@Tinuviel said in RL Anger:
@Thenomain I understood that speech somewhat differently. It wasn't that spreading was the problem, it was spreading without regard to the environment that made humans somewhat unique.
If you think deer care about its impact on the environment, you don't know deer. No, animals don't have any regard to the environment. It's the environment, including other species and sometimes its own, that throws up the problems that creates the rules under which we define positive evolution.
@WTFE said in RL Anger:
@Thenomain said in RL Anger:
… not even evolution has solved overpopulation.
Sure it has. We just don't particularly want to experience its solution.
Reduced effectiveness in breeding? Yeah, no, that's alright.
Oh, wait, you mean death. We experience this solution all the time, though as higher thinking animals we are kind of shit in dealing with it. We work pretty hard to avoid it thus expanding our ability to breed. This is evolution working as intended.
If you mean disease, this isn't our evolutionary response to overpopulation, this is a consequence of it. Evolution isn't solving nothing...well, our evolution isn't. The disease is certainly taking advantage of it.
All of this means that: Evolution doesn't give one shit about the environment, and neither does any animal or plant life. At best, they're taking advantage of changing situations such as natural enemies being reduced or removed entirely when transplanted to a different ecosystem. Or dying off because of same.
The Matrix's "mankind as virus" speech is utter nonsense.
