User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 9:12:25 AM EDT
[#1]
It's for the hippies' children, which we also pay for.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 9:13:47 AM EDT
[#2]
We'll be extinct one of these days, and I'm okay with that. Hell, we'll probably be the only species that actually made ourselves extinct.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 9:15:57 AM EDT
[#3]
Because it turns out spotted owl saliva cures cancer?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 9:17:00 AM EDT
[#4]
It wouldn't bother me. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 9:17:53 AM EDT
[#5]
because then most of the people on welfare would go extinct too?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 9:19:31 AM EDT
[#6]
If they're particularly tasty, I say, by all means, SAVE THEM!!!
 CJ |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 9:20:23 AM EDT
[#7]
 Mother Earth, because she will fight back, and then where f*cked
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 9:20:52 AM EDT
[#8]
Are you telling me that the minuscule possibility of some benefit somewhere down the road justifies such huge government expenditures and other violations of rights?  Or were you being facetious...?
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 9:21:31 AM EDT
[#9]
Its just too cheap to keep them in zoos.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 9:22:37 AM EDT
[#10]
K. The rational is human activity on this planet is not 'natural'. Lions and volcanic explosions are not "sentient" so if a volcanic island is the only nesting sight of a rare seabird and the island explodes and takes the birds with it, that is not a conscious and deliberate act with no premeditated malice or recklessness. Same if a Lion eats the last American Buffalo. What the environmentalist argue is because man has forethought, it is morally wrong for man to let his laziness and or selfishness destroy other plants and animals for man's own self interests. That or it is the same as Pluto being demoted. "It was a planet when I was a kid and I have sentential attachments to it, so damn it, you're not changing it!" On a personal not, I think it is sad what happened to the buffalo.. supposedly the meat is better, in taste and quality. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 9:22:46 AM EDT
[#11]
I know you guys are kidding, but I feel it would be immoral for us, as stewards of the earth, to knowingly allow a species to be wiped out.
When nature kills a species off it's one thing, but when human irresponsibility does, it's a sad day for everyone. For you religious folks, I believe the Bible specifically charges man with caring for the animals of the earth. ETA: I agree though that it's sad that endangered species have been used as an excuse to suck at the public trough, and to trample landowners' rights. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 9:22:57 AM EDT
[#12]
no more Bald Eagles,no California Condor,no American Alligators,that would be ashame .we should not be alowwed to hunt animals into extinction.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 9:23:19 AM EDT
[#13]
Preservation of bio diversity? In some cases there are things we can still learn about them or perhaps they produce chemicals that we can use in medicine.
For example - sharks don't get cancer. Sooo - thats a good thing to study. So what criteria do we have that we should save one creature and not the other. At any rate - I am for preservation - but the current laws we have are stupid and relatively ineffective. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 9:23:20 AM EDT
[#14]
because in the past extinctions were generally due to natural selection. now it is because we mismanage our environment.
and when a species vanishes it really messes up the balance of the local Eco-system if enough disappear then we may do irreparable damage to the planet which will adversely effect us plus if I ever have any kids I want their to be wolves and polar bears and the like around. not that they would ever likely see one, it is just nice to know that their are places like that left in the world |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 9:25:44 AM EDT
[#15]
Only partly. There is a middle ground between "scorched earth" and "save every bug" that we aren't taking. Spotted owls, snail darters, etc, could be preserved at the same time as completing the projects that were cancelled or delayed because some hippie got his panties bunched in a wad over it. Frankly, a reasonable plan to "get both" (save the endangered example and also complete the project) would likely be cheaper than the massive lawsuits that always seem to ensue. See where I'm going here? It's ALWAYS about the lawyers, and making sure they get themselves paid. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 9:25:51 AM EDT
[#16]
I think the reason behind it is, we (humans/people) are assumed to have caused the extinction of them, therefore we are responsible for keeping them alive.
Depends on your opinion on conservation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 9:33:05 AM EDT
[#17]
With the great advances in technology, We have gained a power that no other species on this planet has. The fact that human beings for being as intellegent that we are really quite stupid. This intellegence has hindered our ties to nature, natural selection, and given us almost godly powers to determine the fate of the world. It is important to save the biodiversity of this planet when Mankind has put it and its creatures in harms way. Eventually we will destroy ourselves and the world will probably be a better place without us.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 9:35:44 AM EDT
[#18]
So does Darwin only apply to humans? I thought the animals that could adapt survive and the ones that can't go extinct?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 9:36:59 AM EDT
[#19]
Bald Eagles? They once were a protected species due to the fact that in the 60's they were endangered,, less than 500 mating pairs. Now they are protected under the bald and golden eagle act and are not endangered. The basis for their protection is that they are the National symbol. I have seen hundreds of different Bald eagles! Alaska has as many as the lower 48 I a certain of that. Use Google if you need any more info. PLEASE educate yourselves about our nation and it's history! It is our duty to be knowledgeable about our History, and the mistakes we have made in the past to help us learn and not repeat it. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 9:39:20 AM EDT
[#20]
And how does that negate anything he said? You might want t to try that education thing yourself.
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 9:43:57 AM EDT
[#21]
but we change the environment much faster than would occur naturally, and adaptable or not if they have no habitat to breed/live in they are fucked. Just remember most of us would not last long with shelter either. that is our environment and for all the haters out there that think conservation is stupid. well you might want to thank Mr. Teddy Roosevelt for the parks that you hike and hunt on. If not for his actions we would have but a small fraction of the national parks we have today I am a Roosevelt Conservationist, not an environmentalist. The difference is that people like me want land for the sake of enjoyment, the enrichment of your life, and as habitat for wild life. Environmentalists just want land for the sake of the wild life and let no person go on it, ever |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 9:44:39 AM EDT
[#22]
most likely because we are responsible for it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 9:44:57 AM EDT
[#23]
Are you really saying that you would not care if polar bears or bald eagles went extinct?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 9:46:09 AM EDT
[#24]
I hear piping plovers taste like Cornish Game Hen.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 9:48:51 AM EDT
[#25]
The lack of intrinsic value is the very reason they are at risk in the first place. The surest way to save a species from extinction is to allow its value to be fairly evaluated by the market. In many cases the only use a species has is as game or sport. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 9:49:04 AM EDT
[#26]
Two words: genetic diversity. We need it on the earth and can't pick and choose which species to save and which to ignore.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 9:54:55 AM EDT
[#27]
If a species was on its way out there is no need to save it. The level of absolute arrogance and stupidity required to believe some of the tripe, even in this thread is staggering.
Some of the drivel posted here assumes that: 1) We are somehow in charge of the Earth. 2) That we are somehow not a natural part of the Earth. 3) That every species is special. And this crap :
Please kill yourself for the sake of the Earth now please.
I hate to break this to you, but there are plenty of wolves and polar bears. I do not know what kind of horseshit you have been fed, but to the thought that you are worried about that stuff is hilarious. It is almost like me saying "Gee, I hope my kids get to see a COW." I cannot explain to you the utter vastness that surrounds me here and the millions upon millions of acres of land that are untouched, and probably never will be touched. Hell, I don't even goto them and I live here. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 9:56:32 AM EDT
[#28]
This gets my vote for "Redneck topic of the day."
 Also, I am sure that many of the people who responded in here agreeing with the OP are hunters. A big reason for hunting and for HOW hunters justify what they do is conservation......go figure. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 9:56:56 AM EDT
[#29]
Nah...they taste more like chikken. It's the Spotted Owls that taste like Cornish Game Hens 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 9:58:35 AM EDT
[#30]
It would be nice if there a few animals around for my childrens, children to see...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 10:00:24 AM EDT
[#31]
the treetards want to save one animal I haven't heard about and don't care about
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 10:01:15 AM EDT
[#32]
Natural process of species going extinct is about one every decade. Keep in mind there are about 1.5 million identified species in the world and scientists speculate there are actually many times that which have not been identified. We (humans) have sped up the natural process to the tune of hundreds going extinct over the next two decades unless we change the way we do some things. (deforestation, pollution, introduction of invasive species to non native environments, propagating the human species, and folks, we are in NO danger of becoming extinct any time soon
 )One of the most endangered species on the planet right now is coral. They are being destroyed in great quantities by harmful commercial fishing practices (dynamite and poison) and also by increased CO2 in the atmosphere and warmer temperatures. No coral means no coral reefs. No coral reefs means the 25% of the marine wildlife which depend on the symbiosis of the reefs for their homes (including many species which contribute to the world's food supply) will also die. The marine ecosystem as we know it, collapses. At current rates, the coral will be extinct by 2100. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 10:03:21 AM EDT
[#33]
you know you can voice your opinion with out all the anger, if you disagree fine. but it is alot easier to get people to listen to you if they dont feel like they are being yelled at or talked down too. i do not agree with your opinions but atleast i respect them
|
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 10:03:32 AM EDT
[#34]
I dunno, I bet Komodo dragons would make nice lookin pair of boots.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 10:38:25 AM EDT
[#35]
Really? I am so sorry, I was just voicing my opinion and I did not mean to hurt your feelings. In the future I will be sure to take into consideration your delicate condition and try and voice my typing in a more appropriate manner. Nah, Fuck it... Frankly, you are the one talking down to people. You do not respect my opinion or you would have not gone out of your way to try and lessen my opinion by not rebutting it, but by disparaging the methods in which they were parleyed. "Shoot the messenger" is a fairly common tactic used by those who refuse to listen to the message. So you consider yourself a better person because you "respect my opinion"? I have the right not to respect opinions that I do not agree with and the idea that I have to is utter bullshit. I don't agree with fascism, do I have to respect it? How about Pedophilia? "I don't agree with fucking little boys in the ass, but I respect your opinion that it is right to do so."......Yea, that flies well.. Greentardation is a curse upon us all and will result in the wholesale slaughter and deaths of millions. Some even state that as a goal. From Greenpeace convincing African nations to refuse certain foods, to our not being able to drill and produce the fuel we need to feed us and our economy. This also goes for the assholes that have send California into a drought because of a stupid fish. These animals are not worth the lives of humans. Any asshole who thinks they are is seriously mentally ill. I DO NOT NEED TO RESPECT YOUR OPINION WHEN THE RESULTS WILL LEAD TO GENOCIDE. Go on, respect my opinion if it makes you feel better, but don't expect me to have to respect yours. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 10:57:13 AM EDT
[#36]
Welcome to arfcom. Be sure to invite your DU friends to come visit also. They might learn something. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 11:28:10 AM EDT
[#37]
Kill-9 I know you're one of the market oriented guys. I think a very valid approach is opening up the market to allow farming them. Especially with regards to endangered animals that are poached for their monetary value, like tigers, elephants, white rhinos and so on...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 11:30:47 AM EDT
[#38]
My liberal friends are much smarter then you must think....... |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 11:31:44 AM EDT
[#39]
What do you think drove natural selection back then? Changes in the environment. We've had at least 4 major extinction cycles since the fossil record began. And guess what: Nature bounced back, strong as ever. I don't think we should shoot or kill things just for the heck of it. But the idea that the world will end if the Spotted Owl disappears is silly, and not supported by scientific record. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 11:43:14 AM EDT
[#40]
The problem is that you cannot win with the greentards with that approach. The animal rights sect will freak out about animals being caged, the way whacky greens will whine about land being used for it and so on. Farming is a great idea and would work, but it would not ever be implemented because it goes against the ideals of the very same people that are screaming up and down about the present situation. There have been lawsuits filed against wind farms because they kill too many birds. Greenpeace likes to travel to the North Slope in a Diesel Icebreaker and protest drilling, running around in 2 stroke powered inflatables holding signs that say "No Oil, Go Solar". Al Gore likes to travel in his Gulfstream. Logic evades them and nothing will stand in the way of their ultimate goal of saving the Earth...FOR THEMSELVES, because they think the rest of us are too stupid to cherish it the way they do. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 11:43:17 AM EDT
[#41]
Thats why. We are responsible for it. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 11:46:13 AM EDT
[#42]
I would not miss cockroaches in the slightest. Nor mosquitoes. Or sharks that are known to eat people such as great whites and tiger sharks. I'm not a big fan of alligators, either,
and snapping turtles are worse than useless. Paper wasps and hornets are utterly useless. Oh yeah, the world could do without fire ants. CJ |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 11:47:41 AM EDT
[#43]
We are part of nature. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 11:48:22 AM EDT
[#44]
Cool so than means what I do is 'Super Natural'!? When do I get the x-ray vision or the magical powers? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 11:49:06 AM EDT
[#45]
Because, some of us want to play God. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 11:49:15 AM EDT
[#46]
I think we should be stewards of the land, but there are literally millions of species. Letting some die is really not not going to affect biodiversity. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 11:53:07 AM EDT
[#47]
What the fuck are you talking about? Billions of dollars? I would love to see where any government--hell, all of the governments in the world combined--are spending "billions" of dollars to protect or assist endangered species. When you say billions, I expect a number that is larger than $2B. I seriously don't see it. The economic 'harm' of wildlife protections is in the private sector with limitations on property uses and increased costs due to biological surveys and impact studies. A >$2B tax burden specifically for wildlife protection simply does not exist, IMO. I could be wrong, of course, but I really doubt it. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 11:53:20 AM EDT
[#48]
Were you scared by an environmentalist this morning or something? What do you have, 3 threads on this in one form or another? Be at peace with Gaia, man. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 11:56:36 AM EDT
[#49]
you just equated conservation with genocide. there should be be some sort of Godwin's Law for this. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2008 12:07:53 PM EDT
[#50]
Conservation is one thing, sacrificing people to serve a nonsensical agenda is another. For Example. |
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
.jpg)
