Does this point of view make you really angry??

[greenitup]

"Why not it is the american way.. It is about time we annihalate any endangered species that gets in our way.. After all man's needs are most important.. I would hate to see a time when endangered species were in abundance while man's time on earth was about to expire.. Even though we came last to his earth.. As humans we are entitled to all the earth recources and heaven help any law that leaves any species above our inalienable right to plunder our own land......"

i found it in the yahoo questions section in the conservation area, somebody asked why we don't kill all the endangered species so we don't have to deal with them anymore.

Don't you think its about time we wiped out ALL endangered species? - Yahoo! Answers

i know it pisses me off because many people are only concerned with themselves and do not care about others.

[ttoyoda]

Does this point of view make you really angry??

Well it is a troll. Someone wrote it for the express purpose of making someone else angry. It has no wit or humor it it, it does not inform or amuse. Just a troll.
Ignore it. If you want to immerse yourself in trolls as an immunity procedure, like vaccination, you can read fark.com

[dcb]

In response to: "Don't you think its about time we wiped out ALL endangered species?"

I liked the response: "yes , it's been nice you knowing you "

[Trox]

Just want to make two points on polar bears

1. America threatened species.
2. Canada sport hunting legal.


Disclaimer
I am a shill to big oil as they pay my company so my paycheck does not bounce.

[dcb]

here is an article on that very subject, basically economics vs conservation:

Canadians argue for polar bear hunt

[zjrog]

Moving an increasing population (polar bears) to the Endangered Species is politics not conservation. I'm all for minimizing our impact on the planet but this isn't right.

[dcb]

Why do you think the population is increasing? It is the conservationist groups predicting a 30% decline in the population as a whole by 2050. There are two out of 19 known populations that are growing, but there is a net drop in population largely attributed to loss of sea ice, not politics?!?

[LostCause]

Polar bears are just a poster species. Whether they live or die only affects our perception of ourself. What about the rest of the biomass of the earth? The non-mammalian...non cuddly?

Over 100 amphibian species are already thought to have gone extinct. Those that have survived are threatened with an extinction rate 211 times over the background rate. Oceanic dead zones increase in size every year, square miles of flotsam have been found in the Pacific, coastal waters are overfished, and an area the size of Rhode Island is degraded in the Amazon rainforest every year.

Whether we like to admit it or not, we live by the words of the first post. While the green, hippie Prius driver may hate the god-fearing "troll," the actions of his western ways say the same words. We are in the middle of the Holocene mass extinction. An extinction we've caused collectively.

If it does come down to survival, the polar bear will be dead. It's the flaw of humanity and the flaw of thinking you were put "on" this earth rather than "in" it. Don't worry, though, polar bears go to polar bear heaven, right?

- LostCause

[zjrog]

While I understand MAN has an influence on all animals, what of all the animal extinctions before we ever stopped swinging from trees and used our opposable thumbs? Yes, it is sad that we can't save every living species. But we shouldn't go out of our way to get rid of them. And for heaven's sake, we shouldn't politicize ANY of it...

Some critter populations fluctuate with the natural cycles of the Earth's cooling and warming. WE WILL TOO! Remember the glaciers haven't always been there. Our ancestors walked and farmed the ground now covered by many.

[NoCO2]

I can sort of see his point, although he put it in such a manner that made it into a troll post.

If you think about it another way, we are the ONLY species that care about conservation and putting other animals on the endangered species list. No other species on the planet really gives a crap what happens to the others, they just see them as "Food" or "Not Food". The only difference is that we have the ability of self consciousness and that causes us to us to be concerned about our impact on other things because that same self consciousness has the ability to create things other species can not.

I can see both sides of this, but I don't think either is right by itself.

[GenKreton]

We have a good reason to be concerned about extinctions while other animals do not; no other animal can cause as much permanent damage as humans and maybe our very survival depends on biodiversity. Viruses, like Sars and Avian Flu, develop in areas of low biodiversity because it's easier to infect entire classes of animals - like birds - when there are only a few species to worry about. I can sit here and explain reasons why we need to care all day but it won't move anyone. Just realize, biodiversity is necessary for our survival too.

And the polar bears are a funny case, one that may have less to do with humans than 97% of the rest. There has been modeling done about the movement of the magnetic poles and it is quite drastic in the past 14 years. They use the poles to get around it seems and are no walking the wrong way and into areas that haven't been safe for a long time but they have known to avoid. The theory is we're overdue for a pole shift, where the magnetic north and south flip. This could finish what we started when it comes to the polar bears. It doesn't happen often on earth but on the sun it happens up to every 6 years and is a rather frequent event on the cosmic level.

[jamesqf]

You know, I don't really get too angry with that point of view, because it's just a less-developed form of my own. As for instance their view:

"As humans we are entitled to all the earth recources and heaven help any law that leaves any species above our inalienable right to plunder our own land..."

Now my view would be something along the lines of "As a functioning superhuman (as shown by my ability to spell :-)), I'm entitled to use all the earth resources I want, which includes clean air & water, and a lot of open space filled with interesting plant & animal species. I therefore propose to reduce the surplus subhuman population which is interfering with my enjoyment of these resources, and guess what? You're elected :-)"

[Formula413]

Originally Posted by NoCO2

If you think about it another way, we are the ONLY species that care about conservation and putting other animals on the endangered species list. No other species on the planet really gives a crap what happens to the others, they just see them as "Food" or "Not Food". The only difference is that we have the ability of self consciousness and that causes us to us to be concerned about our impact on other things because that same self consciousness has the ability to create things other species can not.

I have always felt that since only humans possess these qualities that you speak of that we would be remiss to ignore them. I am happy to be a member of the only species that can understand it's impact on the world and other living things.

[bhazard]

Man I cant believe some of you morons driving the speed limit out there trying to save a penny or two on gas. Im gonna sell all my cars and buy a sweet hummer. I dont care about gas prices, I wanna drive the way I wanna drive. I dont care if it costs a couple bucks more. You people with your little dink cars need to get with the program.