Planet on 'path to catastrophe' as million species threatened, warns UN report

Isn't Conservation Contrary To Evolution?


Moi BSc Biological Sciences
We're All Gonna Die Slow, Painful, Writhing Deaths.
More News At Eleven. Ten Central.

​

 

Well then allow me to retort.

You claimed we are "in a major extinction event, according to all the data".

Please produce the list of species that went extinct 1.5 million years ago.

For bonus points, tell us why we discovered 280 new species in 2018.

We don't even know the totality of whats here now, let alone what was here 1.5 million years ago.

 

Clearly you did not grasp my point and I see no point in continuing this discussion.

Have A Nice Day

 

Should we also protect endangered ethnic groups, like those mysterious black-skinned natives (not African) in the Andaman Islands off the coast of India?

 

Compared to the multiplicity of threats that we're facing from global over-population, which by association includes the diminishing sources of drinking water, climate change is a mere bagatelle. And next comes antibiotic resistance. Hope I haven't depressed anyone!!

 

"Blaise Pascal's famous wager was that even if the existence of God cannot be determined through reason, a rational person should wager as though God exists, because living life accordingly has everything to gain, and nothing to lose. What logical flaws and/or fallacies (if any) are committed in making this argument?"

That's the biggest load of pretentious crap I've ever read.

 

That's gotta be worth more than a Like. Yep, 'science' is where it's at these days. Better than actually working for a crust though? Just dream up some ridiculous 'science' story and the trash press including the BBC will pay £squillions for it. Or $squillions? lol

 

No comprendo.

 

Pascal's Wager, when extended beyond the original Christianity form of the argument, argues that [insert catastrophic event here] will occur if we do nothing to prevent it. It is a fallacious argument because, if nothing is done to prevent the catastrophic event, the catastrophic event will NOT necessarily occur. Essentially, Pascal's Wager is a void argument.

 

You don't get your scientific information from the Fox NEws do you? It is a political body.[/QUOTE]

 

Evolution, leads to new species, as well as the dying out of other species. The planet and the creatures that inhabit it are also part of a continuing cycle.... The planet warms, and either the creatures adapt, or they die. The planet cools, and either the creatures adapt, or they die.

What you are suggesting, is stagnation.... and the Earth cannot do that.....

 

humans play a roll now, we do need to consider our choices wisely

 

While I disagree that 'humans play a role NOW', we always should consider our choices wisely. That doesn't mean we need to go into a panic state, nor need mandates from the government as to our behavior.

 

we have the ability to wipe out the mosquitoes via dna modifications, we have a lot of power to make changes, so not sure how you could disagree with that, just making fields, cities, ect all have an effect

not to mention domestication of animals, ect....

 

Mosquitos are eaten by some birds, along with other annoying insects. Deprive the birds, and the food chain starts to unravel.

You are advocating screwing with Mother Nature, instead of Mother Nature taking care of things as she has done for billions of years.... That is not only a horrifying idea, the ignorance in thinking that is a good idea is even scarier.....

 

I am sayign we can do it, your saying we can't, now your saying we shouldn't

btw, I think we would survive just fine without the Mosquitoes

 

Clearly you grasped my point, which is why you're disengaging.

 

Really?

Evolution is about the best, most adaptive, successful species taking over a niche.
Conservation bent on species preservation seems contrary to evolution. eh
Comprende?


Moi
Vote evolution over stagnation

​

 

Mankind has manipulated natural evolution from the time we knew how. We have created subspecies and eliminated species as we saw fit....we have become the biggest force in evolution by saving or destroying what we want......so in many ways you are correct.

 

[/QUOTE]

Of course not. I get it from comic books.

 

Just because we can, doesn't mean we should.

I never said we couldn't. I don't support that we should.... again, nature's cycles will do as they have since the dawn of time. Adjust.

 

Mankind has manipulated some evolution, but since when did man usurp nature, and for those inclined, God? When do you think they have pushed the line too far? Genetic engineering? Selective conception/abortion?

I'm not going to go Godwin, but the concept is right at that edge. Imperfections are beautiful, nature makes room for evolution, and changes of all sorts.

Quit trying to **** with it.

 

I think the article was referring to habitat destruction and pollution/pesticides and its effect on various species. Unlike earths current warming trend, which has been going on for about twelve thousand years, people are one hundred percent responsible for pollution and habitat destruction. Where I grew up in central Florida, there used to be land toads and small lizards everywhere. Now the toads are all but gone, and the lizards have been replaced by larger, more aggressive, dinosaurish looking lizards. Because they used to thrive around human structures and neighborhoods, I assume their passing to be from chemicals, pesticides, etc.

 

never said that, I said we are and can..... we farm land, clear trees, spray bug spray.... all that has a effect on other species

 

I'm afraid I don't. In fact I seldom comprendo any of your posts. It must be the very reverse of 'Great minds think alike.'? And I assure you I'm not being personal - it happens in this medium.