Excuse me, if I made it seem like a lot of people. the time frame I forgot to specify is like 5-10 minutes, which is nothing when compared to when you are a baby, but people are still amazed at the length and give people titles. Also thanks for telling me the words for babies in the womb because I forgot. I don't believe humans should live in water because they have already messed it up just as much as on the surface. But many important discoveries can be made by looking at what is below us. Of course then pressure comes to play and being able to withstand that so being able to breathe underwater would only be useful if for helping something or low water level exploration. Gaining one could cause losing in another factor. Fish will die from lack of water ( the ones who cannot live outside it) because they cannot breathe and extract the oxygen as well as the lack of sweat to keep them cool, just like with pigs who roll in the mud and other animals. I think unnecessary exposure to bacterias could lead to different developements for animals and humans ( I will look for the pic and article but did you see the deer with lungs on the side of its face ) that may or may not be useful but I think most have gotten as far as they need to so it might not be necessary to develope anymore unless there will be experiments to be able to withstand nuclear radiation and the like. Wait, could roaches had created strength against somethings based on previous exposure. That bug that puts itself into suspended animation nd can survive anything. Maybe these things developement process should be researched even more to help in the developement of various tools. Structure have been built based on what animals have been able to make. Maybe substances to emulate their shells could be develope as a..defensive measure?
Cockroaches are pretty crazy. They've been around for hundreds of millions of years. If you chop their head off, they'll survive. And will only die because of starvation. As for radiation, yes, they can survive a greater amount we humans can. But it's a myth that cockroaches are the most resistant to variation. Humans will die after an exposure to 400-1000 rads. Depending on the cockroach, 1000 rads will affect its fertility. Immature German cockroaches will mostly die after 6.4 rads. There are many insects and bacteria that can survive a greater amount of radiation than cockroaches. I think the most resistant organism is the Deinococcus radiodurans which can survive 1.5 million rads of radiation, and even more when frozen. So if there was a nuclear war going on, wiping out most of the life on earth, cockroaches would just be as vulnerable as us.
Without disease we wouldn't appreciate good health and life. That's a simple fact, and it's all part of life. You need to distinguish whether you are talking about strictly diseases and viruses, or bacteria and micro-organisms as a whole. To say the latter was bad would be idiotic. But not all diseases are caused by bacteria either.
Well of course we wouldn't appreciate good health and life, because we'd always be healthy. We wouldn't know any other way. I rich man may not know how good his life is until he puts himself in the shoes of another economic class. And if you're talking about me, I never said all diseases were caused by bacteria. Look at one of my past quotes And So we have actually distinguished the differences of them, and have talked about each accordingly, although some people have confused them in the past. I'm not sure if you read all of what we've written.
I have read your posts; that last sentence wasn't a response to anything, just a statement. I sometimes write like that because that's how my thought pattern goes, and i type as i'm thinking.. it's like autopilot The title of this thread is asking simply if they are good or bad. My opinion is that they're necessary, even if just to show us that good health and life is something to be appreciated. Life is about a series of lessons and mistakes, and I try to learn from everything i do and everything that happens.
Not to go off into another direction, but when you said they were necessary my mind started to think about people's personal ideas on when they are good or bad. Sometimes, when a "good person" gets sick and dies then its usually a "what a shame" type attitude but when the same sickness happens to a "bad" or "cruel person" then others might feel "good riddance" or even that is was a "blessing", for like of others words, in disguise.
I don't believe that a disease is deservedly put onto a 'bad' or 'cruel' person any more so than a 'good person'. That's not to say i don't believe in karma, because i do, but i believe karma catches up with you in less blatant ways, and not necessarily in this life. That attitude is how the whole AIDS being a homosexual's disease put on them by God thing started, which i don't believe i will have much trouble convincing you is total rubbish. If a bad or cruel person contracted a disease, you might care less than if they were a good, honest, decent person, because they're cruel. That may be a natural response, but it doesn't means they deserve it any more than you or I do. Any loss of life is a shame.
I feel the exact same way but many people feel differently. Animals are murdered everyday almost for meat production. I know people say " well, we need meat to survive " but I don't believe that statement. Most food pyramids have meat as one of the smallest portions. The protein in meat is necessary but there are other less violent means. as well as sources. If a person really does need the meat, then I will just have my cry and try to move on but to disvalue a life and take it as if it is nothing to further poison people ( many meats have a little extra in it ) is just really sad. The meat companies are making more meat then they even need and put animals into horrific conditions. I just wish that people would have more respect for animal, plant, and insect life ( I'm terrified of bugs but would never kill one).
Does that mean you don't believe in the death sentence? If Osama Bin Laden was caught, and sentenced to death, would you say the man who caused misery to millions of people didn't deserve it any more than you or I? Loss of life may be a shame, but his loss of life I wouldn't feel any negative response towards. Well, no. We don't need meat to survive. viewtopic.php?f=23&t=12672 some of the points are covered here. And what sort of little extra things are poisonous in the meat? If you're talking about the bacteria (getting back to the topic) then if cooked properly there shouldn't be a problem. As for the meat companies making more meat than they need, if you mean more meat than their consumers need, that's a given. But if you mean meat companies making more meat then the consumers use, that would just be a loss to the companies. Not all animals are put into horrific conditions when being slaughtered, free range farming techniques avoid this. And (not all) but people do respect where their food has come from. It's called "Saying grace" before a meal.
That is very scary but does go back into peoples personal ideals. I believe some companies have found other means, but there are meat places that feed animals substances to stimulate hormones so that they become big and plump. Also some workers get a little weird with the animal. Petatv.org has the video. Also, the conditons, in many places, has the animals contracting illnesses that are not dealth ( spelling, sorry ) with. They respect where it has come from, but not the actual food. I don't know much about religious things but I don't think "saying grace" includes nice words about the food and what it was before. Probably what good it is going to, but that is really it. That is not respecting the animal.
Hormones are found in everything. They also use hormones to stimulate plant growth. Do you drink milk? If so, hormones have been used to create that, as well as to stimulate production of more milk. Studies that have been done do not provide evidence that left over residues in meat is detrimental to human health. In America, the FDA regulate the level of hormone allowed to be given to an animal. People should be more concerned about eating a balanced diet. I am thankful that I have food to eat, I know that many people go hungry, but I don't say nice words about what the meat was before. I appreciate the meat, but I won't go as respecting it's past form, and I don't see why I should. It may have died so I could eat, but it wasn't given a choice. It didn't sacrifice itself. It was born and bred for this, as cruel as it sounds. Man has manipulated the animal for this purpose.
You're damn right that means I don't believe in the death sentence. Any loss of life is a shame. But at the same time, some loss of life is necessary (I'll explain this point further if needed). If Osama Bin Laden was caught tomorrow, he should be locked in some hole somewhere for the rest of his life. No rights. Fair enough. But killed? No way. The right to live is not given to us by any man on this earth, so how the hell do people think that they can take it away? You cannot take away somebody's 'God-given' right to live. And this isn't a Christian view. And if Osama was responsible for those attacks you allude to (which IS debatable, but that's a completely new thread ), what good would it make to stoop to his level and take more life? How would that make it right? Would it bring anybody back? Would it heal any hearts? No. It would just add to the shame. I wouldn't blame you for not feeling any negative response towards it if that did happen, but despite it all, loss of another life would be a shame. Yes, Animals are brutalized and murdered every single day needlessly. We don't need it to survive, in fact we would be a lot better off with a meat-free diet. Meat companies are amongst the biggest liars in today's corporate world. Do you think anybody would eat meat if slaughterhouses had glass walls? I don't eat meat. And i feel better knowing at least I'm not contributing to their pain. Thousands of people who say they 'love' animals sit down 3 times a day to enjoy the flesh of animals who have been utterly deprived of everything that could make their lives worth living, and who endured the suffering and terror of the slaughterhouses. It's shameful. Here are a few quotes from name you'd recognize. "I brainwashed youngsters into doing wrong. I want to say sorry to children everywhere for selling out to concerns who make millions by murdering animals." - Geoffrey Giuliano, the primary Ronald McDonald actor in the 1980's, in his public apology after quitting his job. "Nothing will benefit human health and increase the chances for survival of life on Earth as much as the evolution to a vegetarian diet." - Albert Einstein "The meat industry spends hundreds of millions of dollars lying to the public about their product. But no amount of false propaganda can sanitize meat. The facts are absolutely clear: Eating meat is bad for human health, catastrophic for the environment, and a living nightmare for animals." - Chrissie Hynde, singer/songwriter of the Pretenders "If you are as you have described yourself the king of the animals - it would be better for you to call yourself king of the beasts - since you are the greatest of them all! - because you help them only so that they may presently be able to give you their young in order to gratify your palate, for the sake of which you have tried to make yourself a tomb for all the animals. Even more I might say if to speak the entire truth were permitted me... Now does not nature produce enough simple vegetarian food for you to satisfy yourself?" - Leonardo da Vinci "If anyone wants to save the planet, all they have to do is just stop eating meat. that's the single most important thing you could do. It's staggering when you think about it. Vegetarianism takes care of so many things in one shot: ecology, famine, cruelty." - Sir Paul McCartney
If you're talking about the September 11 attacks, I was not referring to it. He himself denied it. What i'm talking about was his formation of the terrorist group al-Qaeda, whose objectives is to end foreign influence in muslim countries. This group justify killing innocent people because "any innocent bystander would find their reward in death". Members of the group have instigated numerous attacks causing the deaths of people. Even if they weren't responsible for the attacks that brought down the World Trade Centre, they are still a group that people fear. You said that "You cannot take away somebody's 'God-given' right to live. Isn't locking Osama in a hole with no rights at all taking away his 'God-given' right to live? If killing him would prevent the deaths of further innocent people, I would say that would be necessary. (which you did mention) But people have different morals and ideals, and to me it wouldn't be a shame. I respect your point of view though. Hey, I have seen the insides of an abbatoir, and my decision to eat meat hasn't been affected. It is important to treat the animals as humanely as possible, and that when it is time for the animals to be killed to be done as painlessly as possible. I am against animal cruelty, but not against eating meat. No, we don't need animals to survive. And the world would be better off if they all turned vegetarian. But that isn't going to happen in the near future.
I'm refreshed by the fact that you don't mean the Sept. 11 attacks. Yes, the formation of al-Qaeda and their use of terror tactics justify moves to disable them, I concur. But I don't think locking him away isn't taking away his right to live, just his right to freedom. Specifically - his right to live in society and the privileges given to him by the development of that society. So society takes back what it gave this man. I don't always completely agree with this either but that's another case. Fair enough. He may lose the right to a happy or very rewarding life if he is locked away, but no one is ever guaranteed that anyway. He abused his right to be a part of that society so that right is gone. But did he abuse his right to live? Whatever the case, no man can decide that and so no man can take the right away. Forgive me if I'm unnecessary in further explaining my point of view, I'm confident that you see where I'm coming from. I know it's not going to happen in the near future, I'm realistic about that, but is that an excuse to not do what I can to avoid contributing to evil I see happening? "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing" - Edmund Burke
There's no need to apologize, it's not like you wrote hundreds of words for one point. You said earlier, So I interpreted it as locking him away, solitary confinement, empty room. To me that would still be a death sentence, albeit a very slow one. But if locking him away will stop him from doing further damage while doubling as punishment, I can understand where you're coming from. From my perspective, unnecessary and pointless loss of life is a shame. Still, giving a real life example, I didn't feel anything, happy or sad when Saddam Hussein was executed. Of course it's not an excuse to do nothing. Standing by your beliefs no matter what is admirable. In Australia and New Zealand, voting is compulsory, but it would be like Americans not voting in a presidential election, and then complaining when the 'wrong person' gets voted in.
I think I already started a topic on placing blame a while ago. So, if someone else sees this today, then could you start a new debate topic on something about rules, laws, dealing with others, who has or does not have the right to , or trying to be bigger than you are. I have already posted. This debate is over with some for and some against.
To me too, that would be a death sentence. But I wouldn't feel at all sorry for Osama if that was his fate. He would still be alive. I hope I haven't come across as some bleeding heart save-the-children e-activist - but I just don't feel that the state, or any other person or authority, has the right to end life.