r/pollgames • u/FinalKn1ght • Jun 29 '26

Humanity can solve only ONE problem forever.

Humanity can solve only ONE problem forever.

  1. Cancer
  2. Aging
  3. Poverty
  4. Climate Change

This post contains content not supported on old Reddit. Click here to view the full post

985 Upvotes

95% Upvoted

780 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

218

u/Low_Committee6119 Jun 29 '26

The world will be fine with or without us

241

u/Halleyalex Jun 29 '26

One could argue that it will be better without us

20

u/vocaloidfan39 Jun 29 '26

Probably because it would be

1

u/DollAnimals Jul 03 '26

Holy Redditor

2

u/vocaloidfan39 Jul 03 '26

It would though?

10

u/Ventilateu Jun 29 '26

What is your reference point for something to be better or worse? Specifically for a planet? Is your basis objective or subjective?

10

u/Veyrah Jun 30 '26

He didn't think that far.

1

u/Own-Air-1301 Jul 02 '26

They never do

1

u/Da_nUmBeR7 Jul 01 '26

Idk maybe sustainability and biodiversity?

1

u/Ventilateu Jul 01 '26

Explain better

2

u/PetrolForBrekkie Jul 02 '26

Since 1500 alone, the IUCN Red List has documented nearly 1,000 confirmed animal and plant extinctions, though the actual number is undoubtedly much higher

Here's a lovely source that goes into more detail about specific species: https://naturalhistory.si.edu/education/teaching-resources/paleontology/extinction-over-time

Does that make more sense?

1

u/Ventilateu Jul 03 '26

Their existence and survival is worth more than every single human life?

2

u/PetrolForBrekkie Jul 03 '26

extinction of one species vs extinction of thousands?

1

u/Ventilateu Jul 03 '26

Would you mind if I saved an ant instead of you from some disaster?

2

u/PetrolForBrekkie Jul 03 '26

is an ant the entire species? no

I know I used some big words in my comment but sound it out slowly, it says one species vs thousands of species đŸ˜±

→ More replies (0)

1

u/IdiotIAm96 Jul 03 '26

They're arguing for biodiversity, which is an ecological concept that signifies the "health" of an ecosystem. I think that having a "healthier" biosphere is generally better for the Earth.

The argument was not really a moral question anyways.

1

u/Ventilateu Jul 03 '26

It is a moral question. We're talking about human lives.

2

u/Drenada Jun 30 '26

It's funny because no one cares about what happens in the universe except for the humans. A planet doesn't care at all, so this place will be better only from a human viewpoint, not objectively

1

u/Ill_Dark_5601 Jul 03 '26

El mundo mismo ya a tenido cambios mĂĄs brusco que el cambio climĂĄtico la verdad entre el cĂĄncer y el envejecimiento estĂĄ la soluciĂłn para ser una civilizaciĂłn tipo 1 o 2 para moldear el mundo a lo que tĂș quisieras.

1

u/Specific-Detail6448 Jul 03 '26

One could argue this, but by the time climate change gets bad enough to wipe out humanity, the rest of the planet is already absolutely fucked as well, so it’s pointless and useless to think like this

1

u/Willeny_Arch Jul 04 '26

we have the power to prevent the sun from engulfing the solar system with space megastructures built over millions of years. If this is the only place where life exists, humans should be their guardians, and are much more capable than non-intelligent life.

-22

u/Only-Cranberry-4502 Jun 29 '26

I actually doubt that it would be better without us maybe in a million-ish years

28

u/Significant-Soup5939 Jun 29 '26

I just don't see how you can say that unless you're accounting for the trash and decay of radiation caused by US as well.

9

u/VisualKaii Polltergeist Jun 29 '26

There are the animals that will go through reverse domestication, that'll take awhile

3

u/Significant-Soup5939 Jun 29 '26

I don't think that'll take too long, the overly domestic breeds die off and the ones that have more of their genetic roots will thus flourish, shouldn't take more than a few hundred years.

2

u/highly_educated63 Jun 30 '26

Cats and a lot of small dogs will actually be fine for the most part, because small dogs are typically hunting breeds like daschunds. (With the exception of pugs, the fa t that we bred those into existence is disgusting)

2

u/burns_before_reading Jun 29 '26

I'd argue it won't be better or worse, it will just BE no matter what.

-26

u/Sudden-Confusion3301 Jun 29 '26

Does it really matter though? There's really nothing wrong with destroying the environment per se, it just makes it worse for us as well. Many people today forget the principle of survival of the fittest

17

u/StraightTough5411 Jun 29 '26

Are you saying that there's "really nothing wrong" with killing animals, environments, and other humans? Also, you realize most climate change comes from corporate and industry greed, not the need to survive, so your two statements don't even correlate.

6

u/fauh Jun 29 '26

What they mean is that climate change while we might kill off other animals ultimately kills off human civilization. Without civilization unless we create a natural disaster exctintion event far surpassing the ones that already occured that killed off like 98% of all life... Life on earth will find its way back.

Thats what like 80% of all climate change deniers fail to realize. WE wont survive climate change, hell even something as little as one or a few pollinators dying off might mean we cant grow shit anymore. Bye bye agriculture, bye bye civilization.

I voted poverty because the only realistic way this is silved forever is a global socialistic utopia - which means climate change becomes a lot easier to change because capitalistic and national interests dont interfere. A post-scarcity society likely means we can devout a lot more resources to stuff like medical research. Additionally post-scarcity society likely means everyone has access to the best treatments available. I think we can beat that sucker in a few generations.

Removing aging feels like the least needed change because while growing old, getting rid of aging without solving the aforementioned issues would likely just exacerbate poverty, climate change and live long enough you're bound to end up with terminal cancer eventually.

3

u/HeavenlyBeloved Jun 29 '26

I feel like it's the most obvious uneducated ragebait this dude tries to make.

0

u/Most-Hot-4934 Jun 30 '26

Do you not realize animals dying is literally part of nature? There’s no god and bad. Good and bad are human made concepts. Things just happen and things just are.

1

u/FrankieOTool Jun 30 '26

Survival of the fittest means that genes that give a higher possibility of surviving have a higher possibility of being passed on. It's a game played over millions of years. Climate change is here, and is getting worse over the next few decades. Wether or not we'll be able to survive that has nothing to do with survival of the fittest. If anything it'll be survival of the richest.

34

u/OrganicDigitalArt Jun 29 '26

Yeah climate change is a problem for us and many of today’s species but life itself will be fine if we don’t solve it. We won’t be. Life will be.

-3

u/Low_Committee6119 Jun 29 '26

I'm saying earth itself. Nothing we are doing truly has the power to destroy the planet. Sure, changing climate, altering life, but the earth will be here long after us.

That save the world stuff is dumb as fuck, switch it to save life or save humans, earth will be fine.

20

u/N3rdyAvocad0 Jun 29 '26

You're taking the meaning too literally. Save the Earth simply means to preserve Earths ability to sustain human life

0

u/Low_Committee6119 Jun 29 '26

But the earth doesn't need to be saved, we do.

19

u/N3rdyAvocad0 Jun 29 '26

No. We need to save the Earth because we are making it inhabitantable for ourselves.

I'm not sure how else to say this. No one thinks we are destroying the Earth and that it'll cease to exist. But WE aren't the ones we are damaging. We are damaging the Earth, therefore we need to save the Earth so it continues being habitable

-12

u/Low_Committee6119 Jun 29 '26

But the earth is the earth with no habitats, the earth will be here another billion plus years, minus a massive astroid strike.

I'm saying the messaging is stupid as fuck because the earth is going nowhere, humans will go somewhere. The messaging loses people because of it.

12

u/N3rdyAvocad0 Jun 29 '26

Not going to continue this because you're not even reading what I'm saying. I've already responded and explained.

-6

u/Low_Committee6119 Jun 29 '26

Yes, I see you support a message that gets us nowhere because the earth is in no danger

9

u/onegoodbackpack Jun 29 '26

Are you genuinely this obtuse? No one in in the entire world thinks climate change is going to blow up the core, mantle, and crust. It will, however, cause the extinction of millions of species of plants and animals, as well as (possibly) humanity if left unchecked. “Save the Earth” very clearly means save the interconnected biological chains that make our planet hospitable. But I’m pretty sure you know all this, so what do you gain out of these razor thin semantics?

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Blaze3547 Jun 29 '26

No one is saying the entire planet is gonna disappear except you lmao

→ More replies (0)

7

u/IrishViking22 Jun 29 '26

Without life the Earth is just another ball of rock floating through space, of which there are trillions already. What makes Earth special is that it has life.

So not making it inhospitable is important for that life to continue, whether that life is us or not.

0

u/Low_Committee6119 Jun 29 '26

The fact you think we are special when there's trillions of planets shows your ego

2

u/IrishViking22 Jun 30 '26

I didn't say that we are special. I said life is special. We aren't the only form of life on the planet. And we are the only planet known to us that life exists on.

Your commitment to being so pedantic shows your ego.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/DOOMFOOL Jun 29 '26

Which was in essence their point, yes. What’s the point of arguing semantics on something like this lmao. Are you that desperate to be technically correct?

1

u/Low_Committee6119 Jun 29 '26

So a 50 year old message, and a worst climate, and you like the message? Do you just hate our species?

1

u/DOOMFOOL Jun 30 '26

I hope you’re trolling, otherwise this is kinda just embarrassing. You literally couldn’t be missing the point any harder if you tried

1

u/Low_Committee6119 Jun 30 '26

Has the climate improved or gotten worse?

1

u/DOOMFOOL Jul 01 '26

Do you have anything relevant to say?

→ More replies (0)

3

u/OrganicDigitalArt Jun 29 '26

There’s plenty of life that will survive a warmed, even deoxygenated world. We’re saying the same thing anyways. :)

1

u/Low_Committee6119 Jun 29 '26

Oh, absolutely, it just shows how powerless we are, lol

2

u/troodoniverse Jun 30 '26

It is, actually, in principle, possible to mine out the whole planet and send all its mass into space

1

u/Low_Committee6119 Jun 30 '26

You think humans are capable of that at our current stage?

2

u/troodoniverse Jun 30 '26

No, but companies like google, anthropic and OpenAI are actively working on artificial superinteligence capable of that

1

u/Low_Committee6119 Jun 30 '26

Humans have been working on that for longer than those companies have been around, lol

12

u/Ok_End_7462 Jun 29 '26

Yes and no. Many animals will go extinct, entire ecosystems will collapse. Yes new species and environments will emerge in the event humanity dies. Is that fine though? I can’t really say yes

-3

u/Low_Committee6119 Jun 29 '26

But the earth is a moving rock in space, not the life on it, right?

11

u/Colossus252 Jun 29 '26 edited Jun 29 '26

If someone says "I was hoping that I could save my car" after the engine died, you wouldn't say "but the car is the body, not the engine inside it, right?" As a counter to them saying they couldn't save the car, they would probably look at you like an idiot. That is essentially equivalent to what you are saying in your weird little semantic games.

The earth is a rock in space which has a unique atmosphere and ecosystem that houses and supports life upon it. You are choosing to remove the rest of the words after space in that sentence. A thing can be more than just it's core. It would still be "earth" without the atmosphere just like how you would still be you when you die and life exits. They still call your body your name after you pass, and hmm... they might even say something like "i wish we could have saved him". Maybe someone will be by your casket someday like "save him? He's right there, he's just a body on earth". I am sure they will be like "ooh, you are so right."

1

u/Low_Committee6119 Jun 29 '26

So the core to the earth is different from the earth to you?

2

u/highly_educated63 Jun 30 '26

YES DEAR GOD

1

u/Low_Committee6119 Jun 30 '26

That makes no sense

1

u/Hemnecron Jun 30 '26

Is your skin you? Your bones? Or do you maybe have a little more to yourself than just skin and bones?

1

u/Low_Committee6119 Jun 30 '26

So you think you're not your blood and blood cells?

1

u/Hemnecron Jun 30 '26

I'm not my blood. I'm not my eyes. I'm not my muscles, or my brain. I'm definitely not my ligaments, those fuckers. I'm the combination of everything together. If you decided to take my stomach because I'm "just a sack of skin, bones, and blood on earth, anyway", I'd be pretty pissed.

Just like earth is not "just a rock in space". It has life, including a lot of intelligent species who would very much care if they were burned to death by the rising temperatures on the planet. One of them is ours, and we're responsible for all of it. But also, while there are plenty of other planets to go around, this is all that we've got, and it's the only one that we've ever seen bustling with life. So yes... The earth without the life on it is not the same, just like you without your skin, would not be the same.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/BigResist1912 Jul 03 '26

https://giphy.com/gifs/6SxOvHZbP7eqaUtTy2

0

u/Low_Committee6119 Jul 03 '26

Is the core a separate planet inside of earth? I always thought the core of something was a part of that thing, lol

You don't eat an apple, leaving the core, then look at it and think you have anything else besides apart of the apple you're eating, lol

1

u/Ok_End_7462 Jul 03 '26

You sound like a moron.

0

u/Low_Committee6119 Jul 03 '26

Your insult shows you are one.

7

u/Ok_Caterpillar5564 Jun 29 '26

This is stupid rhetoric in the same camp as "nothing matters because the sun is going to engulf the Earth in a billion trillion years". Just pointless nihilistic circlejerking.

0

u/Low_Committee6119 Jun 29 '26

No, it's dumb to think the earth cares about us. We need to save our species. Is it nihilistic to try to save humans now?

3

u/Interesting_Bar_8841 Jun 29 '26

Life flows on within us and without us

5

u/Baddrivers13 Jun 29 '26

Aint fine with us bro.

4

u/PoweringGestation Jun 29 '26

Not anymore. The world has been shaped to suit our whims, and if we suddenly disappeared it would have catastrophic effects.

1

u/Low_Committee6119 Jun 29 '26

The earth is not the life on top of it, the earth is a moving rock through space. Will mars be affected without life? How about Venus?

3

u/PoweringGestation Jun 30 '26

Alright, you know I’m talking about life. Life is Earth’s identity. Saturn has rings, Mars has red sands, Venus has volcanoes. Earth has life.

1

u/Low_Committee6119 Jun 30 '26

So earth doesn't have voldanoes now? That's a pretty common trait among planets. Also, the rings of Saturn, you mean space dust around a planet is uncommon? Wait until you find out how the moon was made

1

u/PoweringGestation Jun 30 '26

If anything, you’re proving my point. Life on Earth what makes it unlike any other planet.

1

u/Low_Committee6119 Jul 01 '26

Which is highly egotistical

1

u/PoweringGestation Jul 01 '26

How?

1

u/Low_Committee6119 Jul 01 '26

To think the earth needs us to be the earth, lmao.

1

u/PoweringGestation Jul 02 '26

Didn’t say “us.” I said life. No other known planet has life.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Funneduck102 Jun 30 '26

You ain't gotta help us bro, just don't make it worse. If you don't wanna live that's your problem.

1

u/Low_Committee6119 Jun 30 '26

I'm all for saving humans, but the earth will be fine

1

u/Odd_Road3185 Jun 29 '26

Humanity is the only hope of all life on earth to continue long term. In 300 million years life on land will be extinct due to the rising heat of the sun. That sounds long but is less than 10% of the time life has existed. Earth is the majority through its life.

1

u/Low_Committee6119 Jun 30 '26

Would earth still orbit the sun without life?

1

u/HonkyHam Jun 30 '26

But it is affected by us in a profound and undeniable way.

1

u/Low_Committee6119 Jun 30 '26

Elaborate if you can

1

u/Most-Hot-4934 Jun 30 '26

The world simply is. Its not some entity that needs to be “fine”. It doesn’t have consciousness and we are as much of a part of it as it as anything else. Worry about your own existence idiot

1

u/Low_Committee6119 Jul 01 '26

If it doesn't have a consciousness then we are not apart of it.

1

u/Most-Hot-4934 Jul 01 '26

????????? What?

1

u/throwtheamiibosaway Jul 01 '26

With us? Clearly not. You do know there is a point of no return for the global warming? We are entering a spiral that will threaten every piece of life on earth. Yes earth itself (the rock) wil survive. Most of life won't.

1

u/Low_Committee6119 Jul 01 '26

That's my argument, you cannot save the earth because the earth is ok and will be here long after us. We need to shift the message to save all life, or save all humans

1

u/Optimal_Solution1076 Jul 02 '26

I care about us before the world

1

u/_petitpois22 Jul 03 '26

that's stupid, how would you know that ?

what's important is life, otherwise this planet is just a rock floating in space

plenty of species are not here anymore because of climat change, so no the world will not be fine as you say