LogFAQs > #914079421

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, Database 4 ( 07.23.2018-12.31.2018 ), DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	12,000 people or all cats. You must sacrifice one.
visualboy2003 12/13/18 7:12:18 PM #176:	Aressar posted... visualboy2003 posted... jumi posted... visualboy2003 posted... jumi posted... 600 million cats, or 12000 humans? eliminate cats is the wiser choice. No it's not. yes, it is. No, it's not. It's nice that you think 'science will find a way to solve that within a few years' but if it were as simple as that, literally all of society's problems would be solved by now. Scientists might indeed look into it, but a permanent and stable solution will definitely take more than a few years, since there are an enormous amount of factors to take into account when interfering with the ecosystem in this manner. During that time, many, many people would be negatively affected by the consequences (i.e. disease), resulting in a lot more human casualties than 12,000. Either choice has a chance of affecting your loved ones. The sacrifice-all-cats choice simply brings a significantly higher chance of (many more) loved ones dying. You're killing people either way: either 12,000 or many more. That's what it comes down to. not if the government put most of the money or a lot of money into develop machinery or medicine that to kill only rats in the shortest amount of time possible. the world would also help solve that problem by united to spend more money and human power to solve it in the shortest time. the reason other problems that you mentioned didn't qet solved that quickly was because the world didn't get united as one to solve a problem that they see as serve and as important that it needs to be solved immediately as it seemed to be. <cite>visualboy2003 posted [p:914079421] in 12,000 peo... [t:77294675]...</cite> <quote><cite>Aressar posted...</cite> <quote><cite>visualboy2003 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>jumi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>visualboy2003 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>jumi posted...</cite> <quote>600 million cats, or 12000 humans?</quote> eliminate cats is the wiser choice.</quote> No it's not.</quote> yes, it is.</quote> No, it's not. It's nice that you think 'science will find a way to solve that within a few years' but if it were as simple as that, literally all of society's problems would be solved by now. Scientists might indeed look into it, but a permanent and stable solution will definitely take more than a few years, since there are an enormous amount of factors to take into account when interfering with the ecosystem in this manner. During that time, many, many people would be negatively affected by the consequences (i.e. disease), resulting in a lot more human casualties than 12,000. Either choice has a chance of affecting your loved ones. The sacrifice-all-cats choice simply brings a significantly higher chance of (many more) loved ones dying. You're killing people either way: either 12,000 or many more. That's what it comes down to.</quote> not if the government put most of the money or a lot of money into develop machinery or medicine that to kill only rats in the shortest amount of time possible. the world would also help solve that problem by united to spend more money and human power to solve it in the shortest time. the reason other problems that you mentioned didn't qet solved that quickly was because the world didn't get united as one to solve a problem that they see as serve and as important that it needs to be solved immediately as it seemed to be.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1