HOME | DD
paramoreSUCKS β Humans
Published: 2010-12-17 05:01:34 +0000 UTC; Views: 7865; Favourites: 197; Downloads: 1
Redirect to original
Description
When did a wolf create your computer?When did a fur seal discover the polio vaccine?
When did a lion create a grand masterpiece?
When did a horse create the Tempur-pedic?
Don't agree? Don't care. C:
Related content
Comments: 378
π: 0 β©: 0
π: 0 β©: 0
Humans
π: 2 β©: 0
I see a perfect balance of selfishness and generosity.
π: 2 β©: 0
Humans are not smart. They hurt animals for pleasure, that's proof
π: 0 β©: 1
So do a lot of other animals. Hunting for sport is a very common behavior among species, especially intelligent species like Orcas and Chimpanzees. Any intelligent social mammal predatory in nature will hunt for sport.
So orcas and chimpanzees are dumb animals too I guess, despite being among the closest to humans for intelligence.
π: 1 β©: 1
π: 0 β©: 1
Um, they will? Your cat hunts because they feel like it, for one.
Anyways your point is humans are dumb because our species does some shitty things that most other advanced species do.
Then every one of those species is dumb.
But you are also arguing humans are superior when you want to say humans are inferior.Β
I am actually pro-combat if we are talking about stopping a genocide or if your way of life is threatened, that is survival isn't it? Also humans have committed cannibalism for survival. But yeah rape is never justified.Β
Also no, it isn't always for survival. Male on male buttrape is very common among animals.
Honestly we humans are still driven by our animal brains, even though we have cognitive thought we still do have animal instincts underneath it all. We really are no better or worse than any other animal out there.
π: 0 β©: 1
π: 0 β©: 1
we still choose immoral paths
Who's we? Me? Bob? You? The Illuminati? Be specific. People aren't all the same you know. Or are you subconsciously talking about yourself with that statement?Β
Morality itself is a human construct. It's a tool of in groups of humans to allow us to survive. Different groups have different morals, often in the form of philosophical, legal, or religious doctrine. We don't have "moral capability" rather morality is something we came up with as part of our built in tribal/pack hunter mentality.
Some people find it immoral to vaccinate their kids, just because a position is perceived as "moral" doesn't mean it's always rational.
Also Earth is a layered pile of rocks, it'll be fine.
π: 0 β©: 1
π: 0 β©: 1
βMoralityβ is still a human construct. The only other people who drone on about βmoralityβ as much as you are religious nutcases.
Also, again, animals donβt always kill or rape things for survival. They do it for fun a lot of the time too. Male polar bears will eat a femaleβs cubs just because heβs horny and wants to fuck her, even if itβs not necessary for survival.Β
Tell me why thereβs overwhelming scientific evidence that humans are natural predators which contributed to the speciesβ overall intelligence. βAnimal rights activistsβ are people with an agenda and highly biased and not the overall mean opinion of the scientific community.
π: 0 β©: 1
π: 0 β©: 0
IDGAF about animals
Except opossums, bees, pigeons, and crows. Maybe cats.
π: 0 β©: 0
Can you do any of the things you listed? Can you? You're a human right? You think you're so full of yourself. Don't judge a fish for climbing a tree, speciecist. Being superior is about moraltiy, not intelligence. That leads to arrogance, corruption and evil. We have the moral obligation. They're actually superior. More moral, more dutiful, more innocent. They survive in conditions you would not hope to set foot in for a minute. They sacrifice themselves, their families, and their well being for the environment's stability.
π: 0 β©: 1
"speciecist" LO Fuckin' L
π: 0 β©: 1
Shows how much you care. You're proving my point.
π: 0 β©: 1
He's an embarrassment to life.Β
π: 0 β©: 1
π: 1 β©: 1
Go to Hell, you Hitler supporting freak.
π: 0 β©: 1
π: 0 β©: 1
I heard you say you thought Hitler was a good person.
π: 0 β©: 1
π: 0 β©: 0
Everyone knows the Tempur-Pedic was created by unicorns!
π: 0 β©: 0
Actually, there are some animals that can do human things.
There are some ants that practice agriculture, by milking little animals.
There are some birds in Australia (I think) that purposely sets fires to catch prey.
There are some animals that uses tools.
There is a pig that can play videogames.
But I can still agree with this stamp.
π: 0 β©: 1
some ants also grow fungus.
crows are known to use cars to crack open nuts.
pigs are smarter than dogs and some human children.
π: 0 β©: 1
Good point.
Wouldn't it be embarrassing to be dumber than a pig, tho? Just think about it.
π: 0 β©: 1
Pigs are as smart as human children. But yes, it would be.
π: 0 β©: 0
I'm sorry you lack the basic empathy to connect to something other than a creature that was biologically created to please you.
π: 0 β©: 0
Yeah, let's kill all bees and see what happens. We don't need food when we got cool things like computers, polio vaccine, grand masterpieces, and Tempur-pedic.
Don't get me wrong, the good things which extremely few of our species created/discovered/built for others to copy and use are fantastic. But don't forget the whole universe is a whole network of important creatures and roles. There is nobody higher or lower. In fact, lots of destructive things were done because we thought our species (or race, religion, gender, sexuality, etc) matter more than others.
Don't agree? Don't care. Β―\_(γ)_/Β―
π: 1 β©: 1
I don't think the stamp is implying that we should actively seek to abuse or kill animals for no reason, but rather that it's silly to value animals over humans when they don't really participate in society or to only value animals which we find amusing or cute. I've heard people say they value their dog over other human beings because their dog doesn't judge them and doesn't run away from them or argue with them - a dog CAN'T judge or run away or talk back, which displays not a loving relationship, but one where an animal is being used to comfort a needy, emotionally-unstable person who can't handle being told the truth about some things and can't stand human beings who don't appear to worship them the way a fluffy pet does. Animals are not "better" than human beings in any respect. Some animals actively destroy the environment. Locusts wipe out whole crops, bacteria kill people and animals in vast amounts, hamsters eat their own offspring often, lions rip apart wildebeests and elephants and gazelles alive to eat them when they could just as easily kill them first to end their suffering. Only a select few animal species (including humans) even show genuine empathy. Cats and dogs will eat the corpses of their owners after the owner has died, even if there is already food in the house which they can access. Animals will wipe out other groups of the same species in feuds over territory, something akin to human genocide in our own species. The only difference between us and animals is that animals cannot appreciate the gravity of their actions. Like a psychopath, they simply don't care, and it's not a matter of survival. Otherwise, why do cats "play with" and torture their prey before eating it? Why do even the most well-trained dogs in the best of care still snap and maul people to death on occasion? We as human beings are better not because of our technological or creative advancements, but because we KNOW better. We have over time developed a whole system of laws, social/cultural norms, structures and resources to protect ourselves and each other from abuse, harm, killing, exploitation, theft, sexual assault and violence. While our system certainly isn't perfect by any stretch, it's more than can be said for any animal. We even extend our compassion so far so as to include animals - there's a reason why cockfighting and "dancing bears" and ivory poaching have been made illegal in so many places. We care about the welfare of other species besides our own, and we are willing to sacrifice our own trivial amusement and profit if it protects animals from unnecessary abuse and death. Very few animals have the capacity to do that. While every so often there'll be one of those hokey Facebook news stories about the "loyal puppy that saved its master from a burning building" or whatever, generally most of those stories are hoaxes, and those that aren't are rare flukes. Generally most animals do not actively care to help another species besides their own, and will sacrifice members of their own species for no apparent reason.
In a nutshell, until you can give me a cat or a dog or a horse or any other animal which can do all of this, I don't see how anybody would consider an animal to be "better" than a human - and it's a rather silly presumption, anyway. If you prefer animals over humans, just say it. Don't try to claim that objectively animals are "better" than humans unless you can back it up, because it's pretty arbitrary.
π: 0 β©: 1
Thank you so much for your constructive feedback! I'm actually happy you understand my message here. 
I totally get where you're coming from when you say there are dog-owners who are needy, emotionally unstable and hate everyone who doesn't like dogs too. I don't like those people myself. I even have trouble taking someone seriously who owns a chiwawa for a single pet, lol.
Just remember that not every dog owner is like that. I definitely know some dog-owners who are alpha AF and get a lot of work done in their lives, with dogs that are also alpha AF and get a lot of work done. For example, protection from wild animals and criminals.
I believe when dog owners say "I like my dog because he doesn't judge me." they really mean "I like my dog because he accepts me the way I am." Because I noticed the word "judge" is often misused as a way of saying "hate the way I am". For example when a person says "I like death metal music, don't judge me." Everyone will be judged no matter what.
The definition of judging is (from cambridge dictionary) :
"to form, give, or have as an opinion, or to decide about something or someone, especially after thinking carefully."
Dogs (and other intelligent animals) CAN judge, actually! In fact, scientists have learned there is something called "Intelligent disobedience" especially within service dogs:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligβ¦
Basically, the dog will disobey you if there's a situation where it's too dangerous to follow orders. This is a matter of judging. You also can't tell a dog to jump off a cliff into their certain death and expect them to do it without hesitation. You also can't force a horse you're riding into doing something that would definitely kill them (like running towards a hungry grizzly bear, etc). But you could easily crash your car against a wall at full speed, because a car doesn't think nor judge.
You mentioned "...it's silly to value animals over humans when they don't really participate in society..."
I'm afraid we've made some animals officially part of our society by domesticating them; For example, there are dog breeds that are literally refered to as "society dogs" which is merely another word for "lab dogs" (like pugs). It's their only job to get socially involved within our human species and do nothing else. Other dog breeds are refered to as "hunting dogs" (like greyhounds), "protection dogs" (like shepherds), "sled dogs" (like huskies) and others. These dogs can get socially involved, but more likely love to do the thing they're actually bred to do. You won't find a greyhound that hates running- especially running after small animals like rabbits and then biting them to death.
During the time where machines weren't invented yet, many dog breeds have made plenty of participation in our society. Some animals are still doing it where machines cannot replace them.
For example, horses (as in horse-riding) can provide a very good therapy for people with muscle and back problems. I was one of those patients myself. No man-made machine could replace that help. I believe this is also a very valueble part to give to our society.
Of course I'm not saying we should misvalue humans. Just saying we need to appreciate our domesticated, working animals as part of our society too.
You are absolutely right, there are the awful locusts and sicknesses/viruses! Because nature is full of give and take.
Locusts are animals which destroy a lot of lives (because plants are alive and if they're gone, other lives like animals and humans will follow too). Luckily, nature made it so it balances out. Not only do locusts have a relatively short life span of 10 weeks, there are many animals that eat locusts when they're there too, including humans. I've actually eaten some freeze-dried locusts once myself, because these animals are so numerous and harmful, doesn't it make sense to eat them? Especially because locusts are a GREAT alternative for when you're starving and there's no other protein source around. 50% to 60% of their body weight is protein, making them denser in protein than cattle!
So nature is like, yeah these locusts suck, but look at all that protein they provide! 
Also, compared to humans, locusts luckily are not there 24/7 during the whole year. They're not even everywhere all around the world. The colder the country, the less likely you'll find a huge swarm of locusts. I'm in Switzerland and I've never seen a BIG swarm of locusts. Big swarms of butterflies, May beetles, bees, wasps, and hornets, yes. But never BIG swarm of locusts. Just single ones here and there, and small swarms. The consequences of global warming here are far worse, with our glaciers melting, and tree-harming beetles not getting killed in the winter cold. But that's a whole other story.
Hamsters are rodents, and rodents make so many babies per year, that it may be cruel but actually good on the big picture if some of them get eaten; whether by their parent or a predator. If this didn't happen, you'd get rodents so numerous like a big swarm of locusts... and then the damage they can do. By the way, not only hamsters eat their own babies, it's rodents in general. Mice and rats do it, too. If you have a rodent pet that becomes a mother, give her small pieces of sausages when she gives birth. She will be very hungry for meaty protein. Sausages replace baby meat.
And yes, you're right, plenty of species will kill babies of their own species, too. Wolves kill the offspring of rival packs without hesitation. Lions and bears will also kill babies of their own species too.
Even shark embryos, while still inside their mother's womb, will attack and eat themselves as soon as they run out of yolk sac, when they're at the stage when they got grown teeth:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1sXAqβ¦
It's called "embryonic cannibalism". It's kinda metal, actually. Natural shark population control and the fight for survival already happens before they're even born.
But is a species extinct because a species sometimes kills their babies (or babies killing each other)? Which species is actually responsible for the actual EXTINCTION of countless plants of animals, and why? Which is more cruel; some killing inside a species, or complete extinction of countless species in fewer than 100 years?
I'm well aware of the fact that some dogs and cats eat their dead owners, but there are also others which either run away or protect the dead body from others. What I don't understand is that people act so surprised about the fact that carnivores love eating meat. This has nothing to do with cruelty. I'm pretty sure that if I was fed the same food for 10 years and then find a new kind of meat lying around which hasn't moved for many hours, I'd want to try eating that too. Does this make it cruel?
When you mentioned "Like a psychopath, they simply don't care, and it's not a matter of survival." it reminded me of that story I heard of elephants where one elephant of the herd got bullied by the others until one of the bully elephants got a little too rough and accidentally killed him. Upon realizing he was dead, the bully actually tried to bring him back with gentle pokes and voice. From then on he was so traumatized, and transformed from a rough elephant to a nicer one.
I believe empathy and realizing the gravity of your own actions is also a question of where your intelligence is most advanced. Unfortunately, not even all intelligent creatures have that empathy trait.
I'm pretty sure you've heard of (human) serial killers which are extremely smart at some things, like numbers. But not gifted when it comes to emotions, not at all. And that's why they feel nothing when they torture and murder others. It's the same with intelligent animals! Some are smart and kind, others are smart and cruel. I know big dogs that wouldn't hurt small animals like cats, piglets, and bunnies. But there are other big dogs which see these small animals as toys which they can literally rip apart within seconds. There are also dogs that get along with other dogs, and other dogs that kill every other dog they see.
I'm actually scared to learn what the police knows about how many people are cruel compared to a country's population, even though we are a species that is supposed to have intelligence and empathy.
A whole system of laws is good and important. But it does not prevent cruelty and crimes created by humans. However, that whole topic is too complex, I'd have to ask someone who studied crime rates on all countries and what makes them high or low. Some people say that it's only poverty which turns you into a criminal, but there are also many wealthy people doing tax fraud, vandalism, sexual abuse, etc. Other people say that a childhood full of abuse turns you into a criminal, but there are loved, spoiled brats out there which never had any pain in ther lives, which become greedy criminals too.
I'm happy you are aware of those fake videos! I've gotten very careful about those too. Some people will go as far as making a fake video about saving animals or heroic animals and then they just keep the money for themselves.
At the end of your comment, you told me I should show you an animal that can do ALL of those nice and positive things that humans can do.
Well, I cannot.
Neither can I show you a single human that is 100% empathy, 100% loves everyone equally, 100% crime free, 100% cruelty free, 100% never did something destructive out of anger and doesn't regret it to this day, 100% would die for any friend, family member, or complete stranger.
I know I'm definitely not a flawless human who's better than any other animal on this planet. I've done some stupid shit in my life, some of which I regret, some of which I don't.
I get your points though, there are better humans and worse humans. And this is a fact.
No, I do not prefer animals over humans, nor vice versa! If I prefered animals over humans, I wouldn't be here on social media or even talking to you. But a world without animals would have something important missing, don't you think?
If you read all this, thank you! And I please don't take me or any of this here too seriously. I don't want to insult you or your points, they're valid and important!
π: 0 β©: 0
If humans didn't exist, this world will be a better place. So...why are humans so great again?Β
π: 0 β©: 1
did YOU create your computer?
what the fuck seriously
π: 1 β©: 0
i agree. Everyone was down my throat when I wasn't crying abt Harambe being shot. A monkey over a child? Definitely the monkey.
π: 0 β©: 0
These things don't make us superior. They make us unique. These things just mean we're more intelligent.
Dogs are superior to us in sense of smell
Ants are superior to us in strength.
Cheetahs are superior to us in speed.
Nature is a complex web, not a hierarchy. It isn't about who's more important. It's about treating them responsibly.Β
π: 1 β©: 0
When did an animal kill someone because of their sexuality?
When did an animal kill someone because of their religion?
When did an animal kill someone because of their political views?
When did an animal kill someone because of their race?
When did an animal kill someone because of their nationality?
Humans aren't perfect either. I know Humans have done more significant things than Animals, but still, Animals aren't as destructive.
π: 0 β©: 1
When did an animal kill someone because of their sexuality?
Non-human animals likely do not have developed sexuality, and thus have no concept of it.
No concept = no intent to kill over it
When did an animal kill someone because of their religion?
They don't have religion.
When did an animal kill someone because of their political views?
Or politics.
When did an animal kill someone because of their race?
Carnivorous animals frequently kill their relative species to get rid of competition, while species isn't the same as race, I think it qualifies.
[Think hyena and lion, or bear and wolf.]
When did an animal kill someone because of their nationality?
Rival groups of animals, be they herbivore or carnivore, will get into vicious battles over territory, often killing each other in the process.
π: 0 β©: 1
My comment was a few months old, so I don't have absolutely agree with it anymore, and yes, I do see your point.
I was mostly just countering some questions people say like "When did an [animal] make your electronics?" or "When did an [animal] make a cure for illness?". What you explained could also apply to those questions. Animals don't have knowledge on technology or medicine, or anything advanced.
π: 0 β©: 0
Depends on the human. Some of them seem to be shitbags.
π: 0 β©: 0
Crows have displayed a variety of superior cognitive behaviors and abilities that even 7 year olds and people with severe mental disorders aren't even capable of scraping by. Based on your logic, crows are clearly superior to those people. Octopuses are able to reason better, they just live underwater, lack language and innovative abstract skills to display them (That's why we've never seen something like Atlantis)Β
What about those primitive tribes that still dwell in the forests? They don't have the advancements we have either. I guess they're inferior according to your reasoning.
Just sayin'
π: 0 β©: 1
dont sound like bad reasoning to meΒ
π: 0 β©: 1
This comment was old anyway
π: 0 β©: 0
| Next =>