So would we, if it was our only chance of survival. It's pretty much a nonsensical argument.Bobbity said:Just keep in mind that the fuckers would eat us if they had the chance
Poll: Should We let pandas become extinct?
- Thread starter rdaleric
- Start date
Recommended Videos
if they are to dumb to breed, to the point where we have to artificially inseminate them, then yes they should follow the dodo, besides they are useless herbivores as they can only eat one single variety of flora... bamboo, hell they are not even designed to be herbivores. and honestly black and white fur?? worst camouflage ever ... evolutionary dead end if ever there was one.
the only remarkable thing about them is their cuteness... which is useless as i cant have a panda in my apartment...now if we were talking about genetically modified dwarf pandas then yes by all that is holy yes we should save and market every single one of those critters
the only remarkable thing about them is their cuteness... which is useless as i cant have a panda in my apartment...now if we were talking about genetically modified dwarf pandas then yes by all that is holy yes we should save and market every single one of those critters
I don't think we should let it happen. But I feel like the best way to go about saving them is to protect their environment rather than any sort of forced breeding program. Perhaps not the best in the terms of chance of success but they most "natural". If we let nature do it's best and they still die out then yeah it sucks but it may just be their time (artificially ripened by us of course).
I actually don't know. Having written this I realise my opinion on the matter is complicated and not fully-formed.
I actually don't know. Having written this I realise my opinion on the matter is complicated and not fully-formed.
Considering that despite the fact that we're trying to help them make a comeback, they still won't just fuck (seriously, what animal doesn't have the drive to procreate) I say we let them die out. Maybe save some samples of them so that we can create some copies later down along the line, but otherwise I don't see much you can do for a species whose members don't try to save themselves when given a chance.
lol and how much meat did you eat today. dont feel ashamed we are carnivores/omnivores, its what we are suppose to do, unlike the panda that is vegetarian carnivore that has no sex drive or any drive at all... kinda like the hippie of the animal kingdom, and the 60's are long over.Jim-a-Lim said:
a less polite person would have made perhaps made offensive parallels between vegetarian humans and pandas.....but not me, im to civil
Evolution has proved that they can't survive with humanity, like polar bears, they're good as dead. We're wasting valuable time and resources trying to fight against evolution.
Sorry to say, but yes. I know we're partially the cause to their inevitable end, but the fact of the matter is that they have evolved to only eat a certain food, and because of this they wouldn't have a chance of surviving if we don't help them, even if we hadn't destroyed half their habitat. Since they have no natural predators, they would end up with the same problem we're having. Over-population and a severe lack of food to feed them. They should be allowed to die out with dignity and remembered fondly, much like other species have.
Pandas are damn stupid animals that should've been wiped out a long time ago. But they're not, so we'd best not let the efforts go to waste.
Bobbity said:No. Even though they're a total fuck-up of evolution, I don't think that we should let them die out if we have the power to stop it.
On the other hand, it'll likely become even harder to keep them alive, the more dependant on us that they become.
/edit
Besides, we're causing their extinction, through the fragmentation of their habitats. Some might say that we owe it to them. Just keep in mind that the fuckers would eat us if they had the chance
How about spending the money used on keeping them alive on helping our own race. We've got enough problems as it is. When we solve them, sure, spend as much as you want on keeping endangered species alive but as it stands, it's just plain immoral.
Answer: No and you're a terrible person.
Look into that face and consider how you can actually think that.
Look into that face and consider how you can actually think that.
I don't see why not, they're a rather dumb species and they really don't do all that much positive.
I'm in total agreement, the only reason people even care is because Panda's are cute. If they weren't, everyone would've given up on them by now.Bayushi_Kouya said:
Yes, let them die out.
They are extremely picky about mating.
They only take care of one of their young. (they let the other one starve)
They are a bear/raccoon than pretty much only eats bamboo. (and a ton of it)
They require a ton of space as territory.
They need a very specialized and dieing out habitat to survive.
Clearly they want to die out, so let them.
They are extremely picky about mating.
They only take care of one of their young. (they let the other one starve)
They are a bear/raccoon than pretty much only eats bamboo. (and a ton of it)
They require a ton of space as territory.
They need a very specialized and dieing out habitat to survive.
Clearly they want to die out, so let them.
Yes, it is.TheBelgianGuy said:
This may be difficult for you to accept, but humanity as a naturally occurring species is one that adapts the environment, rather than adapting TO the environment, to suit its needs. So, as it is the purview of other species to adapt themselves, who is actually failing at their job if a species of animal can't keep up? To put this another way, if a species of wolf migrates into a new area and wipes out all the deer, then whose fault is it the deer are gone? Or more importantly, who cares?
You're trying to apply a sense of right and wrong to a phenomenon that bucks notions of morality. In order for one form of life to live/thrive, another one is going to die out. That's nature for you. Sorry if it's not the cutesy song and dance utopia that Disney brought you to believe.
Nah, too cute. "Fuck nature" - that's the way of science (and all people that want to forge their own fate) after all.
Besides, there are way bigger money wasters out there, I don't see why we should start here.
Besides, there are way bigger money wasters out there, I don't see why we should start here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eqUtK61SOs
This is all I have to say.
EDIT: Oh, someone already posted this.
This is all I have to say.
EDIT: Oh, someone already posted this.
Yes. We are stopping natural selection by letting them live, Humans aren't the ones who are killing them. They are cute, true, but hon there ain't no thing as survival of the cutest.