Same to you. You might be preventing mammoths from coming back with the best of intentions...
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
I don't have intentions. I look at the feasibility/practicality of solutions and what consequences might happen from those solutions. I then weight the pros against the cons.
My only intentions are located outside of this matter.
edited 4th May '15 10:45:12 PM by Quag15
Bk... how old are you?
"War without fire is like sausages without mustard." - Jean Juvénal des Ursins
Sure is Ludd in here.
The extinction of other species is a perfectly valid part of ecology. It happens. It happened before homo sapiens. It will happen after the extinction-level event that kills us.
edited 4th May '15 11:28:23 PM by math792d
Still not embarrassing enough to stan billionaires or tech companies.
We aren't talking about natural extinctions, only ones we caused.
Just a harmless giant from a foreign land.
I think we have mentioned that a few times but: Extinctions we caused are natural. We are part of the natural system of environment not some foreign invader.
You can either give an argument on that that goes beyond "isn't so" or stop making the argument that it isn't.
edited 5th May '15 5:24:39 AM by 3of4
"You can reply to this Message!"
By that logic, we should bring back Neanderthal and Cromagnum men.
After all, homosexuality sapiens were part of their demise.
I think you are giving humans too much credit.
Some things died because they just couldn't catch up. And the cost to bring them back and keep them here without cost to the existing creatures is too much.
After all, mammoths were not in Africa. They were in North America and Russia. Neither of these lands look like what they did in times of mammoths.
To bring a creature back only to have to keep them in a pen is a dick move to me.
"Psssh. Even if you could catch a miracle on a picture any person would probably delete it to make space for more porn." - Aszur
the habitat change is an effect, not cause, of mammoth extinction. They'd do fine today.
Just a harmless giant from a foreign land.
Also, I think this is the point where I once again ask for your biological science qualification to make these kinds of statements without sources.
![[down]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_down.png "[down]"){kind=icon}
edited 5th May '15 6:28:48 AM by 3of4
"You can reply to this Message!"
Do you know how much vegetation mammoths need to survive? And with global warming, they don't have the cold areas like what North America and Russia looked like all those hundred of years ago.
We're seeing the same problem with the Polar Bears. Polar Bears have evolved to have such a specific diet that they are having difficulty eating with all their ice melting. They are also not made for warmer climates and with all this they're developing diseases that they didn't have before.
I much rather save the polar bears then bring back a huge ass fuzzy elephant that we don't have the grasslands to feed anymore.
"Psssh. Even if you could catch a miracle on a picture any person would probably delete it to make space for more porn." - Aszur
Most mammoths were actually warm-climate animals. The one we all know is an exception and even then it's adapted to current northern temperatures.
How are you going to feed them?
We can't even feed the cattle we have now properly.
Even if you can find the open space, how are you going to feed them?
"Psssh. Even if you could catch a miracle on a picture any person would probably delete it to make space for more porn." - Aszur
Who says we need to feed them? They're native species. Let them live off the land.
THERE IS NO LAND FOR THEM TO LIVE OFF OF!
Seriously dude. I'm with 3 here. What makes you think they can do this?
"Psssh. Even if you could catch a miracle on a picture any person would probably delete it to make space for more porn." - Aszur
There will be if we put them back because proboscideans engineer their own habitat.
CAN WE ALL PLEASE DISCUSS THE NOW DISAPPEARED HABITAT OF THE UNICORNS!?
After all we know their disappearance was unnatural because humans were grown in a vat by robot aliens and placed on the idyllic; paradisal earth to purge animals that were too majestic.
"War without fire is like sausages without mustard." - Jean Juvénal des Ursins
I can see the headlines now:
Scientists killed in brutal impaling massacre!
According to sources, Extreme right-wing scientists attempted to being back the Unicorn in order to enforce their abstinence only agenda.
Regretfully as the developers discovered, Unicorns do not acknowledge marriage.
There were no survivors.
"Psssh. Even if you could catch a miracle on a picture any person would probably delete it to make space for more porn." - Aszur
Just a harmless giant from a foreign land.
I once again inquire you to answer my questions regarding your background. because at this point it looks like you are only restating this in various forms:
Step 1: Clone Species that died out due to an arbitrary "humans did it" criteria
Step 2: ???
Step 3: Save the Planet.
Without *any* elaboration on the details or anything else and even ignoring some counterarguments blithely. You refuse to engage on challenges to the very basics of your argument, on why anthropogenic extinction is supposedly different than "natural".
You want some credibility on your "it will fix the environment" claim? Then show us you have the knowledge to deserve it.
Show your cards or off the table. Your choice.
edited 5th May '15 7:11:33 AM by 3of4
"You can reply to this Message!"
I'm pretty sure BK is younger than 15.
"War without fire is like sausages without mustard." - Jean Juvénal des Ursins
Ha ha. I'm older than that.
And I just couldn't access my cards at that point. I can now.
https://www.americanforests.org/magazine/article/trees-that-miss-the-mammoths/
http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/281/1787/20133254
http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/276/1667/2509
You do realize none of these sources has your back right?
"Psssh. Even if you could catch a miracle on a picture any person would probably delete it to make space for more porn." - Aszur
What do you mean?
Just a harmless giant from a foreign land.
On the Articles:
I. Article on how Forests and Tree's have adjusted and evolved to deal with the loss of certain species. I fail to see how that is any argument for bringing something back. If Anything its an argument on *not* doing it. Its main argument seems to be "The way we see nature is flawed due to lack of some context."
II. Is an analysis on how humans were possibly responsible for the extinction of megafauna.
III. Is an analysis of the consequences of said extinction.
None of these sources say in any way "we *need* to bring them back to fix the world" or even support your "anthropogenic extincion is not natural" argument in any way.
Honestly, at this point it feels like talking modern day politics with someone who has just finished Atlas Shrugged.
"You can reply to this Message!"
Nothing in your sources back up your claims that mammoths can survive in the world as we know it now.
And again, where are you going to put them? How are you going to feed them?
You keep saying we can change the land, okay, whose land are you going to confiscate and terraform?
How many species are you willing to kill or endanger to bring back something we have absolutely no use for?
"Psssh. Even if you could catch a miracle on a picture any person would probably delete it to make space for more porn." - Aszur
See, here's the thing: I know you have the best of intentions, that you think it's right, but you're dismissing potential consequences for the sake of some ideal of making rights out of long gone past wrongs.
Careful with that thought.
edited 4th May '15 10:30:28 PM by Quag15