![]() 08/16/2013 at 22:30 • Filed to: Food For Thought | ![]() | ![]() |
Need I say more?
Night folks!
![]() 08/16/2013 at 22:35 |
|
*cough cough*
![]() 08/16/2013 at 22:44 |
|
The funny part?
The shopping cart has more cargo space, a bigger engine and gets to sixty faster on fewer MPG.
Amiright people?
![]() 08/16/2013 at 22:46 |
|
Honestly, I tried to come back with something witty but this picture left me utterly and truly speechless... Congratulations sir, you win 1 internet
![]() 08/16/2013 at 22:47 |
|
We do hope to see our children have better lives and outshine us. It only makes sense that the next generation would be a Flintstone mobile.
![]() 08/16/2013 at 22:49 |
|
Yay! I'll make sure to spend it wisely.
![]() 08/16/2013 at 23:33 |
|
I loved the one I had when I was two and I suspect that person loves theirs just as much. If you're going to own a smart, that's the paint scheme to go with.
![]() 08/16/2013 at 23:34 |
|
See? That right there?
"We do hope to see our children have better lives and outshine us."
Sure. We do. But the we I'm speaking of, we are are but a few generations in the grand scheme of human exitence. For the vast majority of our existence we were satisfied with the idea, "We do hope to see our children outlive us."
The idea that you, parental unit, had raised your young and in your passing, they remained, was good enough. Job done. Rest easy, old soul. At least, this is what many anthropologists, historians and other egg brained types have put down. Of course, if you believe the world in no more then 6,000 years old... well, this is a pointless discussion as we'll never find a common ground. The idea that our young not only outlive us, but live better then us, seems to be a fairly recent development... that is, speaking in terms of the entirety of human existence which, depending on your school of thought, could be anywhere from 300,000 years to million or more but, it seems that many scholars agree that for the majority of modern human development (homo sapien forward) the expectation was not, as you suggest, given that the same majority of time was spent living egalitarian hunter-gatherer societies or early agricutural (prior to cultivation) communities.
I'm rambling.
And I am in no way suggesting we give up the cities and head back out into the forrest where, if we're lucky, we could see a return to drastically shortened life expectency due to illness, injury or inbreeding (I needed a third "i"). I'm not.
I'm just suggesting that maybe we, as a species, need to make some hard choices about how we want to go on living on this planet. Note, I'm a total hypocrite. I drive a car which hates Mother Nature, I barely recycle and even in the face of vary obviously receeding glacial ice keep pumping my fair share of toxins into the sky but it's hard to ignore the general consensus among the worlds big brains that somewhere between 2030 and 2050 we, as a species, are going to be looking at some harsh realities.
If we only expected better of ourselves... If I only expected better of myself (note; I expect everything I believe right now is going to change, drastically, in 11 weeks time when my wife and I meet our first child for the first time) then maybe, among other good things, we could have cars with pop-up headlights, roadsters made of nylon and fiberglass, and many manual transmissions that run on fairy farts and heal the world with soft kisses from their tailpipes. I'm just saying, there's probably a way that we, or some version of we on down the line, could have it all. It's not likely, of course, and I realize that, because we humans are conflicted beings and even as I type this I lament the demise of the internal combustion engine in a Sci-Fi world where the sun powers everything that the wind or the sea isn't, but why can't I ramble and rant on, at times for no reason, about these crazy ideas of mine?
You're not my supervisor.
By the way, if you can't tell; I've completely lost the plot.