top 200 commentsshow 500

[–]scotlandfig 141 points142 points ago

just so we're clear here, "i'm not an environmentalist"...but if you agree with this message why the strange need to distance yourself from environmentalism?

[–]PurpleSfinx 55 points56 points ago

Because redditors don't want to believe it, but are actually very conservative.

[–]AeBeeEll 50 points51 points ago

Yeah, the only liberal policies redditors embrace are the ones that directly benefit them. In twenty years' time, when pot is legal, and the controversy over online piracy is settled one way or another, and the average redditor is earning enough money that taxes hurt them more than tuition rates, they'll all be voting Republican.

[–]CrawstonWaffle 3 points4 points ago

They truly are the Baby Boomer's children.

[–]cdcox 2 points3 points ago

I think it's more that people tend to associate labels with the worst of a movement. Also humans love being special and imagining their views can't be easily summarized by a word.

[–]IAMAGiraffeTrustMe 10 points11 points ago

Todays liberals are tomorrow's conservatives.

[–]aelisef 10 points11 points ago

Says every conservative, and only conservatives.

[–]velocipotamus 6 points7 points ago

I wish everyone who said this could meet my parents, both in their mid-50s, who've voted liberally their entire lives...

[–]Eminemineminem 6 points7 points ago

I think because if you label yourself as an environmentalist you're seen as a tree hugger who hates everything artificial. In all seriousness, if you take time/effort to recycle, don't litter, carpool when you can, support efforts for clean energy, and just make a small effort into making a cleaner world for everyone you are an environmentalist. You may just not be an extremist about it.

[–]vazura 2 points3 points ago

I can say I agree with something, but that doesn't make me an activist.

[–]strangethingtowield 352 points353 points ago

Turns out that high-rise cities are actually a good way to reduce our damage to mossy rainforests. By concentrating our activity in a small area, we minimize the resources wasted in moving people and things between places.

[–]GrinningPariah 125 points126 points ago

I was going to point this out myself. The utter destruction of nature is always symbolized by a high-rise city, but in reality low-density sprawl is far worse for the environment.

[–]cito-cy 12 points13 points ago

Yeah. On top of the smaller amount of land used to house more people, the density of Hong Kong also enables a very high quality public transport system. 90% of trips in the city are made by public transport, and the different bus and rail systems are actually profitable. Per capita energy usage in the city is among the lowest in the developed world.

[–]JPong 2 points3 points ago

And walking/biking also naturally become viable modes of transportation.

[–]BlackSnakeMoans 44 points45 points ago

But... but the buildings are so big and and scary. :(

[–]TheZenji 3 points4 points ago

So we build them beautifully... artistic architecture and all that.

[–]taneq 39 points40 points ago

INDUSTRY BAD HUMANS BAD NATURAL SCENERY GOOD

Pro tip: Unless you're unusually outdoorsy you'd probably die of starvation in "nature". It's as unfriendly to us as we are to it, that's why we bothered with being humans (ie. developing tools, agriculture, permanent residences, cooking, weaponry, plumbing, supply chains, industry, mass production, automobiles, supermarkets, telecommunications, computers...) instead of just sitting around eating berries and accepting that eventually we'll be eaten by a tiger.

[–]Burge97 3 points4 points ago

One great thing is modern buildings are also becoming far more environmentally friendly. One of the latest building ideas are "algae generators" which envelope buildings, creating future power, clean air and insulation.

[–]Unfortunate_truth5 6 points7 points ago

I like chicks with dicks. How about you?

[–]Toby-one 34 points35 points ago

I always think of this comic when I hear we are killing the earth/nature

[–]Grammer_NotZ 2 points3 points ago

I figured this was going to be the top comment

[–]DimlightHero 1 point2 points ago

That is such a powerful comic, I was about to link it.

[–]FriendlyCommie 26 points27 points ago

To quote Ian Malcolm: "The Earth is not in danger - we are in danger. We don't have the capacity to save the world, or destroy it, but we might be able to save ourselves."

[–]deadjawa 2 points3 points ago

I like how the belief that the Earth (a giant rock floating through space) doesnt care what humans do is so controversial that he cant even get through his sketch without being quite heavily heckled. People are crazy.

[–]_zoso_ 15 points16 points ago

Still, for each km2 of city, we need many hundreds more km2 of land taken up by farming, manufacturing and water collection. Yes, cities have a smaller footprint than detached houses in suburbia, but its not like there is zero impact. Farm land is the really big consumer of land overall, cities don't change that.

[–]orangeybroc 8 points9 points ago

Nature has big nips

[–]Hedgesmog 40 points41 points ago

On top of that... Everything we've ever built is well... natural. Our cities ARE nature, they're our nests. Those roads too.

Everything. Is. Natural.

[–]Ragnalypse 121 points122 points ago

In that sense, the word natural is meaningless.

[–]ShitsAndGigglesSake 41 points42 points ago

Naturally.

[–]HigherFive 11 points12 points ago

Look, if I throw the ball to first base, somebody's gotta get it. Now who has it?

[–]ikilledyourcat 6 points7 points ago

yes

[–]HigherFive 0 points1 point ago

Who?

[–]turver -1 points0 points ago

No, where has got the ball now.

[–]Nidies 26 points27 points ago

pretty much.

[–]ilasnow 19 points20 points ago

So is the word chemical. In fact, I'm going to go in the kitchen and pour myself a nice big glass of chemicals right now.

The differences between chemical and natural are imaginary.

[–]ssd0004 40 points41 points ago

I agree, but in the context of ecological sustainability its a rather useless technicality.

[–]The_Adventurist 28 points29 points ago

But the picture is portraying all of humanity and industry as evil and nature as the pacifist good when, in reality, we are the same thing and represent the lengths of nature's abilities. Humans tend to see themselves as above or at least different from nature, but we're not. Brain parasites are also natural.

"Nature" isn't just Fern Gully.

[–]Parker307 0 points1 point ago

This is why our population will boom and bust like other living things.

[–]rasputine 10 points11 points ago

In a philosophical sense you can make that claim.

The problem lies in that in the very literal sense, the word "nature" means "Not created by people", vs. Artificial, which means "People did that shit."

[–]green_clock 13 points14 points ago

I think you're confused about the definitions of the words natural and synthetic - you can't simply lump anything that has been made by mankind into the 'natural' category just becase mankind itself is natural. Natural is what occurs in nature without humankind. E.g. oil is natural, plastic is synthetic. Clay is natural, concrete is synthetic. Look it up.

[–]worn 10 points11 points ago

Check this comic.

From abstrusegoose.com, but since it's down right now, I'm linking to the picture.

[–]vinfx 2 points3 points ago

It's also natural for over populated species to die out in swaths of huge numbers. Only problem is. Few care when it's some flightless bird on an island, but a lot care when it's human civilization.

[–]Arrythenameless 2 points3 points ago

"Triumph of the City," by Edward Glaeser, gives a great account of this.

[–]FatherEarth 2 points3 points ago

It's the idea of pollution that's being conveyed.

[–]cometparty 2 points3 points ago

But the problem is that cities, no matter how dense, still require the importation of resources. So they still have a harmful effect on the environment.

[–]TimeWaitsForNoMan 16 points17 points ago

ITT: nature semantics

[–]KrunchyKale 154 points155 points ago

Why is nature always a chill sexy plant lady?

I want to see a classy picture of nature personified as the scary, uncaring, parasite-and-death bitchface it is, for once.

[–]GeraldKlem 46 points47 points ago

Probably in reference to Greek mythology such as Gaia.

[–]G0VERNMENT 27 points28 points ago

Gaia was not a very nice deity. She was pretty spiteful.

[–]heyangelyouthesexy 23 points24 points ago

well what do you expect when your own son tries to rape you??

Zeus control your GODDAMN DICK FOR FUCK'S SAKE!!!

[–]Frix 14 points15 points ago

Gaia is not Zeus's mother...

Rhea is Zeus's mother while Gaia was Rhea's mother.

So Gaia was his grandmother and Uranus his grandfather.

On a similar note: Zeus's father was "Cronus" and not "Chronos", the ruler of time, as some people seem to think. Cronus was ALSO the son of Gaia and Uranus. And he castrated and overthrew his own father (as well as almost all his brothers and sisters) just like Zeus would do to him later.

Let's just family dinners on OIympus were pretty awkward...

[–]G0VERNMENT 5 points6 points ago

Also, it was Oranos not Uranus.

[–]gangbangtang 2 points3 points ago

Wanting to castrate someone who is constantly raping you is spiteful?

[–]Kode47 20 points21 points ago

No, still too human. I want something with massive snakes that can strangle people, worms that grow inside living brains, acid spit that horribly burn skin off.

I need Australia.

[–]pheedback 3 points4 points ago

It's actually both - nature is beautiful as well sinister. We are made of it.

How ever toxic runoff and chemicals being dumped into the oceans is not beautiful, just sinister.

Personally I'm not into this picture because it over simplifies things. Our technology got us out of the constant fear of living in the wild (by technology I mean even basics like shelter). Cities can be good, dense populations give the opportunity to save pristine wild land. But how do we find a balance where we can be comfortable and free of the dangers of living in the wild yet not be destructive in a way that could ultimately destroy ourselves?

[–]Dysgalty 5 points6 points ago

The pollution is the sinister side of civilization much like the sinister side of nature has Tsunamis, volcanoes, and what have you.

[–]bunnymunro40 81 points82 points ago

subtle.

[–]JiggamanOnATram 73 points74 points ago

OMG SO DEEP!

[–]Izawwlgood 225 points226 points ago

I'll just repeat the same thing I said the last time this was reposted; the gun is facing the wrong way. We aren't going to kill the Earth, we'll simply kill our ability to stay on it.

[–]Womec 12 points13 points ago

The Earth is fine, its the people that are fucked. -George Carlin

[–]dopafiend 55 points56 points ago

I hear that repeated over and over but it's really being a little obtuse to ignore the fact that we could likely take a lot of other flora and fauna with us on our way out.

[–]The_Adventurist 67 points68 points ago

So? It's happened many times before and will happen many times again (assuming a planet killer meteorite doesn't blow the earth to pieces anytime soon).

"Nature" always endures.

[–]gangbangtang 5 points6 points ago

Yes of course life will endure.

But those who love nature see beauty in what it is now. We care that we not kill the whales and dolphins, and polar bears, and all the other creatures and ecosystems that grace Earth now, no matter what other beautiful creatures will come to be once we are gone.

It's a shame that we destroy such beauty now.

[–]BioQuark 6 points7 points ago

Yes, of course it has happened before and will happen again, but the point is that it's happening faster than ever (besides mass extinction events) and that unfortunately, we have the means to prevent it from happening to this extent, but aren't using them.

[–]smokinDND 3 points4 points ago

I can't understand why this comment has more votes than the previous one. sure it is a valid point, but is it the winning argument?

It's like saying lets just trash the place, nature will come an clean it anyways.

[–]Urban_Savage 0 points1 point ago

Every single organism in existence that lives on only one plant WILL go extinct, no exceptions.

[–]Womec 11 points12 points ago

We're by far not the worst thing that has happened to life on Earth, not even close. In fact we are probably the best thing that has happened to life as we know it and the fact that we have the ability and may have already spread the "Earth Strain" as some call it to other worlds and possibly eventually throughout the galaxy.

Even if we 'destroy' the Earth and its ecosystems and maybe even ourselves (doubtful; we are quite resilient clever little bastards.) the Earth will be fine its not going anywhere and if the many disasters of global scale that wiped out 90% of life on Earth are anything to show for it, life, even if we tried to wipe it out won't be going anywhere anytime soon either. If anyone is fucked, its certainly not Earth (well at least until the sun has something to say about it), its certainly not the life around us, its us who are fucked, the planet's fine and will be fine no matter what hell we put it though. Maybe we are just another evolutionary deadend, a footnote in Earth's vast history, also doubtful given what we have done in such a short amount of time, but something to think about and to keep our wits about us which has come quite in handy indeed, so far anyways.

[–]Kode47 5 points6 points ago

Look at it this way, soon (or even now), we can deflect an asteroid or something from hitting the planet. Then the Earth will owe us.

Edit: spelling.

[–]provokedcarp 7 points8 points ago

Now we just need an asteroid...

Somehow I feel like this is similar to a nerd's dream of defending a lady from a brute in order to win her over.

[–]Kode47 3 points4 points ago

Now we just need an asteroid...

Ever seen Starship Troopers?

[–]howtojump 3 points4 points ago

Of course we would, but life will go on.

There have been quite a few near-extermination events on Earth but there are always some critters that make it through.

[–]binklsbury 4 points5 points ago

Life will find a way

http://i.imgur.com/Qdiv2Hm.jpg

[–]LLKjr 8 points9 points ago

To me, the knife was overkill.

[–]Diorannael 50 points51 points ago

To be fair, she started it.

[–]rumckle 26 points27 points ago

Mother nature's been trying to kill us for millennia, but when we finally start winning all of a sudden it's not fair.

[–]AeBeeEll 5 points6 points ago

"Oh, so mother nature needs a favor? Well, maybe she should have thought of that when she was besetting us with droughts and floods and poison monkeys. "

[–]EatPrayQueef 6 points7 points ago

I'd tap mother nature.

[–]Otsuko 4 points5 points ago

A nagant

[–]dhockey63 4 points5 points ago

to be far, mother nature is pretty brutal to humans as well. There's a reason we spent centuries perfecting the house

[–]FuturePrimitive 2 points3 points ago

Why aren't you an environmentalist??

[–]spiffyclip 37 points38 points ago

Why would you not be an environmentalist? As far as I know environmentalists try to preserve and protect the environment, are there people opposed to that view?

[–]daddys_lil_soldier 9 points10 points ago

To put it simply, yes. There are people who oppose that view.

Edit: Grammar is not my friend at this time of the night/morning.

[–]The_Adventurist 14 points15 points ago

We're looking at you, China.

Though, mostly so we don't have to look at ourselves first.

[–]TimeWaitsForNoMan 27 points28 points ago

Yeah, there are, and a good deal of them are on reddit. They see environmentalism a vapid, bleeding-heart pursuit without merit because of the occasional hippie claiming trees have feelings. It's kind of like feminism. The idea is sound: people advocating for the equal rights and opportunities of both genders. But there's a good deal of extremists feminists with radical opinions, upon which many base their conception of the particular school of thought.

[–]Reshimon 0 points1 point ago

I think it is the name of feminism, sounds like it is for womens rights rather than for peoples rights.

[–]oozles 5 points6 points ago

Some people let the image they of a group completely change what the actual core idea of the group is. They hear environmentalist, they think tree hugging jobless hippies who want to make it more expensive to go to work and think people should live in caves.

See also: Feminist

[–]buckykat 20 points21 points ago

hell with that. nature isn't some benevolent mother, waiting to take us in to all live in peace and harmony. nature is cold and dark and savage and toothy.

nature is smallpox and earthquakes and billions of pointless deaths. it is the greatest conceivable enemy.

now, all that isn't to say that we don't need to do a better job of fixing the biosphere. but agreeing to break it slower is not a solution that makes any fucking sense, nor is casting human civilization as the villain of the piece.

aaand i see now that this is /r/pics and i might as well be pissing into the wind. c'est la vie.

[–]Jeffy29 2 points3 points ago

Nature is nor lawful evil nor lawful good - by definition a neutral (also called Nature's alignment)

[–]watsername 4 points5 points ago

Anyone else notice her tree nipple?

[–]TheBaconsmith 6 points7 points ago

Why the fuck is there a knife on the revolver? What is this? Gears of War?

[–]MrFatalistic 3 points4 points ago

I'm not a folding chair, but this speaks to people.

[–]Jesus_luvs_Jenkem 11 points12 points ago

So brave

[–]Vakieh 3 points4 points ago

I like how it implies men are evil industrial tycoons, and women the peaceful nature loving waifs. Wonder what the sort of reaction would be were the genders reversed...

[–]KissMyAsthma321 18 points19 points ago

Stupid bullshit propaganda. Reality isn't so black and white, it's not good vs evil. It's ugly, and it's complicated.

Let's see you give up your precious internet, your electricity, your clothes, even your home. Even still, in the end, it's us vs ourselves, nature most likely will have survived whatever minuscule thing we throw.

[–]enginedriver 0 points1 point ago

Don't get me wrong this piece is exceptionally well done technically but I really don't like art like this. It's so overt, it's gauche, it's like something you'd see hanging on the wall at a dentists or something. It's like they've gone 'heh it's a metaphor'

[–]lawlshane 0 points1 point ago

Wow this is so subtle and not heavy handed at all!!1

[–]CashMoneyChina 0 points1 point ago

I'M NOT AN ENVIRONMENTALIST (UNLESS YOU ARE, THEN I AM), BUT THIS IS ONE BADASS PICTURE.

[–]TheLastManitee 0 points1 point ago

"im not an asshole, but I'm not going to credit anyone for this"

[–]IsThatTana 8 points9 points ago

Why aren't you an environmentalist?

[–]Warlach 2 points3 points ago

TIL it's a bad thing to be an environmentalist.

I guess it's like living on a ship your whole life and being all "You know what? Fuck boats, what have they ever done for us." right?

[–]JustDontKnowDude -2 points-1 points ago

Humans are part of the environment, along with cities. It's is so amazingly stupid people still consider it "unnatural". You're an idiot.

I can understand not liking it and they way we treat the earth, but goddamn if I hear these environmentalists fucks say they hate big cities and farming one more time I'm going to start a forest fire.

[–]TimeWaitsForNoMan 10 points11 points ago

Those "environmentalist fucks" are probably hating on unsustainable cities and farms. As we're well on our way to an ecological disaster which will fundamentally change human civilization, we can't really afford NOT to ask the hard questions.

[–]mattindustries 8 points9 points ago

Cities are great, sprawl is not; farming is great, wastefulness is not. Cities like Phoenix and L.A. are waaay to spread out.

[–]mrjosemeehan 7 points8 points ago

environmentalist fucks say they hate big cities and farming

I think you're mistaking anarcho-primitivists for environmentalists. Environmentalists tend to be down with responsible and sustainable farming.

[–]AndrewZed1 1 point2 points ago

I know the only way for something to be "unnatural" is to be something not part of this universe. Just something other than this.

[–]ikkake 2 points3 points ago

Humans are part of the environment, along with cities. It's is so amazingly stupid people still consider it "unnatural". You're an idiot.

There is one major difference between natural and human. Natural stuff is based on cycles and very quick recycling and reuse of materials. Stuff we make is made once and then degenerates for a very long time and is pretty much unusable by anything else. (so far)

[–]smoochieboochies 2 points3 points ago

To be a human on Earth is to be an environmentalist.

[–]AndrewElmore 2 points3 points ago

Subtle.

[–]Illford 0 points1 point ago

except if discovery has taught me anything is that if we all disappeared tomorrow nature would act like we were never there. we are less of a gun more of a scratch.

[–]seann999 0 points1 point ago

Well, this thread backfired...

[–]imPrettyTall -1 points0 points ago

I'm not an enviormentalist, nor does my upvote represent a whole lot.

[–]soulbend 0 points1 point ago

By the time we advance enough to flourish without exploiting the planet's ecology, we will probably have destroyed most of it. I only hope that humanity or whatever succeeds it embraces diversity in some way, just as evolution does, to replace the billions of years of diversity evolution has brought this planet. Can you imagine all of the details and information of life on earth replaced by one species with one single-minded goal? I think that would be terrible. It's true that all life we know of only has one main goal, to reproduce, but if we were able to actively prevent anything else other than one type of entity to do that, even if that species reached so-called perfection and survived until the heat death of the universe, it would be nothing but boring.

[–]Whoops_Shot_Marvin 1 point2 points ago

can some one make this into a wallpaper for a widescreen moniter for me?!

[–]impressive 1 point2 points ago

Nipple tree.

[–]senorbutts -1 points0 points ago

Awesome picture but why is that the man has to be the bad guy

[–]tomtermite 0 points1 point ago

Cities are not the problem -- they are where civilizations are born, and are more environmentally sustainable IMHO

[–]CraftOfWord 0 points1 point ago

That picture is stunning

[–]ZackNasty -1 points0 points ago

Heh heh... titty.

[–]directzero 0 points1 point ago

Awesome. Any 1920x1080 versions around?

[–]JimmyDaGent 0 points1 point ago

mankind about to kill gaia

seems pretty accurate about our situation

[–]starfries 0 points1 point ago

Why does the gun have lips!?

[–]EdGG 0 points1 point ago

I've been looking for Kratos for a full 10 minutes...

[–]eiv 1 point2 points ago

"I'm ignorant, but I like kitch!"

[–]cha0s 0 points1 point ago

The caption of this picture should be "You can keep the smallpox, bitch."

[–]brekus 1 point2 points ago

So what you're anti-environment? Is that a thing?

[–]bright_yellow_vest -2 points-1 points ago

Is.. Is that a.. Tree nipple?

[–]balamory 0 points1 point ago

You see I immediately think of tsunami's earthquakes and eruptions...

[–]FreyWill 0 points1 point ago

How can anyone say they aren't an environmentalist? Do you hate where you sleep?

[–]Relish11 1 point2 points ago

Meh, the artist is trying too hard with this one.

[–]chase2020 0 points1 point ago

Mother earth's forehead is almost as big as angelina jolie's

[–]tedstyle -1 points0 points ago

You think that humans are actually signficant enough to destroy the Earth?? that's called Ego.

[–]spock_block 0 points1 point ago

Seriously? Not even Mother Nature get's away without a huge rack and lipstick.

[–]Concoelacanth 0 points1 point ago

The picture needs nature pointing a gun right back.

[–]b1gtym1n 0 points1 point ago

A whole lot of karma that you reposted.

[–]marekknowak 0 points1 point ago

Just the new environmentalism religion completely insane propaganda.

[–]dijitalia 0 points1 point ago

Why aren't you an environmentalist? I think everybody should be sensitive to and respect our environment.

[–]Bluedemonfox 0 points1 point ago

Mother nature can just puke lava on everything.

[–]NudgeMyNoodle 0 points1 point ago

i too have been playing guild wars recently

[–]YoungPhillieCO 1 point2 points ago

I like my metaphors like I like my women: Not heavy enough to crush me, and not tacky as fuck.

Sorry, but this one isn't doing it for me.

[–]scottybee915 -1 points0 points ago

Yes, you are an environmentalist. Pussy.

[–]bluegoon 0 points1 point ago

You should totally print this on a black Tshirt.

[–]Buckaroosamurai 0 points1 point ago

I think this Simpson's reference is appropriate:

Mr. Burns: Oh, so mother nature needs a favor? Well, maybe she should have thought of that when she was besetting us with droughts and floods and poison monkeys.

[–]hummusntabouli 1 point2 points ago

How could someone not be an environmentalist?

[–]PurpleSfinx 0 points1 point ago

Okay what the hell is up with /r/pics right now? It's full of great, interesting pictures that aren't all reposts. Did the mods decide to start banning dead relative posts or something? Usually the front page would just be filled with cancer victims.

[–]Mr-Nemo -1 points0 points ago

Why does it haaaaaaaaave to be a gun? Sheesh.

[–]karlbirkir 0 points1 point ago

How can you not be an environmentalist?

[–]Visura -1 points0 points ago

Tits or GTFO

[–]Outofmany -1 points0 points ago

Kind of trite especially attempting to portray it as a zero sum game, ostensibly for shock value. This is an issue that has been in the public consciousness for over 50 years, at what point does re-hashing the same shit get old?

[–]reddKidney 0 points1 point ago

that nature is not a person and that even if it did have emotions it would not give a fuck about any of that crap as it is going to continue to murder life in the most horrible violent ways possible.

[–]KoreanDogEater 0 points1 point ago

If I meet something that creepy looking i might shoot it too.

[–]Weekend_Racist -1 points0 points ago

Senior art projects FTW!

[–]iamsofired -1 points0 points ago

If you have kids your part of the problem - hippy or no hippy.

[–]rex0b 0 points1 point ago

my immediate thought was King Kong

[–]Sarastrasza 1 point2 points ago

[–]KommodoreAU 1 point2 points ago

The city on the gun is a mix of Brisbane and Melbourne I think, since no one has mentioned it yet.

[–]cpu_outlet 0 points1 point ago

That barrel looks a little flaccid.

[–]Ishy55 0 points1 point ago

repost from /r/wallpapers

[–]Mokky 0 points1 point ago

Only thing i can think of when seeing this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7W33HRc1A6c

[–]Sugar_Skull 0 points1 point ago

Well why aren't you?

[–]tylerxedge 0 points1 point ago

Why do you have to be an environmentalist to like this picture?

[–]WTFnoAvailableNames 0 points1 point ago

This is bullshit. We are as much nature as trees and animals are. Stop worrying about the planet. We're the ones who are fucked.

[–]ValleyOfTheMountain 0 points1 point ago

the lip on the end of the gun is a really creepy touch

[–]Confozedperson 1 point2 points ago

LOOK OUT MOTHER NATURE HE'S GOT A KNIFE ON THE GUN. HE AIN'T PLAYING.

[–]Shardaine 0 points1 point ago

Does anyone know how to make this a high res pic for my desktop image?

[–]matthias7600 1 point2 points ago

Makes zero sense. The only thing threatened by our way of life is our own existence.

When the time comes, the Earth will eradicate us in a heartbeat.

[–]WhiteRaven42 1 point2 points ago

Because anthropomorphizing a planet or an ecosystem is the only possibly way to fool a person into pretending to care what happens to the environment.

[–]xphateslater 0 points1 point ago

I think that people tend to forget that we as hunans, are part of nature too. We're just animals like any other species.

[–]Ptylerdactyl 0 points1 point ago

As naturally-evolved organisms, there are a multitude of things that nature has designed generally and specifically to kill us.

Now, I think we're smart enough to find a balance so it isn't an either-or, us-or-nature relationship. But make no mistake, a lone human in deep "nature" like a rain forest or a desert... nature won't seem so motherly. It genuinely doesn't care if a single being lives or dies.

[–]LuvBacon 0 points1 point ago

The difference between an environmentalist and a developer is that the environmentalist already lives there.

[–]Bouffy 0 points1 point ago

REPOST

[–]TheBigVitus 0 points1 point ago

IT'S COMING RIGHT FOR US, NED!

[–]Timepunch 0 points1 point ago

Nature and industry wants to make out with eacother the hand representing humanity helps industry and nature to reach eacother so they finally can be togheter.

[–]TheVanguardBandit -1 points0 points ago

I love these kinds of posters, because they are made using computers, made with components made by plants that could be polluting the environment.

If they want to make a point, they should use naturally occurring mediums. Just sayin.

[–]ketfu 0 points1 point ago

Damn! You guys see the nipple on Mother Earth?

[–]alragusa 0 points1 point ago

Anyone see this from the other side?

Gaia has the high ground. Man builds cities to defend ourselves from nature. It is only our industry and ingenuity that allows us to thrive in a dangerous world where heat, cold, animals and natural disasters could kill us.

[–]BoSquared 0 points1 point ago

By destroying the environment we're only destroying ourselves. Nature is more resilient than we give it credit for and could easily bounce back in mere decades because plants adapt faster than humans. We will be dead long before nature is. Worry about us, not the environment.

[–]superaldo94 0 points1 point ago

To be fair, I'm quite happy not living in the wild with millions of bugs and deadly creatures. Fuck that! I hate centipedes and spiders, I don't want to fear them crawling up my legs as I try to sleep.

[–]coffeemug20 -1 points0 points ago

I wonder how many of the people that rally behind this image live in the large metropolitan areas represented in the gun. Not a whole lot of environmentalists moving out to live in the woods like Walt Whitman. With that being said, if there are any environmentalist out there who have sacrificed their urban lives for a more peaceful and less intrusive life in a rural area I applaud your choice.

[–]dkey1983 -1 points0 points ago

Fucking luddites...

[–]mayowarlord 0 points1 point ago

This is actually one of my rotating desktops from when it was posted before.

[–]jacls0608 0 points1 point ago

Overly preachy and not subtle at all. Additionally, this looks like a photoshop I saw kids doing in highschool. Not a fan, personally.

[–]BrutishElf 1 point2 points ago

I posted this a week ago, 3 karma!

[–]inanecathode -1 points0 points ago

This is a shitty political poem in picture form.

[–]Qumbo 0 points1 point ago

cool repost

[–]Oboyo 1 point2 points ago

life's not a bitch, life is a beautiful woman .. you only call her a bitch because she won't let you get that pussy

is what I think of when I see this photo

[–]patchesmalone10 0 points1 point ago

What you don't see in this picture is the spiders, vermin, and disease that mother nature is covered with. I wouldn't recommend shooting her, maybe just spray her down with some stuff.