• Welcome to the PopMalt Forums! Whether you're new to forums or a veteran, welcome to our humble home on the web! We're a 20-year old forum community with thousands of discussions on entertainment, lifestyle, leisure, and more.

    Our rules are simple. Be nice and don't spam. Registration is free, so what are you waiting for? Join today!.

Should The Endangerd Species List Exist?

Unity

Living in Ikoria
Staff member
But most species go extinct. We are artificially keeping species around longer then they would have been without human intervention. What if new species are not coming to light because natural progression is not happening because we have intervened and kept other species around longer than they should have been?
A lot of these animals wouldn't have become endangered without human intervention in the first place.
 

Raos

Registered Member
Not to sound like Bill Clinton, but that depends on what your definition of "a lot" is. 99% of anything that has ever lived has gone extinct, so by comparison, humans really have not cause a lot to become extinct. Regardless of semantics, I am not talking about the ones that humans have had a role in. I am talking about the species that are on the list that would have gone extinct regardless of humans, which according to history is most of them.
 

Unity

Living in Ikoria
Staff member
Not to sound like Bill Clinton, but that depends on what your definition of "a lot" is. 99% of anything that has ever lived has gone extinct, so by comparison, humans really have not cause a lot to become extinct. Regardless of semantics, I am not talking about the ones that humans have had a role in. I am talking about the species that are on the list that would have gone extinct regardless of humans, which according to history is most of them.
lol that depends what your definition of "is" is!

I can understand your point of view; I think that if human intervention (hunting, environmental damage, habitat destruction, etc.) isn't a part of a species demise it does become tricky, and my answer is a "I'm not sure."

I'd also add that regardless of human involvement, if a species being in danger is of concern to its ecosystem (other species hunt it, it hunts a species that would become overpopulated and cause damage, local water/soil would have a problem) then proper care is needed.

Plus, when it comes down to it, the animal lover in me (insert bestiality joke here) really thinks that we have a responsibility. We've evolved and developed technology to a point in which we can be custodians of life and of the planet...I think that unless a species is harmful in some way, if we can provide protection it's just an intrinsically moral imperative to do so. In my opinion, showing care for things like that is just one of the ways that human beings continue to evolve.
 
Top