extinction

The Bollox

what is the difference between humans killing every last member of a species and another creature doing it? why is it that if humans kill of Condors it's a massive thing, but if lions or eagles did it it would be called natural selection?

we feel, so do lions. we make our own choices, so do lions. Is it because so far we have not found out if any other creatures have a conscience?

Surely if it is called natural selection that means nature had something to do with it, but what is nature? the way I see it, nature is every living thing on this planet, so why is it not called natural selection if humans kill off a species?

Flukey

Because humans kill things directly, often for simple things like "fun" or "sport" as they like to pass it off as being. That is not natural. Unnecessarily destroying creatures or habitat in an organised manner is not natural. Animals killing each other over a long period of time is natural. Most creatures don't hunt others out of existence. That has been man's influence. In nature anything that does become extinct, does so over a long period. The reduction in the quantities or even the existence of some creatures has been accelerated by man. Without some protections put in place, many of those creatures would be gone. Having a bullet put through your head is not natural. Put a man in a cage with no weapons of any kind and then put a hungry lion in, and then we'll see nature in action.

artieanna

First and foremost Animals hunt and kill for survival, to eat is to live or to die. This causes natural control over animal populations also disease and injury. Animals do not kill to cause extintion they kill to survive, if they killed everything they came in contact with, well, what animals would be left today!! and if the food becomes extinct, so do the predators. Eskimos are a good example of humans killing for survival, they kill what they need to eat and clothe themselves and no more.

Then there are humans who kill for sport and for MONEY:mad: , killing elephants for the ivory in their tusks:mad: , and others for animal furs and skins for luxury unnecessary items:mad: . a good example too, is the huge fishing trawler (factories) at sea catching so much fish that the population of fish is disappearing.:mad: They are catching young fish which should be producing offspring next season:mad: . Apart from all this changes in global weather are affecting survival of some specimens.
BIG difference between killing to survive and killing for the money or thrill
artieanna

crosstownk

But is our ability to 'selectively' kill not a natural evolutionary thing? Its something we've evolved into. The fact that we can decide and choose is something that is unique to humans - but it is still a trait we have due to evolution. The real philosophical debate is what we do with this choice.

Personally, I disagree with any unnecessary killing. Live and let live I say.

Ultimatley, the culmination of todays actions and the effect they have in several generations time is how we will be judged by future generations.

artieanna

I don't think its an evoloutionary thing at all, there will always be some people with a strong sense of right and others with none. Some humans think about the impact their actions will have, others see £ signs and don't care. I don't think ancient man went around killing everything, he too would have killed to survive. It is our conscience that guides us towards right or wrong...

megadodge

what is the difference between humans killing every last member of a species and another creature doing it?

Other creatures DON'T do it. That's the difference.

As other posters said they kill for survival and as a result a fundamental law of nature that your question suggests you are unaware of is the result and that is that the amount of prey determines the amount of predators NOT the other way around, hence the balance is always maintained.

piraka

Marts wrote:

what is the difference between humans killing every last member of a species and another creature doing it? why is it that if humans kill of Condors it's a massive thing, but if lions or eagles did it it would be called natural selection?

we feel, so do lions. we make our own choices, so do lions. Is it because so far we have not found out if any other creatures have a conscience?

Surely if it is called natural selection that means nature had something to do with it, but what is nature? the way I see it, nature is every living thing on this planet, so why is it not called natural selection if humans kill off a species?

We are killing of every last member of countless different species, big difference to what the little ole lion or eagle is doing.

piraka

Quote from New Scientist Sept 9th

"The cause of the the sixth extinction is well known: human selection (what might be termed unintelligent design) is systematically replacing natural selection as the engine of evolution.."

http://www.newscientist.com/channel/earth/mg19125685.700-weeds-shall-inherit-the-earth.html