woof woof woof Posted July 20, 2002 http://www.vhemt.org/ Heh! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waterdragon Posted July 20, 2002 how could they possibly see the need? AIDS will do the job just nicely and there will never be peace as wars are such good business. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Mesqualero Posted July 21, 2002 Originally posted by waterdragon:how could they possibly see the need? AIDS will do the job just nicely and there will never be peace as wars are such good business. It is entirely possible that AIDS is not the result of HIV infection.. lets not go into that though don't Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
woof woof woof Posted July 21, 2002 HIV & AIDS will really ding the human population ineed. Wars will too. I bet that the those two causes will have us thinking again for a while if (rather when) a large part of humanity gets wiped out. Still VHEMT is a cool though.... It kind of occured to me once... I mean thinking allong the lines of VHEMT. Anyway, don't worry be happy Irie _____________________________________________ Originally posted by waterdragon: how could they possibly see the need? AIDS will do the job just nicely and there will never be peace as wars are such good business. Welllll ,being more conscious about puttin kids on this planet is the way to go...even after a good % is wiped out. [This message has been edited by brian (edited 21 July 2002).] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WarpedAstro Posted July 21, 2002 Why pick AIDS/HIV and wars to wipe the human race?? it will even cost more, medical business is not cheap, it will cost more to treat the terminal ill people plus injured people from the wars, also they will die slower and in pain, why don't just hand out lethal injections, and they can die in under a minute or two, I am sure this is way cheaper option than wars/AIDS and less painful I am sure.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
woof woof woof Posted July 22, 2002 Warped, That would be the way to go , as long as they volunteer. overpopulation is a worldwide problem. and is a matter that needs to be looked at more indepth. So that is why i think the Vhemt message is a very good and usefull one. Just to bring this subjet to peoples attention is something good to think of and is also a good subject for discussion. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RubyTuesday Posted July 23, 2002 I've seen this and can't quite get my head around it. It's going against all instincts to reproduce... I dunno... Anyway, they can die out, I'll keep breeding P.S. Looked at the FAQ and the response about the instinct to reproduce is: "Humans, like all creatures, have urges which lead to reproduction. Our biological urge is to have sex, not to make babies." ----> Obviously written by a man!!! ------------------ http://www.angelfire.com/apes/liberty [This message has been edited by RubyTuesday (edited 22 July 2002).] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
woof woof woof Posted July 25, 2002 ahhh yeah ahhh ahhh yeah, reproduce, reproduce , ahhhh ahhh ahhhh hah haha hahahhaha. SEX is rooted deeply yeah, but standing above ones feelings is also a deep rooted drive in life. As in "smartening Up" is also an essential part of existance. Just like a plant, we grow towards the light! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RubyTuesday Posted July 26, 2002 Can growing toward the light include killing ourselves off? I dunno, still can't come to terms with this. ------------------ http://www.angelfire.com/apes/liberty Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
woof woof woof Posted July 27, 2002 RubyTuesday , killing ourselves is not VHEMT's idea. I think that they think more allong the lines of human management. The stupid thing indeed is that the title "VHEMT" does not entirely correspond with what they really mean or what they are really saying. I think it's more like a way to grab ones attention. Probably not the best way.... Still read it ,it's an interesting read. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dubius Posted August 4, 2002 Guys, alow me for a moment to be devil's advocate. (I would like to think that what I am about to say is wrong) By changing the environment and utilizing an intelligence that is a natural product of evolution, Humanity is doing that which is the birthright of all living things. If we out compete other species and are relentless in our quest for survival and procreation, are we not doing what we have evolved to do? If humanities activities lead to another mass extinction is that not the natural course of things? When we question our behaviour, do we assume that are outside the nature of things; that we supernatural; that we can deny the trillions of bits of encoded genetic information that compells us to do what we do? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RubyTuesday Posted August 4, 2002 Originally posted by Dubius:When we question our behaviour, do we assume that are outside the nature of things; that we supernatural; that we can deny the trillions of bits of encoded genetic information that compells us to do what we do? Well then questioning our behaviour is part of nature too And this brings us back to what Brian said about us 'growing towards the light', although I don't agree that the VHEMT is an example of that. I actually think that raping the environment, worshipping the dollar etc is a PATHOLOGICAL behaviour which goes AGAINST the 'encoded genetic information'. I don't believe that compulsive consumerism is instinctual per se, more like an instinctual response to an unnatural, fucked up situation which sort of feeds off itself. Does that make sense? ------------------ http://www.angelfire.com/apes/liberty Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
woof woof woof Posted August 10, 2002 a [This message has been edited by brian (edited 10 August 2002).] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest reville Posted August 11, 2002 overpopulation is a worldwide problem. and is a matter that needs to be looked at more indepth. Just to bring this subjet to peoples attention is something good to think of and is also a good subject for discussion. I dont think overpopulation is an issue at all. T use two extremes as examples- A desert nomad uses less than 10L of water a day, uses firewood for fuel and creates very little waste. Your average american or Australian uses Massiveamounts of water to support he lifestyle, uses Fossil fuels and creates mountains of garbage. Most of the world sits somehwre in between those extremes. There is no reason why human populations couldnt reach multiple billions as there are thje resources to do this and maintain it. What we have alreday is countries like australia who live under the false assumption that we are underpopulated and places in Rural africa are overpopulated. If you take the carrying capacity of the land and do the sums with the resource consumption australia would have a massive population. Gloablisation will just make this worse. You make quick money by exploiation and policies that encourage global foreign investment work by negating workers and human rights, sliencing political opposition and ignoring environmental safeguards. Within no time you have a depleted environment, loss of the 'moderates' in politics because of oppression, loss of confidence in trying to build anything long term and domination iof a 'cash economy' Foreign money leaves the system and the this weakened place is flooded by the carrion feeders like Peddlers of Human misery trading in Guns,Sexual exploitation and other forms of slavery and all manner of addictive susbtances. Shortly after we have total breakdown in social infrastructure, disease and famine move in, civil war engulf sthe region and it all goes to hell. Meanwhile the benefuciaries of this process sit in the living rooms of the world and reinforce the misconception that this has somehow been due to over population.... just my opinion Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
woof woof woof Posted August 19, 2002 Word Rev!, but butt butt! There is no reason why human populations couldnt reach multiple billions as there are thje resources to do this and maintain it. Ehhh, do we really need to push it, I mean we can learn to make more sensible decisions. the entheogens can be helpful in achieving better understanding.... but then again... whatever chokes your chicken right, i mean everything and every one has got coming to them what them got coming to them....ey! Peace (dope)friends Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
woof woof woof Posted August 29, 2002 If I dont post , this thread will voluntarily go out of existance! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darklight Posted August 30, 2002 Brian matey, I've lost yer addy. Can you email me at [email protected]? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Adrian Posted September 5, 2002 Yeah, I was just going to get in there with Rev and spiel on about how population is not an issue. Surely resource management etc is the key to the continuation of any population...of any nation Is sharing ultimately the key to resource management? What is the key to sharing? Surely those who have something to share hold the answer??? Those that consume a great deal of resources must produce a great deal of resources, and thus have something to share... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gwydion Posted September 5, 2002 I have to both agree and disagree, I'm afraid. Yes, resource management is vital in the maintenance of any population, but it is nevertheless possible for a population to exceed the bounds within which responsible resource management provides solutions. Creating something and sharing it is not necessarily enough, unless, for example, it is a new way to produce food. For the record, I think it was 1995 when the WHO declared that the balance had shifted, and that there was no longer enough food in the world to feed everyone in it, if distributed equitably. And I haven't even started on the impact of a huge human population upon the rest of the species in the ecosystem, and what impact the damage we do it has upon ourselves. I guess, you're right, tho', if you are willing to regard population as a resource- and one that must be managed. ;-) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Adrian Posted September 5, 2002 QUOTE: 'if you are willing to regard population as a resource' Like as in Soylent Green I mean cremation WTF! Using gas to burn dead people, what a waste. It could be the other way around. I want eco-frienly funerals. When I'm passed it, throw my lifeless body in a mulcher & then into an anaerobic digester, then sprinkle me on your Urb garden & smoke, me remains (in your brains) We spend enough of our life passing gas, why not pass on gas when we pass on [is age as bed i ted bAd an (edi 05 Seem ber 2002).] [This message has been edited by Adrian (edited 23 September 2002).] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
woof woof woof Posted September 21, 2002 Word Adrian, Word! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Adrian Posted September 23, 2002 Liberal Government: Over our Dead Bodies http://abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s680129.htm Quick tell all the voters!!! EMAIL THIS TO A FRIEND [This message has been edited by Adrian (edited 23 September 2002).] [This message has been edited by Adrian (edited 23 September 2002).] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
