no trees? :too bad; I would be really sad.
Himanity would be somewhere without plants: still here. I agree that they’re beautiful and all that, but every species that lives’s destiny is to disappear one day. In some point only the sensient ones will stand.
Originally posted by Ren
Humanity would be somewhere without plants: still here. I agree that they’re beautiful and all that, but every species that lives’s destiny is to disappear one day. In some point only the sentient(maybe?) ones will stand.
By your own logic you admit humanity will die out then you contradict yourself by saying all animals will still live, since animals are sentient as well. So which is it? Life or Death?
We would die without plants. End of story.
Originally posted by Ren
Himanity would be somewhere without plants: still here. I agree that they’re beautiful and all that, but every species that lives’s destiny is to disappear one day. In some point only the sensient ones will stand.
Uhh no. Humans will probably die out one day, and then evolution will happen, and a new species will fill our niche that we left. Everything depends on each other on this planet, you get rid of one thing, other things will disapear… unless it goes away naturally, but the way humans do shit, they’ll probably speed up the process.
Basically, the message of Republicans is this:
Big government is bad. The States should have most of the rights, not the capital. The government should stay back and let them handle things.
So in other words, Republicans don’t support massive government organizations that micro-manage the state governments, despite the occasional neccessity to do so sometimes. Environmental laws are just like that; the government has to watch every single plant, every single animal, every single mineral; things it doesn’t have time for.
Also, all parties bed with big business. It’s just a part of human greed. Not just the US, either; all countries are controlled by big business. We’re just the ones you watch the most; thus you say we’re being controlled by greedy politicians and big businesses while your leaders are selling your freedom out to the Disney corporation in exchange for Winnie-the-Pooh dolls.
Originally posted by Alyx
We would die without plants. End of story.
In the present or past, yes. But in some future, only maybe.
SD: lemme reelaborate: every species that isn’t able to develop its own high-tech civilization will disappear. Even some who have a civilization will too. I am counting possible civilizations in places other than Earth.
I used the term sensient for creatures with an intelligence like ours. I hope my reelaboration makes it easier to understand.
Ren, you so have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about, it is hilarious. Wow. I gotta know where the scientifically recognized backing for what you have to say is. It blows my mind.
Though algae to contribute to the world’s oxygen, its not 90%.
Though plants and algae convert CO2 to O2, that doesn’t make it right to say we still have such and such plants because CO2 still accumulates in the atmosphere (along with other wastes) creating a greenhouse effect.
If all plants in the world died, we would die because we don’t photosynthesize. Photosynthesis is what energizes biosynthesis in plants. As you go up trophic levels from there, less and less energy is conserved within the system (approx 10% efficiency). Even if we lived off plants alone, which would be bad, we’d have to find other nutrients, we would need plants since our skin doesn’t contain enough cholorplasts to satisfy our energetic needs.
Sure, Oxygen IS one of the most abundant chemicals in the world. Let’s look at the ocean. H2O. Nice, plenty of oxygen there. It would require absurd amounts of energy to make humanity survive off oxygen extracted from the environment.
All you keep spouting , Ren, is utterly baseless, opininated, unbacked bullshit that makes absolutely no sense to anyone that knows anything about how ecosystems and organisms work and interact. Please, shut the fuck up. You’re annoying.
I love it when Sin says intelligent stuff 
Much better than I could have said Sin, bravo.
Originally posted by Sinistral
Though algae to contribute to the world’s oxygen, its not 90%.
I may be wrong on this one, but I’m searching for data on it right now.
Though plants and algae convert CO2 to O2, that doesn’t make it right to say we still have such and such plants because CO2 still accumulates in the atmosphere (along with other wastes) creating a greenhouse effect.
I never said anything about greenhouse effect.
If all plants in the world died, we would die because we don’t photosynthesize. Photosynthesis is what energizes biosynthesis in plants. As you go up trophic levels from there, less and less energy is conserved within the system (approx 10% efficiency). Even if we lived off plants alone, which would be bad, we’d have to find other nutrients,
I’m not talking about a near future. I was talking about a pretty, pretty distant future, over a millenium or two away, maybe much more, hypotethising that humanity would be able to create synthetic food out of minerals by recombinating atoms. I’m thinking on fine nanotechnology here.
Also, I was not talking about the loss of energy throughout the trophic leves.
we would need plants since our skin doesn’t contain enough cholorplasts to satisfy our energetic needs.
You amazed me on this one. Chloroplasts in human skin? And you say my biology is bad…
[b]
Sure, Oxygen IS one of the most abundant chemicals in the world. Let’s look at the ocean. H2O. Nice, plenty of oxygen there. It would require absurd amounts of energy to make humanity survive off oxygen extracted from the environment.
[/b]
Did you know that in the next five decades or so hydrogem fueled cars are expected to be sold regularly? Did you know that with the process that generates their fuel you also have oxygen as a product? Alright, in five decades we won’t be able to generate all the oxygen we need this way. But in a few centuries it would be possible, since it seems like someday hydro will be in almost everything. There are other sources too. Most of the oxygen on Earth is associated with minerals.
All you keep spouting , Ren, is utterly baseless, opininated, unbacked bullshit that makes absolutely no sense to anyone that knows anything about how ecosystems and organisms work and interact. Please, shut the fuck up. You’re annoying.
You flatter me.
Ren, you’re basing everything you say in vague, fantastical, sci-fi like notions that involve nanotechnology and unknown energy sources. Almost every statement you say invovles “in a few centuries” or “in the future”. That’s a bad thing to base your stuff on, since it’s <i>all</i> merely guesswork.
Guess what plants breathe during the night: Oxygen. That’s why it isn’t reccomended to have plants in your bedroom.
And what would humanity eat if there were no plants, meat?
Well, that’s depending we can figure out a way to raise animals for food without a food source for them.
"I never said anything about greenhouse effect. "
Less plants , higher CO2. No plants, no food, all higher lifeforms die.
I attacked your logic. Or lack of rather.
"I’m not talking about a near future. I was talking about a pretty, pretty distant future, over a millenium or two away, maybe much more, hypotethising that humanity would be able to create synthetic food out of minerals by recombinating atoms. I’m thinking on fine nanotechnology here.
Also, I was not talking about the loss of energy throughout the trophic leves. "
That’s purely hypothetical and unsupported information which you dreamed up in your head then. Its not because you can imagine a utopia that things will be that way. The future is uncertain. As for trophic levels, these do matter since if there isn’t an abundant energy source and nutrients and such available, we’re fucked. We starve to death.
"You amazed me on this one. Chloroplasts in human skin? And you say my biology is bad… "
I said there WEREN’T you dope.
"Did you know that in the next five decades or so hydrogem fueled cars are expected to be sold regularly? Did you know that with the process that generates their fuel you also have oxygen as a product? Alright, in five decades we won’t be able to generate all the oxygen we need this way. But in a few centuries it would be possible, since it seems like someday hydro will be in almost everything. There are other sources too. Most of the oxygen on Earth is associated with minerals. "
1-I know about hydrogen fueled cars since my dad does research and development in that field
2-Its not because in 50 years we might have them readily available that they will be used everywhere. Consider the amount of people in the world that use and need cars, consider the demand for cars, consider the demand for ressources, consider getting stations converted, consider getting all these things to all those people that already own cars and convincing people that they should abandon their cars for the new cars, esp if they can’t afford it. That’s a lot of things to consider. Yes, its a hope for the future, but no, its not something that we should count on. You don’t plan ahead in the world thinking everything’ll work out. You plan for the worse so you don’t get fucked. And I’m probably forgetting factors to consider too, like pressure from the petroleum industry.
3-Oxygen is not something that’s really going to run out. Consider the volume of the atmosphere and consider that it has approx 17% oxygen in it. The problem isn’t a lack of O2 but an excess of other bad chemicals.
4-Excess oxygen in certain areas can react with other chemicals and potentially cause certain environmental issues. Remember that though we live off oxygen, we also need other gases that are in the atmosphere , as our system is at equilibrium.
There is a lot of places in the world with sub-zero temratures, water freezes at those tempratures. Hydrogen powered cars produce H2O and oxygen as waste products.
Untill they can eliminate water as a waste product, hydrogen powered cars remain an inviable alternative in those places. And I don’t think that is about to happen any time soon.
Ren, are you just making stuff up as you go along? Just shut up and let people talk who know what they’re talking about.
Although I’m careful with the environment, I’d like everyone to know that there’s not much we can do to damage the environment. At least not severely. We shouldn’t damage the world on purpose, or damage it severely, but when it comes down to it, we don’t matter that much. Everything would still wither and die without us, because the nature of other animals. And either way, in a few thousand years, our sun will probably die out, and unless we have a solution by then (I doubt it), it’s over.
I’m not too sure about that, actually. I’ve taken both sides in my life, and I realize, once I die, I won’t be around to witness the side effects anyway. If you REALLY care for some reason, do what you want, but you don’t matter. One man’s opinion changes nothing, and it won’t be a concern because once our sun dies out, nothing will matter.
And we can’t survive off only plants, they don’t provide enough nutrients. Another thing is that even if we come out with Hydrogen cars, they won’t be mass-produced because oil would no longer be required, and that means lower prices and less money earned. Believe it or not, the world revolves around money, and no one cares about what happens, just as long as everybody but you has all the cha-ching they can get. That means we will never have better technology because then we’d have the money instead.
the sun will die out in trillions of years and life would go on without us. We play more of a role destroying ecosystems than maintaining them.
I think it’s gonna take a bit more then a few thousand years for the sun to burn out. The point here is that people need to think a bit more about the future generations rather then just about the here and now.
Experts say the sun is about half way in it’s life cyclus, and I believe it is about four-five billion years old. Not that we will be here to see it die.
As the sun age it also becomes warmer: I’m afraid we would be boiled, along with everything else on this planet, long before she says good night and shuts the lights off.