Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Author sees happy ending without humans

JOHN ALLEMANG

From Saturday's Globe and Mail

Latest comment posted at 2:09 PM EDT 21/07/07

In new book, Alan Weisman imagines Earth after polluters, proselytizers and the rest of us disappear ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. D. B. from Greater Sask., Canada writes: But what a great run we had! Take away all the anger and hate and greed, and what's left of real value is: the music, the poetry, the art, the capacity to reflect, which of course is what makes us human. But the music - that is what was best about us. We may have used music for purposes of warfare, but it went far beyond that.
  2. D. B. from Greater Sask., Canada writes: In a fight between you and the world, bet on the world- Franz Kafka
  3. martha stewart from Canada writes: Two legs bad, four legs good.
  4. gord winters from Canada writes: why do people show the statue of liberty surviving when everything else has been destroyed? the torch holding shoulder on that statue is never going to out live mankind. its a mess.
  5. D. B. from Greater Sask., Canada writes: 'I don't know / Don't really care / Let there be songs to fill the air.' - Ah, Jerry Garcia, good man.
  6. myna johnstone from saltspring island, Canada writes: Having recently abandoned my auto for an electric bike I have seen how utterly absurd is our overuse and reliance on the automobile. Streets are filthy from their use, our air is polluted, the noise is nerve wracking and the joy of train travel was removed by the need for propelling ourselves about in tons of metal. It is an overdone addiction and we are in denial to the utmost about the consequences of the production and use.
  7. D. B. from Greater Sask., Canada writes: I applaud you, Myna Johnstone. But I don't see how what you are doing can be turned into a mass movement that will change things. I don't have a car and these days, accept rides only rarely from friends. But I still accept them . . .
  8. martha stewart from Canada writes: 'As an author whose point of departure is the eradication of Homo sapiens, Mr. Weisman' writes: “I think we're worth saving. But right now we're just wreaking too much havoc that affects everything else.&8221;

    Yes Mr. Weisman, two legs bad, four legs good, and right now you apparently think that humans just aren't worth saving. This kind of anti-human thinking is the core of modern environmental extremism. True believers should logically lead the way and eradicate themselves. But they don't. Its always those 'other' people who are the problem. No wonder they are commonly called eco-nazis. It fits.
  9. Anna Laslo from Saskatchewan, Canada writes: 2 min - Aug 26, 2006 -

    This is the last 98 seconds of the classic film Planet of the Apes...classic film charlton heston

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUR-OdR3egU

    PEACE!
  10. Open Mike from Vancouver, Canada writes: There's an entire literature (usually just all piled into the gloryhole of science fiction or fantasy) stretching back the late 1800's about depopulation of the earth. Earth Abides, a novel by George R. Stewart, is possibly the closest take to Mr. Weisman's. Kurt Vonnegut's hilarious Cat's Cradle is a lovely ain't-no-one-else satire, as well. Just to name to kind-of recent examples.
  11. David Srigley from TO, Canada writes: Canadians, Europeans, Russians and the Japanese are already self-extinguishing themselves by way of family planning. Now if only the rest of the overpopulated nations would catch-up.
  12. Mr Fijne from Calgary, Canada writes: 'So why not now, while nature still has a chance to reclaim what was hers before we moved in? '

    What a awfully idiotic statement ignorant of Earth history: one would wonder how this author would have enjoyed nature during the Permian extinction 200 Millions years ago!

    'Mr. Weisman, an author, radio producer and professor of international journalism at the University of Arizona, has decided to usurp the role that once belonged to deities impatient with the follies of the human race. He instantly eradicates the species with breathtaking detachment, which not only saves us from environmental death throes but also immediately puts the focus back where it belongs: on the awesome powers of nature to reclaim the Earth despite the human detritus of highways, skyscrapers, nuclear reactors and billions of pesky plastic bags.'

    Woaw, here comes the authority, the specialist: a journalist, glorified by another journalist, writing pseudo rousseauist philosophy for global walarmists decerebres: 'Nature is beautiful' blah blah blah. When I read the words culture & science, I close the Globe and Mail!
  13. Matthew Harris from Toronto, Canada writes: I don't really understand the point of this. So nature is 'beautiful' and it will keep going on after us. Yeah, and the point? If nature is so intrinsically beautiful on its own without our interference or our appreciation, we really shouldn't bother worrying about it, should we? And that's not much of an argument for environmentalism.

    The only valid environmentalist argument is that environmental destruction makes this planet less habitable for sentient species. Any other argument is specious fetishization of a natural process.
  14. mondo pinion from Canada writes: Odd how satisfying it is to read this scenario . . . We really don't like ourselves much these days.

    I have wondered if fertile planets don't give birth periodically. Perhaps the last birth was at the end of the dinosaur age, and the result was today's birds. If so, that gives faeries a really interesting slant -- the magical time-travelling heirs of the present human race. Or perhaps what is born moves on, and we can't see it in from our material womb. But some births end in stillbirth, even in the death of the mother. That too could happen to Earth. Even as, across the galaxies numerous as sand grains on a beach, other planets will are giving birth too, and on the grand scale everything is OK.
  15. James Cyr from Balmertown, Canada writes: Poor Mr. Weisman--does he really hate the human race that much? How does he come to terms with his own existence?
  16. Emma Hawthorne from Canada writes: We should focus on solutions that will: netralize nuclear energy castoffs, end plastic production in favour of biodegradables, and plan a survival strategy for the next ice age, which is fast approaching. Less than 100 years ago, humans acquired technology. Where will we be during the next ice age, less than 20,000 years from now?
  17. Walt O'Brien from Binghamton, New York, United States writes: The object of writing books is to sell books. I am always leery of people waving tracts and screeds telling me I have to believe this or that, at the same time that person is reaching around me to get at the wallet in my back pocket.

    Messianic medievalism, which this writer promotes, comes down to one simple practical joke based on the concept of: 'Your life is worth nothing, and life is meaningless, so you must do this for me.' It is slavemaking in its most basic form and the launching concept for every religious war in human history.

    My response to Herr Doktor Weizman is that he needs to get laid. If the world is going to end, what is he going to do about it?

    I know what I'm NOT going to do: buy his book. Thanks for the heads up, G & M. Sounds like more all-American snake-oil philosophy on the order of what 'Reverend' Jim Jones and the Hale-Bopp comet 'astronauts' used to peddle. It's one way to deal with a bad credit rating and a divorce, but No Kool-Aid for me, thanks.
  18. Leonard Sanche from Canada writes: I agree we are blip between ice ages, but we are also just a part of a massive buildup in biological material after the last mass extinction on Earth, and last I heard (or paid attention) we are fairly sure of one before that as well. The idea that we are somehow subject to special scrutiny or that the present proliferation of species won't survive us before the next sudden change in circumstances (meteor, comet) which levels the planet of life above the size of a shrew or smaller ... is anthropocentric itself. After all we evolved manipulating our environment among the mammal explosion that exists now. Given the changes in our physical selves over the few millenia since agriculture with our relatively stable form as homosapiens, the question should probably be will we even recognize ourselves in a million years. The whole range of grandiose ideas of the environmental movement that place us at the center of the cosmos is animism for which we have quite a rich history. Nothing special or new. I much prefer looking at the larger cosmos and then squirrel down to our planet with what is now becoming known to be a common set of circumstances in terms of being an incubator for organic chemistry. That gives you the right perspective. Whether our species has the capacity to evolve into something relavent in this context is probably the question worth asking. As for an individual's worth ... that question is just pure manipulation outside the context and mind of an individual. It is part of the anthropocentric absolutist 'group think' that some think we are prone to through evolution as a successful adaptive instigator to 'group action'. A switch that has been used to turn off our cognition and help us draw straight lines to quick 'group action' and often institutionalized (which has 'helped us' and 'backfired on us' in the past). Mr. Weisman doesn't trip a switch to action in my reptilian brain stem. His ideas are common and subject to mammalian contemplation.
  19. The Skipper from Canada writes: A smiling passenger pigeon on the cover jacket would have been more appropriate.
    Personally our species just doesn't deserve this wonderful place. We have made such a mess of it!
  20. F/A josquin from van, Canada writes: Martha Stewart (stupid choice of names by the way) says 'This kind of anti-human thinking is the core of modern environmental extremism. '

    I think, I think you are a poop-disturber aren't you. I think you just like to stir it up, cause if you really believe in what you say----well then, there is absolutely no hope for us two-legs. Come on, you are a caring, concerned environmentalist posing as a cranky prick, to kick start more debate, aren't you?
  21. Edmond Dusablon from United States writes: James Cyr -- 'How does he come to terms with his own existence?' Exactly. If he was so concerned about the situation you'd think Weisman would show us 'the way' and take himself out but there are book royalties to enjoy and Tucson's quite a nice place, especially the saguaros and high-altitude pine forest around Mt Lemon.
  22. Keith who is from Ottawa, Canada writes: To whomever thinks eco-nazis are bad, Mother Nature is an even bigger b!tch. I agree with the environmentalists' assertion that arrogance and our reluctance to consider anything other than it's own needs will be the downfall of this species. Human civilizations have collapsed before because they couldn't reconcile themselves and live in balance with their natural surroundings. We are now raping the planet on a global scale, unprecedented in history. By the time people wake-up and start to get serious about the way they live on a global scale, which is what is needed to address this crisis, it will be too late, if its not too late already. Nature doesn't give a damn about our economy or sensibilities. If you cut down all the vegetation, poison the oceans, and pump the natural environment full of carcinogens, nature will stop producing the necessary ingredients for human life, such as air and clean water. Keep chopping down the rain-forest and nature may unleash some new virus she's has tucked away there. The death and eradication of our species would be as insignificant to mother earth as a short bout with the flu.
  23. D. B. from Greater Sask., Canada writes: It's the story of everything and unfortunately, that brings in, for me, the search for 'meaning.' And for me, the best way is the way of the Tao- disrupt the natural flow of things as little as possible. A simple philosophy that applies to all aspects of our lives - health, relationships with others, everything, how we live out our emotions, our passions (we are passionate about some things, aren't we?). Technology- this morning, I was walking on a sunlit and very charming street in my adopted city. A car's horn started beeping loudly and it beeped for several minutes. The owner was nowhere in sight. Its automatic system was broken, perhaps, as was the tranquility of the scene. A very minor illustration of how we disrupt the natural flow of things, but an illustration all the same.

    If there are civilizations in the future, they may not resemble ours. But the tribal element will surely still be there.
  24. Jim Smith from Vancouver, Canada writes: It is remarkable to see the best and the worst of man played out and represented here in the comments pages relating to this article. Thanks everyone for the reality check.
  25. Keith who is from Ottawa, Canada writes: Nature doesn't judge things along the lines of 'good' or 'bad'. Nature only recognizes balance and imbalance. Where there is imbalance, nature brings about balance. If man creates imbalance in nature, nature will eliminate that imbalance. Our notions of 'good' and 'bad' are another example of human arrogance. Nature is indifferent to these concepts.
  26. Mr Fijne from Calgary, Canada writes: So this pseudo philosophy book is the object of a full, massive PROMOTION in the Globe and Maird: another journalist wrote a review and thus can also promote her upcoming book... Woaw rub my back and i'll rub yours... if it continues we'll get a third journalist writing an apology of terrorism and nuclear war to condone humans stopping producing CO2... as long of course that journalists are sacred LOL.
  27. The Objectivist from Canada writes: myna johnstone it is great for the planet that you have abandon your car, but I suspect you're an urban 20 something - we were all holier than though when we were 20 somethings, right? That isn't meant as an attack, its meant to point out that your paradigm and ease at lifestyle change is maybe not scalable to others, lets wait 15 years when there's a bunch of rug rats and hubby commuting to a job in the burbs or even living in the burbs (god forbid right) because you don't have $2m for a 4 bedroom house in a nice safe area of the city. or even put all that aside, whats your consumption profile today? did the soil that grew your food get tilled with a peddle powered tractor, or the truck that brought it to town or the hydro that powers your computer? switching to the bike is irrelevant, we all cast a very large shadow on the environment. were the population static, one could argue that these drops in the bucket will make a difference. however look at a historical graph of the worlds population - with an x axis of a few thousand years, the line recently has gone almost vertical. Those drops are drummed out by the tidal wave that is population growth. If you believe, as i do, that man's foot print is doing too much damage to the planet, and you look at both consumption per unit and population trends, there is no logical alternative but to conclude that we must reverse the trend in population growth especially among the high consumption nations. The only ones who can truly speak as the righteous would those living self sufficiently on a few acres tilling the soil with a mule. not to many of those around are there. otherwise you to are part of destroying the environment. unless you are willing to change and go stand behind the mule, the only position for self preservation thatstands up to scrutiny and logic is to stop population growth and in fact look to reverse it. Else we must just end up behind the mule anyway
  28. Rob Backhouse from Comox, Canada writes: The collective 'we' are simply a bad case of planetary acne. As the planet contiues to mature this irritating condition will pass.
  29. Scotty Dont from United States writes: Nature is only beautiful because humans are here to perceive it as being so.
  30. I. M. Al Wayswright (not opinionated) from Canada writes: I agree with the author Mr. Weismann (is that wiseman in German?) on three points:
    1) We will all die (probably not at the same time)
    2) Life will go on
    3) We, the human species, are arrogant

    The rest is all speculation.
  31. Jeremy F from Alberta, Canada writes: And nobody is going to read this guys book, so why are we even having this discussion? The only way to change anything in life is for someone to make the first step and become a role-model to others. Monkey see, monkey do, just like Planet of the Apes:D
  32. Some Guy from Canada writes: To the anti-environmentalist troglodytes who habitually throw tantrums at anything that hints at conservation,

    Relax. It's just a book and a product of one's imagination. Try reading some once in a while.
  33. William Bailey from Ottawa, Canada writes: Every living thing considers itself the centre of things. Does the author think flies care about other flies, let alone other species? If flies were as smart as people, they'd build factories and cover the world in sugar. Human share quite a few genes with flies, fish, and even bacteria - we weren't dropped on the earth a few hundred thousand years ago to wreak havoc. We evolved with every other living thing and we're as much a part of nature as every other living thing. Our nuclear power plants are as natural as termite mounds and coral reefs.

    Of course we should try to minimize our impact on our environment for our own sake, but we should be very wary of grandiose visions like Weisman's. They have more to do with millenarianism than with science. The idea that the human race will be destroyed in great natural catastrophe due to our sins is older than the Bible. Even dressed up as environmentalism, it's still bunk.
  34. Jack Box from Grey County, Canada writes: This book sounds really dumb and does nothing to solve any of the practical problems of the world; the author sounds like one of those people Margaret Wente was writing about today...
  35. Emma Hawthorne from Canada writes: The Planet of the Apes clip of the last 20 or so seconds is really excellent. Thanks to the poster above who provided it. Here's the link.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUR-OdR3egU
  36. Sarah Bee from Canada writes: Mr. Fijne writes: When I read the words culture & science, I close the Globe and Mail!

    Obviously not, as you continue to pollute not only the planet but all the G&M discussion boards, too.
  37. Pauline Papp from Toronto, Canada writes: ...Is this supposed to be original?

    next
  38. Jean Stewart from Victoria, Canada writes: I'm devastated by the book review and the article about this book. Not because I disagree with it, just the opposite, I see us as being at the most stupid, testosterone ridden, egotistical, fundamentalist and headlong plunge ever. We fight about everything. We are the only species that denigrates the other half of our species. We want to short term solve some of our perceived demographic skew by upping the birth rate and so on.....In the 60's some people worried about over population. Some pointed to third world countries but some of us realized it was our responsibility to limit our child bearing here. And we did. We need responsible criticism on subjects like that. We need help with getting in touch with our better selves and help with realizing just what toll each of us takes on the earth. Maybe its too late. But what if it's not. Marilyn Rose in Victoria
  39. D. B. from Greater Sask., Canada writes: Mr. Fijne does not realize that the word 'culture' means 'cultivate,' as in 'agriculture.' And agriculture must certainly rank as one of the greatest scientific achievements ever, if not the greatest. But look at how fast nature would undo this achievement if we weren't around to keep it alive (wheat would be replaced by wild grass; garden vegetables replaced by inedible strains in how long- 20 years?).

    Separating science and culture- now that is a dangerous thing to do!
  40. grover station from Hamilton, Canada writes: Love is the answer.
  41. D Q from Canada writes: ...the term "mental masturbation" comes to mind...
  42. Peter Cromerovich from Erehwon, Canada writes: martha stewart from Canada writes: "Two legs bad, four legs good."
    That is sad for birds, but really that statement has insufficient nuance. What about 6 legs and 8 legs, not to mention millipedes and centipedes? What about those bacteria, viruses and prions etc. with no legs at all? Are they good or bad in your binary world?
  43. Mr. Jones from Canada writes: Pete, turn off the computer and go read a book...
  44. Arec Bardwin from Canada writes: My name is eric and I'm a socialist.

    I hate hate hate people. We're like a virus, I hate myself, I hate humanity, I hate capitalism.

    I'm filled with so much hate. I loath everything the western world has done. I hate cars, I hate farms, I hate roads, I hate skyscrapers, I hate medicine, I hate human happiness, I hate computers, I hate love, I hate sports, and I really hate the wealthy.

    The world will only be right when the human virus has been eradicated. We are not natural; we spread and destroy.
    Only Jack Layton can instill the correct amount of human suffering that we deserve.
    Vote NDP


  45. GlynnMhor of Skywall from Canada writes: Arec Bardwin from Canada writes: "My name is eric and I'm a socialist. I hate hate hate people. We're like a virus, I hate myself, I hate humanity, I hate capitalism."

    Well, I hate to say it, but you sound typical of far too many self-described 'socialists'.

    If you feel so strongly, snuff yourself in some environmentally neutral fashion and have done with the life you so despise.
  46. martha stewart from Canada writes: Peter Cromerovich from Erehwon, Canada writes: martha stewart from Canada writes: "Two legs bad, four legs good." ... in your binary world?"

    Peter - I'm just quoting Orwell's 'Animal Farm' and you missed my sarcasm I guess. Hopefully my 1:07 post which followed up on this will clarify my point.
  47. martha stewart from Canada writes: GlynnMhor of Skywall - Looks to me like Arec Bardwin was just being completely sarcastic and fictional with his "I'm a socialist" post. Maybe he works in Horrywood? But I do agree with your last line for all those zealots - like the author of this book - who believe that the world would be better without humans.

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top