Tigers could be exctinct within 12 years

[Danalys]

Tigers are dying off because they cannot adapt to living in close quarters to a rapidly expanding dominant species, just like many, many, many species before it.

Why don't we quit pretending that Homo sapiens is somehow outside of nature, and that any effect we have on the world is not a neutral thing?

by that token if we do decide to save the tigers it's perfectly neutral.

 

[Danalys]

Attempting to regulate the population of a species is playing god. Us having the ability to kill of the tiger population is natural selection. We are the dominate predator. We should act like it.

we are a dominant omnivore unlike any other before us. so powerful infact that we can afford mercy.

 

[SuperFerret]

by that token if we do decide to save the tigers it's perfectly neutral.

Yes. Yes it is.

I'm not saying that we shouldn't try, but acting like we're all a bunch of evil bastards for existing and doing what comes natural to us as a dominant species is a load of BS, and I'm pointing that out.

Also, I'd like to point out that we only really try to save species we like, because, well, **** bacteria, right?

 

[Danalys]

when it makes us severely ill then sure.

 

[SuperFerret]

Yeah, how dare it perform its natural function of trying to survive and make more of itself.

 

[Danalys]

i'd blow up a terminator aswell.

 

[Franklin Richards]

Well if we're gonna play God then we need to follow his example. Arbitrarily picking the species we want to live and the ones we want to DIE.


Next year I'm gonna turn Ferret into a pillar of salt.

 

[SuperFerret]

Terminators cause problems regardless of where they are or how much of them there are. Bacteria mostly cause disease when there's an overabundance of them (kinda like people) or when they're not where they belong (again, kinda like people).

You're basically saying screw E. coli (something that is integral for our survival, or at the very least, our comfort) because you can't take your kids to see it trapped in a zoo.

 

[Danalys]

no i'm saying we take the steps to kill the ones in the wrong place that are harming us. if we are the only place it lives and it's harmful to us then it dies. are you bemoaning the eradication of small pox or are you going to make a technical distinction that it's a virus and thus may not be classified as life.

 

[Franklin Richards]

I don't want to tell my grandchildren about the mythical creature that once roamed the land. It was called a Tiger.

 

[SuperFerret]

no i'm saying we take the steps to kill the ones in the wrong place that are harming us. if we are the only place it lives and it's harmful to us then it dies. are you bemoaning the eradication of small pox or are you going to make a technical distinction that it's a virus and thus may not be classified as life.

Smallpox hasn't been eradicated, since it's in labs all around the world.

EDIT: Also, disease is a good thing.

All I'm pointing out is the hypocrisy of all this. You just want to keep tigers around because of reasons like this:

I don't want to tell my grandchildren about the mythical creature that once roamed the land. It was called a Tiger.

which is a pretty selfish reason.

The world isn't going to, and shouldn't, stagnate because a bunch of hairless apes decide that they like the idea of certain things.

I love tigers. They're beautiful animals, but I'm not going to delude myself that their continued existence is absolutely the way it should be. Maybe it is, maybe it's not. The world is changing constantly, and all species are essentially running at a furious pace in order to stay where they are. Most have fallen behind and never recovered, and all of us will as well. That's how nature works. That's the real world.

 

[Danalys]

don't strawman me because others come to the same conclusion by different means.

still do you think it's fair that it only exists in labs now.

the only good disease would ever have done would have been population control. but we have birth control for that now. other than that it makes people less useful.

 

[SuperFerret]

Birth control? Really?

No. We have war for that now, and we still have disease. And even if you lump birth control in with it (as well as crime, disasters and alcohol-induced stunts), there's still a gross over-population of humans on this planet. I've said many times that we need less people, and while war is effective, it essentially weeds the strong from the weak by killing the strong. It's also far too specific in that it mostly kills people of one type, much like genocide. At best, population control should be enacted by something that doesn't care if your male or female, what race or religion you are, etc. Like disease.

Now, I'm not saying that I want smallpox, or that I want it to be unleashed onto the population at large, but that's only when I think about things in a personal manner. When looking at the big picture (like we should be doing here, as in "does the extinction of the tiger really have an impact on the world?"), it becomes clear that there are too many of us, and the eventuality is that one way or another, equilibrium will be achieved, and most likely that will culminate in some sort of mass culling of the human herd. (Cross your fingers for zombies.)

 

[Ghostvirus]

The thing that scares me about a virus that kills the weak. Is that I might getting, & realise I am one of the weak ones.

 

[Showtime]

Tigers need to learn to adapt. If they figured out how to fire guns and drive tanks, we wouldn't be talking about this. The bottom line, Tigers are actually stupid and should just accept their role as pets.

 

[Danalys]

Birth control? Really?

No. We have war for that now, and we still have disease. And even if you lump birth control in with it (as well as crime, disasters and alcohol-induced stunts), there's still a gross over-population of humans on this planet. I've said many times that we need less people, and while war is effective, it essentially weeds the strong from the weak by killing the strong. It's also far too specific in that it mostly kills people of one type, much like genocide. At best, population control should be enacted by something that doesn't care if your male or female, what race or religion you are, etc. Like disease.

Now, I'm not saying that I want smallpox, or that I want it to be unleashed onto the population at large, but that's only when I think about things in a personal manner. When looking at the big picture (like we should be doing here, as in "does the extinction of the tiger really have an impact on the world?"), it becomes clear that there are too many of us, and the eventuality is that one way or another, equilibrium will be achieved, and most likely that will culminate in some sort of mass culling of the human herd. (Cross your fingers for zombies.)

over population is self correcting eventually, without needing disease or war. just lack of food will do.