Just the ramblings of another atheist dismayed by religion's grip on society. Science works.
Sunday, November 15, 2015
Another day, another terrorist attack. Although only given lip service when it effects the Middle East, it's another story when it is in a Western Country. Already the hawks are out in force, already the talking heads are calling for the heads of all muslims; they are a threat to the world you know.
Even though millions of muslims are decrying the brutality and events in France, their voices will be muted. Terrorism by small groups, the whining and screaming of conservative christians; these are the voices we will hear for the coming weeks as sanity is thrown into the back of the bus. We know critical thinking, logic, and any other reasonable attempt at understanding, will be sanity's company as the god-botherers go ballistic.
Which is sadly funny, since god is also bothered constantly by the opposition.
I've already started replying on the social threads concerning death to all muslims. I'm looking forward to the outcry because I've turned around the discussions to examples of christian terrorism. I am counting the minutes until the first "not a true scotsman" fallacy is unleashed.
The joy of understanding religious humans is a sick joy.
Regardless, everyone that wishes to know about France and the attacks has already read and seen the story, so I'll let you decide on what you think about it. Maybe you'll even share those thoughts with the rest of us. The following is what I wrote a few days ago for the Sunday Planet discussion, interesting enough it seems to be even more relevant today than it was on Thursday. Religion will not be eliminated in our lifetimes, so how shall we deal with it?
AN AMERICAN ATHEIST
Being an atheist in America is a constant battle. It is not a war, war usually includes death, but it is still a battle for acceptance, a battle for community, a battle for reason.
Not that I'm claiming that all atheists are reasonable, or have a need for community, or could give a shit less about what someone else thinks of them. Yet I would think for most of us, these desires, or possible needs, do go on a rampage obliterating the peace that usually dwells in our minds. I do not speak for others, but I'm sure I'm not alone; after all, humans we are.
Community is a need that we all share. We visits sites like AU, we chat with like-minded friends and family, and we seem to always be searching for more, for a larger community. We are a tribe, a clan, a family, and we want the support from those of our ilk. The reality is though, that we want to have a local community, not just an online community, as well. Some live in areas where atheism may not be the atrocity some would have us all think, and some live in areas where atheism is not just frowned upon, but where it is an evil that needs to be eliminated. How do we survive without becoming hermits?
Living in a small conservative town like I do, it is difficult to establish community while openly being anathema. The way I find some community is by finding the minority of progressives in town; usually they are a little more accepting, especially since they are in the minority. Even with those though, I have to give a little.
As an example, one of my, and my wife's, favorite locals is a lovely lady entering middle age. She works at the local pub and her family has lived in this town for generations. We find her knowledge helpful in dealing with a small town's craziness. She's had a troubled life, drugs and alcohol and all kinds of raising hell, yet is one of the sweetest people we know. She's no longer living by a thread, she's cleaned up her act, she is doing what she needs for her family. Although liberal, and accepting of my family's lack of faith, she is god's friend. With the crazy in her mind - and one could say she traded one crazy for the other - she has to find something that my wife and I find meaning in that is spiritual; she just can't help herself. That is the way she has found peace, and although I don't respect the institution that gives her that peace, I do respect her and her fight to be the mother she needs to be. So I give a little when she questions.
She asks if I believe in god, I say no. She asks if I'm spiritual in some way, I say no. Almost hopelessly she continues to question trying to find a bond in an area of life that is important to her, while I know what I think contradicts who she is. She finally comes up with "nature." Yes I say, I do find peace in nature. Not spiritual as she may think, but it's enough to form a bond. It is enough for her to feel we have some common ground. It is not a lie on my part, but not what she thinks I mean by finding peace in nature.
Maybe that's wrong, but works for me.
Hey, I like people, forgive me or not. Isolation is not part of being human. I cannot allow myself to withdraw from the diversity that humans express in their personal lives. I think that by struggling to find a common denominator that can be used as a base to expand upon is the only route a human can take to live in peace. I would rather try to change minds, even if slightly, than to ignore my fellow humans. I mean, if my voice is unheard, there will never be any understanding. We continue down the road of intolerance.
I drink beer with the conservatives and am happy to give them as much shit as I take, after all, conservatives are not what the very vocal, whiny, conservative christian base is; it is extremely varied and I work on them as well. Do I believe in family values? Hell yeah, I just expand that to include everyone. Do I think hard work is a good thing, again yes, but still knowing that there some of us that are not capable of work. Life goes on, there are things that we can all relate to, and I work to find them.
Finding total acceptance is difficult. That's why I can be found at atheist/humanist meetings every so often. It is why I can be found lurking on the internet for atheist companionship. We all want to be accepted, though in different manners. We're not hermits, we cannot seal ourselves away from the world, we cannot live alone. This is why community is so important to us, and why we'll give a little, we will bend our thoughts a little, just to have that companionship.
Lets be clear about this, by no means are atheists inherently more reasonable than any other group you may find. When Bill Maher goes on a rant about the evils of vaccinations, I cringe. Here we have an atheist in the spotlight of the American public who shows time after time that reason is not his to be had in all things. I think we can easily ascertain that at least most of us are unreasonable at times, regardless of religious beliefs, or non-belief.
So where does that leave us? To some degree we want to be accepted, to some degree we need community, and to some degree we can be totally unreasonable. To me that speaks volumes. That says we are all human. That says we have to figure out how to not only get along, but to respect those who do humanity good regardless of what hides in the weird corners or their minds.
This American Atheist is always sticking his head into the midst of possible trouble, I just can't help myself. There is meaning to life, the meaning we give to it, so what is yours? How do you take care of basic human needs, or do you not feel the desire for community? Are atheists different than theists in that we don't have that need for community and acceptance, or are we as human as the next guy?
Do extremists control what we think of each other?
At many funerals you will get to hear this supposed solemn thought. "Earth to earth, ashes to ashes, dust to dust." I guess for atheists, the earth to earth thing isn't incredibly horrific, it is in a way true. It would be much more accurate to use the oft stated line that we are "made of stardust," or "made of starstuff." Every bit of your being is part of the universe, but I think theists would rather state earth because it follows along with the biblical narrative. From baptismals, through life, and at the end, the narrative must be reinforced. Every opportunity to inject death into life is taken advantage of.
It is easily observed that theists strive always for the narrative that promotes ultimatums. No matter how the question is disguised, what they search for is absolutes. For those who were involved in the "where do atheist morals come from" discussion, you should realize that what was being promoted was the theist argument that morals must be objective. That is the key word, just like meaning needs to have an "ultimate" tagged on. Everything they do or say has to have a profoundness that shows what atheists are supposedly missing.
Everything must have purpose. Another absolute. Our purpose on this earth is very simple and easy for anyone to accomplish. Our purpose is to glorify god, nothing else. Whether rich or poor, well fed or hungry, healthy or sick; all must spend their lives glorifying god. Purpose, morals, and meaning, are all absolutes. They must not be questioned or ignored.
Theists must find a way to cope with their existence, and god is the easy way out. The world is too big for them, too much unknown, too much confusion. Original sin is what they accept, and is the reason life can be tough. An important distinction between atheism and theism could be as simple as being able to accept life as it is, no ultimate meaning, no purpose, just life. Doesn't mean all atheists are scientists, or philosophers, or anything; it just means we can handle the truth. While atheists may not be happy about death, they don't run from the fact. Theists are all about running from a reality that apparently scares the hell out of them. What better bait is there to stealing a person's inherent intelligence? Eternal life is the answer.
God's plan for man is likely the worst plan ever. For way too many, it appears the plan is disease, hunger, and hopelessness. That would be an atheist viewpoint though since theists believe it is all for a reason. There is hope for all if you glorify god. We need not to fix the horrors of the world, this is how it is supposed to be. All of the pain and suffering is god's plan, and it will become clear when you're dead the reason why.
I'm sure that theists will continue to join the site. We cannot be allowed to exist in a world without god. When theists debate us, there's always a new trick, a new way to phrase the same old shit. You cannot stop debating theists, otherwise you have no voice.
If theists have anything going for them, it's the fortitude to continue the fight. Every time you smack down a ridiculous thought, they come up with a new one. They will stay the course, overcoming any obstacles or criticism. They will not stop in their need to defend the indefensible. They will protect the fantasy because they need to; they are afraid of life and death.
If there is one absolute that atheists should embrace, it should be to never stop voicing their objections to religion. Whatever that voice is, however you explain the reality that is life, that voice is important. I do not look at theists as the enemy, I look at them as the children of the world. They never grow up, which I find ironic. "When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things." Someday maybe theists will become men and women, but for now they are afraid of their own shadow; fear is in their heart.
I have nothing, and at the same time too much, for today. There's only one thing I can do, bring back the ranter.
Americans love their homeopathy. Between 2000 and 2014 the industry earnings rose 33 percent. In 2014, 1.2 billion dollars were spent on water. Confirmation bias does the trick. You drink medicinal water, and guess what, in a week or two you feel great! Must of been the magic piss water.
Various sects of christianity revel in homeopathy; scammed by myths apparently makes one receptive to being scammed by just about anything. Homeopaths know a sucker when they see one.
Every one of us knows that death awaits, except for believers of course. They will live an eternal life listening to shitty harps played by untalented fools, but for atheists we'll be gone. And here's the thing, we all know we're going to die, but none of us think it's going to happen now, today; it's always in some nebulous distant future. Yet one of these days it will be the day. For the homeopathic crowd, specifically that guy drinking piss water for his chest pain today, that day may be sooner than he thinks.
If today is your day, later bitch.
Religion kills. Christian pastors in Africa are killing children at will. Witches the young ones are, evil and worthless. "The nine-year-old boy lay on a bloodstained hospital sheet crawling with ants, staring blindly at the wall. His family pastor had accused him of being a witch, and his father then tried to force acid down his throat as an exorcism. It spilled as he struggled, burning away his face and eyes. The emaciated boy barely had strength left to whisper the name of the church that had denounced him – Mount Zion Lighthouse." A month later, he died.
"There's a scar above Jane's shy smile: her mother tried to saw off the top of her skull after a pastor denounced her and repeated exorcisms costing a total of $60 didn't cure her of witchcraft. Mary, 15, is just beginning to think about boys and how they will look at the scar tissue on her face caused when her mother doused her in caustic soda. Twelve-year-old Rachel dreamed of being a banker but instead was chained up by her pastor, starved and beaten with sticks repeatedly; her uncle paid him $60 for the exorcism.
Israel's cousin tried to bury him alive, Nwaekwa's father drove a nail through her head, and sweet-tempered Jerry – all knees, elbows and toothy grin – was beaten by his pastor, starved, made to eat cement and then set on fire by his father as his pastor's wife cheered it on."
Children outcast from family and community. When churches outnumber clinics, schools, and banks; only evil remains. Education, health, and enough money to feed your children? No thanks, we'll take religion please. The end of this atrocity is nowhere in sight, and no response from the world's "good" christians who watch in horror but take no actions. Unchecked christianity in action, disgusting, evil, and sick. Evangelical nonsense taken to the extreme, "thou shalt not suffer a witch to live."
This cannot be ignored, it is everywhere. America has a long sordid history of religious terrorists. Whether based on white supremacy, to acts of violence on government buildings, health centers, doctors; on anyone who challenges the word of god.
Here, hundreds of children have died from parents and pastors who are withholding easily accessible medical treatment. Children are prevented from getting medical attention, because faith is all they need. In 1944 the Supreme Court ruled that parents cannot interfere with a child's welfare, including for religious reasons. 38 states and the District of Columbia then created laws that protected the religious from this basic protection for children. Right to life my ass. Child Protection Services there are discouraged from reporting religious based problems and seem to turn an eye to what they see.
Religious groups who allow children to die are terrorists in their own right.
Here's hoping that all of the clergy involved in all these, and many more, horrors leave us soon. Today should be their day, later bitches.
Muslims killing muslims, muslims killing christians, christians killing muslims, christians killing hindu, muslims killing hindu, hindu killing muslims, hindu killing christians, etc.; the list is very long. This is not a problem that is central to the Middle East or parts of the African continent, this is everywhere.
God. God is the problem. God has always been the problem. Tribal mentality that all humans have originates with god. My god is always the real god. God is a sickness that separates humanity, for without god why would we hate our brothers?
Tribalism is an ongoing slaughter of intellect. It tells us we are better than others, that we are superior, and that others are beneath us. It is always entwined with religion or myth, and is the primal source of conflict. God loves some of us, others he really detests.
God's day cannot come soon enough, and we should all be happy to wish him a short farewell.
We've talked many times about "enablers;" those that support religion at any cost. Liberal theists who are more accepting of reality than their conservative brethren seem to be harmless, but they take no real action to stop the more harmful elements of their chosen religion. The pacifists always back down, they have to. You cannot both be religious, yet not support the religious. There's always an area where they think all belief should be respected, which is why many think the enablers are as bad, or possibly even worse, than their more aggressive counterparts.
The "No True Scotsman" fallacy is another way of covering up religion's crushing grip on the world. If a believer takes an action that horrifies the world, they are not a true theist. Theists refuse to take responsibility for the actions of those of faith, the actions that many times are caused by that same faith. To continue down the road of faith and madness, you really must blindfold yourself to the evils that are created by belief.
Religion effects humans on a global scale, more so now than ever in our short history. The conflicts brought about by whose god is better than the other has always been a blight on humanity, but as technology becomes more commonplace it allows the insanity to spread quickly. What was true in the past is still true today, religion fights science in every manner conceivable. That fight is leading us to to the annihilation of our species.
Climate change is one of the biggest threats to this planet. Religions are starting to embrace the science sporadically, but as always it's too little too late. Pope Francis embraces Climate Change as a fact; that's really nice of you but you're decades late. And herein lies the problem. While the faithful fight reality, we lose our chance to take the actions that would counter the problem. Religion has us shackled with a ball and chain that slows our need to react to the world's problems.
An American problem is the foul unity of politics and religion. A Handful of republican presidential hopefuls have rebuked the science of climate change. The ones that accept the findings still have no plans on doing anything to combat the crisis, they are in the pocket of our local billionaires who make millions polluting the earth. American evangelicals who are always at the front of the anti-science movement, seem to be leaning towards the stewardship angle in the last year or so, but again, they vote for those who have stated they will do nothing to combat the problem. And even as some of the faithful decide on action, there is still a large group that states any action will bring harm to the poor while not really accomplishing that much.
Here again we see the ignorance of faith. Faith only concerns itself with what technology is available at the moment, and doesn't look forward to investing into new technology that may help. Politicians put science in the poorhouse, if you don't have the money for research, you can't help us. Life sciences are under attack in the states.
Evolution, such a center part of all the life sciences, is still debated by theists. There is no debate unless you are one of the faithful. The only reason to deny the obvious is because of god. Our lives right at this moment would be enriched if religion never came into play. We'd be living healthier and longer lives, excepting for the incredible battle that has been waged against us by the believers. Our suffering is directly related to the obtuse thoughts of the brainwashed. It is on their heads, the blood is on their hands. Disease is their gift to humanity.
We need to understand how species react to environmental changes to minimize our threat to the planet and to help save endangered species. We need to know how parasites evolve to keep us healthy. Cancer research, agricultural techniques, mutagenic substances; every part of life on this planet benefits from embracing this reality. Again though, the faithful would rather embrace death and disease than to admit their god did not create man.
In 1859, Darwin's "On The Origins of Species" was released. Sixty years ago the catholic church started to embrace that reality, even though they're still jumping through hoops trying to reconcile that thought with their god. But we're still talking almost a century before the church would acknowledge the science. A hundred years of progress restrained by belief.
The beginnings of our universe has always been a battle. As recently as in the 1980s, the pope admonished scientists against studying the moment of creation, since it was holy. Regardless of which view holds true, whether there is a true beginning of the universe, or it has always been in place, why would anyone want to stop research? It does no harm except to unprovable beliefs that restrict humans in every endeavor.
I think Stephen Hawking replied to those who need a divine creator correctly. "What was god doing before the divine creation? Was he preparing hell for people who ask such questions?"
Exactly. Understanding the universe can only help us understand who we are. There is no need to answer why, that would be silly at best. There is no need for a "master plan" created by as savage god. There is no need for a theist's desire for "meaning," that we create ourselves.
As long as the believers need to fight for their belief by denying reality, faith will be the death of us all.
Every so often a nice theist joins the site. The conversations always seem to have an aura of friendliness at the beginning, but then they quickly turn into a never ending defense of belief. The arguments are not new, just rephrased to confuse. Apparently it works, since we all jump in to defend an atheist viewpoint, and it always seems to confuse us for a few days until we finally come up with the answer. We do not spend our days studying for a conversation that has no end; the infinite debate will continue with or without us. There should be an answer though, regardless of our lack of enthusiasm to engage.
For atheism to exist, there would seem to be a reason needed. Absence of belief is a fine definition for the word, but that definition would seem to require an argument; an argument that defines the definition. Speaking in circles isn't just for theists.
For religion to exist, a network of falsehoods must exist. Lies must be told:
According to Tm Mazur:"Immanuel Kant said that lying was always morally wrong. He argued that all persons are born with a ‘intrinsic worth’ that he called human dignity. This dignity derives from the fact that humans are uniquely rational agents, capable of freely making their own decisions, setting their own goals, and guiding their conduct by reason. To be human is to have the rational power of free choice; to be ethical is to respect the power in oneself and others… Lies are morally wrong for 2-reasons: First, lying corrupts most important quality of being human: the ability to make free, rational choices. Each lie told contradicts your moral worth. Second, lies rob others of their freedom to choose, rationally. When a lie leads people to decide in ways other than the way they would had they known the truth, you harm their human dignity… Kant believed that in order to value ourselves and others… we must avoid damaging, interfering with, or misusing our ability to make free decisions, in other words: No lying."
Certainly, that premise exists only if you give in to a theist's certainty that free will exists to some degree. Without free will, the theist doesn't have an argument on morality to make, so wasting time trying to convince otherwise might be a, well, waste of time. Might as well skip the heart and head straight to the brain. Free will's added benefit to an argument could be Kant's view regardless, so catching a theist in a lie would be the same as said theist partaking in an immoral act, and theist's arguments for god containing falsehoods become repetitive instances of evil. Case closed.
We need to clear up our arguments. It should not take days or weeks to file the bible in the fiction section. It shouldn't take days or weeks of allowing circular arguments to control the debate to exorcise the fantasy from our collective thoughts. It shouldn't take days or weeks to refute the theist's statements. Logic should be the simple answer, but the theist takes that as well and twists it into proof of god.
Hundreds of years before jesus, Aristotle delved into how we process reason. The three basic laws of logic, though already a given, were given a more formal expression. For the purpose of creating a discussion, do these basic laws not negate religion without going any farther? Is there a need to look at all the different ways religion tries to deafen our sensibilities with arguments, that on the outside, may seem meaningful, but when deconstructed become nothing more than a cloak for faith?
Any of us that lay claim to being reasoning humans probably know the three basic laws of thought, even if we don't vocalize them.
1. The Law of Identity. Everything is the same as itself. Whether a thing, or a proposition, A = A.
Without going any farther, this would seem to trash religion immediately. Asking for a definition of god should be enough to show the proposition is nonsense.
William Lane Craig seems to be one of the focal points enlightening us with the latest ontological definition of god. The first premise usually goes like this. "God is the greatest being conceivable. If you can conceive of a greater being, then that is god." To me this states that "A" does not equal "A." A proposition is true or it is not. If "A" changes, then it is not "A", and we cannot have a reasonable discussion about "A" because "A" has not been defined. God of the old testament is different than god of the new testament, and everyone who describes god has a different definition according to his or her own biases, so god does not exist.
Even if an argument could be made that the tree in my back yard is still the same tree as it grows - like god can change and still be god - that glass doesn't hold water. Everyone has the same definition of a tree, yet all are different when it comes to god.
2. The Law of Non-Contradiction. Nothing can exist and not exist at the same time and in the same respect; or no statement can be true and false.
Again, if the definition of god changes depending on the mind that has created him/her, then the statement describing god is certainly false.
3. The Law of the Excluded Middle. Something either exists or it doesn't exist; or every statement is true or false.
Once again, if a definition changes, then the statement is always false.
This seems simple enough, yet we get caught up in debates that should be nullified immediately.
Is there a need to go further when it comes to logic? We ought be informed, reasoned, and ready for any attempt by a theist to proselytize the site. We should be able to be courteous, informative, and respectful to the theist, but not necessarily to his ideas.
If anyone cares to play, tell us why these statements are false.
Pope Francis has been in the States for the last few days, and although much of his message many of us may agree with, his is still a message of death. Although recognizing, and if at all possible, battling Climate Change is a message that resonates with a hopefully large number of atheists, it does not alleviate the path to extinction that the catholic church would like to take us down.
Although conservative leaders did not welcome his messages on climate, wealth, refugees, etc.; they really enjoyed his life starts at conception spiel. The catholic church has been at the lead when it comes to the rights of cells. Apparently that is so much more important than the unknown number of children molested by priests; the church has still not made their records accessible to the government or the people. All internal, christian law.
The Ordovician-Silurianextinction occurred about 439 million years ago due to a drop in sea levels as glaciers formed followed by rising sea levels as glaciers melted. During this extinction 25 percent of marine families and 60 percent of marine genera (the classification above species) were lost.
The pope's reluctance to bring up the many horrors that have been recently committed by the church, and his stance on women negates and overwhelms any good his message may contain. The anti-choice movement has its champion, and the world screams in anguish. Over 7 billion humans now hold sway over all life. Catholics have been in the forefront of the anti-choice terrorist movement, and the pope supports the terrorists.
The Late Devonianextinction took place somewhere around 364 million years ago. To this day its cause is unknown. However, evidence supporting the Devonian mass extinction suggesting that warm water marine species were the most severely affected in this extinction event, has lead many paleontologists to believe that an episode of global cooling, similar to the event which that may have resulted in the Ordovician-Silurian mass extinction, may have lead to the Devonian extinction. Thus this theory suggests that the extinction of the Devonian was triggered by another glaciation event on Gondwana, which is evidenced by glacial deposits of this age in northern Brazil.
According to Earth Overshoot Day we used up what the earth produced on August 13, 2015. This means we are drawing down on the earth's principle instead of living on its interest, if economic models work for you. Basically we use more resources than the earth can produce.
The Pope's desire to see humans needlessly propagate is an abomination; propagation is what animals do to keep their species alive, but it is not something they should be forced to do. To straddle teens who have an entire life ahead of them with the burden of raising offspring, to destroy a woman's life for the sake of the unborn, to deliver children into the misery of a life that cannot be sustained, is simply torture.
The Permian-Triassicextinction happened about 251 million years ago and was Earths worst mass extinction. 95 percent of all species, 53 percent of marine families, 84 percent of marine genera, and an estimated 70 percent of land species such as plants, insects and vertebrate animals were killed during this catastrophe.
The anti-choice comments were applauded by our conservative congress. The anti-science crowd who cannot accept basic life sciences like evolution, who cannot understand climate science, who purposefully close their eyes and minds to reach an unsustainable goal of profit for the few and misery for the rest. These people really are not just a freethinker's enemy, they are the enemy of all life that exists on this planet.
The Chairman of the House Science Committee, Lamar Smith, cut NASA's earth science budget this year. Though he chairs a committee on science, he doesn't understand what science is. Ben Carson, one of our fine anti-science conservatives running to be president of the Unites States, thinks evolution is a fairy tale. A neurosurgeon who does not accept the basic life science that we have al benefitted from. Instead of science, we now used ideology as theory. This list goes on and on, the vast majority of conservative elected officials do not have our best interests at heart.
The End Triassicextinction, taking place roughly 199 million to 214 million years ago, was most likely caused by massive floods of lava erupting from the central Atlantic magmatic province triggering the breakup of Pangaea and the opening of the Atlantic Ocean. This possibly contributed to global warming.
If you glance at the possible reasons for past extinctions, you'll notice that climate change has been a possible helping hand, or the main event, that drove countless species into extinction. Yet here we are, ignoring all the signs of another catastrophe. We are drowned out by a media that cannot explain what is happening in a soundbite so doesn't bother trying. The public seems to care less and less about anything science, unless it's a new way to kill, and that fault lies squarely on the confusing data being fed to them by the media.
The Cretaceous-Tertiaryextinction occurred about 65 million years ago and is thought to have been aggravated, if not caused, by impacts of several-mile-wide asteroid that created the Chicxulub crater now hidden on the Yucatan Peninsula and beneath the Gulf of Mexico. Yet, some scientists believe that this mass extinction was caused by gradual climate change or flood-like volcanic eruptions of basalt lava from the Deccan Traps in west-central India. During this extinction, 16 percent of marine families, 47 percent of marine genera, and 18 percent of land vertebrate families including the dinosaurs.
Religious leaders, and politicians, are only looking out for their own welfare; senseless puppets in our new Oligarchy. These are the newest of the false prophets. They are living for today and not for eternal life.
The Holoceneextinction, sometimes called the Sixth Extinction, is a name proposed to describe the currently ongoing extinction event of species during the present Holocene epoch (since around 10,000 BCE) mainly due to human activity.
Humans may be on their way out. We have spread to the ends of the earth using resources as fast as we can. For the most part, we have no sense of the future. Our ideology and politics are driving us to extinction. Any that have even a minimal understanding of the ecological requirements for diversity, basic biology and life sciences, should be able to imagine a future that doesn't include life as we know it.