• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Sir David Attenborough warns that humans are a plague on Earth

Status
Not open for further replies.

Edmond Dantès

Dantès the White
ibghN3k7K1BkTQ.jpg


Humans are a plague on the Earth that need to be controlled by limiting population growth, according to Sir David Attenborough.
The television presenter said that humans are threatening their own existence and that of other species by using up the world’s resources.

He said the only way to save the planet from famine and species extinction is to limit human population growth.

“We are a plague on the Earth. It’s coming home to roost over the next 50 years or so. It’s not just climate change; it’s sheer space, places to grow food for this enormous horde. Either we limit our population growth or the natural world will do it for us, and the natural world is doing it for us right now,” he told the Radio Times.

Sir David, who is a patron of the Optimum Population Trust, has spoken out before about the “frightening explosion in human numbers” and the need for investment in sex education and other voluntary means of limiting population in developing countries.

“We keep putting on programmes about famine in Ethiopia; that’s what’s happening. Too many people there. They can’t support themselves — and it’s not an inhuman thing to say. It’s the case. Until humanity manages to sort itself out and get a coordinated view about the planet it’s going to get worse and worse.”

Sir David, whose landmark series are repeated from Monday on BBC2, starting with Life on Earth, has also spoken out about the change in wildlife documentaries during his lifetime.

The 86-year-old said commentary from presenters like himself are becoming less necessary as camera work is able to tell a story.

“I’m not sure there’s any need for a new Attenborough,” he said. “The more you go on, the less you need people standing between you and the animal and the camera waving their arms about.

“It’s much cheaper to get someone in front of a camera describing animal behaviour than actually showing you [the behaviour]. That takes a much longer time. But the kind of carefully tailored programmes in which you really work at the commentary, you really match pictures to words, is a bit out of fashion now … regarded as old hat.”
Telegraph
Independent
Live Science
NBC
 

commedieu

Banned
Took him a long time to find eastern philosophy. I Think everyone agrees, but... Who will do anything about it?

{[agent smith pic.bmp]}
 
We could also save valuable resources by not letting people live such ridiculously long lifespans (e.g. 86) and take up valuable resources well past their working age. It's not an inhuman thing to say.
 

bonercop

Member
We are in the process of demolishing the earth, yeah, but limiting population growth is a minor concern compared to the other shit that needs to change, namely our CO2 output.
 

Curtisaur

Forum Landmine
Something exists, something else exists to ruin it - either for advancement of self or maybe even no veritable reason at all. Woopty fucking doo. Such is the cycle of everything.
 

Tesseract

Banned
oh shut up old ya senile old crotch. we're progressing at a decent click and well on our way to mastering the universe. fusion is almost here bitches.
 

jett

D-Member
Agent-Smith1.jpg


I'd like to share a revelation that I've had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species and I realized that you're not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply and multiply until every natural resource is consumed and the only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet. You're a plague and we are the cure.

It's sad that he's right.
 

Blader

Member
We could also save valuable resources by not letting people live such ridiculously long lifespans (e.g. 86) and take up valuable resources well past their working age. It's not an inhuman thing to say.

Who are you saving those resources for then?

"Not letting people live such long lifespans" actually is an inhuman thing to say. Limiting population growth is one thing, suggesting earlier-than-necessary death is something completely different.
 

A.E Suggs

Member
So what does he suggest we do, eliminate ourselves so that the animals are left to rule? Sure the earth may be saved, but what comes from it being saved if there's no humans.
 
So what does he suggest we do, eliminate ourselves so that the animals are left to rule? Sure the earth may be saved, but what comes from it being saved if there's no humans.

The earth does not need us. Other species can, in millions of years, evolve to the point of being intelligent and taking dominion over the renewed earth.

Not that I suggest we off ourselves.

We will, though.
 

bonercop

Member
oh shut up old ya senile old crotch. we're progressing at a decent click and well on our way to mastering the universe. fusion is almost here bitches.

Commercially available nuclear fusion as an energy souce is what? 40 years away at this point?

It will be far too late. We need to get rid of coal, now. Nuclear fission is our best bet.
"Not letting people live such long lifespans" actually is an inhuman thing to say. Limiting population growth is one thing, suggesting earlier-than-necessary death is something completely different.

Also, if you're gonna kill of folks to save resources, you might as well go big, and hit those that consume the most, rather than crotchety old farts who eat through straws.
 

Eteric Rice

Member
It's true. But slowly humanity is becoming more aware of how important keeping the Earth in good condition truly is. Hopefully when we all realize it, we can reverse the damage somewhat with Science and innovation.
 

Inversive

Member
So what does he suggest we do, eliminate ourselves so that the animals are left to rule? Sure the earth may be saved, but what comes from it being saved if there's no humans.

It has no humans destroying it? It's funny, a planet capable of sustaining life, a jewel of the universe and that very life tears it apart piece by piece. It sickens me to be human sometimes.
 
What? Life is preserved. Humanity isn't needed.

Then an asteroid hits the earth, exposes the mantle, and eliminates all life that way.

Or a gamma ray burst occurs within a few light years, and wipes out everything in a blink.

Or a million other things.

99% of life on earth went extinct before we existed.
 
So what does he suggest we do, eliminate ourselves so that the animals are left to rule? Sure the earth may be saved, but what comes from it being saved if there's no humans.

He doesn't want to kill all humans. He just wants to stop overpopulation, pollution, destruction of tons of species and habitats, etc.
 
So what does he suggest we do, eliminate ourselves so that the animals are left to rule? Sure the earth may be saved, but what comes from it being saved if there's no humans.
Our biggest fault is that we think so highly of ourselves. The world doesn't need us.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom