Saturday, December 16, 2006 . 12/16/2006

This pisses me off. Sure, it was only a six week expedition and there still may be some of these dolphins left, but this just goes to show how pathetically stupid and ignorant people can be.

Some may say that this is the "survival of the fittest". This is in itself ignorant. Let's take the lion and the antelope for an example: the lion has claws and sharp teeth, while the antelope has speed. Both have a fair advantage. Humans and animals on the other hand don't. We've developed harpoons, guns, and a variety of other things simply to capture a helpless animal for its fur or for a trophy. Furthermore, if people continue to do this, it will end in our own downfall. Besides this, "survival of the fittest" actually refers to the reproductive success of an organism and not how it is killed. So either way, the claim of it being "survival of the fittest" would be wrong.

Humans create an inbalance in nature. Without us, what would happen? Less pollution, a rise in animals that were once endangered, and just a healthier environment as a whole. Animals have a way of keeping the world balanced; vegetation feeds the herbavores, and the carnivores help to keep the herbavores' numbers stable.

What do humans do? Find a remote place, bring in their livestock which eat all the vegetation from the animals that normally would inhabit the area, cut down forests which drives animals away, build cities which produces pollution.

Every animal that we make extinct is one step closer to our own downfall. For example, these Chinese dolphins. Take them away, and their predators have less food and their prey become more abundant, bringing an inbalance. Keep doing this, and eventually we will be next.

Think of a world with no forests, tons of cities, and no animals except for livestock and dogs and domesticated cats. What kind of a world is that?

And while extinctions happened millions of years before humans, those extinctions couldn't be prevented. They were due to weather and environmental changes. We can, however, prevent tigers from disapearing, and we could have done the same for this river dolphin.

Maybe I'm wrong about humans 'destroying' the world. After all, animals can certainly adapt to their environment, making it easier for them to live in cities or tough enough to resist humans. But what happens if all of these species goes extinct before they even get the chance? Seems unlikely, but consider all the poaching and destruction of habitat that is going on. Some might argue that "If you consider evolution to be fact, it shouldn't matter that these animals are going extinct since new ones will pop up anyway". Evolution has to do with how animals adapt to their environment, not on how life actually began. To this extent, no one knows. Even if a big-bang like theory were to be true, then it would take thousands of years if not more for life to spring up again.

We as humans are unique in that we can choose to be ignorant assholes or well-informed. Honestly, which would you rather be? Ignorance may be bliss, but it won't be anymore when you're made to look like a fool.

If by now you are calling me a hippy, you can just call anyone who cares about humanity to be a hippy aswell. I care about humanity for the history, and for how much we can learn. Without humans, who would be there to record information, or to even read it? Sure, many people are stupid. But without any at all, there isn't even a chance to produce smart ones.

Someday humans may go the way of the dinosaurs despite our advances in medicine and overwhelming numbers. Someday, a huge earthquake may hit, or a huge meteor. Who knows. But why be stupid enough to create your own downfall before nature takes its course? 0 Comments - Post/view comments