Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Holocene Extinction

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 136 posts

Re: Holocene Extinction

#101

Post by Ididntdothis »

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #95
Ididntdothis wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s true that some animals can digest plants that we can’t digest. But there is plenty of evidence that humans can live perfectly well on a plant based diet if they eat the right plants . It’s not necessary to eat meat for getting nutrients.

> But there is plenty of evidence that humans can live perfectly well on a plant based diet if they eat the right plants . Vitamin B-12 From https://www.mayoclinic.org/drugs-supplements-vitamin-b12/art... “However, if you follow a vegetarian or vegan diet, you might be prone to deficiency because plant foods don't contain vitamin B-12. ”

If you are deficient there you can take supplements.

Re: Holocene Extinction

#102

Post by gdubs »

otabdeveloper4 wrote: post #94
jtolmar wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Letting grazing animals eat grass that's just growing on its own is incredibly energy-efficient, but that's not what we do. We manually grow food for them then ship it to the animals.

Who's "we", Kemosabe?

Humans, basically — the majority of agriculture.

Re: Holocene Extinction

#103

Post by [deleted] »

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #49

Many times there is a heavy dose of misanthropy in these environmental discussions. Phrases like "humanity is a virus", etc. I would like to share a different perspective.There is a saying, "It is better to have loved and lost, than never to have loved at all." Even if humanity overburdens the planet and goes extinct in the next 100 years, I prefer what we have now, than if we had remained hunter-gatherers or pre-ind…

[deleted]

Re: Holocene Extinction

#104

Post by sylvain_kerkour »

The problem is that too many of us do things with a marginal utility near 0 which are bad for the environment just to buy food, pay debts and pay landlords.

The solution is obvious. Do nothing. Just do nothing (obviously you can read, ride a bike, write poesy and so on...).

States should pay people to do nothing rather than destroying the world.

Re: Holocene Extinction

#105

Post by mesarvagya »

jungletime wrote: post #72
alex_young wrote: post #64

A huge chunk of our net impact on global warming and deforestation is a direct result of our food system, namely animal agriculture. There is disagreement about just how inefficient turning an acre of corn into slabs of cow, but it should be clear that it is some fraction of the efficiency of just eating that corn as food itself.

I'm always amazed how good the fruit and vegetables look, but how little flavour they have when bought from super market here, compared to Europe, or actually most parts of the world where vegetables are grown locally and organically. Very sour unripe oranges, bananas, grapes, flavourless green peppers, tasteless tomatoes. Pretty much the norm in Supermarkets.

I believe those vegetable and fruits are GMO i.e. constructed genetically to look good. Moreover quality of soil and its nutrients is not like it was before, making vegetable and fruits less nutritious [1]. In the end, until grown vegetable and fruits are grown in home, we don't have much choice.

[1] https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/soil-depletion-an...

Re: Holocene Extinction

#106

Post by Endlessly »

rapind wrote: post #86
shrimp_emoji wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if humans did care, that doesn't mean they could organize a meaningful response. COVID-19 is affecting people right now. It, and other viruses like the flu, are just a giant rhythm game: if everyone could be isolated for 2 weeks, it would be over in 2 weeks, and we'd never have to deal with it ever again. We just have a fundamental coordination problem. A lot of foresight and resources are required, and only a C…

I've thought about how a hive would manage, but I suspect there are other weaknesses a hive would have that would come to light pretty quickly (you know besides lack of free will, and extinction from depression or lack of motivation). We probably need something new, but seem unable to experiment quickly with new ideas.

“Hive mind” as it relates to a singular species is a work of science fiction to my knowledge and barriers to such a systemic centralized existence appear to defy the laws of physics, information theory, etc.

Even the human mind in my opinion does not exist as a hive and at best described as an ecosystem that eventually experiences systemic failure.

Re: Holocene Extinction

#107

Post by Endlessly »

sherr wrote: post #74
Endlessly wrote: post #69

Struggling to find a word for it, but it’s obvious that humans lack the will collectively to avoid certain types of systemic multigenerational issues. Climate change is the most obvious, but there’s long list of issues like this that if suddenly every human on Earth magically expected to live 1000 to 10,000 years would become more pressing issues. As a semi-futurist, this is the core issue, it’s not that humans don’t…

> the issue is that humans simply do not care about the future. I think that's overstated. Many only look to their /own/ future, not the species/collective. Maybe the family unit, so humans with children may have a longer term outlook. Also, many people's economic situation makes immediate or short term needs (food, shelter etc.) more pressing. I agree that current trends are disheartening.

You’re taking the sum of my comment, extracting a singular phrase, and changing it’s meaning.

I clearly define the scope of what “humans” & “future” means via “humans lack the will collectively to avoid certain types of systemic multigenerational issues“ — and cherry picking examples beyond that to me is irrelevant unless there a clear reasoning linking those examples to the topic.

Re: Holocene Extinction

#109

Post by GcVmvNhBsU »

raiflip wrote: post #78
alex_young wrote: post #64

A huge chunk of our net impact on global warming and deforestation is a direct result of our food system, namely animal agriculture. There is disagreement about just how inefficient turning an acre of corn into slabs of cow, but it should be clear that it is some fraction of the efficiency of just eating that corn as food itself.

What about in the case where animals can extract more nutrients from plant food than we can? Cows in particular have specially built stomachs that can extract nutrients from plants than we can. I don't think this would be enough to make eating meat more efficient, but it may be necessary to eat some meat to get nutrients you wouldn't otherwise get from plants.

That’s an interesting point, given modern animal farming practices. 97% of cows are going to come from a feedlot, where they’ll be fed grain (corn). The special part of their stomach that allows them to extract more nutrients from certain plant foods compared to humans, the rumen, is “made” for grass. When switching over to grain, acid builds up in the rumen which can lead to acidosis, so we then have to pump the cows full of antacids to keep them placated while we continue to fatten them up for slaughter.

Re: Holocene Extinction

#110

Post by walleeee »

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #49

Many times there is a heavy dose of misanthropy in these environmental discussions. Phrases like "humanity is a virus", etc. I would like to share a different perspective.There is a saying, "It is better to have loved and lost, than never to have loved at all." Even if humanity overburdens the planet and goes extinct in the next 100 years, I prefer what we have now, than if we had remained hunter-gatherers or pre-ind…

> I would like to share a different perspective.There is a saying, "It is better to have loved and lost, than never to have loved at all."

Is it equally good to maim and destroy one's lover, oneself, and countless other forms of life in the process?

Post reply on HN