An environmental question
 

...do you think it is more important to protect a species from becoming extinct at the expense of jobs for people or do you say fuck the species and let the people prevail?

I'm going to have to go with preventing extinction. If people's jobs depend on hunting said species and they mindlessly hunt it to extinction then they're out of a job anyway.

Better to label it endangered, protect it, and preserve it. Keep on with exterminating species after species and, well, the eventual outcome won't be good for anyone.

I expected that you would answer as you have...but there are many people that say fuck the species...particulary if it personally affects them. I for one say protect the species and think I would say the same even if it affected me personally.

Why protect the species? Species have been going extinct since the beginning of time.

If you ask why...then I suspect that no explanation will be acceptable to you...and I do not have the inclination to offer one.

Yeah and those people are unable to forward think more than about 3 hours. Good on you for choosing to save the species.

Biodiversity of the planet is fundamental to our survival as a species and some short term solution to a long term problem that results in the extinction of another species is going to have far greater implications than the loss of a few stupid jobs.

Someone hunting you down?

http://roflrazzi.files.wordpress.com...ction-just.jpg

I love you, you love me,
Together we can kill Barney.
With a little bit of poison,
And a little bit of gas,
Together we can kick his ass!!!

ADG

I'm thinking, for the sake of argument, that there's maybe a difference between a species going extinct on it's own naturally and an otherwise plentiful species hunted to extinction by humans for profit.

And I'm of the mind that the latter, if left unchecked, will ultimately be harmful to the well-being of all life on the planet.

Is that theory a tad overdramatic or well-reasoned common (or what should be common) sense?

essentially the same question, survival of the fittest.

What I mean by this is that if there was a threat to our way of life, By something becoming extinct, than we as humans will prevent that threat....Why because we need it more in the long run.

Eco-System


duh

Any additional input?

you pretty well nailed it on the head there :2 cents:

Although not my belief but I want to start by saying that from a strictly objective standpoint, anything that humans do is just fine. It's hard for people to believe, but nuclear power plants and coal mines are 100% natural. They are no different from a group of beavers building a dam or a hive of bees building a nest.

However, and I've argued this in another thread about vegetarians, is that what makes humans different is the ability to see and choose options which give them the benefit they want, but with less negative impact on others. When people exercise that choice, it is then that they become human.

So I would say that there is almost never a situation in with a species and humans cannot find a way to coexist together if humans are the dominant species in that equation. It may be "easier" to choose the option that harms the species, but it is never necessary.

Any more input?

So have jobs. Adapt or die. :1orglaugh

Just learned tonight that many species of sharks are now endangered because of the human animal...and the band plays on.

Can't it be both? lolllllllllllllllllllll