I hate to say it but it really is common knowledge that our worlds oceans have decreased in population by 90%. Even time magazine accepts this and made it the cover story of one of there issues.
If it's common knowledge, it is common only to you.
There have been multiple documentaries on the subject and o yeah....
There are documentaries claiming that the US Health Care system is inferior to Cuba's and that 9/11 was an inside job. The existence of a documentary does not make that documentary's assertions true.
Its back by 49 Noble prize winning scientists.
Too bad the Nobel Prize has since become just another trophy for the left-wing zealot du jour (As do endorsements by TIME, which is not a scientific or scholarly journal.) Apparently no one did anything for World Peace last year, because they gave it to Al Gore for combatting global warming, despite the fact his documentaries too are scientific horse hockey.
there is nothing natural about humans preforming a yearly genoside on entire species that we pump full of hormones and chemicals to change the color of there flesh, the amount of flesh on there body, and the amount of milk they produce.
Yearly genoside [sic] on entire species? You do realize they have regulations on overfishing and the EPA is highly protective of plots of dirt in Southern Cali, nevermind rainforests and the like. Plus cows and chickens are a controlled population now solely in existence for human farming. They literally serve no other purpose. All you do if you set all the cows free from human opression is cause more road accidents. All you do if you set the chickens free is increase the fox, coyote, and cat population.
Theres nothing natural about even going to the supermarket and buying food.
Good thing vegetarians don't do that too. They also don't chat on the internet because using man-made inventions to aid man is also completely unnatural.
If you want to go natural, eat organic foods.
Which you will then buy from an organic market, which I assume is exempted from the unnaturralness of the supermarket because it keeps vegans from being destroyed by malnutrition.
And killing isn't natural for humans, is something we have been classically conditioned to accept.
Native Americans, Europeans, Africans, Asians, Middle-Easterners, and basically every surviving society known to man disagrees.
I'll see if I can illustrate this for you. There are 6 billion human beings on planet earth. If we were to remove 90% of them, we would be left with 600 million people. Such a loss would be nearly impossible to recover from unless a large portion of the 600 million were close enough together to rebuild a society.
If we were to wipe out 90% of edible aquatic life, they are not equipped with the intelligence to repopulate at a level that can be sustained. Predators would die off because of no prey, and the prey of the killed off creature would presumably grow in number. There is no possible way to insure a blanket 90% negative impact on every species in the world simultaneously.
Moreover, what are we comparing the 90% to, and how often does it occur? If we were to wipe out 90% of a population every 10 years, and we started with a population of 1 million, They would be culled down to 100,000 after 10 years and maybe 20,000 after 20 years, and 3,000 after 30 years. I've even assumed the remaining population doubles in 10 years. These numbers aren't sustainable, but the market effects would be obvious. After the first 10 years, markets would have incredible shortages, and the entire business model would dissappear.
The fact is Ambitions, you've used nothing but appeal to authority, while providing us no linkage to your assertions, and combined them with poor reasoning as to what is and is not natural.
