Obviously Thanos is Evil. He's also Wrong.
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 8 ส.ค. 2018
- Support Out of Frame on Patreon: / outofframeshow
Watch our newest video, "How Can You POSSIBLY Not Be Red-Pilled By Now??": • How Can You POSSIBLY N...
Check out our podcast, Out of Frame: Behind the Scenes: / @outofframebts
Not only is Thanos, the Marvel Cinematic Universe's most powerful villain, evil... His ideas about overpopulation are bad and he should feel bad.
LINKS
The story of Julian Simon and Paul Ehrlich’s bet:
fee.org/articles/how-julian-s...
How capitalism defuses the population bomb:
fee.org/articles/capitalism-d...
Population controls are ill advised and inhumane:
fee.org/articles/population-c...
Can food supply keep up with population growth:
fee.org/articles/can-food-sup...
PODCASTS
FEEcast: "Why the population bomb will never go boom":
fee.org/shows/video/feecast/w...
Words & Numbers: "The population boom could save the world":
fee.org/shows/audio/words-num...
Thanos killed half of Gamora’s population claiming he saved them. But the first GOTG says that she’s the later survivor of her species. The dude literally destroyed her species.
He is Isane.
this was retconed and marvel have problems with continuity and marvel should make a new cut of marvel movies in which the scenes that includes continuity problem
@@jeremyanderson6789 he is called the mad titan for a reason
@@xeibei4804 he no hero. Lex Luther: his peace is a joke.
He destroyed almost the whole specie cause they didnt understood they suck the whole resources of their planet only for themselfs and their comfort, in that way Thanos loses his planet
In the case of the MCU, Antman is proof Thanos was objectively wrong.
They were on the verge of discovering infinite energy and healing but the Snap killed everyone who knew how to do it, leaving Scott trapped in the quantum realm.
Thanos is a brute that doesn’t understand anything past high-school level philosophy.
How do u know this? I don't remember this scene in infinity war
shubham katyal end scene if Antman and Wasp
@@Jessie_Helms ok
basically a edgy teen
infinite energy is impossible
It's also frustrating how edgelords in my school instantly were like "he was technically right though", as if human populations behaved exactly the same as an ant population without farming, GMO, engineering, biofuels, wind and solar power and so on and so on that essentially are a limitless source of energy and materials
That's the terror of social engineering. It's everywhere these days.
in my day we called it brainwashing@@mikeexits
That edge lord was also wrong. Thanos is a titan they are well lived enough that a century of time is a blink of the eye. In that time span populations would of easily reproduced and been right back to where they started and having deleted the stones to prevent undoing it he also removed the ability to do it again. Comic book Thanos didn't have some stupid ass motivation of saving the universe from overpopulation. He was crazy and simply just wanted to impress the cosmic personification of death (Mistress death) with a high kill count.
"All he cared about was proving that he was right, which he wasn't. Thanos was never a brilliant cold-hearted logical humanitarian. He was only ever a big ego, with a big stick, and a dumb plan."
Correct. Thank you for pointing that out.
No thanos is our hero
Lmao, all communist revolutionaries spout the same views as Thanos
MoTaKez no
Hol'up big stick?
There's one more thing worth mentioning. Gamora was stated in Guardians Of The Galaxy to be the last survivor of her race, even though Thanos claimed that her home world is a "paradise" now.
If it's not a continuity error, then Thanos and his entire idea has clear evidence that his mass murder will only make things so much worse.
No that's just a plot hole accept it
@@nomad8166
Or this only shows that Gamora is right. Thanos didn't know that he did NOT make her home world a paradise like he thought he did and his plan to wipe out half of the universe did make things worse.
If I COULD play devil's advocate here, maybe saying she's "the last" was actually towards a specific part of her race (it's like saying being the last Atheist or last Mexican means you're the last of your entire species).
Still though, I would like to imagine that they did mean she's last of her species in that movie, and it'd really help emphasize how wrong Thanos is
How is thanos to blame if the other half of the population just kills themselves?
Idiotic culture can't even sustain itself... huh?
@@kenjidev576
When Thanos snapped half of the population out of existence, he made the other half too traumatized to go on living.
To get this stone you must; demonstrate a basic understanding of economics!
Thanos: NOOoooo!
Someone should make a parody just like that, with Red Skull saying that to him
Found the contributor to environmental collapse.
He wipes out half of the universe obviously he's not gonna bother with earth economics and each planet is governed differently
_Thanos is a libtard confirmed_
If simple economics was so important why did his entire species go extinct?
"In the 1970s, people will starve to death"
Genetically engineered crops: hold my beans.
"genetically engineered crops"
Fat and meat adapted human body: hold my diseases
Honeypot What is that supposed to mean?
@@coda72
We've all been eating engineered food for a while now, but the amount of sick people hasn't grown, at least not in proportion or not caused directly by GMOs in particular.
@@NotBigSurprise Been eating GMO since roughly 10,000 year ago, when we first modified wheat and cattle.
We still need to distinguish the difference between selective breeding and gene splicing, selective breeding is technically a way to achieve a genetically modified organism and gene splicing is genetic engineering. Both are examples of GM but gene splicing is specifically GE. We have been exposed to foods that have been genetically engineered for decades without significant long term testing. I'm not trying to bash GE I'm just pointing this out in general.
While there aren't any problems with GE per say it's more about how as a product the companies that produce it lobby to get subsidies and tax breaks and like any big conglomerate are seeking to form into a monopoly as far as our food supply is concerned.
I wouldn't mind the idea behind GE if we took more time to understand it and it wasn't so politically corrupt for it to be produced. The science itself isn't doing harm to anyone.
Spoiler here
I saw Endgame and in the battle Thanos said he thought the universe would b grateful for his idea to bring universal balance but they wanted everything back the way it was. This statement proves just how crazy delusional Thanos really is and should b committed.
No, I think it was lazy writing where they decided to make Thanos a one dimensional villain.
@@CaptainBones222 I don't know, him giving the order to murder half a planets population in cold blood was pretty shit. I mean come on, dudes supposed to be super duper smart, surely he could have racked his lobes to come up with a better solution then capping half the population of any given planet on a random whim
Rather than destroying the remaining half, erase their memories
@@jeremyallen492 if he could Create a Brand new Universe, then he could just duplicate all Earth Resources.
@@tonistaak or come up with a solution that doesn't involve committing genocide. He almost ripped the fabric of space and time apart to create his stupid Mcguffin, why waste it on something as mundane as murder when he has legions of troops trained exclusively for the destruction of those who oppose his half assed sense of "balance"?
The point is not that Thanos is right it's we the audience believe that HE believes he's right. That's why he's interesting, that's why he left such an impression, and the fact that there's videos like this popping up all over the place debating the topic is proof of his success as a villain. He challenges our firmly held perspective, forcing us to come to stronger conclusions, that's what villains are for.
Someone finally gets it. But, the fact that people don't realize easily that Thanos is wrong, puts me on edge. It's almost as if people have forgotten how to think.
I know it's a meme. But, some people actually believe killing half the population would solve the world's problems.
I'd argue that an important point is that the characters in the movie seem to believe he's right, but cruel. Not one of them brings up "hangon, that doesn't work even a little bit no matter how you turn it around", they all just act as if it's a functional but evil plan which makes them all seem... really, really stupid.
Even without all the economical principles, there's still the basic fact that nearly all populations recover from a loss of 50% in very few generations.
You'd have to continuously snap every few dozen years to keep them down, and even then you'd likely just encourage the overpopulation.
Nice seing you here
PaperPatriot He’s* and also his*
The stance of the protagonists is that they don't know whether he's right or not, and that as far as they're concerned it doesn't matter if he's right or not.
Also, many jobs require specialization and thanos killed people with specialization so many important jobs are left unfilled. Thanos caused complete societal collapse
NCR Master Race excellent observation.
Foundation for Economic Education I don’t know why no one else notices this
NCR Master Race also he killed a lot more people cause think about those in life dependable positions like doctors who were doing surgeries or piolts oil tanker drivers and workers all those people gone at cruicial times will kill a lot more than just half the population
+NCR Master Race
A lot of people notice it. I was one of them. But a lot of people are steadfast in their belief of overpopulation and don't realize the shear collapse of chain of command in business that occurs if you kill half of people at random.
Like the shear logistical problems you have when half of your managers died, half of your supervisors died, half of your ceo's, you will have compete economic collapse of large companies.
Just imagine the chaos that Thanos created if his snap erased one or more presidents
Thanos: a well written character with an understandable motive. Who also has murdered and tortured billions of people. Not to mention a poorly thought out plan.
Duped Fans: Is this a hero?
Contributor to environmental pollution found
Thanos is written very well, as a charismatic psychopath. There's plenty of real world examples of such people. This movie was just a painful example of why they're always so successful.
@@KyoushaPumpItUp Unsympathetic self righteous narcissistic one found right here.
I really hope you're trolling.
@@slothful2039 Why have sympathy to those who are contributors to environmental destruction?
@@KyoushaPumpItUp A better question is why *not* have sympathy? If you refuse to sympathise you end up dehumanizing people; which is almost always problematic. Sympathising doesn't equate to excusing; you can understand why someone took specific actions without excusing people of the wrongs they've wrought. But it's always a good idea to try to understand why people think the way they do. Understanding why is the best way to enact change.
also he assumes everyone is going to share the new found resources but nothing will change there will just be half as many poor people
Agreed
Grey Wild Wolf I mean you say that but through saying that you discredit humanities ability to fix problems(and also make problems) and there is a chance someone maybe even me or you will discover something new that changes society.
Exactly. Hawkeye became Ronin for a reason and Black Widow was reporting on cartel stuff down in Mexico. All Thanos did was create an opportunity for people who were bad to gain control and power.
@@green4527 humans ability to fix problems is there even before the snap. The snap didn't create ingenuity. If you think people have the capacity to solve problems why would you need to go through with the snap in the first place? We could have just figured out a solution for overpopulation, like you think we would've solved whatever problems the snap caused. This is insane logic dude.
@@Petard01 I was disagreeing with the snap tho?
He isn’t called _”The Mad Titan”_ for nothing.
Mad should be short for delusional
Ethy “the resources are finite.” You are literally holding the infinity gauntlet! It’s in the name!
@@castle9165 mind blown
It's a little disturbing how many people would be happy to go along with a genocidal maniac. But, of course, they often have, through history. 🤔
Gr2020ant... you proved my point. He’s mad. Insane. Delusional.
Personally I still think Thanos reason for mass murdering the universe is really just an excuse to woe and impress Lady death from deadpool.
Yep but most people don't know that
@@fjreyna4100 doesn't matter if they know it or not because they don't need to. Thanos isn't trying to impress her in the movie.
@@Riskofrain527 that's because it was made for trend hopping homogenous drones.. not fans. There is a huge hole in the logic for the movies... He could've snapped exponentially more resources into existence, but fuck the source material. Let's make trash to peddle propaganda to the plebs consumed by consumerism.
@@michaelmiller7909 this is the cinematic universe not the comics so obviously they're going to be changes which is fine. Infinity war was a great movie even if they changed the backstory of thanos.
@@francisvallieres-leclerc people don't understand that MCU and Marvel (actually) Comics are different 🤣🤦🏿♂️ They are creating their own story. Which. work. well.
Great arguments, though I'd like to add that the very idea that the universe could be overpopulated and run out of resources is insanity. The ratio of inhabited planets to uninhabited ones is massive. Our solar system alone contains an unimaginable amount of resources beyond that of Earth.
In the MCU, almost all civilizations are space-faring. If your civilization is capable of easily travelling through space, you will never run out of resources.
Although O'Neill colonies would be a better use of resources (you could use asteroids to build them) and put them into Lagrange points, unlike planets that would have to be in the life zone.
I agree. Just because a resource is cheap doesn't mean we aren't running out. Helium being a prime example.
Also even meteors have many many recoures, scientists are even trying to day to find a way how we coulf gather the recources from them
It sure would lead to Imperialism,tho
@@atanaZion and that’s… bad?
Scp foundation just lost HALF of its staff. Universe is screwed.
Yeah but roughly half of all organic SCPs are also gone
@@sensoryeuphoria6947 including scp 682?
Edit:
I just remembered, SCP 682 had been subject to reality wiping in the past. It didn't work either.
@@DoomguyIsGrinningAtYou. potentially since the deaths are random. But from my understanding it isnt really death Thanos is causing it is basically wiping the person or thibg from existance. So no damage would need to be caused. The anomaly would sinply cease to exist.
when u realize they’re different universes. yes im aware this is a joke but im just pointing it out
Bitch Lasagna Then what’s the point of pointing it out?
The thing about natural resources is many of them are renewable. So even if our population reaches unsustainable levels, we wouldn't suddenly go extinct from a lack of food. Instead, our population would just drop back down to a level our renewable resources could sustain. The only way a scarcity of resources could result in our extinction would be if we started fighting wars over food or fuel and those wars turned into nuclear exchanges, and even that's a stretch.
Not as much of a stretch as you would think.
@Christopher S the solution that thanos has doesn’t work either because of your same reasoning. If he kills half the population, the population won’t stay that way forever. He would have to keep killing people for his plan to make any sense, but he destroys l the stones which means that he didn’t think that through and only cared about proving himself right.
@@johnheart8574 Didn't his wish wipe out half of all life? That would wipe out half of all food.
Alternate History hub has a good video on this too. Laying out why everything Thanos was trying to prevent would only come about, because of his wish.
@Christopher S planets themselves are not renewable, but most minerals are indeed still being produced, similar to oil and carbon, they are just freaking slow, so indeed, if this world would turn unsustainable by some magic reason, we go to another planet and this one would re-create resources meanwhile
His point was not a war, it was a nuclear war that would wipe 100% of the human race, if we were to have a non-massive scale war, we would go back to a population level that can be sustained as it was sustained in the past
Also, yes, you can double resources forever, those stones make you almost a god, you can double them infinitely
And even with all this answers, you totally misses the point of the video, he is telling you with freaking maths and graphs that economy is not zero-sum, its not 1 to 1, we create wealth and we will discover new and more efficient ways of do whatever we do now, therefore, increasing the effective durability of the resources we have
I wish end game would be literally just the avengers giving thanos a lecture on basic economics.
🤣👌🏼
No you don't.
That would be boring though. but still pretty funny 😂
@@jamesroby6152 r/wooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooosh
@@jamesroby6152 Not even a fan of the MCU so I wasnt planning on watching it if it was what I said then I certainly would
I’d also like to point out that the snap also killed half of the plants and animals, making him an even bigger idiot than said here
Joshua Calosso no, this video literally proved it isn’t, and btw, population growth has slowed and will slow
Zachary Ham that has literally never ever happened and it will never happen and would take a lot longer than that and eventually we’ll be in space and stuff and by that point it’ll basically become impossible
Joshua Calosso what do you care about more? Humans, or the environment, cause nature isn’t that great, the only reason humans use up so much is cause they can and any other living species would too
Joshua Calosso money is a foundational piece of society and writing was invented because of it, would you rather the bartering system?
Joshua Calosso no, currency is important and if we didn’t have it life would be much harder
I think thanos is just so shaped by his personal experience that he doesn’t use logic
Which is why he is extremely delusional and arrogant!
What "experience"?
@@jeremyallen492 his people going extinct ,his whole motivation
@@jeremyallen492 I consider experience, experience.
@@QFl7098 why the fuck should EVERYONE ELSE have to suffer because HIS PEOPLE couldn't play nice?
I loved gamora yelling "you don't know that" when he says the universe needed correction. Real passion in her voice, great acting by zoe saldana.
She really impressed me in this film.
I think she stole the movie. Truly great acting from her.
Gamora doesn't know her place and should obey her father.
@@Hakirokone :/
@@Hakirokoneyou mean the chucklefuck who murdered her family without a shred of remorse and spent some time setting her against her adopted as some sort of idiotic game?
Yeah, some 'father'
Tony Stark should have totally been the one to counter the zero-sum idea, since literally the entire progression of his Iron Man suits has been improving technology and using less resources to do it. Like, he started with a big suit he needed a full room to put it on, then he went to something he could carry in a box, then he went to suits that could literally just throw themselves onto his body, and now he's got a suit that is billions of nano-machines that respond to his will perfectly, and has applied that same technology to Spider-man's suit. Heck, in iron man one, he literally invents a portable power generator that not only saves his life, but provides clean energy for people all over the place- and enough of it to be able to use it to power the iron man suit. Yes, he was born with abundance and wealth, but he used that to improve the lives of people around the world, all while being a superhero.
Missed opportunity, marvel. Missed opportunity.
what if this is argued in the next movie?
I think there was no time to do that and it wouldn't be that entertaining. Would you rather have this movie or something like Lincoln movie?
Though I really hope they somehow well address this in the next movie :)
We? As western population? Well there was famine in Ireland in 19th century, North America and Europe in 1930s, Russia and Ukraine and please don't forget all those African countries a few years ago.
What are you suggesting instead of capitalism?
David Calman We? As western population? Well there was famine in Ireland in 19th century, North America and Europe in 1930s, Russia and Ukraine and please don't forget all those African countries a few years ago.
What are you suggesting instead of capitalism?
Zifer The next movie is far too late - everyone who heard him and didn't point out the imbecilic nature of his plan (as opposed to its evil) right away looks like an idiot now.
While what you said was a far more detailed version, there is the obvious and far more simple problem with Thanos's plan - the fact that half of all life, be it person or animal, being wiped meant that so many farmers, construction workers, plumbers, doctors, nurses, bin men, butchers, and general labours were also gone, and therefore the resources and knowledge they could have held or created.
Not to mention, the snap of pilots and drivers would lead to far more death.
That is what he said at minute 7:32 ; "always remember that more people doesn't just mean more mouths to feed, it also means more minds to create and more hands to build"
Yeah, even if you want to kill half of everyone, doing so at random is extra stupid. You're losing unimaginable quantities of knowledge only those individuals had. You're shutting down crucial infrastructure.
By fine tuning it, you could probably commit a mass murder that leaves a lot of people better off, but in this way everyone gets fucked.
Thanos: I’ll wipe out half the population of the Universe
Billions of Pregnant Mothers: Let me ruin this whole Man’s career
hhahahhaha!
I don't know if it's a lack of understanding or if they're just raging misanthropes, but some people just thrive on oversimple, anti-human explanations for problems.
Some are just edgelords. Some like to toy with the idea as a thought experiment. But some, like a significant chunk of people, are just attracted to simple solutions.
Those are the kinds of people that quote Agent Smith like the Bible, oblivious to the fact that they too are part of the problem, just in a different way.
I swear, if they hated mankind so much, why haven't they tried to off themselves or go on a shooting spree?
Classical pizza cutter edgelords:
All edge, no point.
@Chibiel Was that a rhetorical question or are you insinuating something?
@Chibiel Well I do believe there are plenty of reasons to hate mankind even now. Let's face it, we aren't exactly a savory bunch.
But just the same, I do believe that we can all be better if given the chance and that said hatred could and should be used in a way to improve the world and mankind as a whole.
Hating people is piss easy. Offering advice and solutions to the very problems that lead to such hatred; that's how you fix things, not by killing people or destroying stuff.
That is a common human problem we all fall into from time to time. People like simplyfying things, eliminating all other posibilitues.
The simpler the solution, the better leaving barely any room for abstraction, partially ideologicall science is to blame as the main objective of science is basically discoverong and understanding stuff until it's simplified.
Math is a perfect example of that, though usefull, it's total.
Copper wires became useless, Tin fell to aluminum, tungsten to a new kind of lightbulb probably, the thing is humans keep engineering better ways to use the materials we have
Until we don't.
@@fussel676 Then we invent or discover new materials. And then new methods. And so on.
Cuz we still don't know what new things we'll discover during our space exploration which might happen within this century. ^v^
@@randomdude9135 until we dont
Lets hope we find some cure for some deadly deseases we have yet to heal.
@@fussel676 Universe is almost infinite. With almost unlimited resources.
And yes, we need to find cure for a lot of diseases. And developed countries can't do it alone cuz they'll eventually run out of smart ppl. So if all of poor Asian and African countries get proper education then we'll surely get tons of smart people.
I mean, even if IQ is race dependent. With a conservative estimate of .1% we'll have millions of people from poor countries who'll be smart enough to get a Nobel.
So education is the solution to everything.
@@randomdude9135 i just slowely walk away from this comment section. After YOUR "IQ is race dependent" comment.
I just dont feel comfortable dealing with the risk to be associated with you in this day and age.
Thanos doesn't know that the universe corrects itself.
explain please
Elaborate pls
The humans have caused pollution and environmental damage. The coronavirus was the solution.
@@KyoushaPumpItUp you know we're not "killing" the Earth right? It's just a rock. The Earth has gone through billions of years of environmental changes, from an uninhabitable fiery hellscape to almost completely being covered in ice and snow. The Earth or the universe doesn't care what we do, since it only affects her habitability and therefore ourselves. That's why we're so hell bent on saving "the planet". We're not trying to save the Earth, we're trying to save our species. Coronavirus isn't the "universe's solution" to humanity's carbon footprint, the universe doesn't give a crap and it's all coincidental
I think out of everyone you put it the most simply and I thank you for that. Earth doesn't will itself to be one thing or another. It just is. No matter what we do it will eventually find equilibrium. Humans are nothing in the grand scheme, or lack thereof, on this giant ball of rock floating through space that will outlive us.
"As long as people are free..."
That's the difficult part, ensuring freedom.
No there are always people fighting for freedom
finally, someone who doesnt believe thanos is right
thanks for the heart :)
Nah he is
People are just saying Thanos is right so they can appear somehow thoughtful but going against the norm.
Tyler, there’s more evidence to back up on why The Joker in the new Joker movie is right than Thanos is in the MCU.
Tornike Tvalchrelidze, at least Light Yagami’s and Lelouch’s reasoning for genociding people actually made logical sense because they wanted to rid of the world full of crimes, so that way people can live happy safety lives whereas Thanos in the MCU is shown explicitly that you can in fact solve the problems he wants to get rid of by using the stones to make an endless amount of resources, and if you believe that the stones couldn’t be used for those purposes then there’s plenty of scientists that could solve the problems that Thanos talks about such as Tony Stark, Bruce Banner, and Shuri, but instead of there’s still idiots that think that Thanos did nothing wrong which is stupid as Hell.
UGH MY GOSH!!! THANK YOUUUU!!!! i can't tell you howmany times i've seen so many youtubers say that he's right or he's not a villain, but a hero. finally some one with sense is speaking out about this insanity.
pollutant found
@@KyoushaPumpItUp I mean he's not wrong about thanos and all those crazy philosophical fools who say he did nothing wrong
@@fathercosmic8061 that just means you support the environmental degradation of the earth.
@@KyoushaPumpItUp what do you mean? Those theories you thought were true aren't. And me saying that I agree that thanos was wrong doesn't some how magically mean that I want the earths environmental situation to decline. To think like that is foolhardy.
@@KyoushaPumpItUp that's like me saying that since you think thanos was right, you support mass genocide. Do you see hiw that logic is heavily flawed? You're basing someone's opinions of real life problems from the logic of a villainous comic book character. That's dumb.
If I'm in 6PM traffic, I'll feel he was right
Well what if he snaped you.
right, because all of the empty cars because of the snap are going to move faster than they would if the people were still driving them. so your options are slowly moving traffic or non moving traffic.
Zack Wiley it’s better than being stuck in traffic at 6 pm
@@Fred-ff6bv If he'd also snap randomly half the cars and all the key and key code components then I ship it.
I don't care if my car disappears right under me, I'll just stand up and take another car
@@Zak-bv4qm snapped*
He is delusional and insane, But his distinct motivation and clear speaking makes him a great villain.
Yeah this point has always annoyed me and will never seem to die, literally every population with reach a peak before slowing down, including humans
Salokin
Not to mention, people in first world nations tend to have less children.
Yes its a good thing their isn't something like feedback global warming coming to upset the proverbial apple cart o wait! In fact a lot of things seem to be going extinct in this time of plenty ever wonder what happens when we run out of animal to make the losers of the resource race. I wonder how the world looks from animal about to go extincts point of view overpopulated?
CoolCraftCool Hey, I found the misanthrope!
Stylus Sketch
It’s damn hard to reach and maintain 2.1 consistently without an authoritarian regime forcing it, which is China’s long term plan. They held on to the 1 child policy for too long and if you think the InCel problem in the West is worrying, it is NOTHING compared to China’s. There are millions of men who can’t find a prostitute their own age, let alone a girl to marry. I find it more disturbing that they have been able to keep them from rioting over this, a testament to how little freedom they have. Those men will leave no children and the population will crash. In twenty years, one in ten couples who have had two children will be allowed to have a third, keeping the population exactly the same indefinitely thereafter, at around 450,000,000, after the InCels mostly die off.
Voluntarily aiming for 2.1 one will always be an approximate endeavor, and the simple fact that more religious people ALWAYS beed more and irreligious people always breed less, has been an unpleasant truth that nationalist skeptics have had to contend with.
Based on some of Jordan Peterson’s ideas, I think a symbiotic relationship between tolerant, non-anti-theist skeptics and a community of moderate but consistent religious people would be the most progressive civilization (in the proper sense) that we could indefinitely maintain. VERY religious people have 6+ kids, and very irreligious people tend to have 1, so a moderately religious population, that is, people who go to church, say, 1-2 times a month, occasionally say grace at meal but often forget, that level of devotion could have a flexible but not too extreme family size that can be adjusted from 2-6, as members variably join the moderate skeptical community, subsequently having fewer kids themselves. Also, some skeptics’ kids may want to go the other way, and become more religious, which would also need adjusting. The moderately religious are the sort most willing to adjust and be flexible to degrees. If some minority wants to maintain extreme devotion, the moderately religious could plan to have fewer. These can all be taken into account and be used to adjust the whole population and keep growth or shrinking, not perfectly stable, but close enough.
lol even if global warming was a threat, which it isn't, the best solution is actually opening the market more. (surprise) We make it easier for space companies to operate and innovate, it wouldn't be long to putting mirrors in orbit to shade out infrared light, thus making it less hot. We could do it now with current costs and materials for around 100B for material cost, but shit is constantly getting cheaper.
I really had no intention of pinning a comment here, but every day I get a couple dozen replies to this video nitpicking a specific line where I questioned why Thanos wouldn't just double the resources.
The common response seems to be that per the rules of the universe and conservation of matter, doubling resources is impossible. Matter can't be created or destroyed, even by the Infinity Stones.
There are two massive problems with this line of argument.
1) There's nothing in the movies or the comics that establishes this rule.
2) Even if such a rule did exist limiting the power of the Infinity Stones, it would be unnecessary.
Here's why:
Thanos does not need to create new raw materials or "resources". The universe is filled with matter at a scale completely incomprehensible to us all. He doesn't need to create anything from nothing. It's all available already.
There are a minimum of 100 billion galaxies in the universe.
www.space.com/25303-how-many-galaxies-are-in-the-universe.html
Ours - the Milky Way galaxy - contains about 100 billion stars all by itself.
There's obviously no hard data on this, but this means that there are probably at least 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars in the known universe. If we assume that there is at least an average of one planet orbiting each star (and given that our 1 star has 8 - maybe 9 including a new one just discovered - planets and over 150 moons, this is a very conservative estimate), that would be a functionally infinite supply of matter available to Thanos. There's no need to create new matter.
Obviously, the vast majority of these moons and planets (and asteroids, comets, etc.) are uninhabited and unihabitable, so there's no risk of harming any living being by taking minerals, gases, energy, or whatever else from them and moving it to the inhabited parts of the universe where people need those raw goods.
Also, as I said in the video, resources aren't the same thing as raw materials or the stuff just laying around. Raw goods only become resources when we learn to use them to create value. The other planets, moons, and asteroids in our own solar system contain a wealth of materials but they aren't resources for us because we can't access them.
Thanos could easily change that, even if you assume there are some limits on his power.
Thanos *should* be able to make more raw materials wherever he is standing using the Reality Stone, but even if he can't, the Space Stone can permanently transport matter from the trillions of uninhabited planets to the inhabited ones, adding to their overall supply of metals & minerals, hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen, water, and whatever else anybody needs. And again, the supply of otherwise inaccessible raw materials is functionally infinite.
Meanwhile, the Mind Stone would allow him to provide knowledge to people and allow them to use newly accessible resources in the most efficient and high value ways - like the way the Green Revolution radically expanded our ability to produce food using fewer resources, only a billion times better and across every area of life, not just food production.
He could show people how to capture every joule of usable energy from the sun and other stars, and create new energy sources people have never been able to use before. He could give people the knowledge of how to grow perfectly healthy meat in a lab at scale or farm thousands of pounds of vegetables in a few square meters of space, reducing the need for any kind of livestock or large farm area. He could go use his power to not only create transportation and distribution infrastructures that don't exist now, he could also liberate billions (trillions?) from dictators and command economies that keep them poor... And as creepy as this is, he could rewire people's minds not to tolerate those kinds of systems in the future.
The list of options is endless.
The thing is, Thanos chooses to do *none* of these things, not because he doesn't have the power. He clearly does. He doesn't do any of this for a far more obvious reason...
He's the bad guy.
-Sean
Director of Media
> He doesn't do any of this for a far more obvious reason...
> He's the bad guy.
He's also the Mad Titan, not the Titan With a Clearly Thought-Out and Rational Plan.
The first 3 points and the last point all add up to Thanos teaching people how to utilize the seemingly endless amount of stars in the universe.
You share this knowledge with every species in the universe, or your morality is worse than Thanos.
Hence Thanos choosing to kill half the population for the survival of life, being chosen randomly as he explains in the movie, you on the other hand by not sharing this knowledge with everyone, are choosing who gets to live and who gets to die by preference so to say.
"but even if he can't, the Space Stone can permanently transport matter from the trillions of uninhabited planets to the inhabited ones,"
You would be killing more people than Thanos.
Adding that much matter into all the inhabited universes?! Gravity would go haywire and all the planets, stars, you name it would be compressed together like magnets!
It would be like creating in every Universe additional neutron stars about to go nova.
Only the user can benefit from the knowledge of the Mind Stone. Meaning Thanos would have to teach. Trillions of lives, minimum billions of species to teach this knowledge. If he took 5 minutes for each race. And there were only 1 billion species. He would take over 1000 years. Making it literally impossible. This could be avoided thanks to the Space stone, Thanos could be omnipresent. Meaning he could technically teach all races at the same time.
Only problem is, that using the infinity stones on such a massive scale, as shown in the movie seems to "break" the gauntlet.
So Thanos would have to choose a solution that will work without having to count on using the gauntlet again.
Summing it all up, the list of options is not so endless anymore!
- Erasing half of the population in the universe.
- Creating additional resources
- Teach as many living cultures how to utilize their resources perfectly in the time given that Thanos lives.
But saying Thanos is necessarily evil, hard to define what you mean by evil.
Going by the definition of just being morally bad, then killing in all forms is evil. So if you kill a woodtick that's sucking blood from you to survive, does that make you evil?
Well knowing if you don't do anything about it you could be infected with some sort of disease?
Or more by the term wicked? Being murder, rape, torture and so on?
Humans murder animals daily and are not considered to be evil. Even Though murder can technically only be between a human and another human.
"What a weird definition of evil. As far as I can tell, every dictator and mass murderer has thought that what they were doing was right."
Adolf Hitler thought that some races were superior to other races. That is not really "believes what he is doing is right" And Ted Bundy killed his victims at first not to get caught, like most people who murder. Which shows they know what they are doing is wrong.
And for the last part, Thanos did not misunderstand anything as you mention here 6:15
Thanos clearly states that his planet and his people FACED extinction and gave a solution. AND what he predicted came to pass.
Meaning the nature of natural resources and the origin of material prosperity did not hold up on Titan. Otherwise they would not be extinct....
If Thanos would double, tripple, ... the resources in the universe, they would still stay finite.
Also there is something called: the Le Chatelier's principle / Equilibrium Law
If you apply this rule to the 2 components (Life and Resources) it would look like this:
Resources -> Life
Life -> Resources / 2
=>
Resources / 2 -> Life / 2
Life / 2 -> Resources / 4
=>
...
(If you can't already tell, its not in balance from the beginning, like Thanos said)
Imagine your way of fixing the problem, with this general principle:
Resources -> Life
Life -> Resources / 2
Resources x 2 -> Life x 2
Life x 2 -> Resources / 4
=>
Resources / 4 -> Life
Life -> Resources / 8
=>
Resources / 8 -> Life / 2
...
If you create more resources, the direction "Resources -> Life" will be strengthend (more Life will exist then before) and yet again ... the more life there is, more resources will be needed. Result: If you multiply all resources in the universe, the problem won't be fixed but would end up more severe and rapidly resulting in the end of all life then before.
Now Thanos way of fixing the problem:
Resources x 2 -> Life
Life / 2 -> Resources
(Suddenly ... BALANCE ... mind blown!)
Why?: Because both Products are now in balance, and you have a temporary solution (a functioning cycle between life and resources) to the stated problem ... ofc its just temporary like the solution of doubling the resources in the universe but less severe if the balance breaks itself again.
If you see any problems in my explanation why Thanos is right or don't understand parts of ... comment on it and change my mind
(And sorry for my bad english ... I am not good at it)
There’s also another major problem with Thanos’ logic of wiping out 1/2 of a worlds population: a lack of understanding. In the film, it’s stated that he simply invades worlds and wipes out half the population. He doesn’t put into consideration why, how, or even IF the people on a given world are suffering (as far as we know). What if on Gamora’s world of Zen-Whoberi, the public suffered as the result of a global famine, or an oppressive government restricting development, or some other global catastrophe? What if a world was just recovering from a devastating plague that left the survivors with a collapsed infrastructure, only for Thanos to arrive and further devastate the planet?
And the reason Thanos doesn’t simply increase the amount of resources is because he thinks that overpopulation would only get worse, only delaying the inevitable. Thanos essentially wanted to “teach” the universe to be cautious of its population or else it would lead to the end of all life. But here’s the major problem with that mentality: People (at least humans) are unable to learn something if they don’t know they’re supposed to taught something. To those worlds that Thanos is still an unknown entity and are made completely unaware of his Modus operandi, half the population just... vanished without any explanation. There would be mass panic, people would be trying to either find something to explain what happened or someone to blame, and even that worlds society would potentially be at risk of total collapse (in a worst-case scenario).
Edit: Grammatical error.
There is one point you didn´t mentioned. If we assume the population grows exponentially, it would grow back after Thanos cuts it in half. To the point it had to be cut again and then over and over again. so Thanos´solution is certainly not the finale one.
Funny to think that Thanos' comic book motivations made more sense, originally he was just in love with the personification of death and wanted to please her, obviously being in love with the grim reaper is sort of crazy, but wanting to wipe out half the universe cus it's overpopulated is crazy and idiotic.
True dat
There's an analogy I stumbled across a while back that I think sums this up pretty well. Think of resources like slices of a pie. For most of history, the only way we knew how to expand our influence was by taking someone else's piece of the pie. This seems to be the only strategy Thanos thinks will work. What he and a lot of other people fail to consider (and often completely disregard) is what happens when we gain the ability to make new pies. We are no longer consigned to fighting over what we are given and can now share what we create.
Yes, it's called the fixed pie or the zero sum fallacy in economics.
Villain Watchlist : Thanos
_What we do here is go back, back, back, back..._
Zuzu Underrated comment
gave me an incredible idea for a video, would you mind if i took this as a legit video? Credits of this idea would go to you.
"Mr Stark I have crippling depression"
oh boy he gon break down that philsophy of his to the ground
"I wish I was Adam. Sure being the first human would be hard, but he must have been a TRILLIONARE!" - zero sum theorist.
UNLIMITED POWAAAAAAAA!
John Smith
Ah I see you are a man of culture as well.
Hey! I'm one of the top comments thanks everyone!
Yes, he has all the resources for himself in terms of raw materials
He WAS a trillionaire, and more. He controlled the entire planet without any competing claim from any other human. Do you really think the planet is worth less than a trillion US dollars??
Thank you! I'm kinda disturbed that people think he did nothing wrong. Are they trying to be edgy? He killed half of all life, including animals and plants. He's still a *Serial Killer.* But if someone tryed to do this IRL these same people would condemn thier actions.
nailed it, thanos needed a talk with the austrians
Or Georgians
I am surprised you didn't mention the fact that losing half your population isn't as devastating as it would sound to populations AND that far more resources would be lost from the sudden population decrease than from "overpopulation". His solution is as nonsensical to the problem he is trying to solve as possible, suggesting he is insane. I think the reason why the movie never challenged his ideas is BECAUSE they are ludicrous "My planet was overpopulation, so I am going to kill half the population of every planet and that will magically make them well!" I can't even imagine how his plan would have saved his own planet, they are a space faring race... why are they having a sudden ludicrous famine?
Titan looked more like it was attacked by Galactus than anything else. And I bet Marvel will make that the reason when they get the rights back to him.
Except once again he is trying to fit a square block into a round hole with a non-solution to a problem that not even most of the universe has. He is projecting Titan onto the universe and cannot see beyond his own grief and that is why he is insane.
Thanos was right actually. Like lets say we keep going as we do. If everyone survives... more mutations will appear in the species. We use fuel as our source... if it runs down. Most of our machines will be rendered useless. So we will need to research on some alternative energy sources without most of our technology slowing us down and if the land keeps getting contaminated and water polluted. The drinkable water will be diminished. Contamination was not a problema 60 years ago... it is now.
Did you know that using the technology of the 1400s we couldn't possible survive with the population we have now? As well did you know that after losing large parts of the population people instinctually start to have babies? And did you know the earth's population doubles every 64 years?
Nionivek Most of the arguments you just gave are complete bs
In the comics he at least had the fact that with technology progressing half of everybody that has lived on earth will be alive at the same time and with finite resources everyone would die.
Plus in infinity gauntlet he killed trillions to make death like him more than anything else.
Lich olas as bizarre as it is, I think the comics version is better. A man can be as insane and evil as Thanos and there's no real logic plothole or bad ideas to discredit if his whole motivation is trying to impress someone he loves. It's bonkers, but I can't bust it as bad narrative logic or undermine it with a bit of basic homework about the world.
to be fair to the movie, in Infinity Gauntlet, he's basically doing it to get it on with Lady Death. Bottom line: he's just as utterly petty in the comic as he is in the movie.
KingRandor82 killing for love is at least a better excuse
Lich olas it's at least "more" reasonable than just reinforcing Hollywood's elitist political socioeconomic philosophies; y'know, like the kind that gave us the Purge movies (which incidentally operate via the same formula and philosophy, and even a *Brit* movie critic even stated doesn't work).
Lich olas no if it was a mirror mirror copy from the comics to movies people wouldn't care for thanos cause its bland without any death of character in it
Thanos: We should snap everyone because too many people are alive,
conditional on the fact that I survive
Umm no Thanos was more than willing to let himself die...
@@JasonWilliams89 Umm no Thanos made it clear that he himself would love after the snap.
Hell this was proven in endgame.
@@slothful2039 Umm no quite the contrary. Even after seeing that he died in the future, he was perfectly ok with it.
@@JasonWilliams89 "now that, is destiny fulfilled"
CbbTyrone that doesn’t affect 2014 Thanos though, as he’s from a branch timeline. That literally meant nothing to him and just shrugged it off. He had a chance to recreate what had already been done (the snap) meanwhile staying alive. Try again
He actually "destroyed half of all life" which means he killedgalf of intelligent life, animals, and plants. Basically took more than halfof the resources as well as the people.
Since Fortnite became popular, I noticed that half of the population disappeared from social life, no wonder Thanos was part of the game
Xd
Amazing comment. Simply underrated.
@@iamthesenate5769 thanks man
Thanos *Is worried about the unviverse not having enough resources*
*gets glove with infinite power*
*wipes out half of universe instead of creating more resources*
Exactly. Perfect illustration of hubris.
Vincent Castro Exactly.
Thanos has a level thinking similar to Mao. He thought he knew better than anyone else and came to the conclusion that he should lead, by force. In a sense, Mao acted like someone who thought themself as a good without thinking themselves god like.
He ain’t called the Mad Titan for nothing
Exactly!
Problems with that. More resources only multiplies the problem.
You can make more resources, but you can't make more space.
Its literally the laws of physics.
Matter cannot be created.
Space cannot be created.
Creating more resources doesn't just magic more resources. The infinity gauntlet cannot even do that.
You can synthesize materials from across the universe, but what kind of repercussions will THAT have? If you need more nickel so you pull 2000 tons of nickel from all asteroids, what happens?
You grab carbon from other parts of the universe to terraform mars, but you kill another planet in doing so.
If you have also watched Dragon Ball Super, remember there was an antagonist in the series who had nearly similar ideals to that of Thanos, Zamasu. Zamasu wanted to exterminate all mortals just like Thanos wanted to exterminate half of all life in the universe. But during the end of the arc, Future Trunks proves Zamasu wrong saying that Zamasu was a person who believed in no one but himself. Thanos also faces the same problem where he believes only in himself. So his philosophy was definitely wrong.
True.
we don't talk about dragon ball super because they erased entire future trunks arc so it was all just pointless filler
@@ryszakowy, Kid Trunks still fucks a GILF, so erasing Future Trunks timeline didn’t really change much about the ongoing series of Dragon Ball, and it’s very obvious that the MCU just did a shitty copy/paste of Dragon Ball Super down to the fact that the posters of the series looks nearly identical to one another, so there aren’t any perfect MCU films.
Thank you for the fantastic video, I show it to my students as a supplement to a unit on population geography. Out of Frame is a very beneficial resource for educators!
That's awesome to hear!
@@FEEonline it was good explayned but there are many theorys saying hes good and if and u can actually realize that he dhad the good idea and the good manifestation
I like the video but just to be clear, r/thanosdidnothingwrong was created to be a parody of the subreddit r/theempiredidnothingwrong where people post star wars memes in favor of the empire where in Thanos did nothing wrong they post memes about Thanos but then it exploded in popularity at the beginning of July 2018
Blue haired lawyer i have those Star Wars fans commenting on another video in this series all the time.
You do know there are people who take this seriously right?
But palpatine did nothing wrong indeed
@@nuddle7726 True true. Goooooodddd. Join the Dark Side Shrek. I have free onions.
I hope the 3.5k dislikes are not plotting to kill the 18k likes.
only 9k likes ;)
(joke ahahaha not bothering xD)
Videos are finite, likes and dislikes are infinite. Too many viewers need videos.
Therefore we must wipe half of the viewers
@@darnit1944 stop
@@Riskofrain527 _Where is the gold plate button stone?_
Only half of them.
It really scares me at the look of the like/dislike ratio.
and god said "be fruitful and multiply, and fill the whole earth"
Please make a video about "Captain America: Civil War" and discuss the division of Cap and Iron man.
Who is right?
Should they be registered and controlled by the government? Or should they decide what to do with their powers?
I think it is a topic worth mentioning.
Panperl both are wrong
Krishnanand Premanand Then who is right?
Prot07ype a omni consensual Organisation would be optional. The unregulated avengers violate the NAP with all the collateral damage and the regulated ones are just as bad, but they would also loose all their pluspoints.
Panperl The argument present is irrelevant. You can't regulate superheroes and you shouldn't try to do so. The setting just doesn't work with red tape. What are you going to do about mutants born with evil, destructive, uncontrollable powers? What are you going to do when your superheroes have to follow the same bullshit diplomatic immunity rules armies do? Does a committee need to approve Iron Man saving kids from a burning building, or upgrading his suit tech, or both?
I think Infinity War dismissed the whole debate on whether the world leaders should manage the Avengers. Once the invasion happened, no government authority except Wakanda had a say in how to proceed.
Ah so nice to see a form of media highlight how much better we are off today as a whole than we were decades ago despite our current problems. It's positively refreshing.
Only if you are ignorant and don't know how many people are suffering in third world countries with overpopulation. Even first world countries.
Now, most people would say it's because of overpopulation. Exactly what I meant.
Surya Teja Cheedella I'm not ignorant of these issues, I just understand the concept of proportion. Acknowledging the world's issues whilst ignoring all the strides humanity has made is true ignorance.
mxt mxt Once again I am perfectly aware of the issues that plague modern society. I'm not trying to understate their severity. But I guess it's pointless debating this with people that have one sided opinions.
We are far better off. People today live better than kings did less than 100 years ago. We have A/C. iPhones, and there are more trees and less pollution in America than there was 50 years ago. Prosperity makes it so we can worry about such things. In the 3rd world the poverty is such that they burn wood and dung for heat and just try to survive regardless of cutting down old forests and polluting. We clean things up. Life expectancy is up, and we are curing diseases and medical breaktrhoughs. Resources are always changing and are a function of technology and innovation. A lot of the world ran on whale oil to the point of almost killing ALL the whales, but thankfully oil was discovered and it saved the whales, and then in the 70s they said we would be out of oil in 30 years. Well we now have over 100 years because their stupid predictions don't take into account human innovation nor the fact that as a resource gets scarce then it gets expensive and so its use slows down and we have time to find other options. You could fit the entire population of earth in TX with each person having more than 2 acres. Hong Kong is very dense with people but very rich. Some places have same density but are poor. It's not the so-called overpopulation that decides if a place is poor or rich it's whether they have freedom and free trade, and property rights-rule of law. As long as we are allowed to innovate, we can absorb almost any number of people, since technology will also increase crop yields and nutrition. It's going to be fine folks, really, and we live better than any generation ever, by far.
mark Wolf Every innovation technology has made hass come with a cost. The fact is you can't create something from nothing and believe it or not, we have finite resources.
Just because the first world countries live like kings,doesn't mean everyone else does. And the ones who do have enough natural resources to back up their needs.
Thanos is like Hitler
He was evil and wrong but in his own delusional mind he thought his intentions were good
Thank you FINALLY
I think all Europeans and Americans would be happy without people of color and LGBT people, no?
Your points ring true but Thanos, as a villain, even though I think he's the Flawed Protagonist in Infinity War, is flawed. Which is what a villain needs.
Thanos's flaw is that he's incorrect, struck by grief to do something drastic as a coping mechanism.
He's not meant to be right or have the answer, he's meant to be the bad guy taking a drastic measure to "fix" everything.
But what they are saying is that a scary amount of people think he's right.
@@connorbennett1517 .....Its almost as if Jacob Brown is to stupid to understand what was being said in the video! Or didn't watch it
Even if this is true, why not have it explicitly mentioned in the movie why Thanos is wrong?
@@VainerCactus0 because he's meant to be seen as the good guy, and directly pointing out the flaw in your villain makes him less compelling. The viewer is meant to figure it out for themselves.
@@mada1082 True I guess. It is a shame so many people missed the easy logic.
Thanos obviously never mowed a lawn in his life. If he had, he would know what's living things' response to something like cutting down half of its competition.
I haven't finished this video, but when you think of it, the way Thanos approached population control wasn't even population control. He destroyed half the resources along with half of life. He didn't solve anything, there's just less people.
He has a sadistic notion that humans are evil and resource hogging.
Well, yes and no. We’re currently producing surpluses of food here in the US (granted underdeveloped countries aren’t so fortunate), but other resources such as oil, iron, gold, aluminum, drinking water is all on a ticking timer. While this may not correlate with population in any way, it’s still concerning to realize our resources we heavily depend on may not be there 100 years down the road if we don’t develop new technology fast.
(Not defending Thanos’ mindset on eliminating half the universe, just on the part of finite resources on the scale of Earth)
Visible Thoughts oh hell yeah. Thousands of years through different forms of algae coagulating underground. Yet we’re taking way faster than it’s restoring. For now I really believe we need to focus on renewable resources, as well as finding a way to extract materials from other celestial bodies. Because we can’t depend on our oil for the next hundred years at the rate we’re currently harvesting. So it really angers me when politicians are focused on “oh that’s too expensive”, even though the end result will be 100x more expensive if we don’t do anything now since we are actively destroying our earth currently.
@@GhostStealth590 Well, you're wrong on so many levels. For DECADES the naysayers have been saying we're running out of oil. Yet today we have more PROVEN RESERVES in the ground than EVER before. You're basic argument is flawed in that oil is not some algae underground, nor is it rotting forests, etc. Oil CAN be made from such over time, but oil has been found in places it has no business being. Not where ancient forests, nor ancient seas existed. It actually seems to be a natural creation of geology. This is why the Russians found oil where it had no right to be, etc. And then we have NEW technology to separate oil from shale deposits, we have fracking, etc. ALSO, we will NEVER run out of oil, why? Because of market forces. IF there ever comes a time that oil cannot be produced (say under government regulations) or used (government regulations), then oil is still needed for lubricants and plastics (not just bags, your car is half plastic right now; so are plates, flatware, desks, beds, TVs, etc.). But at some point, should oil become scarce, the PRICE climbs. Simple laws of economics. That signals the market to produce more or use less. In fact, the higher the price, the more the market will do either or both of those actions.
A thousand years from now, there will still be oil, but it might be $1million a quart and uneconomical to use for anything. And with oil we have natural gas, which is pretty dang clean burning (note even the Mean Greens have backed off on the CO2 claims as CO2 was NEVER THE greenhouse gas of doom. They have moved on to methane which is much more of one, but still orders of magnitudes below the #1 gas -- water vapor. All those "let us burn Hydrogen" supporters are producing the greatest greenhouse gas on the planet, water vapor!
On other resources, such as copper, why do you think FIBER OPTICS are so great? FIBER made from oil, carrying a thousand times the information that copper can so it's replacing copper for telecommunications. Not for power; but some high voltage power lines are now made from SODIUM. Others from HOLLOW copper plated steel tubing. High voltage lines waste the majority of the metal as the electrons repel each other! So 99% of the electron flow is on the outer surface (called 'skin effect') of the conductor. The center is just there for strength to string it from tower to tower. Cost of copper is too high for this, so cheaper centers coated with copper are being used. THIS is technology. Using NEW materials, or old materials in new more efficient ways. Those are MARKET forces. Government has a role to insure we don't dump the tailings from copper mines into our rivers, but about half the time, the government IS the worse polluter on the planet. The mess in the Pacific isn't matched by one in the Atlantic. Why? Because the vast majority of the trash is coming from Asia, not the Western World. The USA and Canada, combined produce less than 1% of it. Cutting our trash in half won't make a dent in the great plastic mess in the Pacific. California forbids straws automatically being put into drinks in the state, even hundreds of miles from the Pacific... but exempts fast food joints literally ON THE BEACH... yeah, in 2004, I said, "If government is the solution; then it is highly probable that government created the problem in the first place."-DK
2:44
There are actually two explanations, I have a third one, to that
The first and more logical one, the universe is finite, or at least Thanos says it so, I´m not so sure, I´m in highschool. But whatever. Physics dictate that two objects can´t ocupate the same space, so if he were to create double the resources, the universe would probably colapse.
The second and more MCU answer, is that it has been said in previous movies, that while the infinity stones´s power IS infinite, what they can actually do depends on the user´s capabilities. Thanos has done nothing more than destroying his entire life, so he is naturally good at it, it´s what he does best. Also keep this in mind, destroying something is way easier than to create it. An even then, when he snaps his fingers, the gauntlet is almost destroyed, who knows what could have happened if he had tried doing something harder, it might just didn´t work.
And the third one, is more my interpretation of Thanos´s character. He wants to save the universe, yes, but he also wants it to learn a lesson. So, even if he could create double the resources and he would have done it (there wouldn´t be any conflict in the movie, but whatever), nothing would have actually changed, life would still be unchecked and it would still cease to exist. With killing, it´s not that, it´s also a warning.
He couldve just used the stones to generate infinite resources for each planet and then the mindstone to give all life intellect on how to gain from those infinite sources and make them not fight over it and use it in a sensible way.
@@Seedonator SPOILERS FOR ENDGAME IN MY ANSWER
.
.
.
.
That´s basically what he wants to do after he sees IW Thanos´s mistake, so cudos to you
I can't read it all bro
@@perezortegavalentin9343 The universe is always expanding. It's not finite.
@Graeme Montgomery That is literally exactly what it does. The heat death of the universe only happens when it gets TOO big.
The problem with Thanos is that a space travelling race would have tons of resources to work with before ever having a problem with overpopulation.
That said, this video is a bit misleading. First: resources are indeed finite, and this is not a technicality. To keep producing anything, you need an energy gradient to generate work up until the point the gradient is lost. The universe only works on this direction: by balancing out energy gradients. As far as we can tell, there will come a point where everything will just be molecules jiggling at the same rate everywhere, and no work, life or anything really will be ever generated again. That is the heat death of the universe, and we're roaming towards it.
Now, while indeed we are far away from that scenario, we are not far away from a scenario of environmental collapse in our planet. This video makes it seem that economy alone will deal with the issue of resource generation, forgetting that economies have problems dealing with negative externalities (i.e. our environment).
If and when we start to exploit the world around us at a rate greater than what it can provide to us, life will collapse. This is not a hypothetical scenario, because it has happened in many historical cases where humans went to inhabit a more fragile ecosystem and explored it until the brink of collapse (the Mayans in central america, the Norse in Greenland, the Easter Islanders in Easter island, the Anasazi in North America, etc.). We are doing just that, but the scale is now the whole planet Earth. These societies that I mentioned collapsed and were wiped out in great part due to mismanagement of resources and overpopulation. This can happen to us. We're past the point of return for CO2 emissions and we're risking to enter a hothouse Earth scenario where temperatures will rise above 5 degrees, which would easily exterminate a great part of biodiversity in the planet with immeasurable impact in human life. Heck, given the CURRENT rate of species's extinctions some scientists believe that humans already are a mass extinction event.
So, let's be clear: economies can allocate scarce resources and generate the incentive for innovations in ways that compensate for population growth. However, economies are not that great in dealing with the collateral environmental damage that they generate themselves due to the incentives put in place. This environmental damage can and is mounting up over time, creating a foreseeable scenario of population collapse that can take a while only due to the sheer size of the biosphere and its capacity to dampen the damage that we are causing. So, let's not get too ahead of ourselves. We could easily be heading to a post-apocalyptique WALL-E type of planet Earth (without the spaceships to save us).
Thank you. At least someone here see that this is just an economic perspective of a multicausal problem
Except natural climate change is both what allowed the Norse to colonize Greenland, and eventually made it uninhabitable. Nothing they did had an effect on Greenland's habitability, long-term. I'm not familiar with the Anasazi, but last I checked we only have theories about the Mayan collapse (deforestation being one of them). Same with the Easter Islanders, except with them there's strong evidence that Europeans brought diseases which devastated the island.
Mark Laver. No. The Norse insisted on raising cattle and pigs to keep up with their traditional meals. Pigs destroyed the natural vegetation and had to be abandoned, cows were kept in spite of the gigantic cost that it was to maintain them in comparison with goats and sheep. They also practically didn't fish, for reasons that are frankly beyond comprehension. With their initial choice of raising livestock and lodgding to build their houses they started a cycle of deforestation and soil erosion. As a consequence they didn't have lumber to keep on building, firewood for the winters and coulnd't make charcoal to work on their iron. No iron meant no iron tools, and it would take much more to work on their field or to chop carcasses or to fight enemy inuits. The soil erosion destroyed their prospects of having decent amount of hay and pastures in the long term. In short: they did a lot of things wrong long before the climate got colder and sealed the deal for their fate in that region. They basically destroyed the environment around them, one that was pretty fragile already, making it sure that any colder winter season would end them.
Easter islanders had deforested and destroyed their own habitat way before europeans set foot on the island. The Mayans and the Anasazi also did similar things. Check Jared Diamond's Collapse where he explains in painstakingly detail all the way these civilizations shot themselves on the foot by the way they manage their envrionment. He gives all the archeological evidence and scientific explanation that you will need. Humans can easily destroy environments if left uncheck. Both the Easter Islanders and the Anasazi, towards the end of their societies, showed a great propensity for cannibalism. Yes, things got so bad that people had to eat each other to survive. Once again, none of that is hypothetical.
thank you for this comment. i feel like this video is just another example of people overlooking the environmental costs (and associated dangers) of the human economy, simply because the global standard of living has increased.
but poverty alleviation does not invalidate the realities of environmental overconsumption.
This should be the top comment. Well said.
About time someone got this right. Looking at you, MatPat.
Not that simple. Matpat and this video look at the topic from entirely different angles and with completely different spans of time in mind. This video only covers history so far, not history to the point of technological advancement comparable to Thanos' race.
gtafan110010 Nothing is finite with civilizations living inside computers. Time can be extended to allow more computations but at a lower rate. We will only lack resources if we continue living in our very limited physical forms.
That is an entirely different topic and a very risky one at that. Computerization of the mind also means completely relying on the program and very likely a complete loss of free will. Not to mention that within a program with infinite resources NOTHING has value. I suggest you appreciate these 'limited physical forms' we have currently, because that digitized dream you seem the have is full of risks.
gtafan110010 With quantum computing, you won’t have to worry about free will. You won’t feel a difference when computers can perfectly replicate the real world. Value comes from the amount of time put into code by someone since everybody can’t just spend their time coding everything. People will still find interesting things that others have that would take very long for themselves to create. There will still be trade.
I believe you're missing the point, when your argument is that quantum computing can replicate the real world, because then you achieve nothing. The entire reason to justify making a digitized world is to make it better than the current one. It also does not address the issue of free will when you are being governed by software. Not even touching upon the fact that most people would hate the thought of losing their actual bodies. Also, the state of quantum computing currently is still very far off from creating anything remotely similar to a completely digital world that can translate people into online identities. Quantum computing isn't even functional yet aside from very rudimentary commands. I do imagine you know that, but I personally do not find 'online worlds' to be a solution to the problem. It's merely open a completely different can of wurms (problems)
I almost cried when you put the picture of Chávez there.. as a Venezuelan, it destroys my heart everytime I remember the country we had before that monster came into office... we weren't perfect by any means but we were on the verge of becoming great.. and then he brought his fucking Socialismo del Siglo XXI and doomed us all...
@Anti Cucho Si, seguro, mucho peor... A los venezolanos nos llamaban los ricos de sudamérica, el bolívar tuvo una época en la que valía más que el dólar, conseguías todo en el supermercado y teníamos algunas de las mejores universidades del continente. La Venezuela pre-Chávez tenía muchos problemas, pero no vengas a pretender que estábamos mejor con Chávez. Es por gente como tú que el país está así de mal, gente que todavía defiende el régimen y el socialismo del siglo XXI (asumiendo que eres venezolano, aunque si no lo eres eso por lo menos explicaría la burrada que dijiste). Pues, pana, de bolas que soy antisocialista haha Presencié de frente lo que el socialismo hace a los países, obviamente no soy fan ni tampoco se lo recomendaría a cualquiera que desee que su país salga adelante. Y puse el comentario "antisocialista" en el video de Thanos porque este tipo puso la foto de Chávez hablando sobre líderes autoritarios y se me vino esto a la mente, ¿cuál es tu problema?
@Anti Cucho Compadre, suponiendo que tu métrica de inflación es verdad, déjame recordarte que Chávez estuvo en la presidencia en la época de mayor bonanza petrolera de LA HISTORIA DE VENEZUELA y la inflación continuaba porque robaban sin parar. La industria privada sufrió muchísimo y las inversiones extranjeras se fueron en picada debido a las expropiaciones y clausuras del gobierno. Aparte, el que tira la palabra socialismo no soy yo, ERAN ELLOS, genio. O se te olvida el Patria, Socialismo o muerte? Dios, es que no puedo creer que esto todavía sea tema de discusión. A mi papá lo botaron de Petrozuata porque firmó contra el gobierno en el referendo y no podía trabajar en ninguna otra petrolera en Venezuela. Se tuvo que ir de expatriado a Guinea Ecuatorial como muchos otros. ¡Por algo uno veía ingenieros trabajando de taxistas! Pero sigue defendiendo tu socialismo...
@Anti Cucho De qué coño estás hablando? Yo no tengo ningún partido, simplemente me opongo al tirano que tumbó nuestro país, qué es tan difícil de comprender? Yo no comparé a Chávez con Stalin y me vale verga si tú lo haces, y es obvio que un venezolano no saldría diciendo estupideces como que estábamos mejor con Chávez. ¡Hasta el más chavista ya reconoce la verdad! Solo los enchufados siguen con sus vainas. Y es muy sencillo explicar por qué Chávez, el presidente populista por excelencia sigue siendo popular: el compa jodía a los pobres y luego les regalaba despensas, les lavaba el cerebro con propaganda (la cual estaba en TODAS PARTES) y culpaba al Imperio por todo. Honestamente, cualquiera que viviera en vzla es perfectamente capaz de explicar por qué había chavistas en el país. Justamente, ahorita lo que se está hablando es que el venezolano tiene que cambiar para que el país mejore, sacar a Maduro ya no es suficiente porque la cultura es ser dependiente del gobierno. El único que ha soltado mamadas de su partido y propaganda has sido tú. Yo no soy de derecha ni de izquierda, simplemente le tengo arrechera al socialismo porque lo sufrí de primera mano, el día que la derecha me joda también la criticaré. Créeme que si hay algo que no tengo es confianza en los políticos
@Anti Cucho Compa te respondí todos tus puntos. Pero supongo que si no pongo los numeritos no lo cachas.
1. No, la economía no estaba mejor. Artificialmente, parecía que estaba mejor porque el gobierno estaba recibiendo cantidades absurdas del petróleo y las consecuencias de destruir la industria privada no se hacían ver de buenas a primeras. De todas formas, no sé de donde sacaste que la economía estaba mejor, si cuando Chávez estaba en la presidencia la inflación ya se estaba disparando brutalmente, simplemente no al nivel catastrófico que sucede ahora.
2. Pana, que yo no culpo al socialismo, los chavistas por años estuvieron sacando pecho de que el socialismo estaba causando todos estos cambios en el país y ellos desfilaban por las calles gritando lo maravilloso que es el socialismo. Pues resulta que no es una basura y no funciona, tan simple como eso. Mira, yo no sé de que país seas, pero si eres tan idiota como para querer que se repita lo mismo en tu país, pues muy tu problema. Solamente dime donde es para nunca mudarme para allá.
3. Ah, interesante, entonces te pasas por los huevos cualquier cosa que no quede con tu visión. Mi papá es un ejemplo de un fenómeno que está en toda Venezuela. Te dije la historia de mi papá pa que veas que a mi nadie me lo contó sino que lo estoy viviendo. ¿Por qué preguntas? ¡PORQUE SOY VENEZOLANO y cualquier pana de allá sufre este tipo de cosas de una forma u otra! Y con todo he sido afortunado porque mi papá consiguió conseguir trabajo fuera, otros están de taxistas o comiendo basura a pesar de ser profesionales talentosos. Aparte, yo no sé que transnacional expropia en el mundo, ya que eso es algo que solo pueden hacer los gobiernos. A lo mejor te refieres a que las empresas abusan de sus empleados o algo así, lo cual está mal, pero no son todas ni tienen todo el poder. En Venezuela, los abusadores del gobierno TIENEN TODO EL PODER.
4. No estás aplicando los mismos estándares porque ni siquiera tienes, hermano. Estás pero muy mal si genuinamente piensas que Venezuela con Chávez estaba "bien" y todos éramos felices excepto unos cuantos "oligarcas". El país era un desastre, el éxodo de Venezolanos empezó en 2008 porque ya en ese punto la gente pensaba que el país había tocado fondo. Lo que pasaba era que el gobierno tenía dinero de sobra para regalar plata a los barrios pobres y ponerse como los buenos del cuento cuando en realidad estaban reventando la economía.
Y criticas mis argumentos cuando tú no tienes ninguno. Nada más te ardiste porque hablé mal del socialismo y empezaste a opinar sobre un tema del que claramente no tienes ni idea. Infórmate primero un poco, que Venezuela no pasó de ser una utopía al país más desestabilizado del mundo en cuatro años. Hay que ser muy ignorante o ideológicamente fanático para creerse ese cuento.
@Anti Cucho Si te lo respondí todo, pero dale, te lo vuelvo a poner en numeritos porque es comprensible que alguien así no sepa leer:
1. Yo no comparé a Chávez con Stalin y me vale verga si tú lo haces
2. es obvio que un venezolano no saldría diciendo estupideces como que estábamos mejor con Chávez. ¡Hasta el más chavista ya reconoce la verdad! Solo los enchufados siguen con sus vainas.
3. Lo tercero ni siquiera es un punto, solo estás repitiendo lo que yo dije en el primer comentario.
Ahora, de nuevo numeritos para hablar de las otras estupideces.
1. Pues mira, si lo sacaste de Wikipedia, entonces o no sabes leer o estás bien menso. En wikipedia solo se menciona la inflación una vez y se dice esto: Con Venezuela recibiendo grandes beneficios por la venta de petróleo y con la caída de los índices de pobreza y las mejoras en la alfabetización y la igualdad de ingresos, la calidad de vida mejoró, principalmente entre 2003 y 2007. Al final de la presidencia de Chávez, en la década de 2010, la economía del país empezó a titubear, mientras que la pobreza, la inflación y la escasez se incrementaron, lo que sus críticos achacaron a las acciones económicas de su gobierno en años anteriores, como los controles de precios y el gasto «excesivo e insostenible». Durante su presidencia, el país experimentó un aumento significativo de la criminalidad, especialmente de la tasa de homicidios y en sus últimos años aumentó la percepción de corrupción en el gobierno y la policía. El uso de leyes habilitantes y de formas de comunicación definidas como «propaganda bolivariana» también fueron polémicas.
Ves? Por esto es que es obvio que no tienes idea de lo que pasa. Esto lo sabe cualquier venezolano sin necesidad de meterse en Wikipedia, pero tú googleas dos segundos y tienes las bolas de llamarme mentiroso sobre un tema del cual no sabes un coño.
2. Mira, compadre, yo no he dicho que el capitalismo es bueno. Lo que yo sé es que el socialismo no sirve pa un carajo y puede destrozar un país por completo. El capitalismo tendrá sus vainas, pero habiendo experimentado las mamadas de ambos sistemas, sé que prefiero aquel que no lleva a la gente a comer directamente de la basura. El mundo no será sencillo, pero esta decisión los chavistas la han hecho bastante fácil para cualquier venezolano.
3. Compa, no es anecdotal, lo sería si solo me pasara a mí. Pasó en todo el país! Qué es lo que no entiendes? Estas vainas son comunes en venezuela hasta el punto que casualmente estás hablando con un pana en TH-cam que lo sufrió! Ese es el punto, y yo no sé de qué países capitalistas hablas. Yo no he escuchado que en ningún país capitalista boten a alguien de su trabajo porque no está de acuerdo con el gobierno, pero bueno, googléalo en Wikipedia a ver qué sacas porque es obvio que tampoco tienes idea de esto.
4. Ahora te contradices... En el primer comentario dijiste "Venezuela pre-Chavez era mucho peor que durante Chavez". No es eso lo mismo a decir que estábamos mejor con Chávez? O es que ni siquiera sabes hablar español? Eso es una vil y total MENTIRA y, de nuevo, evidencia que no tienes la menor idea de nada de lo que sucede en Vzla.
De verdad que me sorprende que creas que eres imparcial, cuando es obvio que ni siquiera estás lo suficientemente informado para serlo. Y ya córtale con lo de Thanos. No sé si es que no entiendes inglés, pero en mi comentario no comparé a Chávez con Thanos, simplemente hablé de lo que me hizo sentir el video cuando puso la imagen de tiranos y estaba Chávez entre ellos. Tú no entiendes lo que todas las personas que me rodean han sufrido por ese desgraciado y pues me tocó el alma. Aunque seguramente a ti te vale verga porque es "anecdotal"... digo, son las anécdotas de todo un país.. pero bueno
Wipe out half the people... and half the plants?
The only problem solved there is a housing problem.
There is no housing problem.
There are 633,782 people experiencing homelessness on any given night in the United States.
The US Census Bureau reports on the residential vacancies. In April 2013, they reported 18,439,000 homes were vacant in the first quarter of 2013. Some of these were seasonal, but 13,970,000 were "Year-round" vacant, so that's a more conservative figure to use. [Figures from Table 3.]
The ratio of 13,970,000 : 633,782 is greater than 22 vacant homes per homeless person.
How dare you question Stalin, off to the gulags for you.
Steven Kravitz yay! Train rides are awesome! Right? Lol
That's the concentration camp for you
SeraphimRoad but I don't have adhd....
lol if Stalin was as masculine as Thanos with that deep voice and his delusional ideas he could have made people kill each other rather then use 6 stones
I could argue that the MCU Infinity Gauntlet cannot create or destroy matter, only transform it. That's why Thanos doesn't double resources.
Also, he is against overpopulation. He might think doubling resources would create an unimaginable population boom even if it might have the same result as genocide.
So, transform an entire planet into all of the infrastructure they would need to sustain themselves.
The shear amount of raw material in a planet would mean that he doesn't need to make matter.
AncapFTW
If they can mine a celestial head, I'm sure they could mine a planet as effectively as any lower tier species. That's beyond Thanos. They don't call him the Mad Titan for nothing.
HaloModder555 then take the dirty resources and transform them clean ones. Alchemy on steroids. #ALLLIVESMATTER
Why doesn't he take an uninhibited planet, or all waste matter, and make a renewable resource out of it?
Snehil Shrey Until the inevitable heat-death of the universe.
Those series from marvel and the numerous that come from Japan such as Dragonball Z and its villains who also want this kind of power.
But in real life you don't need such a power as that glove with 6 infinity stones or the 7 dragonballs (they are similar). You just need to make people aware and give them freedom and opportunity to become entrepreneurs and provide beneficial products to society.
bro if he had that much power why didn't he just increase resources?
He is an anti-villian, he doesn't know it is wrong, he is just an in the box thinker
Hence why you didn't just make the resources infant and stabilize he's not a hero he's not exactly a villain because he's not doing it just to kill people he has a a good reason behind it just not good enough to clear him of it being wrong you just not thinking correctly it's not smart
Thanos' idea is even more ridiculous when you think about the fact that he's assuming the entire universe is overpopulated AND killing 50% is the EXACT number of people EVERYWHERE. It's completely ludicrous. On top of that, population is self regulating. Animal populations fluctuate around an equilibrium constantly because there is either slightly more or less food than necessary.
Edit: Forgot to mention, he seems to be ignoring the fact that cutting the population in half would only be a temporary solution, because eventually they would repopulate. That's assuming that society doesn't collapse overnight because half of everyone suddenly vanished. If it does survive, it may even cause a population explosion because there would be so many resources, and it would be back to the original number even sooner.
Matthew Virgo idk what your fully saying, but 50% isn't a number, and you can take 50% from anything...
50% of the population of a given planet is definitely a number. He's basically assuming that every planet in the universe has exactly 2 times the perfect population.
Matthew Virgo ok, what I'm saying is that 50% is a figure and not a constant number. 20 is a number, but 50% of 20 isn't the same as 50% of 34. If that makes anymore sense
I understand how percentages work. 20 is a number, 50% of 20 is 10, which is also a number. That's why I used the word "number" in my original comment. But in that case, it's not 50% of 20, it's 50% of whatever the population of the planets in the universe are. Still a number.
But you're wrong in the first place though, because percentages are equal to numbers. 50% is 0.5, which is a number, just not a whole number. Still falls under the set of "real numbers." The only variability in this situation is the fact that we would be multiplying 0.5 by some other number. So 50% is actually the ONLY constant number in this situation.
Matthew Virgo I don't see what proving me "wrong" in some trivial factor to a prior comment helps your case, which was never even clear in the first place.
These ideas are correct, but to what extent? Scientists have already been talking about the possibility of a technological plateau; A time where innovations and achievements are few and far between. It is not unrealistic to assume that the same can be said for the resources that we use. You say that it is not a zero sum game and that our natural resources are mainly limited by our ingenuity. Even if we assume that the limits are with the ideas and not the resources, there comes a time when even the greatest minds run out of tricks. The human mind may be able to achieve great things but even that has its limits.
We should not rule out the possibility of the technological plateau hitting harder than we expected. We currently live in an age of discovery and exponential growth thanks to science and human ingenuity but many scientists suggest the end of that to be a very real possibility in a few hundred years.
BTW even if we run with this idea that humans can keep thinking and creating forever, if we run it to its logical conclusion which is the eventual heat death of the universe, how would humans continue on living as energy and matter itself slowly die out & dissipate around us? There is an eventual endpoint, a limit; If its not the resources, its the ideas and uses for them, if its neither then the universe itself will just reach its own limit; Unless we were clever enough to avoid that catastrophe. Besides, even you admitted that natural resources were "finite", limited.
I'm not saying we're anywhere near that wall, as most starvation and current issues with regards to human welfare are a result of political, economic, scientific, or management issues that plague our societies. I just want people to know that it is a very real possibility in the future, it may not happen in our generation but it will happen.
Technically, I think the core of what you're saying is correct. But like you also said, we're probably no where near that wall. Forget one generation--that plateau is at a completely unimaginable point in our future, if we don't all perish from some other reason first.
Right now, even though our world is largely better than ever, to live a semi decent life that approaches freedom, you would have to have already won the birth lottery. The majority of our species do not have freedom or even basic needs and we are still advancing technology through a small minority of ideas.
The main point I took out of this video isn't that we don't have to worry about a plateau of advancement, but that we are nowhere close to being able to actually predict that plateau because so many of us are still unfree. How can we possibly imagine a future where ideas have run out when we are literally running on less than 20% of human ingenuity, so to speak?
And how many of us might not even realize it? Of course we are going to think the plateau is going to happen faster and harder than reality, when that's all we're capable of imagining is by assuming it's always going to be the same amount of people coming up with ideas, from the same sources
And people who talk about the world running out of resources are not only speaking with a lack of realistic imagination, they are often also influenced by corrosive political ideas like eugenics and fear of the Other. And to give power to those kinds of people is kind of dangerous.
Once we've reached a point where almost everyone has freedom, maybe then we can actually come up with more predictable models of the future and a possible scientific plateau. Until then, it might be foolish to even seriously consider that as a possibility
@@VultRoos Agreed
Peak oil
I understand what you mean, but honestly worrying about he heat death of the universe is pointless.
Such a thing is so far away, that even if you're not religious, we will totally be dead by then.
To be honest, the sun expanding is already unimaginably far away, I mean you have to realize humanity has only been in proper civilizations since e the Neolithic period, things like that are so far away there is no ligitimet reason to even worry about it.
That really is an issue to be solved by future generations, but we won't survive that long, so I hardly think it matters.
6.5k dislikes = "Wuut, killing half of the universes population is baddd??? Huhhhh?"
Honestly they better correct that issue in the 2nd infinity war where they explain WHY he's wrong, not just because of murder.
Are you seriously expecting Hollywood leftists to promote free market economy ideas in their movies ?
These are not free market economy ideas necessarily, these are ecological insights from population and community ecology@@Kukainis
@@Kukainis Not everything is about politics.
Especially left v right one's.
It really wouldn't matter , they just have to defeat him he's too narssitic
@@Kukainis yes
The prevailing theory ATM is that Thanos can't actually create matter with the infinity stones, and therefore he could only kill people.
But besides that this video is spot on.
He has a stone that can create matter (reality) and two stones that can alter matter (space and reality)
He can get rid of pollution, make infinite resources, fuelless cars, make it so people don't need food, expand the universe, etc
He can make more space with the space or reality stones
The genocide argument is also kicking the can down the road, Eventually the population will still run out of resources and people will still have children.
My theory is that Thanos is crazy. His plan doesn't help anyone and he isn't genuinely trying to fix the problem he says he is... because he is still mentally trapped on Titan and what happened to him. It would be like if someone shot me, so I used the Gauntlet to kill everyone who has ever shot a gun. Did I just solve violence? Did I even solve Gun violence? Did my actions even justify anything that extreme? and what about places where the violence rate is so low that they didn't need to have all their cops killed?
Also, it would make endangered species even more endangered, while other species would recover to the same population in 50 years
Exactly what I have found to be true. Thank you for this video. I hope some who believe in lack will see this and gain a new perspective of the prosperity that is the truth.
all it takes to change the course of history is the will of a single man - Makorave MW series
Economies and wealth are not zero-sum, that much is evidently true. However, on a long enough timeline how do resources not bottleneck a civilization? At some point there has to be an upper limit to the number of people who can sustain a certain lifestyle based upon the resources available, right?
If we limit ourselves to just Earth for example, there is only so much land that can be used to produce food. Once the peak point is reached there are no more people that can feasibly live on Earth without finding another food source to supplement or a change in consumption.
Loved the video, very informative.
tymo1995 trillions of stars in our galaxy alone. If entropy becomes a problem, it won't be one that humans will ever run into. By the time any sapient creature must worry about the heat death of the universe, humans won't exist anymore. We'll have evolved a billion times over into something we can't even imagine yet.
This assumes we continue to use land to grow food. Already there is 'vat-grown meat', proteins combined in a test tube to make something chemically identical to beef protein (which is, admittedly, not the same thing as steak). Give us a bit and something very like the Star trek Technology of Replicators, using proteins from waste, along with base elements, and energy, will be able to simply produce food. (And 'like' Star trek in the way that your cell phone is 'like' the communicators. Not an exact copy, but one you could look at in the archives and go 'Wow, those folks back in the 20th century could see this coming.')
Tom Roberts this is true,however what if the resources to produce these alternatives aren't sufficient due to rapid overpopulation? Even expanding to other planets would make population control an eventual necessity unless we somehow manage to make something that can break the law of relativity.
quickly growing populations, assuming they are growing not at an exponential rate, tend when they reach a resourse bottleneck to either slightly surpass it and then widdle back down to just below threshold and stay there at a flat population, or fluctuate up and down the threshold like a spring. So long as their isn't a massive injection of resources that increases the population above normal sustainable population threshold, I dont think there would be a problem. Even quickly reproducing social animals like rats which you would think would naturally surpass their environmental capacity then die off, tend to plateau before resources are no longer readily available. see the rat utopia experiment if youre interested.
Assuming a constant rate of population growth and assuming advancement in technology won't find a solution before it becomes a major issue, eventually human populations will plateau. That said, humans are very good at solving problems (other than stamina and opposable thumbs, that's humanity's ace that keeps us at the top of the food chain) and will find solutions as it becomes a problem. The question is, "Is human population growing faster than advancements in tech/science can solve humanity's problems?". That answer is unknown and really depends on your thoughts on the nature of science/technology.
At least Thanos’ snap gave us Endgame
Thanks for putting Chavez alongside Stalin and Mao, you gave it the place it deservers in history.
The reason why Thanos never considered to use the Infinity Gauntlet to solve the overpopulation problem with any other method other then genocide is because he's insane. He's proved himself to be a creative mind and a genius, but in his head there was no chance that there was any way to solve the problem other then killing half of the life in the galaxy even though he could have easily thought of a dozen other alternatives. It's honestly sad because he could have been one of the best heroes, if not the greatest hero in the MCU with his intellect, strength, and the sexy Thanos chin.
AK-12 Ahh, someone who actually gets Thanos as a character, how refreshing. In all seriousness though, I think they could've bypassed the "double the resources" criticism if they had kept the bit of "there are as many people alive now as all the people that have died since the beginning of civilized life" from the comics. That would feed into the theme of balance and would support the need for randomness to insure fairness. While any given planet might not be overpopulated, the universe as a whole is overpopulated and that would be why the proposed correction is so immediate and severe.
Alberic Ponce de Leon Thanos in the comics just wants a girlfriend and in the way the movie portrait him it wasn't shown the crazy side of him just the "dumb" side of him cause thay try to make logic to a plan that originally was just Thanos trying to impress death and just came out as a little boy trying to make a excuse to stay late playing video games everything is just dumb
That is something I like about Thanos. They made him quite more complex.
Honestly, he's probably suffering from a lot mental health issues like PTSD, survivor's guilt, and others that drive him to these extremes.
I could be reading to much into it. I just got the impression he's kind of a broken guy looking for a reason why his people went extinct and he was the sole survivor.
It doesn't justify his actions, but it gives a reason why he's so dedicated to this mass genocide.
Dactaraad yeah I'm OK with Thanos having mental issues which make him take this decision but I'm. Not OK with fans saying he is right and he is not evil cause that's not the case his plan is dumb and fucking evil there's no way around it yes it goes with the character but that doesn't mean he is right
I hate how they changed him for the movies. He should've been in love with Death, it would've made more sense.
Make all the resources renewable and more abundant, while making all the leftovers of industry harmless to the enviroment.
Also, a mass Mind Stone effect to make all inteligent creatures care about their population and naturally control birth rates
Nailed it.
@mikael englund Yep. A lot better.
@Lebeman aren't you a human?
If Thanos is bad, woman who practice abortion are the devil.
@@zeexel8421 How?
The fact there are so many dislikes here is terrifying.
Thanos is the worst and the most evil. Here are some points:
a.Wiping out half of the universe- This shows his contempt of life and pretence of self-righteous. Indeed the world faces resource issues and extinction can be caused if people do not overuse them. But it doesn’t justify on massacring living beings in the world. No reasons in this world can ever justify committing evil, everyone said they’re forced when it it the one thing they choose to do. Maybe if he’s that good, he should probably massacre evil beings in this world (rapists, murderers, tyrants, abusers, child killers etc), I guess these groups accounts for half or more of the population of universe.
b. A murderous, perverted psycho- Thanos talks so much about his great purpose and good intentions while he abuses children. Killing Gamora’s family and taking her from her homeland and train her to a killer, tearing Nebula’s limbs to make her ‘perfect’, brainwashing and twisting his children to create ‘The Black Order’. Finding pleasure of snapping Loki’s neck and throw his body to his brother. Admitting on taking pleasure on killing the avengers and committing genocide. This is not about glorious purpose or his quest for the world. This is a display a twisted, pervert, narcissistic, malicious demon with a mouth of mercy speech.
c.Surrounding himself with evil-Look around Thanos. He had been organising a monstrous army by collect predatory, mindless aliens from the void, which means somewhere the light never touches (metaphor). Just like Sauron breeding Orcs and creating Nagzuls for his bidding (Sauron admits his evil though).
Of course the hardest choices requires strongest will. This is what committing evil means to be- abandon your conscious and heart and soul, that’s a strong will for him.
Well, it’s fictional after all and I’m just here to share my thoughts. So don’t take it too serious and I’m fine with different views. Everyone has their opinions after all.
Another thing is did Thanos kill half the people on the planets he already halved?
Half the universe at the time of the snap - the rest is just collateral damage
Thanos' iron will and determination to his cause already make him the most dangerous villain in MCU. Imagine if his cause to please the Lady Death was brought out to the movie as well. That would've made him more twisted, unpredictable, and more dangerous than he is now.
P.S.: You do realize that by saying "space gems", you've made a small nod to the Stones' original name: Infinity Gems.
I'd like to see a fw explanation spin-offs from this video.
1a) The discussion of the added deaths that were caused the sudden disappearance of half the population (i.e. jet pilots, etc. suddenly gone and the deaths of the passenger, undriven cars, buses, etc.).
1b) In "Endgame" when the half that disappeared, suddenly reappeared. How many were added to the deaths when they found themselves in the air, in on busy streets and highways. ("Spiderman: Homecoming" showed that those that were wiped out, suddenly appeared where they last were. E.g. marching band members suddenly appeared in the middle of a basketball game)
2) The economic collapse from suddenly half the population/workers gone.
3) What if Thanos decided to double, triple, quadrupedal, nth times) the natural resources and both the positive and negative effects from this.
What "Endgame" did was give us an excellent study in unintended consequences from not really thinking things through thoroughly. Just seeing things from one side and believing it's the only correct route.
People love the edgy and less complicated answers to life.
Rather then focus on complicated answers to complicated problems, which would require hard work.
Yeah, it’s sad really.
r/ThanosDidNothingWrong
That sub is founded: A simple meme sub making fun of the plan
Then people who believed in the goal came
Derek Fisher no, its necessary
Derek Fisher
Mismanagement of resources resulting in the extinction of species is not wrong?
Derek Fisher
Overpopulation is not a lie for earth it may be for the marvel universe. Yet Thanos is no good guy who would provide races when they exhaust their resources. This is his way of saying get your shit together.
Derek Fisher
True
But this particular phenomena is different. I think the video didn't mention it. It says the poverty has gone down throughout the history due to improvement of human rights. But the trend won't continue. There is always a breaking point. Thereafter irrespective of corruption or power mongering the Thanos phenomenon will take place given that we haven't countered it with technology. If we are uncomfortable with population control we should start thinking right now about the alternatives: space colonization etc
The argument why doesn't he just doesn't he just double the resources, is not valid, as population would increase to match the resource level. It will always end up near each other. There might be a limit on the stones despite being called infinity stones clear each stones have a finite power range. Otherwise he would have just needed 1 stone.
Ron Zhou Right, only the space and reality stones would be capable of being used to create space for resources and resources themselves, and both are known to have a finite number of ways of expressing their power such that increasing resources would involve constant concentration for all eternity to keep the fake resources from suddenly disappearing along with the lives of those who relied on them.
Each stone contains the power of one aspect of the universe, not all aspects. It's when they are put together that they have their unlimited power. Also if they do have a limited amount of power then the movie never said anything about it.
@Jeff Pryce, if they were truly infinite then there would not be anything capable of holding their power. You would only need the power stone to provide the universe with infinite resources. E=MC^2 you just need a energy matter converter to convert the infinite power from power stone to infinite resources.
If the stones are infinite in one aspect then they are infinite in all aspects that's the fundamental mathematical component of infinity. Infinity + infinity = infinity
Infinity x 6 = infinity.
Thus You need only 1. Since the way it is written you must have 6 to have "infinity" then each one is not infinite and adding the 6 does not give you infinity only some large finite, which the stretched across an infinite amount of time means nothing.
better to learn how not to approach maximum capacity and find equilibrium.
Also this video is retarded, Malthus said population growth was constant rate then we be at 10 billion. Then proceeds to show a graph of declining annual growth rate. WtF??
This video also assumes the infinite possibility to manipulate matter. That thinking is small and naive. Say we have complete mastery over matter. We can turn anything into anything,energy into matter and matter into energy. Then we still have a finite amount of resources on planet earth. There is a finite amount of mass on Earth.
Just STOP! You do realize that this is all fiction right? You lost me at E=MC^2 because that's real life and not the notion of magic stones...
Ron Zhou that's not how math works. Infinite something does not immediately implies infinite everything else. You're basically saying "the are infinite numbers, therefore we have infinite numbers that are divisors of 6", when that's clearly not the case.
As for the infinity gems, it's a common trope to have an object of infinite power limited by the wielder's will or imagination. The stones might very well be capable of getting infinite resources by themselves, as a few characters said of the power stone in previous movies, but they didn't have the technology to do it. Thanos might have infinite power, but simply lack the ability to comprehend all those possibilities.
The reason there’s plot holes related to other things he could have done like doubling resources is a side effect of the movie changing his motivations. In the comics, he was doing it all to get in Death’s pants. Seriously. He wanted to impress her and kill a large amount of the population to please her, but not enough that society would entirely collapse and people wouldn’t die in the future.
While Thanos' plan never really makes sense from a logical point of view, I don't think it's really supposed to - he is the Mad Titan after all. In the director's own words, from their commentary on Infinity War:
Joe Russo: Well, he was told ‘no’ to an idea that he had that he felt was the only solution, and then was proved right to himself when that solution was not acted upon. So his messianic complex - he is now committed to following through on the idea he had many many years ago. He is not a stable - although he appears stable at times, he is not a stable individual. Thanos is sort of screwed in the head.
He's not _incompetent_ - he's good at what he does, but he's very set on his goals. He won't accept anything else just because he's told it's insane or it won't work. Heck, he sacrifices his own daughter for the Soul Stone. In his mind, he's already been proven right because of what happened to his own race. It's only when he sees his plan undone, when people wouldn't accept his universe, that he shifts parameters - or dials it up to eleven, depending on your point of view. He believes he's doing good. He's wrong, but he has conviction. He's a fantastic villain, in my mind. As mentioned in the video itself, people with flawed philosophies, ideas, whatever, already exist in real life.
I think there's one point I haven't seen anyone else mention as a flaw to Thanos' plan.
The entire theory is based on the idea that populations will continuously increase, and in the process will continue to consume resources, putting more of a strain on the environment, until we get to a point where society will collapse because of a lack of resources. Let's imagine that, for us, a population of 10 billion would lead to this collapse.
So Thanos' solution is to cut the population in half. Now there's 5 billion people on earth -- all good, right? Except we've established that the reason Thanos thinks there is a problem is that the human race will *always* continue to increase in population size. So killing billions of people does nothing -- the remaining 5 billion people will continue to reproduce, and in a few years, the population will once again reach 10 billion. So what does he do then -- halve the population *again*? It's an unsustainable and inefficient system that doesn't even fix the problem it's trying to solve.
(And yes, I know that many people would argue that populations come to equilibrium and then stop increasing -- but it is clear that Thanos does not believe this, because if he did, he would know that the population would eventually level out, with no more stress on the amount of resources. In his mind, as demonstrated by his line of thinking, populations can only continue to increase no matter what.)
@@lemonferret You missed the point. If Thanos believes that populations will increase until they outpace their resources, then it doesn't matter whether the population is 7 billion or 3.5 billion. Because the 3.5 billion will continue to increase and in 20 years will be back to 7 billion. So all he did was delay the inevitable by 20 years. If the population of the universe is 50 trillion, and he kills 25 trillion, it will eventually get back up to 50 trillion and we're back where we started. Killing half the population doesn't do anything.
It´s very inefficient since killing half of all turtle is competely nedless, but in reality, the earths population would just rise to maybe 5 billiions and stop, and he would be doing the environment a great favor.
Additionally, the bigger the population, the less the BNP per capita, excluding economic growth from the calculation.
@Final Incept *looks at how overpopulation lead to half of them being killed*
"Maybe we should control ourselves instead of breeding like rabbits"
@@robertgulley1310 Tell that to india, or any third world country for that matter, tell that to the generations of starving africans.
Balancing out our population doesn't involve us slowing down reproduction, it involves us starving out and going to war to balance the numbers. Thanos snapping his fingers only cuts out that period of suffering, even if only to bring on another equally bad period.
Required viewing before Avengers: Endgame tonight!
Why didn’t he just double the resources, it would essentially accomplish the same thing and he would be applauded for it.
Because he just wanted to prove that he was right, due to his big ass ego. He’s a narcissist, not a logical savior
Damn , Thanos gets defeated by Basic Economics .What is he , a Keynesianist ? .
i was one of those people who thought thanos was right, and now you have changed my mind.
The fact that some people actually think Thanos is right makes me lose faith in humanity.
Thanos was right though, it was either half of all life or all of life.
@@ethan7252 The fact that you still believe that after everything this video has shown, proves that you guys are delusional and definitely know nothing about population or the REAL issue behind starvation.
@@ethan7252
No he wasn’t and no it isn’t and wasn’t.
@@GigaChadh976 Tell me you don't read the comics without telling me you don't read the comics
And sadly are most people who think he Is right.
Even if Thanos was right and the universe would run out of resources once the population grew high enough, killing half of all life wouldn't fix it, just delay it.
The population would continue to grow afterwards and eventually surpass the size it was before the snap. So, all the resources would inevitably be consumed, leading to everyone dying anyways.
Unless of course,he snapped his fingers again each time the population went up too high
People would keep their population in check out of fear that Thanos will return
@@Tyler-wz9vb Then why not just give everyone the knowledge to keep the population down?
My human geo teacher made us watch this...
based teacher