A different kind of drug dog

[occidentalis]

what we will leave is a more homogenised world of ecological generalists - monkeys, some apes , pigeons, rats, cattle, racoons, dogs,horses and donkeys, roos etc etc

more than enough to explode in radial evolution once we are gone- and all their traditional predators like eagles, tigers, wolves, lions, bears and so on are also gone which gives them the window

Have you read After Man?

[themagicmushroom]

...double post.

Edited May 25, 2006 by themagicmushroom

[themagicmushroom]

"I think it's outrageous and heinous that they'd use small, innocent puppies in this way," he said.

I agree it's a horrible thing to do, but what a line! Sensationalist indeed!

[reptyle]

does existence preceed self awareness or vice versa.

because i would have thought that the awareness one has of oneself primarily dictates the form and attributes of that mode of existence, as opposed to the form creating the self awareness.

this would mean that animals are not of a lower form of self awareness, as you can only be aware of self to the extent that it exists, but that they are operating on a less complex system of concepts and hence the limits of their being. same with humans, we can further our self awareness simply by expanding and reducing the concepts which we define ourselves with.

so mabe the difference between human and animals is the ability to modify the self that is the focus of the awareness.

hypotheticaly: what of those humans that specificaly manipulated their idea of themselves such that they would manifest in an animal form. would u say that they are more or less conceptualy evolved based on their skin and on the aparent lack of communication?

humans may be the middle of the road in terms of ability to design self through awareness of self. sorta like a bell curve.

Edited May 25, 2006 by reptyle

[botanika]

what we will leave is a more homogenised world of ecological generalists - monkeys, some apes , pigeons, rats, cattle, racoons, dogs,horses and donkeys, roos etc etc

more than enough to explode in radial evolution once we are gone

Imagine the world overun with intelligent kangaroo's :D

[Rev]

Have you read After Man?

not yet but its the crazy shit i like best

im ceratainly no army of the 12 monkeys fanatic but i really believe that EVEN if we get though this phase of existance that humanity will die out anyway

maybe within 100000 years, at an extreme stretch another million.

and unlike the past there are no cousins to fall back on

the genus Homo is down to one species

Like the Platypus or Gingko

so while i wish us all the best for the time we have i do fantasise as a naturalist about future earths

its all so at the core of my feelinsg that no individual matters - really

nor any species

nor any genus

except in a selfish sense

ie we must save species X as its a cornerstone species upon which our environment/economy/cultural heriatge depends

life will always find a way to survive either way

i liked the series

'the future is wild'

same author

[botanika]

its all so at the core of my feelinsg that no individual matters - really

nor any species

nor any genus

except in a selfish sense

'like sand through the hourglass... so are the days of our lives' lol

The selfish sense is probably what its all about. Anything an individual does to supposedly help others is, somewhere along the line, still doing it for themself. I remember in ralph metzners book 'teonanacatl' he recalls a prisoner from his psilocybin project that innocently remarked, after taking it the 1st time, something like 'Your ego is god, its all about yourself'. Is it better for everyone to be nice and lovely to each other, or is it better to follow the naturally competitive dominant path - survival of the fittest, like most plants and animals have to endure? Most of us luckily live safe in the middle of this riddle but as a result the boundaries of ethics are often polarised to extremes so we end up, for example, hating the nazi germans AND hating the greenies that protest logging. Both those groups are selfishly fighting for their own direction and everyone else is selfishly sitting in the middle quietly concerned, minding their own business, hiding or not doing anything about it... but still selfish. The universe is selfish. Only energy is important and the energy that keeps most of alive each day is a selfish energy to survive.

This is what bothers me about sustainability as a concept. Short term it has valuable ideals that many of us want but is currently toppled by economic/political/corporate sustainability that almost everyone wants. Long term, whats the point? Spend all our energy conserving nature, that we dont fully understand, for an even more populated future earth, that we also dont understand yet, when its probably going to be metamorphised somewhere along the line by natural phenomena like ice ages and supervolcanoes, that we also dont understand!? How do we even know conservation is ultimately good, when the earth is continually changing? Big natural disasters often build new diverse environments - maybe big society disasters (like the nazi's/911 etc) actually enhance or speed up societies progress and endeavour? We are a new frontier seeking species, we appear to conquer and explore new things better than we sit around conserving things we already know.

I'll have to look out for this series 'the future is wild' and 'after man', they look good, although I think Id be more interested in the geological changes rather than seeing make believe animals with their kitch CG animation personalities.

[Rev]

That was one of the great things about the series

the geology and climate change is inseparable from speces biology

like the evolution of super high altitude flying birds when continents collide and create high altitude environs

and supersize man O war jellyfish colonies in tomorrows giant shallow seas

Spend all our energy conserving nature, that we dont fully understand,

yeah im no energy conserving advocate

i dont trust humanity to spend its inheritance wisely

and so long as fossil fuel is around its dictates what humanity can be - the way it runs global politics

so i wish it all gone!

the smart people/counries will spend their inheritance on terraforming earth and their settlments for low energy low impact lifestyles with clean air, water and maximum possible biodiversity to look forward to

while the squandereing nations will burn it up in luxury goods and consumer goods and be stuck in future with infrastructure requiring high input and have no natural resources left

if we were a better species id think wed use the fossil fule to terraform the earth for sustainability and the nuclear energy as pyload to leave the planet to access the infinite energy and territor of space

but i think we will not get so far. the best we can hope for due to our intrinsic nature is a comfortable existence on this planet. we dont have what it takes to go interplanetary

so what will i do? well i myself am spending al the oil quota i can buy on making a sustainable settlement. The oil i can afford goes to making water tanks, insulation, greenhouses, drainage, irrigation, phosphate fertiliser, seeds and plants and the fuel oil its takes to get it it all from A to B to Z and in place so that my life AFTER cheap oil will be as pleasant as possible with the least possible outside inputs

Edited June 24, 2006 by Rev

[botanika]

while the squandereing nations will burn it up in luxury goods and consumer goods and be stuck in future with infrastructure requiring high input and have no natural resources left

I sometimes look up at skyscrapers and large high density apartments and imagine them in 1000 years...decaying concrete and riobar frames, trees, plants and vines growing out from rooms and lift chambers, surviving animals and birds using it as refuge... mad max/planet of the apes sort of stuff.

wow rev, we really got this thread off topic... i guess thats pure evolution in action ;)

[ballzac]

wow rev, we really got this thread off topic...

Keep it up fellas. The is one of the most interesting discussions on the forums.

[Rev]

sure i

the old species dies out but some limb or appendage serves as a preadaptation for its descendents to exploit a whole new lifetyle

but i still wonder

why have no animals evolved photosynthesis

[botanika]

but i still wonder

why have no animals evolved photosynthesis

Ecologies are inter-dependent, with many species relying on many others in complex webs of relationships. There is a great deal of resilience in this kind of formation. If animals could photosynthesise and plants could spread seeds or pollen by walking around on their roots, the system wouldn't be as complex or successful (but possibly very humouress). Animals dont neccessarily need to photosynthesise because they eat efficiently produced products of photosythesis in plant matter. In return the plants seeds are dispersed etc through the effecient processes of animals. Diversity and inter-dependency is the ultimate evolutionary success route.

Everyone having long grassy hair could be kinda cool though - like that old Goodies TV episode where they release seed or fertiliser into the atmosphere and grass takes over everything