Dont help the animals

[Merkavar]

Ive heard this a few times, when an animal is injured you meant to not help it and just let nature take its cause. I have no idea why. im guessing because if you help the weak then the population as a whole will be weaker.

but from what i can tell humans have harmed every single animal on the planet so helping an animal thats injured seems to be the only real option.

have you ever heard someone say not to help the wonded gazelle or something along this line? why do you think they said it?

 

[Pedro The Hutt]

If it's within my ability to help an animal I'll help it. I however am not going to risk my life for an animal I don't personally know and/or if its chances for survival are slim at best.

That said, having a vet as your next door neighbour does have its perks in that aspect.

 

[Nunny]

I try to help injured animals... though thats generaly in the form of Putting them down.

 

[Tdc2182]

Well... I'm technically part of nature.

 

[Zyst]

Well, it really depends. And also marks strongly where you draw the line.

If we follow your logic to the purest level then sick people shouldn't be healed, even more so if they have Genetic Problems. Let them die and we as a species will grow stronger.

It's flawed, we are Rational beings, thus, we make irrational choices.

 

[Easton Dark]

We are Rational beings, thus, we make irrational choices.

I love this line. Sounds like a quote from some super smarty smart guy.

OT: Help the animals; if I help it, nature wanted me to help it.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Well you just haveto remember that they will quickly develop a dependency on your help, and this drastically reduces their chances of surviving in the wild.

You may think it's cute to feed, cure and cuddle them for a while, but once you get bored that animal still hasto survive on it's own, food will no longer be in ample supply and the next seemingly friendly human will most likely put a shotgun to their face.

 

[masher]

People like that try to prove their "dominance" over Nature every day of their lives, so why do they back down and let Nature rule (by their definition) here?

My hap-hazard, sleep-deprived response out of the way: helped the poor thing if you are able.

 

[Hamish Durie]

i agree with your subject and (an example already shown in this thread) it will evetuaually come to "don't help the animals" "but we are animals to" "but natural selection" anyway i followed this up into an argument between people who belive darwin and the catheolic church.

 

[Snowy Rainbow]

It's suggested we don't interfere with the natural order of things -- such as if you see an animal being attacked by another -- not to ignore an animal that's suffering -- like one that's been hit by a car.

It's not that we aren't apart of nature, or aren't animals, just that we don't want people stopping the lion from eating its dinner or saving the runt in a family of wild dogs.

 

[manythings]

Well that one is food for something else so by helping it you've probably caused something else to go hungry. It's human interference in the first place that has caused most of the problems with the environment and I find it highly unlikely that more blind interference will fix it.

Look at that bullshit with Barn Owls (or spotted owls? It was an owl) in california. If any of the protesters had done something insane (like consulted a fucking Ornithologist) they'd have known that the Owls didn't nest in the oldest parts of the forest and, in fact, nest in newer, fresher growth where it can actually gather food. So the protesters manage to stop the loggers cutting down the old, debilitated, fairly lifeless parts of the forests and cut down the new, fresh, extremely habitable forest.

 

[viranimus]

My ideology is help the animals.. Harm the people.

Every day we make it harder on nature to be able to keep up, so any little victory you can grant them goes along way.

And as for the notion of not helping the wounded or crippled because it allows them to thrive and hurts the species... what happens to that notion when we look at people? Yes, I am saying let Amy Winehouse overdose before she is able to reproduce.

 

[Monkfish Acc.]

When has anyone ever said that.

I understand people filming DOCUMENTARIES can't interfere, regardless of what they're filming. And wild animals that are hunted can't get it into their heads that people are not dangerous fuckers who will mess up their shit. Also, with young, you have to be wary of getting manstink on them.

But fuck all that, I'll do whatever I feel like. If something is hurt, you do something about it.

 

[Neverhoodian]

It depends, really. It's not always a good idea to try and help a baby animal in the wild for two reasons:

1. Some species have been known to abandon young that have the scent of humans on them.

2. There's a good chance the mother's nearby and (depending on the species) might tear you a new one because she thinks you're after her young.

If an animal is an invasive nonnative species, I won't help it. In fact, I might go out of my way to kill it if it's pushing out the local wildlife.

When I was a kid living in the country our family would help native species of wild animals on many occasions, mostly in the form of saving birds and non-venomous snakes from our cat. One time a hawk got tangled up in a net we put around a nut tree (in order to prevent squirrels from getting to it), so we had to get it out. You don't realize just how dangerous a bird like that can be until you have to get one untangled like that. It could have ripped through skin and muscle with ease with its talons, but fortunately it was too frightened to try.

 

[Zyst]

We are Rational beings, thus, we make irrational choices.

I love this line. Sounds like a quote from some super smarty smart guy.

OT: Help the animals; if I help it, nature wanted me to help it.

Haha, Thanks. Google it, turns out I just invented it inadvertently.

But yeah, it comes down to natural selection. You'd never see, say, a wolf helping a hurt baby bird. Or a giraffe helping a dog. We are capable of making choices that go against that. If you do or do not help the hypothetical animal all comes down to personal choice.

 

[Baradiel]

If my cat is trying to kill/eat a bird, ofcourse I'll stop it. I blame the cat, when I really shouldn't. Thats just what cats do. However, I'll still try and control nature, even though I know full well I can't.

However, I've also got a couple of pigeons who've made a nest on my fire escape. One day they seemed to disappear for a day, and my mum was determined to go and try and warm the egg. After shouting at her for considering something so stupid, she eventually accepted that if something were to happen to the egg, thats just nature. Interfering would only make things worse.

 

[Casual Shinji]

You always hear this bullshit in nature documentaries when they're filming some poor lion with an injured foot or something. But for some reason it's these same kind of people that are trying to save the cheetah from extinction, eventhough the reason for its demise is purrfectly P) justified within the natural law.

In a nutshell, it's just an excuse to put horrible animal deaths on film.

Yet they never show how chimpanzees rape little baby chimps. I guess that sort of thing isn't "pure" and "beautiful" enough for the treehugging crowd.

 

[ryo02]

dont help the animals? erm ok sounds all well thought out to me natures course got it guys Im with you on that

*helps the animals anyway* heheheheh ... they dont have to find out heeheehee

 

[LarenzoAOG]

Actually it might have something to do with the fact that a wounded or scared animal is likely to attack.

 

[FalloutJack]

*Snerk*

I'm not nature. I'm a human being.