Political Crossfire Forums

[John Galt]

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=scienceNews&storyid=2006-03-20T161132Z_01_L20719283_RTRUKOC_0_US-ENVIRONMENT-DIVERSITY.xml&rpc=22

I had thought that one goes extinct every 15 minutes? Google "species extinct minutes" you'll find pleanty of sites that say this, or something like it (100 evry day!!1!!!!!!!OMG!!1!!!111). The UN says that 884 species are extinct in the last 500 years. That's hardly anything, and if there are more that we didn't know about -- why do we care? There is no real reason to care, as they are just animals and we seem to be doing just fine without them and in many cases, it is a better place since they are gone. So what if they are gone? We have plenty more and those that are useful will never become extinct. I for one would rather not have my sky blackened for days as the passenger pigons came by the billions to rape the land and cover it in guano, although it would be fun to just shoot in the air and have them fall from the sky like mana from heaven.

[Random Evil Guy]

many reasons:
*purely rational and self interest - ecologic balance. the extinction of certain species might seriously screw the ecological balance in some areas, which in turn will effect human populations.

*moral - animals have an 'own worth'. we don't really have a right to 'exterminate', indirectly or directly, animals just because we can or it is profitable.

*sentimental - animals are often cuddly! :lol:

there are probably others as well.

[John Galt]

Random Evil Guy wrote: many reasons:
*purely rational and self interest - ecologic balance. the extinction of certain species might seriously screw the ecological balance in some areas, which in turn will effect human populations.

*moral - animals have an 'own worth'. we don't really have a right to 'exterminate', indirectly or directly, animals just because we can or it is profitable.

*sentimental - animals are often cuddly! :lol:

there are probably others as well.

Nothing in there tells me why you should be able to force me to abide by it. Sounds like personal prefences. I do not believe the extermination of mosquitoes will adversely affect us. Sure, some bats might loose some food sources, but millions of lives would be saved, as would countless picnics. Your moral code has no affect over me and while animals are sometimes cuddly, I wouldn't say often, and again, it is personal choice. Now, I honestly would not like to see many animals go the way of the dinosaur... but would I pay for it? Not really. 50 bucks so that my children can see lions is all I'd pay. At most. I don't see why I should have to pay -- even indirectly (taxes on industry that are put in turn on the consumer) -- for someone else's prefrences.

[Random Evil Guy]

John Galt wrote: Random Evil Guy wrote: many reasons:
*purely rational and self interest - ecologic balance. the extinction of certain species might seriously screw the ecological balance in some areas, which in turn will effect human populations.

*moral - animals have an 'own worth'. we don't really have a right to 'exterminate', indirectly or directly, animals just because we can or it is profitable.

*sentimental - animals are often cuddly! :lol:

there are probably others as well.

Nothing in there tells me why you should be able to force me to abide by it. Sounds like personal prefences. I do not believe the extermination of mosquitoes will adversely affect us. Sure, some bats might loose some food sources, but millions of lives would be saved, as would countless picnics. Your moral code has no affect over me and while animals are sometimes cuddly, I wouldn't say often, and again, it is personal choice. Now, I honestly would not like to see many animals go the way of the dinosaur... but would I pay for it? Not really. 50 bucks so that my children can see lions is all I'd pay. At most. I don't see why I should have to pay -- even indirectly (taxes on industry that are put in turn on the consumer) -- for someone else's prefrences.

no one is forcing you. you asked why people care, i answered. or do you expect everyone to act and think like you do...?

[John Galt]

:) Fair enough.

BUT they are forcing me. I pay taxes.

UN collects.

So does the EPA.

[social]

John Galt wrote: http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=scienceNews&storyid=2006-03-20T161132Z_01_L20719283_RTRUKOC_0_US-ENVIRONMENT-DIVERSITY.xml&rpc=22

I had thought that one goes extinct every 15 minutes? Google "species extinct minutes" you'll find pleanty of sites that say this, or something like it (100 evry day!!1!!!!!!!OMG!!1!!!111). The UN says that 884 species are extinct in the last 500 years. That's hardly anything, and if there are more that we didn't know about -- why do we care? There is no real reason to care, as they are just animals and we seem to be doing just fine without them and in many cases, it is a better place since they are gone. So what if they are gone? We have plenty more and those that are useful will never become extinct. I for one would rather not have my sky blackened for days as the passenger pigons came by the billions to rape the land and cover it in guano, although it would be fun to just shoot in the air and have them fall from the sky like mana from heaven.

Don't you remember the classes at school in which you learnt that killing just one animal in a food chain results in the whole chain being affected? Every species is precious...

Also, how can you even suppose that we (we, as in, human beings) are doing 'just fine' without animals? We're destroying the world's natural environments and replacing them with unsustainable, and polluted societies, which though they've led to a rapid advancement of mankind, will I fear eventually lead to its downfall. This is ironic really; but it's important to recognise that one simply cannot mess with animals and the environment on a whim...and certainly not to satisfy your Randist ideology, whose cardinal principle is to treat all things - humans and non-humans alike - for one's own personal gain...

[social]

John Galt wrote: :) Fair enough.

BUT they are forcing me. I pay taxes.

UN collects.

So does the EPA.

Oh god! You haven't joined the ranks of this new conspiracy movement and superimposed all America's problems onto the UN?

[Wolverine]

If the species is going extinct do to people, we need to do our best to preserve the species. Without outrageously infringing on people rights, and/or degrading the well being of people.

But if the species is going extinct just "because", who cares? As what Penn and Teller say, "nature decides who stays and who goes".

Species die, its apart of nature.

[Random Evil Guy]

Wolverine wrote: If the species is going extinct do to people, we need to do our best to preserve the species. Without outrageously infringing on people rights, and/or degrading the well being of people.

But if the species is going extinct just "because", who cares? As what Penn and Teller say, "nature decides who stays and who goes".

Species die, its apart of nature.

true, but how many parts of the world are really devoid of human influence?

besides, following that argument, humans are part of nature and if we cause the extinction of other species, that is what 'nature decides'.

[Random Evil Guy]

John Galt wrote: :) Fair enough.

BUT they are forcing me. I pay taxes.

UN collects.

So does the EPA.

well, there are a lot of things the government spend money on that i don't like, but i guess living in a society, you have to accept that people are different....

[DarkMerlin]

Wolverine wrote: If the species is going extinct do to people, we need to do our best to preserve the species. Without outrageously infringing on people rights, and/or degrading the well being of people.

But if the species is going extinct just "because", who cares? As what Penn and Teller say, "nature decides who stays and who goes".

Species die, its apart of nature.

I saw that episode of Bullsh*t last week! Quite a shattering criticism of the Endangered Species Act. My favorite part is when they interview Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace, and he says "The biodiversity is higher on Earth today than it ever has been on the 3.5 billion year history of life on this planet...There is no mass extinction of species taking place on the Earth today, and it is a complete fabrication." That's a helluva statement coming from one of the pioneers of the environmentalist movement. (If you are interested, you can watch him say it in a clip on the show's website here: <http://www.sho.com/site/ptbs/topics.do?topic=es>.) Of course, Patrick Moore has been criticized by many environmentalists, and since I have only looked into the whole thing a bit I would love to hear arguments against what he says if anyone has them.

[DarkMerlin]

John Galt wrote: :) Fair enough.

BUT they are forcing me. I pay taxes.

UN collects.

So does the EPA.

Then perhaps you would be interested in the Guns and Dope Party. The whole site is hilarious and insightful, but I would specifically recommend you scroll down to just past the middle of the page and take a gander at this gem:

Quote: Question: Would Guns and Dope attempt to eliminate all taxes ?

Answer: We'd follow Lysander Spooner's voluntary tax plan combined with the lightspeed of Internet. Every citizen would receive a semi-annual Republic budget, telling what the Republic of Freetopia wanted to do for them or to them, and each would send in their share of the fee for whatever projects seemed sensible and useful to them. Nobody would pay a penny for anything that seemed pointless,useless, invasive,tyrannical or even annoying to them. If nobody paid for a project, it would get dumped for lack of funding.

[John Galt]

Random Evil Guy wrote: John Galt wrote: :) Fair enough.

BUT they are forcing me. I pay taxes.

UN collects.

So does the EPA.

well, there are a lot of things the government spend money on that i don't like, but i guess living in a society, you have to accept that people are different....

No. You can accept that people are different but that accepting that fact does not mean you have to pay for other people's prefrences. Not only is there no Constitutional reason but it is immoral to force one man to pay for the prefrences of another. Living in a free society one should not be forced to pay for the prefrences of another. It is quite corrupt.

[John Galt]

social wrote: John Galt wrote: :) Fair enough.

BUT they are forcing me. I pay taxes.

UN collects.

So does the EPA.

Oh god! You haven't joined the ranks of this new conspiracy movement and superimposed all America's problems onto the UN?

I have not superimposed all of America's problems on the UN, but a large number of the US' problems are the doing of that evil organization. It was midwived by a traitor to our government, how could it possibly be in our benefit? The "enviornmental" treaties like HABITAT and the treaty on "desertfication" are quite alarming.

[John Galt]

social wrote: John Galt wrote: http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=scienceNews&storyid=2006-03-20T161132Z_01_L20719283_RTRUKOC_0_US-ENVIRONMENT-DIVERSITY.xml&rpc=22

I had thought that one goes extinct every 15 minutes? Google "species extinct minutes" you'll find pleanty of sites that say this, or something like it (100 evry day!!1!!!!!!!OMG!!1!!!111). The UN says that 884 species are extinct in the last 500 years. That's hardly anything, and if there are more that we didn't know about -- why do we care? There is no real reason to care, as they are just animals and we seem to be doing just fine without them and in many cases, it is a better place since they are gone. So what if they are gone? We have plenty more and those that are useful will never become extinct. I for one would rather not have my sky blackened for days as the passenger pigons came by the billions to rape the land and cover it in guano, although it would be fun to just shoot in the air and have them fall from the sky like mana from heaven.

Don't you remember the classes at school in which you learnt that killing just one animal in a food chain results in the whole chain being affected? Every species is precious...

Also, how can you even suppose that we (we, as in, human beings) are doing 'just fine' without animals? We're destroying the world's natural environments and replacing them with unsustainable, and polluted societies, which though they've led to a rapid advancement of mankind, will I fear eventually lead to its downfall. This is ironic really; but it's important to recognise that one simply cannot mess with animals and the environment on a whim...and certainly not to satisfy your Randist ideology, whose cardinal principle is to treat all things - humans and non-humans alike - for one's own personal gain...

Well, OK, you fear that. I fear that WITHOUT rapid advancement our downfall comes. As we can see, third world countries are by far the worst polluters for what they are producing. We can afford to worry about the enviornment. Isn't that amazing? Now, anyway, these third world countries, and ours, needs more advancement. With more advancement comes a cleaner enviornment. Everyone's happier. Me, with my cheaper products, and you, with your cleaner-than-nature outdoors. Anyway, that's my prefrence. It's different than yours. You don't have to buy it. OK. But I don't have to buy yours and it would be certianly immoral to force your prefrence on me.

As for some species dying, sure, I know about the food chain. Bt this fragile web wasn't always the same way. Species come and go. Other species adapt. And that wheel in the sky keeps on turnin'.

[Winchester]

John Galt wrote:
I had thought that one goes extinct every 15 minutes? Google "species extinct minutes" you'll find pleanty of sites that say this, or something like it (100 evry day!!1!!!!!!!OMG!!1!!!111). The UN says that 884 species are extinct in the last 500 years. That's hardly anything, and if there are more that we didn't know about -- why do we care? There is no real reason to care, as they are just animals and we seem to be doing just fine without them and in many cases, it is a better place since they are gone. So what if they are gone? We have plenty more and those that are useful will never become extinct. I for one would rather not have my sky blackened for days as the passenger pigons came by the billions to rape the land and cover it in guano, although it would be fun to just shoot in the air and have them fall from the sky like mana from heaven.

:rofl: Thanks I needed a laugh today.

[Random Evil Guy]

John Galt wrote: Random Evil Guy wrote: John Galt wrote: :) Fair enough.

BUT they are forcing me. I pay taxes.

UN collects.

So does the EPA.

well, there are a lot of things the government spend money on that i don't like, but i guess living in a society, you have to accept that people are different....

No. You can accept that people are different but that accepting that fact does not mean you have to pay for other people's prefrences. Not only is there no Constitutional reason but it is immoral to force one man to pay for the prefrences of another. Living in a free society one should not be forced to pay for the prefrences of another. It is quite corrupt.

let's just say i disagree, but i don't want to derail this thread. i'm discussing kind of the same thing in another thread( http://www.politicalcrossfire.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=51752 ).

[Demonic Spoon]

It really depends. If some catastrophe caused by humans is the result, it can have huge, really really bad consequences. If it is the result of natural occurences, then leave it, as it really doesn't matter.

[Wolverine]

DarkMerlin wrote:
I saw that episode of Bullsh*t last week! Quite a shattering criticism of the Endangered Species Act. My favorite part is when they interview Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace, and he says "The biodiversity is higher on Earth today than it ever has been on the 3.5 billion year history of life on this planet...There is no mass extinction of species taking place on the Earth today, and it is a complete fabrication." That's a helluva statement coming from one of the pioneers of the environmentalist movement. (If you are interested, you can watch him say it in a clip on the show's website here: <http://www.sho.com/site/ptbs/topics.do?topic=es>.) Of course, Patrick Moore has been criticized by many environmentalists, and since I have only looked into the whole thing a bit I would love to hear arguments against what he says if anyone has them.
I only saw maybe the last half..... no make that about the last quater of the episode. :( But it was very interesting. I'll have to download Flash before viewing the clip as well.

Random Evil Guy wrote: Wolverine wrote: If the species is going extinct do to people, we need to do our best to preserve the species. Without outrageously infringing on people rights, and/or degrading the well being of people.

But if the species is going extinct just "because", who cares? As what Penn and Teller say, "nature decides who stays and who goes".

Species die, its apart of nature.

true, but how many parts of the world are really devoid of human influence?

besides, following that argument, humans are part of nature and if we cause the extinction of other species, that is what 'nature decides'.
There isn't an area that is truly devoid of humand influence, everything effects everything to a certain extent.
I don't think that people "influence" a species into extiction, through passive means, who cares? Appearenty the species is weak, and would go extinct anyway.

[Kindred]

John Galt wrote: http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=scienceNews&storyid=2006-03-20T161132Z_01_L20719283_RTRUKOC_0_US-ENVIRONMENT-DIVERSITY.xml&rpc=22

I had thought that one goes extinct every 15 minutes? Google "species extinct minutes" you'll find pleanty of sites that say this, or something like it (100 evry day!!1!!!!!!!OMG!!1!!!111). The UN says that 884 species are extinct in the last 500 years. That's hardly anything, and if there are more that we didn't know about -- why do we care? There is no real reason to care, as they are just animals and we seem to be doing just fine without them and in many cases, it is a better place since they are gone. So what if they are gone? We have plenty more and those that are useful will never become extinct. I for one would rather not have my sky blackened for days as the passenger pigons came by the billions to rape the land and cover it in guano, although it would be fun to just shoot in the air and have them fall from the sky like mana from heaven.

Natural species extiction rates are estimated to be 1 every 100 years or so, so even with this conservative estimate we have increased the rate of extinction by over 100 times.