1) In the fall… Read Full Bio ↴There are at least 5 artists with the name Creatures.
1) In the fall of 2007, five friends came together to play metalcore and crossover thrash in vein of Slayer, Ringworm, and Hatebreed: Creatures was born. The band wrote an incredible demo and played shows non-stop through out Southern California and made sure no warehouse, garage, or venue was safe from their ferocious live performance. Locals wanted more, and they got it when Creatures dropped their debut s/t 7" at Sound and Fury 2008; playing an explosive opening set that blew everyone out of the water (and some out of conciousness). Creatures made their mark on the masses. In winter of 2008, Creatures teamed up with So-Cal locals, Downpresser, to release a split for So-Cal based label, Fineprint Records, followed by a winter tour to support their efforts.
Creatures' debut full length, "I, Lucifer" focuses on the band's metal roots and pushes their sound further to the limit. Face melting solos, heavy-pulvurizing riffs, and extreme speed is sure to provide something for everyone. With lyrics of depression, anger, and rage, this album is sure to keep your head banging.
Creatures' "Vesuvius" is set to be released January 3rd 2012 on Twelve Gauge Records
"Blend of unrelentless force and raw power produces a barbaric sound unlike any other."
Releases:
(2007) Demo - Self Released
(2008) Self Titled 7" - Collapse Records
(2009) Split 7" with Downpresser - Fineprint Records
(2009) I, Lucifer - Eulogy Recordings
(2010) Salvation 7" - Hellfish Family & Closed Casket Activities
(2012) Vesuvius 12" - Twelve Gauge Records
2) Formed in 2009 in Columbus, OH. Creatures is a jazzy punk / indie duo featuring Owen Kelley on guitar and vocals and Chris Mengerink on drums. They self released their 6 song demo in 2010.
3) A heavy metal band from Brazil.
4) UK drum and bass artist Harvey Gordon. Credited for the release titled Gonzo Transmission EP.
5) Dungeon synth from France. https://creatures9.bandcamp.com/
Suffer
Creatures Lyrics
Jump to: Overall Meaning ↴ Line by Line Meaning ↴
Fuck the weak I don't need your lies
I'll get by just find on my own
Being alone is all I've known
Things you say
Drive me insane
You've hit the switch, now just wait for me to break
I've heard your shit too many times
Now I'm boiling over
Waiting for your demise
Standing still for far too long
My fuse is running short
It seems as if I've had enough but I know
When it rains it pours
I don't think you know
But you mean nothing to me
You never caused me any misery
I carried on just fine without you
You're all alone, now what will you do?
Suffer!
I don't need you
What will you do?
I don't need you.
The lyrics of Creatures' song "Suffer" seem to convey a sense of frustration and anger towards someone who has betrayed the singer numerous times. The opening lines "betrayed again it's no surprise" set the tone for the song and suggest that this is not the first instance of betrayal. The singer rejects weakness and lies and asserts that they are capable of getting by on their own despite their preference for being alone. However, the person being addressed continues to say things that drive the singer insane, and they have now crossed a line. The anger slowly builds up to a point where the singer is waiting for the demise of the other person.
The lyrics of "Suffer" not only depict a sense of anger and disappointment, but they also project the idea of self-reliance and perseverance. The singer is determined to overcome any obstacles and frustrations that the other person may have caused. The chorus "suffer, I don't need you" suggests that the singer is past the point of tolerating the other person's behavior and that they are better off without them.
Overall, the lyrics of "Suffer" by Creatures convey a sense of resilience and determination in the face of betrayal and difficult situations. The singer rejects the other person's negativity and asserts their independence, making it clear that they don't need anyone who causes them misery.
Line by Line Meaning
Betrayed again it's no surprise
Once again betrayed and let down, but not unexpected.
Fuck the weak I don't need your lies
I have no use for those who are weak and deceptive.
I'll get by just fine on my own
I am capable of managing alone.
Being alone is all I've known
I have grown accustomed to solitude.
Things you say
The words you utter.
Drive me insane
Push me to the brink of madness.
You've hit the switch, now just wait for me to break
You have triggered something within me, and now you must reap the consequences.
I've heard your shit too many times
I have endured your nonsense for far too long.
You've come too close, and you've crossed the line
You have encroached upon my boundaries and violated them.
Now I'm boiling over
My emotions are simmering at the surface.
Waiting for your demise
Anticipating your downfall.
Standing still for far too long
I have been stagnant for an extended period.
My fuse is running short
I am reaching the end of my patience.
It seems as if I've had enough but I know
Although it appears that I am at my limit, I recognize that I have more to give.
When it rains it pours
When misfortune strikes, it often comes in abundance.
I don't think you know
I suspect that you are unaware.
But you mean nothing to me
You hold no significance in my life.
You never caused me any misery
You have not inflicted any pain upon me.
I carried on just fine without you
I persevered in your absence without issue.
You're all alone, now what will you do?
You are in isolation, what actions will you take?
Suffer!
Experience anguish and agony!
I don't need you
I am self-sufficient without you.
What will you do?
What choices will you make?
Contributed by Elliot H. Suggest a correction in the comments below.
@ninjaturtletyke3328
Whenever I get into these discussions about the different problems of evil I always think
“So much suffering just so a very few can enjoy some complex story”
We stand on a mountain of clear unconsentual suffering and say “wow isn’t this great!”
It may be great for you and your loved ones. But that’s just an emotional position wink nudge
It just makes me want to ask “why do you want a plan that requires hurting so many individuals just to get a nice story?”
It’s seriously like the celestial dragons from one piece looking down on the rest of the population because they don’t just accept the powers at be.
Like if I had to rate the experience of this reality as a whole I’d give it a solid 5 out of 10. Average and can clearly use some very easy improvements. Like not making the food cycle a carnivorous one.
And I think that’s a generous rating biased by my privilege
@ninjaturtletyke3328
@@Noah-ig6re I think there are some mistakes with what he says here though.
I would mostly agree that this is the case. Because pain always is for everyone this thing you need to get passed in order to enjoy living.
But there is a practical problem on one end with this, and then there is a philosophical problem on the other end.
I’ll start with the philosophical problem because I would say it’s the least problematic
And that’s with the terminology always. And you can only support the term always on an evidentiary basis. Which means this statement will be begging the the question on the terms that I can claim a position on the other end of I can’t remember what it’s called anymore. The Christian skepticism where you accept god is true on the mere possibility that he exists based on the ontological problem that you can’t disprove god.
Because you can’t prove ontologically that it’s always true then I can accept that pain doesn’t always supersede pleasure on the mere possibility that, that could be true. Sorry this part would be easier if I could remember the position.
But the bigger problem is the practical problem.
Which is that most pains you get through in life to become a happy person are fairly easy. It’s not that uncommon for people with a lot of privilege to mostly live a happy life and forget the pains of their childhood. While most other pains they experience are consensual pains like in competition. The pain of competing is enjoyable for me. So I often don’t really remember when I’m upset later. I mostly remember the times I improved.
And I’m only objecting because I think the statement leaves a lot to be desired in this aspect. The only reasons I have trouble with depression now is because of external factors like I can’t find a job that I don’t hate that provides for my fiancé and me enough to be worth it for our life together. Im a creative type and I’m doing hard labor strictly because the economy sucks
And the second is her health which drives a level of uncertainty in my psychology that’s breaking me on the inside. And this modern healthcare system in America is being driven by culture wars, billionaires, and politicians who don’t care about fixing anything.
I don’t care about these plights. And I would be living a much better life without them.
Pain may always be greater than pleasure. But certain kinds of pains are disgusting and unneeded. I live in a world of vomit that I don’t care to overcome
@AlmostEthical
@@xavisonline You are right. There is no reason to privilege the claims of Iron Age Abrahamic religion. Why not Ming Dynasty Confucianism, Daoism and Buddhism? It's just cultural bias.
Animal suffering stems from the fact that an animal that fears death is more likely to survive than any peers that don't fear death.
Also, an animal that responds to injury (via pain) will survive better than one that does not notice its injuries and fails to tend them.
If we zoom out, we can consider the journey of the Earth from its formation to its period as a molten planet after the collision with Theia. Then the rocks gradually changed and surface chemistry complexified until biology emerged. From there, we have biology co-evolving with geology.
There may be much more of this story to come. Perhaps suffering will one day become just a relic of the "bad old days" back when we were biological?
One thing I know is that life itself, while being driven to suffer by evolution, strives to avoid suffering. Hopefully it will find a way.
// monologue :)
@zrosix2240
A lot of theists believe that God created man to rule over the rest of creation with him, under his guidelines (this is actually the common Baptist view)
And believe that we were presented an option to either rule creation on our own terms (taking the apple), or under Gods rules
We, of course, took the apple, which lead to a fallen world, where the innate carnal state of every being, along with man’s, came out, where the world was thrown into chaos, because God left it to us to rule over creation (and therefor made it our job to create a peaceful world, in which the carnal nature would be tamed, animal suffering would be stopped, etc.)
And that in the millenium god would take back his hold and all beings would be tamed, suffering would come to an end
So I know it’s a bit of a cop out, and to be clear I don’t hold this view of the fall (I’m mormon), but it’s a valid explanation that I do think needs to be considered as a genuine opposition to this argument against theism. The argument that chaos is the natural state of things and man was put in charge of controlling this chaos, and is horribly failing
@mf_hume
I agree with most of your video, but there’s one thing that struck me as a bit off.
You frequently seem to use a style of argument that is not exactly kosher from a probabilistic point of view. You rightly point out that if E is evidence for, then ~E is evidence against, but then go on to characterize ~E at an inappropriate level of granularity.
So your argument here is about the kind, degree, and distribution of animal suffering we observe, but the negation of that hypothesis includes every other combination of kind, degree, and or distribution from extremely good to extremely bad. That’s just because the negation of a sharply specified E is a broad ~E.
This is really applicable later in the video. You go on to say something like “if the world was better, that would be evidence for God,” treating these better worlds as hypothetical evidence E and noting that our observed distribution entails ~E. But it doesn’t follow that anything that entails ~E is evidence against God. That follows if confirmation is transitive, but it’s not. So E1 can be evidence for God and so can E2 even though it implies ~E1.
In practice I agree with the point you’re making, but I think there’s a methodological point here that is being expressed way too hastily. And I’m not trying to nitpick—I think people miss this point and end up making silly counterarguments in return. So take that Capturing Christianity video a while back where he says that animal suffering isn’t evidence against god because animal suffering entails fine tuning or something like that. I think that’s a silly argument, but it’s kind of a fair response given how you’ve structured your argument.
[I edited this comment considerably to sound like less of an ass]
@billsherman1565
@@thoughtform21 "f there could be a world in which there are no animals BESIDES human beings, it would still be a world with animals, since it is implied in your above statement that WE are also animals. "
Yes humans are animals, this is why you will notice in my statement I stated BESIDES humans. I am aware humans are animals, why are you obfuscating?
'"So the question of animal suffering proper would still be present."
The argument is specifically about non human animals.
"Moreover, there still remains the more basic question of how one would make indeterminate, extended, and changeable matter behave other than the way it does for any other material thing, since it is those very conditions of its existence that are the cause of suffering."
The God in question is supposedly omnipotent. If God exists, it seems trivial to me that there could simply be only humans. Since he is the one who would have propagated said matter in the first place.
@DirkStraussOnline
This is the best explanation I have ever heard on animal suffering as evidence against a god.
@fredrikssen
I respect and admire you very much for addressing this issue that has haunted me since my childhood.I really thought I must have been insane for seemingly being one of not so many people I have known who had even, seriously, thought about this issue. I am a scientist and the pain I have witnessed is heartbreaking, traumatizing and the only important thing I need to know about the loving god they talk about. It is much more logical for us to believe in the non-loving deity or, perhaps, there is a sadistic devil that has created this nightmare universe, from the perspective of almost most sentient beings.
@ninjaturtletyke3328
Whenever I get into these discussions about the different problems of evil I always think
“So much suffering just so a very few can enjoy some complex story”
We stand on a mountain of clear unconsentual suffering and say “wow isn’t this great!”
It may be great for you and your loved ones. But that’s just an emotional position wink nudge
It just makes me want to ask “why do you want a plan that requires hurting so many individuals just to get a nice story?”
It’s seriously like the celestial dragons from one piece looking down on the rest of the population because they don’t just accept the powers at be.
Like if I had to rate the experience of this reality as a whole I’d give it a solid 5 out of 10. Average and can clearly use some very easy improvements. Like not making the food cycle a carnivorous one.
And I think that’s a generous rating biased by my privilege
@Noah-ig6re
As Schopenhauer put it
“The pain in the world always outweighs the pleasure. If you don’t believe it, compare the respective feelings of two animals, one of which is eating the other”
@ninjaturtletyke3328
@@Noah-ig6re I think there are some mistakes with what he says here though.
I would mostly agree that this is the case. Because pain always is for everyone this thing you need to get passed in order to enjoy living.
But there is a practical problem on one end with this, and then there is a philosophical problem on the other end.
I’ll start with the philosophical problem because I would say it’s the least problematic
And that’s with the terminology always. And you can only support the term always on an evidentiary basis. Which means this statement will be begging the the question on the terms that I can claim a position on the other end of I can’t remember what it’s called anymore. The Christian skepticism where you accept god is true on the mere possibility that he exists based on the ontological problem that you can’t disprove god.
Because you can’t prove ontologically that it’s always true then I can accept that pain doesn’t always supersede pleasure on the mere possibility that, that could be true. Sorry this part would be easier if I could remember the position.
But the bigger problem is the practical problem.
Which is that most pains you get through in life to become a happy person are fairly easy. It’s not that uncommon for people with a lot of privilege to mostly live a happy life and forget the pains of their childhood. While most other pains they experience are consensual pains like in competition. The pain of competing is enjoyable for me. So I often don’t really remember when I’m upset later. I mostly remember the times I improved.
And I’m only objecting because I think the statement leaves a lot to be desired in this aspect. The only reasons I have trouble with depression now is because of external factors like I can’t find a job that I don’t hate that provides for my fiancé and me enough to be worth it for our life together. Im a creative type and I’m doing hard labor strictly because the economy sucks
And the second is her health which drives a level of uncertainty in my psychology that’s breaking me on the inside. And this modern healthcare system in America is being driven by culture wars, billionaires, and politicians who don’t care about fixing anything.
I don’t care about these plights. And I would be living a much better life without them.
Pain may always be greater than pleasure. But certain kinds of pains are disgusting and unneeded. I live in a world of vomit that I don’t care to overcome
@xerox2227
Great example with the Celestial dragons 😂
@Abdullah21038
People seem to down play that, but it is truly an amazing thing when one sees animals or insects at each other or even bacteria, theres an aweness that can be recognised in even the way they suffer or fight or live or threaten
@DoloresLehmann
This was an excellent video, I believe Cosmic Skeptic has also made one about the same topic. But I have to repeat myself here: This is not evidence against God, but evidence against our prevalent concepts of God. It says nothing about the possible existence of a God who does not adjust to our concepts.
@leslieviljoen
On Hume's quote: do theists consider that if their deity did not exist at all, their theodicies would be equally applicable?
@anteodedi8937
Ironically, historical theists (substance dualists) even denied that animals are sentient beings. They treated them as insentient robots, propagating even more horrendous treatment of them.