Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2013 23:14:29 GMT -5
Sorry Gander, I can no longer post on your blog because I don't want to subscribe to Google +. But anyhow, I take exception to your description of human life having no more value than just being thrown in the trash after death. Even as an atheist, isn't that extreme? I'm sure there are atheists who think differently, even for their animal companions. Geeze Louise, Alex. If anyone wants to see more about this, just go here: realitybyalex.blogspot.com/2013/07/mercy.html |
|
|
|
Post by raybar on Aug 4, 2013 0:16:04 GMT -5
But Lily -- the suggestion was only to throw the dead body into the trash. That is not devaluing or throwing away a life. The life has already ended. The dead body is not the person.
Still, I agree that it would be an extreme. We don't usually see such callous treatment of the dead except when there are mass casualties (war, genocide, epidemic, etc.) or when murderers try to get rid of the evidence.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2013 0:36:14 GMT -5
But Lily -- the suggestion was only to throw the dead body into the trash. That is not devaluing or throwing away a life. The life has already ended. The dead body is not the person. Still, I agree that it would be an extreme. We don't usually see such callous treatment of the dead except when there are mass casualties (war, genocide, epidemic, etc.) or when murderers try to get rid of the evidence. Yeah, like the Holocaust. Which I agree with Alex has to do with Jews. And my relatives were murdered in concentration camps. And that the Star of David is appropriate and has nothing to do with religion but with ethnic Jews. realitybyalex.blogspot.com/2013/07/david-silverman-american-atheiststhe.htmlOf course, the dead body is not the person. But why in death should we toss each other away like a bag of garbage? Ridiculous. I believe this is just an atheists way of being different from their hated "brethren". Well it's not working. It's just as stupid as that. that is wanted to get rid of. "First take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye." |
|
|
|
Post by faskew on Aug 4, 2013 9:24:09 GMT -5
Different cultures treat dead bodies in all sorts of ways. And, yes, there are even religions that believe once the soul is gone, the body is nothing and there are atheists who treat bodies with various ceremonies. One size does not fit all.
And future folk are going to be doing some changes, like it or not, since the 7 billion or so people alive today are all mostly going to be dead in the next 100 years. Not enough room to bury us all, not proper to use fossil fuel to cremate us all, etc. And if there's ever a virus pandemic or some such that kill a couple of billion in a single year, current religious systems will shift over to bulldozing mass graves, out of necessity. During the Black Plague years in super-religious Europe, even the churches treated the dead like garbage. It will certainly happen again, sooner or later, religion or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by MeLily on Aug 5, 2013 1:53:48 GMT -5
Had to sign in a guest the third time because my name has "already been taken". No kidding. Geeze Louise, if this board doesn't recognize me by now, then what the hell. Anyway, too tired to comment already. Will do so tomorrow.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2013 13:43:27 GMT -5
Different cultures treat dead bodies in all sorts of ways. And, yes, there are even religions that believe once the soul is gone, the body is nothing and there are atheists who treat bodies with various ceremonies. One size does not fit all. And future folk are going to be doing some changes, like it or not, since the 7 billion or so people alive today are all mostly going to be dead in the next 100 years. Not enough room to bury us all, not proper to use fossil fuel to cremate us all, etc. And if there's ever a virus pandemic or some such that kill a couple of billion in a single year, current religious systems will shift over to bulldozing mass graves, out of necessity. During the Black Plague years in super-religious Europe, even the churches treated the dead like garbage. It will certainly happen again, sooner or later, religion or not. There are also religious folks who think the body is "nothing" except we respect the person/soul whatever you want to call it that it contained. And quite frankly except for another plague, I don't believe humans will ever just dump people in mass graves. Not even in 100 years from now. If so, then humans can darn well just become extinct, as far as I'm concerned. |
|
|
|
Post by faskew on Aug 5, 2013 14:06:16 GMT -5
People already use mass graves. Local disease outbreaks, mass starvation, enemy casualties in war, etc. Any stress in society that causes a breakdown of systems means that bodies are either dumped or left to rot. Of course, Mafia type murders, serial killers, and so forth often bury their victims, but only to hide the evidence, not to honor the dead. 8->
|
|
|
|
Post by Gander on Aug 5, 2013 14:44:37 GMT -5
Lily, remember, I'm not suggesting that for everyone. I was espousing my own, personal choice and belief in the matter. If you or anyone feels the need for pomp and circumstance, and the incoherent mutterings of high priests, and the wailing and caterwalling of friends and family, that's their choice. Spend the money, have the ceremony. Do whatever you think will bring you paradise in the next life. For me,it's more than I want me or any of my friends to worry about.
I'm sorry if you feel offended by my post. But how about MY offense that your mystical beliefs should have precedence over the way I want to MY life? And finish it? My dead body is nothing to me. Sorry. It's not up to you to judge the value of it. Value your own.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gander on Aug 5, 2013 14:48:48 GMT -5
All that being said, the least I could do is thank you for putting the link in there.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2013 14:59:16 GMT -5
Lily, remember, I'm not suggesting that for everyone. I was espousing my own, personal choice and belief in the matter. If you or anyone feels the need for pomp and circumstance, and the incoherent mutterings of high priests, and the wailing and caterwalling of friends and family, that's their choice. Spend the money, have the ceremony. Do whatever you think will bring you paradise in the next life. For me,it's more than I want me or any of my friends to worry about. I'm sorry if you feel offended by my post. But how about MY offense that your mystical beliefs should have precedence over the way I want to MY life? And finish it? My dead body is nothing to me. Sorry. It's not up to you to judge the value of it. Value your own. You're describing the most exaggerated of circustances. Honestly, you would criticize that as not using critical thinking to generalize about groups of people that way if anyone else used such generalizations. I have no problem with your body being dumped in the trash. My whole point was, is this how atheists view life. Well, by some answers here, it looks like it hit a nerve.  But isn't that what it's all about--getting reactions to message boards or blogs? Otherwise, why bother? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2013 14:59:49 GMT -5
All that being said, the least I could do is thank you for putting the link in there. Thanks, you're welcome. |
|
|
|
Post by raybar on Aug 5, 2013 20:53:31 GMT -5
Well, by some answers here, it looks like it hit a nerve. I don't know whether or not you've hit a nerve. Not one of mine, anyway. I don't like the idea of unceremoniously dumping bodies into the garbage. It's just not the way to treat what used to be a person. They should be treated with dignity and respect. But there is the practical matter of what to do with them. At present, the world population is about 7,000,000,000 the global "crude death rate" is 7.9 deaths per 1000 people 7,000,000,000 / 1000 x 7.9 = 55,300,000 What are we going to do with 55,300,000 dead bodies per year? One billion dead bodies over the next 18 years. What should we do with them? |
|
|
|
Post by Melily on Aug 5, 2013 21:21:35 GMT -5
Does a person have to be on the same computer as when registered for FACTS board to recognize you? This is crazy. I don' writing as a guest because then I can't go back and edit. Arrgh!
Anyway, does cremating really use too much fossil fuel? And ashes don't need to be buried in the ground in an urn. I for one would rather have my ashes thrown into the wind. If we're this bad off population-wise, then what does the future hold anyway? Looks like we have way more major problems than where to bury people. And just remember, we are also running out of space for garbage landfills. Come to think of it, lots of garbage right now is burned for fuel. So shortage of fossil fuels solved! If it's one thing that humans are good at is producing trash.  |
|
|
|
Post by raybar on Aug 5, 2013 23:22:15 GMT -5
Lily --
I still have no idea what your problem could be with the FACTS board. Once you have registered, you ought to be able to sign in from any internet connection and use the board normally. I use my home PC, my MacBook, my iPad, my PC at work, and Molly's laptop one in a while. No problems ever.
On Gander's blog, however, only the MacBook and iPad will work. On any PC, even though I am signed into Goggle and my avatar image is showing, and I may have signed in several times, when I try to post a reply my text just vanishes. Again, no idea what the trouble is.
==============
I think that over time we (the world) will have to learn to recycle everything, including ourselves. Resources, no matter how abundant they may seem today, can not last forever. And there has been fiction about mining the old landfills for some years -- lots of valuable materials there.
Cremation and scattering ashes is a form of recycling, but it seems like a costly (in energy) and wasteful (of organic material) way to go about it. I wonder if some less destructive method could be found that would be more imitative of nature -- returning the bodies nutrients back into the web of life as happens when animals die in the wild.
I do see overpopulation as a major challenge for the coming generations. Too many people all competing for not enough resources. Could be some tough time ahead, but I there are a lot of smart people working to find solutions. My biggest fear is that politics will get in the way.
|
|
|
|
Post by faskew on Aug 6, 2013 6:59:43 GMT -5
Lily wrote:
>Anyway, does cremating really use too much fossil fuel?
I don't know how much propane (or whatever)is used per body, but Raybar's numbers are a good starting point. If each body required 1 gallon of gasoline (or its equivalent) to burn, that would be 53 million gallons a year just to burn bodies or about 1 billion gallons over the next 18 years. If it required 10 gallons to burn a body, that's 530 million gallons per year or 10 billion gallons over the next 18 years. And there are still places (and religions) that use wood to burn bodies - producing more CO2.
We have too many people to feed and house properly and we have too many people to easily dispose of all the bodies. Soylent Green, anyone? 8-D
Me, I don't care about mine after death. I tell my wife to go for whatever is the cheapest and most convenient for her. If she wants to pay for a funeral or party or whatever, it's for her own benefit - I'll be dead. 8->
|
|
|
|
Post by raybar on Aug 6, 2013 13:39:39 GMT -5
"Soylent Green?" No. Nothing so direct. If I recall correctly, bodies were recycled directly into food for people in that movie. Human bodies could, perhaps, be processed along with all the other organic waste we produce to make compost, fertilizer, etc.
It's a bit creepy thinking about this, but it is a problem that has to be addressed.
=====
"I tell my wife to go for whatever is the cheapest and most convenient for her"
When all the gay boys were dying of AIDS there was typically little money left for funerals. Many of them were broke or in substantial debt by the time they died. Some had been estranged from their families simply because they were gay, so no help there.
The solution for some of them was cremation at a particular facility which offered discounted pricing to AIDS victims, followed by a memorial service in someone's home. Molly and I hosted one such "gathering of friends," as they called it, at our house. The cremation was a few hundred dollars, and the "gathering" cost less than one of our typical parties - just some drinks and snacks really. Anyone who had something to say got a chance to speak in front of the group, and some things were read from people who couldn't attend.
A dignified "send off" doesn't have to cost much or be a big production, but people seem to need an opportunity to say goodbye as a group.
|
|
|
|
Post by russell on Aug 6, 2013 18:12:19 GMT -5
The heading to this discussion seems off to me. Do we devalue life? We are not talking about life we are talking about meat. Life is gone by the time we get to funerals etc. For me I don’t care what they do with my body once I’m dead but I’m sure the people who shared my life would have ideas on what they want done with it and that’s really the critical point for me. Disposing of a body is not for the benefit of the dead it’s for the benefit of the living. If you feel OK composting your departed loved one then so be it, if you need an elaborate ceremony to make you feel better then again go for it. It doesn’t matter to the dead either way.
From what I’ve heard the most ecofriendly way to dispose of a body is to drill a vertical hole in the ground, drop the body in then plant a tree on top as you back fill. The body rots, feeds the tree and something valuable comes from the nutrients that the dead person held. If you plant a fruit tree you get true value from it. Natural composting basically.
Cremating a body does seem wasteful to me. Using fossil fuels to do so seems the worst idea. Using wood is OK as all of the CO2 released was captured in growing the trees that created the wood so it’s actually a zero emission approach so long as you don’t use fuel to collect the timber.
We’re building a home which will be heated with wood. For every kilogram of carbon released by burning the wood one kilogram was captured to create the wood so the total carbon added to the atmosphere is actually zero and all of the energy released comes from the sun. It works for heating and for cremations.
|
|
|
|
Post by faskew on Aug 7, 2013 7:48:59 GMT -5
Trees indeed store CO2, but the negative for wood comes when there aren't as many live trees storing as there are dead trees burning. 8-D
|
|
|
|
Post by russell on Aug 7, 2013 18:36:37 GMT -5
Very true, it does have to be done correctly but compared to fossil fuels that is at least possible with wood. There's no way to make fossil fuels carbon neutral.
|
|
|
|
Post by russell on Aug 7, 2013 18:40:16 GMT -5
Wood has to be handled correctly but it is at least possible with wood to create carbon neutral fuel. That's not possible with fossil fuels.
|
|
|
|
Post by faskew on Aug 8, 2013 6:53:34 GMT -5
Agreed - wood is potentially part of a renewable cycle; fossil fuels are not. The down side of wood is that the world is cutting down trees faster than we're replacing them. Doesn't have to be that way, but I don't see it changing in the near future. And many of the places most likely to cremate with wood are often the places running out of trees due to overpopulation, etc. So I think that in the long-term, cremation will be primarily a fossil fuel activity. Embalming and cremation both do damage to the environment, but those will likely be the norm in our lifetimes.
Texas has some weird laws (and not just about dead bodies). If you bury the body with 24 hours of death, you don't have to embalm it. But there are many regulations about where you can bury a body and most people can't make all the necessary arrangements within 24 hours - especially for unexpected deaths. Still, I wouldn't be surprised to see "natural" cemeteries in the near future offering non-embalming, 24-hour burial services. 8->
|
|
|
|
Post by russell on Aug 8, 2013 18:24:29 GMT -5
One question we need to ask about any fuel has to be, "how will this practice work in 1000 years time"? If we cut down trees and don't replace them then in 1000 years there will be no trees so that's obviously unsustainable. The same is true for fossil fuels, in 1000 years pretty well all the known reserves won’t exist so what are we left with. Solar, wind, hydro, wave energy will all still exist. Biofuels would still exist. Wood could still exist so long as we do it properly. Wood is just another way of gathering solar energy if it’s done properly and with zero carbon emissions in total. We’ve planted more trees than we have cut down to build our house so we’re trying to do the right thing.
I’m not sure why embalming is necessary, surely we can fridge/freeze the bodies till it’s time to bury them? Fridges have an environmental impact but the energy to run them can come from renewables but not so the chemicals used in embalming.
Maybe we need to learn how to walk softly on this plant, we need to take into our psyches that wasting resources on the dead is foolish. We need to take that in the way religions take in the ideas of big ceremonies and prayer over corpses etc. Maybe then we’d be happy to dispose of the dead in an environmentally friendly manner.
For me I quite like the idea of being dropped into a hole in the ground under a newly planted apple tree within a short period of time after I’m dead. No coffin, no embalming etc. The people who miss me could pay homage by picking and eating the apples which could contain some of the matter that was once me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2013 21:25:43 GMT -5
Well, you all can stop worrying your pretty little heads.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2013 22:02:49 GMT -5
For me I quite like the idea of being dropped into a hole in the ground under a newly planted apple tree within a short period of time after I’m dead. No coffin, no embalming etc. The people who miss me could pay homage by picking and eating the apples which could contain some of the matter that was once me. Same problem as for graves. There's only so many apple trees there's space for on the planet. If you're going to do something like that, how about digging way down and interring a large number of bodies in the hole--and then planting the apple tree. Even then, the planet will turn into one large apple orchard eventually. The problem is too many people. How are you planning to stop that? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2013 23:18:04 GMT -5
And how about solar energy for creamatoriams?
|
|
|
|
Post by russell on Aug 9, 2013 0:02:17 GMT -5
HI Lily
We’ll always need more trees on this planet than people so that’s not a big issue plus it’s not like you can only use one plot of ground once, after a certain amount of time the person has completely rotted away so you can drill another hole and bury another one. Alternatively you could put the body through a shredder and spread it around as fertilizer after some form of composting. That does away with the problem of drilling holes and we still get to recycle the materials of the body.
How do I deal with overpopulation, that’s a separate question entirely but it is one we’ll have to deal with. This planet is already over populated and we can only support our current population by the use of fossil fuels with current technologies. In future the fuels will run out then where will we be. From what I’ve heard one of the most effective ways of reducing populations is simply by raising the education level of people, mostly women. More education equals less babies. It may not solve the problem but it seems like a good idea anyway. If we need to go further in future then we’ll have to come up with other methods.
Solar cremations sound like a great answer if, for some strange reason, we feel the need to cremate the body and destroy all the nutrients it contains. I think there are better answers.
|
|
|
|
Post by faskew on Aug 9, 2013 7:09:36 GMT -5
And there are always "body farms". There's one near Austin that does forensic research. Bodies are left lying around to see what happens to them under varying conditions - some left in trunks of cars, some buried in different types of soil, some left in the open, etc. All the nutrients are recycled, and there's no cost to the family. 8->
|
|
But isn't that what it's all about--getting reactions to message boards or blogs? Otherwise, why bother? 
