I know lots of you righteous people are going to get really upset about the following words, but so you should be. If you will not get upset, then I might be wrong.

I want to write about the biggest virus that is spreading our world these days. It is not Aids; it is not chemical or nuclear weapon. It is not the hole in the Ozone. Those things are minor comparing to this problem.

I am talking about billion of creatures, almost human beings but not really. People who evolution has chosen, for some reason, to skip a few stages. People who are worse than animals in their behaviour, people who are below monkeys. I will not give these creatures' names or definition, and you can guess who I am talking about.

Our society has evolved in a strange way. A way that we've become so bright to give all those who we can sort of communicate with the same rights and status as others.

But should it be this way?

When someone kills infants and justifies it as right cause.

When someone shouts and spits at another person in the street just make the female attracted.

When someone thirsts for blood for no reason.

When someone can't talk so it attacks.

Can you think of any creature, which we don’t look at as an "animal" but acts this way?

Let me give you more examples.

Hyenas go in herds. There is a leader, and they always look for a victim to attack. They are one of the ugliest animals known to us.

They attack the finer animals. They will incite those creatures who threaten them and who they can not understand.

But they will also attack themselves within them, and fight other herds that threat them.

We might call those herds – Gangs.

I never have been a racist. Those who know me will say I am very enlighted and liberal. I accept everyone whom I feel can act in a civilised and mannered way, and anyone I see as a human being.

But I had an enlightment. And tonight, I came across a creature in which I didn’t see much human signs. It was spitting. It was loud. It was provocative. It called me names. Why? Because I walked next to it. That is all. I can not understand why this thing thought it needed to act the way it did. Maybe it wanted to communicate? Be friendly? Fight? I can't understand.

I think I cannot understand these things, because this creature was less evolved than me.

Evolution is a proven theory. Humans are evolving as these lines are being written.

But these creatures are staying in their place. No culture, no human behaviour. I would call them predators but some predators are even better behaved than these.

Our society is so evolved, that it chosen to give these things the same rights as the rest of man. We need to think this through.

So this is a cry for all human beings:

Fight. Before these things get more threaten (remember that Tuesday morning when the buildings fell down) and try to beat down man kind.

Fight. Oppose. Man kind was able to unite against threats before (1940's) and man kind can do it again.

I don’t say go to violent war. Violent is only the way of those who are less evolved. Not the human way.

This is just a cry of one man who is hurt.

Use words. Use thoughts. Use wisdom.

We just need to shout.

Do something.

I'm not entirely sure where you are coming from, but your post smacks of racial intolerance my friend.....Can you explain what you are trying to say in clear language without riddles??

Seems I got a different feeling from that post - there was no mention of racial issues, other than to state that the author is not a racist. Sounds like he just had a run-in with one of the less charming local kids. Seems every town's got 'em...

i can guess at what you are trying to mean.. but that is all it is... a guess i can't truely understand you unless you actually tell me what your trying to say. Though i kinda agree with Jonman.

Okay, I have no idea what exactly you're talking about, and before I join anybandwagon against or for you... can you kindly elaborate on exactly what are you referring to?


I love riddles, but not this kind.

Thanks.

I suspect he's talking about Dolphins, they are highly evolved, we can sort of communicate with them and when they wear a false moustache and it's dark and misty they can easily be mistaken for a human (albeit a rather oddly shaped one).

Dolphins are also known for their general ill manners and the fact they hang around in dark alleys and behind bus stations smoking fags and waiting to mug old people.

I join our friend in saying "Down with this Aquatic mammalian menace!" and implore you all to join us.

RJ

Just because humans are rude does not make them less evolved. It makes them assholes. but that does not mean they are less evolved than you. It seems to me you are using a scientific theory to explain why some people piss you off. This does not work. Evolution picks off the less adapted. The theory has nothing to do with making us nice. Yous ay fight, but not with violence. You want us un-united, yet you want us to be peaceful?

Your expectations of man are too high. Lower them. Just because you met an asshole does not mean we are a less evolved species. In fact, we are the most evolved species on the planet.

Certainly consider Sir Maxerpopple's comment, because I think he makes a worthy point. Evolution is something scientific -- survival of the fittest as Darwin put it -- whereas jack@$$es are just, well, y'know... @$$es... You're bound to meet people who treat you like crap and, although you get pissed off at them, eventually move on. At least that's the impression I got from your post. You met someone who didn't like you, or, as Jonman put it, "one of the less charming local kids." However you like. I tend to write the same way you just did when I begin writing a topic, which is why I never seem to start them (they're simply too confusing unless you really know me well), but would you mind being a little less cryptic and perhaps elaborating...? Thanks.

We are not a virus. A virus is a non-living particle that requires a host organism to perform any functions beyond that of crystallization, which is merely a reaction. Humans are living organisms that only require food, not a host, to survive.

As much as youw ould like to think we are a virus, we are just a greedy cild race. Get over the fact that most people are idiots and assholes and move on. Don't blame it on evolutionary error. Evolution does not make mistakes, as it has no intelligence.

I'd have to say, like the others, you need to be more clear if you want to start a serious thread. Make it clear if you're talking about the mentally challenged, street gangs, or terrorists, or just drunk assholes.

Still, though stupid behaviour ticks all of us off and sometimes seriously hurts through hate crimes, gang wars, etc., I think that some understanding is needed, if pity is not possible.

Stupid as it sounds, there are some "uncivilized people" out there who just don't know any better, because they've never HAD it any better....some people were born, raised, and die on the streets, where poverty is rampant, crime and drugs are a way of life, and being part of a gang and practicing intimidation strategies is how they learned to survive from a very early age. Some people have grown up with hatred and been threatened one way or another all their lives, and can you really blame them if this is all they know of communication? People learn social skills and social behaviour from their environments....and what may seem "uncivilized" and atrocious or just plain senseless behaviour to you may be effective behaviours for them...you just don't know why they are doing it.

On the topics of terrorism, if that is indeed what you were referring to, if people are taught nothing but hatred, violence, and in some cases outright lies to incite them to "justified violence", it does not mean they are "lower than animals"-- it means that some groups of people are seriously screwed up in their world views and need to look for more effective ways of solving their issues with other countries/religions/ethnic groups/etc., and this is something the entire world needs to work on.


Still, I believe in basic fundamental rights for all people, whether you consider them civilized or not! Everyone has the right to have their basic food and shelter needs met, and more importantly, the right to live their lives as they see fit so long as it is not infringing on other's similar rights (an it harm none, do as ye will).

(Yeah, I know, the last statement rises the ever-present questions/problems of censorship, how social norms/societal values are developed, mutual right-infringements, but can we momentarily ignore these for the sake of the ideal? )

Very true... but then we could say that the planet is the host that we're leeching off.

See, what Agent Smith said in the Matrix is pretty true. Mammals live in harmony with the planet. We simply wade in, multiply, deplete the resources and then move on somewhere else. We Humans act like we own the planet, and one day we're all gonna pay for this negligence.

Oh well...

The earth is not a living organism. The host for a virus however, is. We leach off of the plants and animals on the planet, but tha makes us neither viri nor parasites, merely hetereotrophes.

Someone has been watching to matrix to much!!!

Seriously though everyone has 'gangs'. I have a 'gang' of friends I hang around with. That doesn't make us evil, bad, less evolved. It makes us a group of people with like-minded views that enjoy each others company. The difference between us and the "less charming local kids" to coin a phrase is that we don't see it necessary to hang around on street corners harassing passers by

Not quite sure what your point is.....I think, personally, perhaps it's to get us all worked up which is pointless really.

Just my tuppence worth

Sank why do you feel only western society is to blame? While we head the hegemony offensive, other people have other problems. The east is just as guilty as the west.

Seems like this thread is...merely...lacking...a...point.......

Time to close it I beleive unless there is some new discussion that could be risen?

Well, no, not in the classic sense. I dunno, though, I find it hard to believe that an object as complex as the Earth could be truly inert. There's an atmosphere, there's all the life it supports, the tides, the movement of the crust along fault lines, the geothermic activity, the weather... I can't believe this just happened to the planet, it must have something happening to make this all occur, more so than any other planet in the solar system.


A good point... anyone else agree??

Don't think in human terms. Many planets could have an dprobably did support life. We know for a fact mars did. Just because we wedren't around to see it does not mean it did not happen. And as for the remarkable nature of this world, beleive it, it's a hunk of rock. Nothing more.

erm... I have to say this: I'm not the one thinking in human terms here. I'm considering the possibility that something can live without needing to breathe or eat in the way that animals do. I think the Earth functions somewhat more like a plant; it gets its energy from the sun... Okay, so not a perfect analogy but it's close enough. I still consider plants to be alive, even though they don't breathe or eat.

And the Earth isn't a lump of rock. Common misconception. The earth comprises of a thin crust, over some layers of rock, has a vast cavity of magma, and finally a dense mass in the centre (it is believed).

Given your argument that life could be supported on other planets in our solar system could support life, does it not strike you as odd that they don't? Do you never sit back and wonder at how amazing it all is, that we're even here? Do you never look down at the earth and marvel at how it knows just what it needs to give to us to support us? Do you never take time to look at a big old tree, one that was there decades before you were born and will be there long after you die, and wonder what it could tell you if it could speak? Do you never look at the ocean and be awed by all that latent power?

I'm no tree hugger, I'm not about to give up my car or anything like that... but sometimes taking a step back and looking at this planet makes you realise that there's more going on than what affects you, and there's a calming element to be found in that. I suggest everyone tries it sometime.

The plants are alive, yes, but the earth is not. The core is not always solid, that I know, but it is still rock, no?

It is beleived that mars once had water, and water could mean life. Therefore it is entirely possible that we aren't alone, just late.

The earth does not get food from the sun, the plants do. The earth is merely the housing area for the plants and animals that reside there. A miracle of happenstance, or perhaps god.

There are two single celled bacteria having this discussion right now in your hair, or possibly on your arm. They are referring to the light globe above you as 'sun' and the blood in your veins as 'magma' and the beating of your heart as 'core'.

Everything is alive, you just don't know it.

Too bad the analogy romanticises microbes.

Give me sufficient proof, something besides mere theory that the earth is alive.

At least god has the bible.

At least our theory has the above posts... which is essentially the same thing.

You and I are both microbes sir, and in the scheme of things, the size difference between either of us and a bacterium is negligible

There's also a whole theory about the earth being one giant living organism and us being cogs in the wheels, or cancer cells, depending on which version you like.

Gaia Theory http://www.gaianet.fsbusiness.co.uk/gaiatheory.html

RJ

Ah but microbes are not sentient, we are. They are alive, and we are small in the universe, but we are small people and they are small microbes.

I have heard of the gaia theory and frankly feel that people are afraid to accept coincidence. Being an agnostic I am open to all ideas, but god seems more likely due to many accounts from many peoples, as opposed to a scientist who wants a god.

Do I have to keep pulling the camera back so you can get the whole picture?

We are but microbes in comparison to the sentinent beings that exist elsewhere (let's not get into the 'life elsewhere' arguement, it's is a mathimatical certainty that other life exists, an endless amount of it, all sizes and shapes. The universe is endless, and whilst we have no proof, we cannot disprove it. It's also the most likely theory that we have, so it can't be argued against until more information is available. Now that might seem like a dirty trick, hiding behind something that can't be argued against, but read the member title, I'm not above this

You are aware that I beleive that man is meaningless in the grand scheme of things?

Read my posts.

Life elsewhere? Then why haven't we seen it, asked Mr. Fermi....

Fermi Paradox

I read the entire thread, it isn't that funny. No where did you say that you thought that our galaxy had races that are superior to us in way that we are superior to microbes.

So yeah, I'm sorry, but that doesn't cut it on me. In fact, I found that post fairly patronising... but I'll assume the most innocent thing I can think of, which is you laughing heartily and slapping me on the proverbial shoulder.

And Jonman, if the universe is endless, then us not meeting another race only tells us that life is very very very very very rare, which still means endless races, just spread out over both the endless amount of time, and also space. That's two dimentions, so the chances of running into intelligent life just got halved.

EDIT: Ah ha! Wanted to reply quick so I only skimmed the article. One would have to assume that one, the aliens are physical and tangible, two, the thousands of UFO sighting every year are false, all of them, 3, that aliens give a damn, 4, that these advanced beings feel the need to beat the moral sh*t out of us with ray guns and 5, that aliens arn't already here. There are just as many endless explainations, and I think it rather foolish that someone would assume that other life would have the same empiratical (is that a word) instincts as us.

Fermi's paradox in math-speak

Looking at the age of the universe, the probably very-rare occurrace of a life-supporting planet, the chance of the development of an intelligent civilisation capable of interstellar colonisation, and the chance of said civilisation being bothered to colonise space, and the chance of it's colonies colonising space .......

*deep breath*

.....you still get probabilities that indicate that we ought to see evidence of it (even if it was flipping millenia ago) every time we look upwards, mostly due to the immense age and size of the universe rendering even mathematically remote probabilities enough time to actually transpire And yet we don't.

That's the paradox.

In fact, let's just take the mathematical side of Fermi's paradox as a given, being that not only Fermi himself was clevererer-erer than all of us put together, but that many many many very very very smart people have pondered it, and agreed with Fermi's numbers....

I still don't agree with the conclusion. Read my edit with apologies that I didn't make it sooner.

Also, the fact that life may not exist in this galaxy, but in the universe? Fermi's paradox doesn't stretch that far, to the limitless possibilities of the area that isn't in our back yard. His statement is the equivilant of saying, "there are no Pansies in my garden, therefore, there are none anywhere."

You dig? There are no mathimatical equations for infinity, 'cept a sideways 8.

What I mean is, if there is no end to the universe, but the universe has a definite beginning, well, then there hasn't been enough time for a race to conquer infinity. And without wanting to sound pessimistic, no race ever will, because no one can.

If a race bumps into another it's pure luck, and damn well impossible. But having said that, it doesn't mean it won't happen, so I guess it's next to impossible, but not quite improbable...

Fermi was looking at life within the Galaxy, it's true. Not sure what the observable limits of astrology is these days, but we can certainly see other Galaxies with the correct equipment, and this makes Fermi's Paradix even more compelling, as there's no clear evidence in them either.....

I've just stumbled on another brilliantsite actually, well worth having a look at...

Here

Contains a more understandable breakdown of the math involved, as well as a discussion of the possible resolutions to Fermi.
Good reading....

Anyway, I'm not convinced by the old 'universe is infinte' idea - I'm off to look for some evidence....

Juice you are fighting with someone who agrees with you. There are probably more advanced beings only a hopscotch away from earth, we are just too primitive to see them. You misinterpreted a point and decided to make a counter arguement.

I hate you for remnding me of this, the paradox will go round and round in my head for weeks now. Damn, you damn you to hell. Etc.

But, this statement does presume we would even recognise signs of intelligenmt alien life when it would be, well alien. There may be signs everywhere and we just can't recognise them, alternatively, if we should see signs from millenia ago it works the opposite way, it may be millenia before we see anything. For all we know we live in a vast space desert and everywhere else is teeming, they just don't come this way.

Aaaah, paradox. my head hurts.

And Juice I hate you too for reminding me of the mobius strip and making me think about infinity.

no sleep tonight.

bastards, both of you.

RJ

P.S. am working on what i remmeber of that article as just happened to be zipping through. feel free to laugh and point at stupid errors.

*guffaw*

*points*

*snigger*

Have a look at the second article I posted - it's top banana!

It is good. Unfortunately, that does not save you from inclusion on "The List," of unfortunates to be up against the wall once I'm Emperor. And you and Juice have almost terminally distracted me from tonights efforts on the novel, shame on you, shame on you both.

You a fortean Times reader perchance Jonman?

RJ

Nah, me no readey Fortean Times.

Being on 'The List' sounds fun. Are there going to be hot dogs? I could really go a hot dog right now. Or even some nachos with that vile yellow crap smeared all over it. Mmmm, cinema food. Might have to go catch a movie tonight....

Well, you traditionally get one meal of your choice...

RJ

*grits teeth, counts to ten*

Ok! What I was implying, or perhaps I actually spelt it out, I don't remember, is that the universe could be a flake of skin that you just scratched off your arm. And that, by that reasoning, everything is alive, but our perception and indeed our definition if 'life' may not quite fit. But that doesn't mean that it isn't.

I havn't misinterpreted a point, I feel quite strongly that you have, and not only that, but that you have forgotton what we were originally discussing. Once again I feel quite patronised, I guess it wouldn't be so bad if you weren't accusing me of the very thing you are guilty of, or that I perceive that you are guilty of. I don't really feel like repeating this whole discussion so that your memory is refreshed.

But well, I see no other resolution.

You said, the earth is not alive.

I said, in the scheme of things, there are creatures on your head saying that your head is not alive.

You said, there is no proof! I won't believe it. The bible is better proof that God exists. Microbes are not sentinent beings!

I said, we are not sentinent beings, compared with what might be out there. (the crux of this issue and the point I feel that you have missed, is that this 'universe' is an atom of another universe, perhaps.)

You laughed at me and told me that you agree that we are meaningless and that i had somehow failed to understand you. But you missed my implication that the other intelligent life is the universe, and that this universe is sitting on more intelligent life so on and so forth into infinity. Thereby, making the universe truely infinite, because out understanding of the universe is 'everything' but we have presumed to much, because what we actually refer to as the universe is but a microbe compared to the endless reaches of everything. I don't mean more of the same, space and planets and stars, that it but our percieved reality. I mean a massive and endless collection of things, all alive, all different sizes and shapes (as in, our bacteria have their bacteria, which is so small that it doesn't even enter into our own perception because it is completely irrelevant. And that to other beings, our planet is but bacteria, or smaller, and that to other races, those races are the size of bacteria. So on and so forth until the end of time.

That's a pretty whacked out theory, but it is essentially the commonly accepted one with my ownspin included. The fact is, because the original disagreement still stands, we do not agree Sir Maxerpopple, and the fact that you keep claiming that, along with implying that I have missed some invisible point when you have, is really bugging the hell out of me. Which is why I didn't do the smart thing and ignore that post and get on with my life, because I'm too stubborn to backdown when I know I'm at least philosophically right. Which is all that counts here because our own science can't even begin to grasp the sort of numbers that I'm talking about, because they do not exist. Think of the biggest number you can, then times that by it's self and you do not even begin to get the size of the universe. Because it is truely endless is that beautiful and abstract way that makes the concept comepletely alien to anything we could even begin to comprehend. It is so endless that in comparison, we are not insignificant, but non-existant, just as the bacteria's bacteria does not exist to us. Everything is perception, because something that is endless cannot support life, of any size, because the universe in infinitely bigger, and smaller. Something caught int he middle of infinity cannot exist. So therefore we are but eachother perception, which exists in it's own limitless universe which is a tiny non-existant grain of sand in ours, andthe same goes for that, ON AND ON AND ON.

So that was my point, that the difference between insignificant and non-existant is important. We don't exist, sorry. That is the paradox

But there is little I can say or do to convince anyone that we even disagree, which we do, because close enough doesn't cut it, especially when we are dealing with nothing and something.

To talk about life other than what we define is meaningless and merely avoiding practical discussion. I think in our worlds term sbecause that is what we have. I am willing to beleive there is a "higher" form of life somewhere, it is probable. I am also willing to beleive that on some level, rock is alive. However those are not human definitions of life, and since we have no way of proving higher or lower life exists, to assume that everything is alive on some level is absurdity.

If you feel that soil is in some way alive, don't walk on it, you may hurt it. However since we can never tell, what is th epoint?

If we encounter higher or lower life, I am willing to broaden definition.


Earlier on I told leopold to stop thinking in human terms, and I bet you want to catch me on some form of hypocricy. To think that there is no life out there because we can't see it is just blind and on a different issue than higher and lower life. Life equal to us did exist on mars, we have proof. It also exists in our hair. However that is quite different from higher or lower life.

I think you've kind of missed Juice's point there Max.

You might want to edit your post a little too as you seem to be debating against yourself within it and it's a mite confusing.

RJ

It seems to me that Juice is stating that there is a whole new dimension to life that we have not discovered, and therefore our whole definition of life can be shattered. This can be seen here

and here

and here

This is a perfectly valid arguement, that nothing or everything is alive. However, we have no way of knowing this until we find out. Until then, I feel that the current definitions of life should stand, for a ball of molecules to be qualified as an organism it must...

• Be organized
• Take energy and materials from their envornment
• Maintain homeostasis
• Respond to stimuli
• Reproduce
• Develop and grow
• And be able to adapt

These seven qualifications are what biologists use to determine what is alive, it is the perception of the scientific community that this is what defines life. Your perception may differ, and that I am fine with.

However, while these theories are great philosophical and scientif curiosities, they do not aid in helping us deal with day to day scientific matters. We use this definition to make the progression of science easier to work with.

Great theory, and as I am not astrophysicist, I will leave that to others. I am merely stating that for matters on earth, we stick to the definitions of life we have.

I still think you're being a little too literal.



This is a whole different stick of mud though. We should never do this, that way leads to flat earths (which of course may be true,) and human beings still standing around, naked, banging twigs together.
Science is not about accepting, that's faith, it's about making up your own mind about proofs you're given, creating possibilities and then proving/disproving whether they are realistic. I don't pretend to understand most of the science behind what Juice is saying but I've read simplified versions for morons like me and it does make a lot of sense, it's something to do with quantum theory and to be quite frank it makes my head hurt to even start with that.

There's a very famous piece if writing, which I don't have to hand unfortunately, that takes the signs of life you've put down and uses them to prove fire is a living organism. It's not so much science as it as a warning about taking things too literally and not being open enough to other ideas.

Anyway, enough wittering, I should be working.

RJ

The Truth is we never really know the truth and the extent of the human races understanding of the universe is very small. Thus in comparison to it, yes we are also very small. We are like germs that are trying to understand the gigantic things we live on., and the things behond. If everything other than what we create is `Natural` Then we are a mutation of that, making us un-natural beings, posibly mutated by ourselves. Even if we know the `fact` doesnt mean we know the reason therefore the `truth` and the deeper reasoning. E.G. the extermination of the jews was a fate which was supposed to reduce the surplus population to make room for new people and reduce the risk of over population and then more senseless murder. meaning could be what us humans create for ourselves and so do animals and any form of life, for the opposite of life is death, we dont want this (duh) but what creates this reasoning? because we live. Living in itself is meaning for life. GOD created the world therefore we have meaning? to please a god? who knows (not my opinion) god is a man who wants ultimate power over everything else. Isn`t this what the usual motif for a main bad guy is? ok, god theory aside, evolution has been screwed by the mutation of us. Why would nature create something which can (and probably will) destroy it? what a masacist... my theory: Nature itself, or the planets life, as with all lives on this planet have germs. Germs eventually = Virus (thus the mutation of the monkeys (in theory) ) into human beings, Earth Virus. Agent smith `` you are a cancer of this planet, you are a plague`` (im not a big matrix fan for all you psychologists out there who think this would sway my judgement) but why oh why would life exist only to mutate into something that destroys itself? my theory = ever been called an accident by your parents? well,. there you go. Life itself is an accident. Life itself is random (but with slight pattern theory 2 contradicting myself) random death (under negligence, purposfully, accidental) random life (mutants, naturally disabled people, mental defects) . BUT WHY?! I dont F***ing know, its impossible to know. we are too far away from the rest of the universe, and maybe we are simply too small a species.

Western society sucks. Stop Samurai showdown 3 for the playstation from coming over to Britain will you!

Until I see some viable evidence for Juices claim I will stick to being literal. I will gladly rethink when there is even partially concrete plausibility. I am open and part of me agrees to it, being the agnostic that I am (I have moved beyond thinking "there may be a god" to "anything is possible"). However when one enters that realm of infinite possibility it is almost impossible to get anythign done in reality. Hence why I stick to what we have.

Hmmmmm... I think this may have wandered off topic somewhat. But this discussion is interesting enough.

Max, I don't think you're as open as you say you are. Look at the society we live in today, and take a look at all those things we take for granted. I know comparing "things" to "life" is not the same at all, but if some people didn't think outside the box sometimes, we really would be the primeval creatures that Dedbut talks about.

We exist in these times because clever people, much cleverer than I, thought about things that could happen, and made it so. Take electricity, for example - a whacked-out idea that burning stuff to create steam to drive turbines to generate an invisible power that could serve Mankind by powering labour-saving devices and entertainment equipment. How could something invisible be so powerful?? But now it's so fundamental to our lives that without it, we'd never survive. But if you went to some remote tribe in Africa and told them this, they'd never buy into it. How absurd!!

I could go on about some of the other oddball ideas that we take for granted; radio, television, the internal combustion engine, the Internet... and what about atomic energy; the crackpot notion that an atom, the smallest entity in existence, could be split? And yet, here we are, under the constant worry that the reality of such a notion can cause us all to be blown to smithereens, just like happened in Nagasaki and Hiroshima in 1946.

So no, I refuse to accept what I see as being all there is. Just cos I can't prove it doesn't make it untrue. It just means someone cleverer than I has yet to prove it.

I am very much for theorizing. However for simple, practical, everyday things, like gardening, should we garden or not because it may hurt living soil is simply too much. That's where I refer to current definitions.

But that is not so, Earth's perception of us my well be that we arn't even here when it comes to things like gardening etc. But let off a few atom bombs and one gets taken notice of very quickly...

So you can continue walking the earth like a dustmite walks through your hair without fear of damaging the planet, or the universe for that matter. But bigger things are obviously going to damage the atom that is earth...

Anyway, I've dropped out of this discussion, I just thought I should point out that the theory that everything is alive doesn't mean that we should not do anything that we would normally do. In fact, I'm not even presuming to argue the morals of blowing the planet to smitherines, I'm just saying that if we did so, we'd be blowing up a living thing, and that goes against our rather odd morals. Which need some tinkering anyway IMO.

life on this planet smells like smelly poo. Excuse me if im being a bit immature, but its fun.

George Carlin once pointed out that our planet has survived asteroid collisions, meteor showers, volcanic eruptions, earthquakes and what-not and we think that some plastic bags and aluminum cans are going to ruin everything. Life will go on. Earth will repair itself rgardless of whether we're here or not. "It'll shake us off like a bad case of fleas." I'm a believer in this philosophy. Life can adapt and continue regarless of what happens. Look at forests. They burn and are later replaced by new plantlife. Life has been doing that for ages so who are we to worry so much?

Interesting as most humans fail to see whats really going on. Most tend to wear blinkers as this is the only way to survive, its best not to look as it will sicken you and if you know what im talking about you have already looked and know theres only one outcome for mankind.
And anyone that does not understand whats being said is worthy of being a human, and the rest of you!! well you know. Any replies to this that are negative only justify whats been said.