tools constructed from stone, bone, and wood, managed to cause the extinction of a large number of species, so I guess that the “evil” of science dates back to our very origins.

Do you consider yourself a Luddite?
 
Over the last hundred years we have had rapid advances in science and I have seen no remarkable decrease in life on the planet.
 
Someone always survives. There are plenty of science fiction movies about your disaster scenario and they all are about survival. So no, I don’t think so.

And as an earlier poster stated, primative cultures have destroyed the Earth as well. That is what happened with Easter Island. It was a forest and when the tribes used up all the trees and depleted the resources, they died out.

Now if science becomes so secular to the point where it is all about euthanasia, abortion and cloning and religon is basically outlawed, then the world might come to an end, but not because of science, but because it will probably mean the second coming of Christ is near and the end of times. Some people make the argument that we are approaching that time now but I don’t think it is something to worry about.
 
modern science and technology are bringing life on earth to an end
nuclear disasters, oil spills, abortion and much more
scientists tell us life on earth has lasted billions of years
but with modern science, common life on earth may last only another hundred years
is there anyone who honestly makes a case that science will not end human life within a hundred years
is science a scourge
I hope you see the inherent hypocrisy in using technology (the internet) to demonize science and technology.
 
an axe does not cause mass destruction to most forms of life on planet earth
science does

no except for not consuming contaminated water and food

no except to avoid exposure. plus, unlike science’s poison concoctions, it does not kill all other manner of life on planet earth

no, but electricity generation is part of what’s destroying a good deal of life on earth
currently listen to the news out of Japan

no, but we have six billion people in the first place because of science

I have answered all of these questions which do not pertain to the OP question
could you address whether science is killing unspeakable life on planet earth
Humans need technology/tools to thrive and survive. Without things like wheels, metalworking, agriculture, and other tools and ways of manipulating the environment to our advantage humans would still be living in caves and living in fear of predators like lions, tigers, and bears.
 
a super volcano is unlikely to erupt and destroy the earth in the next hundred years
a huge asteroid is unlikely to destroy the earth in the next hundred years
i agree that overcrowding will not be an issue, particularly if all forms of life on earth are being destroyed by modern science
the current trajectory indicates destruction of all life on earth
i present no scientific evidence since modern science does not study its own being
So you have no evidence then, and are merely stating your opinion.
 
you first say that science is just a tool
but then all your statements say “Science” did this and that
if it can do this and that, can it not also destroy all manner of life on planet earth?

i am also glad science has granted us these short-term personal benefits
straight teeth are fantastic
all of this at the expense of destroying all manner of life on planet earth

it depends on your definition of “primitive” and your definition of “knowledge”

if knowledge means information that results in the destruction of all manner of life on planet earth for my personal short-term comfort, then yes this is an alternative

my alternative is well documented. it has resulted in thousands of years of living without destruction of all manner of life on planet earth.

should we further explore the concept of “knowledge” and “primitive”?
Yes it is** well** documented.

Since the beginning of recorded history people have used tools (like spears, shovels, etc.) and methods (such as agriculture) to manipulate their environment. Technology is just a natural extension of these tools and methods.
 
my method of communication does not change whether or not modern science is destroying all manner of life on planet earth
you cannot defend your position with distraction
also you mispelled the word “off” further proof that modern science fails us
Your method of communication demonstrates that you benefit from modern technology. Showing a lack of commitment to your stated values at best.

Simply put, you are a hypocrite, and thus have no right to expect to taken seriously on this topic.
 
specifically - catholicism has had a great role to play in the pursuit of truth
if by science you mean “knowledge of truths” then i agree catholicism has a role
if you mean the science of primary causes then i agree
this is a far cry from the modern, **lower **scientific knowledge which is destroying all manner of life on planet earth
i don’t have time to discuss the societies “in tune with mother earth” i believe St Francis who says earth is our sister not our mother
By lower do you mean useful?
Such as the technology you and I are using now?
 
just look at the previous nineteen hundred or so years
compare that to the past hundred years
that is my documentation
So your ‘documentation’ is vague to the point of being worthless.

Good to know.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top