[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 100 KB, 540x720, American Patriot.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4698625 No.4698625 [Reply] [Original]

Humans are part of nature.

If dem whales, pandas and other weak endangered animals can't adapt to the new environment then they fucking die.

How come mosquitoes are still alive and kicking even though we've been trying to exterminate them all for God knows how long? Because they fucking deserve to live on this planet, and they fight for it, unlike pandas who won't even fuck to save their species.

>> No.4698633

Actually you uneducated piece of shit the mosquitoes are still around because of an inability to consistently control them and bans on the use of DDT among other things. And a rapidly breeding insect is in no way comparable to a mammal that is being exploited at a high rate. Evolution does not allow an animal to 'adapt' to a harpoon in the brain or conditions changing faster than it is possible for them to adapt. Hopefully though you are just a troll and not a fucking moron who thinks a human caused mass extinction is a good thing.

>> No.4698635

>>4698625
you've been watching too much fight club.
also >>>/b/

>> No.4698638
File: 22 KB, 470x332, panda9.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4698638

>that feel when pandas will go extinct

>> No.4698639

>>4698633
Okay, what about raccoons and crows, they seem to be thriving.

>> No.4698650

>>4698639
As far as I am aware there is no specific widescale targeting of those animals. The racoon is an omnivore so it does very well off of human rubbish, we throw out a lot of food. The crow probably also does well off of human food waste.

>> No.4698656

lol

>> No.4698678

>>4698633

you're just listing reasons why pandas deserve to die. your argument is agreeing with op.

>> No.4698684

Is a world made of only pests, weeds, and insects the kind of place you want to live in?

>> No.4698686

btw, op isn't even being that controversial. a particularly well known british naturalist agrees that pandas should be allowed to die out. they're an evolutionary dead-end, they're just shit at existing.

http://www.wildlifeextra.com/go/news/packham-panda342.html#cr

>> No.4698687

My main beef with the panda is that they are media whores, greedily gobbling up newspaper column inches as if they were sticks of bamboo, and channeling aid and attention away from other, less media friendly, but considerably cooler endangered species.

All attempts at trying to save this species is wasteful and would be better off being spent on species that actually have a chance of surviving on their own.

>> No.4698688

You don't understand the ramifications of fucking up the entire food web, do you? We could exterminate a huge portion of the animals here on Earth with what we have. Doesn't mean that will be good for us. It's a big food web, and it won't work when you break half of it. Some of us don't want to shoot ourselves in the foot, and would rather enjoy meats later rather than over doing it now and never having them again.

>> No.4698690

Many animals thrive with humans. Here's an interesting example of how to make better use of such an animal.

http://www.ted.com/talks/joshua_klein_on_the_intelligence_of_crows.html

-

Note that appeals to nature are fallacious, i.e.:
1. X is natural.
2. If X is natural, then X is good.
Therefore, 3. X is good.
Such arguments are unsound becus the second premise is false. Similar things hold for "unnatural" and "bad", and for "natural" and "just" etc.

http://www.fallacyfiles.org/adnature.html

>> No.4698693

The fail in this thread made my soul ache.

Basic ecology (which btw is the EASIEST scientific discipline):

There are 2 types of strategies that mobile organisms (animals) utilize:
R strategy and K strategy.
R - strategists reproduce rapidly, produce many offpsring, and have an exponential decrease in cohort size from birth that eventually levels off. (That means lots die early, few die late).
R strategists also develop into adulthood rapidly.

K strategists are the opposite in basically every way, few offspring, long gestation, long life spans, and the death rates among K strategists tend to start low and increase with aging.

>> No.4698698

>>4698688
We let the panda die off and what? a few extra bamboo sticks in china?

>> No.4698716

>>4698698
I can't think of anything significant from letting the panda die off. But it's a dangerous idea to have, that anything that can't stand against our guns and chemicals doesn't deserve to live anyway. That's stupid as fuck. Most larger creatures couldn't do fuck-all if we decided that we really liked their livers. Killing them all anyway would be a piss poor idea that would bite us in the ass.

The sea is really fucking big and hard to observe. Killing off species when we don't know what will happen is also a bad idea, especially when we don't have to.

>> No.4698720

>>4698716
I don't hate about other animals, I just don't like pandas.

>> No.4698724

If you want to save an animal commercialize eating it. It worked for the American Bison. If you can create a market for panda meat then someone will find a way to breed them and turn a profit in the process. Species saved.

>> No.4698729

>>4698688
Actually this is completely fucking wrong.

The whole environmentalist meme about ecosystems being vulnerable to one species dying has turned out to be fucking wrong. Ecosystems are resilient.

>> No.4698732

>>4698724
This.

>> No.4698734

>>4698720
Then base an argument solely around the panda. Don't set up some idea that animals don't deserve to live because we can kill them off. Just say what you mean, and don't include frivolous thoughts.

>>4698724
You know, that's worked fabulously for elephants and rhinos. Farms of them as far as the eye can see, no population problems to speak of..

>> No.4698735

>>4698724
That's just plain fucking wrong, lots of animals are endangered specifically because people want their body parts.

>> No.4698737

>>4698693
You are an idiot with a pop sci understanding of reproductive strategies and no grasp of what the life sciences entail.
Hint: Some autistic savants can reproduce music faithfully with very little exposure but can never compose music. Some autistic savants can do math. None have a talent for biology.

>> No.4698741

>>4698735
You're a fucking IDIOT. There are no elephant or rhino farms for their ivory. If there were, the price of ivory would go down and the black market would dry up and they woudn't hunt wild ones.

>> No.4698742

>>4698729
If you kill everything that we CAN kill, you'd have so little left you couldn't call it an ecosystem. OP was saying that they deserve to die because they can't adapt to guns/harpoons, but following that logic we could safely eliminate most larger mammals, because they don't deserve to live either.

>> No.4698745

>>4698741
You are the one who claimed that a market existing for an animals body parts would prevent it going extinct, this is objectively false.

>> No.4698746

>>4698741
Right. So having an animal with valued parts wouldn't necessarily give rise to farms and the safety of the feral ones.

Hasn't even been addressed whether or not the meat would be valuable. It could taste like shit.

>> No.4698747

OP makes a painfully good point.

It seems to me that eventually every ecosystem on earth will be composed entirely of things we like or use.
If the panda can hold out a little they will outlive the mosquito because we will protect the panda just cause they are cute and keep working on getting rid of the mosquito.

>> No.4698749

>>4698745
He was implying farming, you fucking aspie.

>> No.4698753

>>4698735
That's because the law won't let you farm them. If we had been allowed to raise ivory billed woodpeckers like chickens then they would still be around.

>> No.4698764
File: 727 KB, 765x609, Capture.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4698764

This planet is ours now and we do what we please.

Deal with it, rest of Kingdom Animalia.

>> No.4698778

>>4698764
For the record, the mountain of cow skulls is the result of farming cows, not hunting them to extinction.

>> No.4698782

>>4698741
>implying africans can invent agriculture

>> No.4698790

>>4698778
That is American Bison skulls.

The settlers purposefully killed hordes of them in an attempt to starve the Natives who were dependent on them.

>> No.4698805

>>4698782
The Bantus of West Africa developed Agriculture and metal working completely independent of the rest of the world.

This is actually what gave the edge above other african groups like the Khoisan and the pygmies, who were mostly hunter gatherers. (Both of which are now almost extinct in africa)

>> No.4698818

>>4698724
>Japanese hunting whales for food and their population declining.
>Don't worry, I'm sure they Japanese will start breeding whales for food soon.

>> No.4698820 [DELETED] 
File: 29 KB, 415x471, 1335463113528.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4698820

Ok /sci/, let's see if you can help me. In this thread I will post some questions from a statistics exam, hopefully some of you will be kind enough to show me the correct answers.

I will first start with this one where we test, e.g Ho and H1:

We ask 144 random people if they drive to work, 66 of the people say Yes. Test if less then half of the population drives to work when we have a significance level of 5%.

>> No.4698829

>>4698790
No, apaches and commanches (and many many other tribes) kiled huge amounts of bison just to cut out the tongue. George catlin witnessed this at the last american fort westward, when a small group of apaches came riding in on horses with three thousand bison tongues to trade for whiskey.

>> No.4698842

>>4698829
Fort Henry if anyone was wondering.

>> No.4698843

>>4698829
Shhh

Don't you know that the American Indians were a peaceful and serene people that lived in perfect harmony with the world. It's the white man that is wasteful and destructive.

P.S. Native Americans were killing off the California Condor long before whitey got there. Would Condor taste good? I doubt it.

>> No.4698856

>>4698842
ok sorry, fort henry north dakota, aka fort union.

>> No.4698857

>>4698741
Not the person you're replying to, but not every problem can be easily solved by turning them into a capitalist ventures. We have tree plantations and yet we see illegal logging. Some animals aren't cut out for domestication or farming as easily as others. Elephants are known to destroy shit, are tough to handle especially the African variant, and some animals don't do well in enclosed captivity.

The only way farming rhinos or elephants will effectively work is through genetic engineering for docility, re-productivity and tusk growth, because artificial selection takes too long and no capitalist wants to venture in something they can't get a profit back before he is dead.

Poachers gonna poach like how illegal loggers gonna log and how pirates gonna pirate.

>> No.4698871

>>4698843
Fuck man, Indians were savages. I've always been amazed at how people grow up being taught so firmly that native americans were peaceful. Fucking nutters. But you know, most earlier people were like that. Nuts. The lot of them/early us.

At the time people came to America, we were still hanging people for witchcraft anyway. Crush them under rocks or whatever. Not like we were the epitome of civility, not by today's standards.

>> No.4698886

>>4698843
not to mention they deforested vast swaths of land and might've caused an ice age in europe.

>> No.4698891

>>4698871
It's the weeaboo syndrome. Every foreign culture looks better through those rose tinted glasses.

>hurrr western society is shit. japan amazing everyone respects one another, no crime, japanese high school is so nice unlike baka usa school, asian girls make best waifu durrr i wanna live in japan it's just like my animu and mango!

>> No.4698907

>>4698891
I don't see where they mentioned Japan. They could just as well be a Canadian nationalist.

>> No.4698923

>>4698690
Why is the second premise false? The meaning of "good" depends on the context.

If the second premise is false, then you're saying that "X is natural and X is not good" is true. What makes you think everything natural is bad?

>> No.4698927

>>4698907
he was using japan as an example since its usually the most overdone version of this type of mentality.

>> No.4698975

>>4698923
>Why is the second premise false? The meaning of "good" depends on the context.

Easy mode: Read the link for examples.
Harder mode: make up some counter-examples urself. They are not that hard to come up with.

>If the second premise is false, then you're saying that "X is natural and X is not good" is true. What makes you think everything natural is bad?

The denial of (2) does not imply what u think it implies.
It implies that there is at least one thing such that it is natural and not good. This is true. It does not imply that everything that is natural is not good.

I.e., difference between:
(a) ∃xNx∧¬Gx
(b) ∀xNx→¬Gx
the negation of (2) does indeed imply (a) but not (b). Both (2) and (b) are false.

>> No.4698983

>>4698975
>u
>ur
Anyway, I forgot the quantifiers, so you're right.

>> No.4699000

>>4698891
Lol, Japan. The crime is actually nice and low. But the people can be assholes or nice just like anyone else. One of our Japanese friends took a step back without looking and someone sort of ran into her with a bike. Some grouchy old woman who seemed to be making a stink about it.

But say what you will, that food is god damn amazing. I miss that stuff all the time. Tried some of the stuff here, but it wasn't the same at all. I miss that giant assortment of fish that was reasonably priced.

>> No.4699021

>>4698983
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English-language_spelling_reform

>> No.4699026

>>4699000
I think that guy just made the case in favor of this guys post
>>4698891

>> No.4699053

>>4699000
I live in Japan. You think of the country like a tourist.

>> No.4699056

>>4699026
I was aiming to agree that Japan isn't some beacon of greatness that the western world should model their life after, and not devoid of assholes, but politely disagree on some things. I spent some time in Japan and had a nice time, except for the exchange rate raping my wallet.

The crime rate is pretty nice compared to America.
People can still be assholes just like anywhere else.
Japanese high school is very stressful as far as I'm told.
I like American women over Japanese.

And just a personal note, I find the food to be great. Probably would get accustomed to it after a while and not really care anymore, but there's a lot of great food to try if you're just visiting. You know, like most countries.

>> No.4699059

I'm fine with human-centric values.

But we should take care of the environment for that reason - it's good for us.

>> No.4699063

>>4699053
That's because I don't live there. I wouldn't want to live there. I like living in America. Japan is a place I visit, not somewhere I would want to marry a wife and raise kids in. I'll just take my American waifu over there, we'll enjoy the sites, eat the food/drink that we don't get much of in America, sleep on futons, and then go back to good ole' USA.

>> No.4699072

Some humans understand that the biodiversity of our planet is very special because we have looked at the other planets in our solar system and concluded that this is were shi's happenin'

Now some of us have struck upon the crazy idea that there might be stupid of us to eradicate other species for short-term profit before we possess technology to surpass natures designs of constructing components for eco systems.

>> No.4699161
File: 443 KB, 566x740, rickperry.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4699161

>>4698625

here's some OC of that meme.

>> No.4699216

>>4698690

Oh how AP Lang has hexed me so.

>> No.4699219

Your picture pretty much sums you up as a person.