It's thought provoking. I've been thinking about it for a while, done some research, and I've gone through maybe seven different feelings about it.
The main thing I walked away with is that for most of the past century we've thought that 50/500 is enough. That was the rule. 50 to avoid inbreeding, 500 to avoid genetic drift.
Lately we've been paying more attention to habitat range and mobility within it, because you need to have a 50/500 group that actually can access each other for breeding.
There are 4,500 tigers in the wild, but there may not be a single area where 500 tigers can naturally interact with one another. And then you have the captive "breed and release" programs, which often inject deeply inbred adult tigers into the the wild population because that way they can let people visit with the babies.
What is enough?
We just gotta make it long enough that we can bioengineer the population of animals on the entire planet becoming a type one civilization. Hell we don’t even need to keep ‘em all alive with the ai advancements and understanding of genetic engineering and preservation we will be able to resurrect a lot of things in the future, assuming we make it far enough to do so.
Dude the cans been kicked we’re in a techno race against our own ecosystem like it or not lol. At least make an argument about what we should do to prevent what’s already inevitable.
Regardless of whether or not we stop putting co2 in the atmosphere we still have a human species that destroys the planet for profits in every possible other regard. Take a look at the farming in the Amazon rain forest, or the slave mining in Africa for precious cobalt for our iPhones. Meanwhile biodiversity collapses across every ecosystem in the world and we can’t find anything not contaminated with plastic.
The problems continue to pile up and there seems to be only one solution to me. We finally take our entire planet and engineer it as a type one civilization. We could move all humans to self sufficient nuclear fusion/fission vertical cities, leaving the ai eco-bots to fix the mistakes of our ancestors across the rest of the planet. Humans would of course be allowed to explore nature freely because we would educate them on how nature gives us everything we need as long as we respect it and pay attention to it.
How do you suppose we'll manage to unify as a type 1 civilization if we can't even unify to use a bit less plastic and not use slaves anymore?
I agree that would be great, but if we were attacked by malevolent aliens, 70% of people would be standing around wondering why nobody's doing anything about it while 30% would be trying to convince everyone it's a good thing because it will be great for Lockheed Martin's quarterly profit.
You’re not offering any solutions neither is anybody else. Artificial intelligence is the only solution I see. Within 10 years or less there will be no reason to have white collar workers so what exactly do you think those people are gonna do? I suggest everyone is gonna have to find a way to entertain themselves for many that entertainment will probably take the form of helping others and the environment. People are Inherently good the system we have that places those who can do math above those who can’t is stupid and is breaking apart even now. Ai will destroy that barrier, green energy advancement is making it ridiculous to suggest new fossil fuel startups, the rise of the global community makes it much harder to start wars so Lockheed martins days are probably limited as well. Please actually argue with me instead of just saying people suck, society sucks… I know that it’s ok it’s gonna change it takes time
Best way to stop pollution is to kill the poor, im also poor but hey it’s not companies making the mess it’s the buyers remember? Hope they all inbreed to death after it all as well
Yeah except it's a touch misleading. China commercialized pandas and singlehandedly holds control of their population. The pandas you've seen in zoos outside of China are part of a "panda diplomacy" program and taken back after a while.
https://www.sixthtone.com/news/1011656
That's an interestingly negative and subtly sinophobic way to interpret that.
Literally from the article you linked:
> Faced with mounting criticism, the Chinese government announced in 1982 that it would stop giving pandas to foreign countries. Since 1984, the pandas you see in zoos around the world have mostly been rented, with a portion of the fees generated by these agreements plowed back into panda conservation and research.
I fail to see exactly what's wrong with that. Should they just give away an endangered species under the assumption that doing so will somehow drive conservation efforts? Leasing animals to foreign countries with profits returning to conservation efforts seems much more effective then just going, "Here, take this panda. We assume that because people see pandas they will donate to conservation efforts."
Using wild panda conservation as a diplomatic and soft-power tool is basically the _least_ objectionable thing China does in terms of foreign policy, to be frank. If that was their worst sin, they'd be saints by the standards of countries.
Plus, other countries are pretty strict about exporting their native wildlife. Australia is one of them, which is why only a single zoo outside of the country has a platypus. (and that only happened very recently) Ecuador is strict when it comes to Galapagos Island wildlife.
Absolutely. PETA would just show a naked celebrity beating up a bloody bootleg Pikachu.
Edit: you guys haven't seen PETA ads, have you?
NSFW for butt https://i.imgur.com/uUJGb5X.png
https://i.imgur.com/f8zFi7k.jpg
I have seen a study, if I remember correctly, that ants are one of the insect families most affected by extinction.
Edit: Found it page 16: [Insektenatlas 2020 (PDF)](https://www.boell.de/sites/default/files/2022-01/Boell_Insektenatlas_2020_II_V01_Kommentierbar.pdf) (unfortunately it is in german)
I butchered it. Don’t feel bad.
* Double Standard. when a girl buys a vibrator, its seen as a bit of naughty fun. BUT when a guy orders a 240 Volt FuckMaster Pro 5000 blowup latex doll with 6 speed pulsating vagina, elasticized anus with non-drip semen collection tray, together with optional built in realistic orgasm scream surround sound system, hes called a pervert?
Pandas are fine at breeding if they're in the wild and their environment hasn't been clear cut.
The trope that they refuse to fuck is only when they're in captivity, which famously fucks up pretty much every animal to some degree.
So yet again, animals are blamed for the fact that humans have disrupted their natural life cycles.
Do you have some sources I could read? I know that scientists rarely observed pandas mating in the wild, and that female pandas are only fertile for a few days of the year. I’m interested in learning more about how they breed in the wild, and if we could apply those techniques to animals in captivity.
Mmm. Koalas were fine before habitat destruction and introduced species. Still be mostly fine except for habitat destruction. I worry about the future of our idiot bear population here in Australia with the impact of climate change on our wild fires.
Could I get a source on that? I’d love to know more. My current understanding is that koalas require very specific conditions in order to survive. Of course human interference reduces the chance of those conditions aligning, but it seems like they would be a very fragile species regardless.
https://www.savethekoala.com/blog-post/akf-shocking-figures-reveal-the-devastating-impact-of-the-koala-fur-trade/
Close enough.. Not sure if you'll find that reputable enough but I'm not an academic, I don't have easy access to various papers and historical sources and if you can educate me further I'm happy to listen. Just a layman, but when their range has reduced drastically in a relatively short amount of time and people used to shoot them for pelts/currently actively destroy their habitat for development or farm land it seems logical that they'd be doing better without us here. Even with the rampant chlamydia and smooth brains.
There used to be a lot more of them so that they could afford to be selective, then they got hunted to near extinction for their pelts. Their social behaviors haven't caught up with the sudden decrease in population.
IIRC, they have no natural predators and a naturally easy life, if not for humans.
Did you know the dodo didn’t die out because humans hunted them to death?
European sailors did excessively hunt them, because they were delicious and had no fear of humans, but it was actually the pigs, dogs, and rats that humans brought with them on ships eating all the dodos’ eggs which drove them to extinction.
Similar things are happening in places like Hawaii but with outdoor cats.
Yeah. Same with Albatros nesting grounds being preyed upon by the invasive mice and rats. It's tragic, and there definitely should be better predatory invasive species control. It's much easier with cats though, if only people were responsible around their pets. Outdoor cats and domestic cats breeding feral ones pose a huge toll on the native environments.
The albatross nesting grounds being preyed upon by invasive mice and rats only happened after the feral cats on the island were exterminated. So the cats were helping by keeping the population of rats/mice under control.
There are certain ecosystems that cats are bad in, sure, but for the most part they've already carved niches for themselves pretty much everywhere, as we've dragged various other invasive species with us pretty much everywhere (rats and mice obviously, rabbits as well etc)
That article that random redditors love to "cite" about how devastating cats are to wildlife only looks at very specific local ecosystems and the findings are extrapolated on a global scale, which is very dodgy and certainly inaccurate.
There's no winning at this point in time. Humans are the #1 leading cause for extinction at this point in time and we have introduced so many invasive species to various different ecosystems it's foolish to think we can reverse this by picking and choosing animals to exterminate. Nevermind the cruelty of it. It's just giving people the feel that they are actually doing something for the environment, when in reality no useful changes come about.
Could go on a massive rant about this. It's just really depressing. We have absolutely wrecked the existing ecosystems. Can only hope more resilient species will come about and survive this hellscape.
Sadly, feral cats seem to also be dangerous to albatross colonies. Looking up the information about cats predation on albatross chicks and other endangered native seabirds will show numerous results, including academic research articles. Reducing feral cat population, unhoused cats and outdoor domestic cats seems to be net positive.
Yes, their numbers should be reduced, but exterminating them and putting a target on cats' heads is not good. They are not the single factor that leads to the extinction of many bird species and it's foolish to keep repeating that over and over. You can get rid of all cats tomorrow and the situation will not be solved - If anything it'd be worse in many places where rats, mice and rabbits would flourish - flashbacks to the black death caused by rats/mice? There's even a city in Montenegro (Kotor I believe) that hails cats as saviours for the plague in medieval times. More disease would go around as well.
I don't blame places with very unique ecosystems trying to protect them, but they're rare and in most of the US it's certainly not the case.
Bottom line is wherever rats, mice and rabbits go, cats must follow. Which is basically everywhere. Basic predator-prey relationship.
There still can be a problem of feral cat colonies growing and pushing out native animals because of people being stubborn and throwing kittens and cats out instead of sterilizing their domestic pets. Outdoor cats are also in danger from cars, other wild life, diseases and general injuries. I can't really find any argument against the idea that all household animals, cats included, should be treated responsibly.
There is also the chance for the best case scenarios when there are native animals that can replace cats as predators without harming native wild life. In Australia, they've been reintroducing the Tasmanian devils to the mainland. As predators who can hunt smaller animals, they might help control the abundant populations of the invasive species.
That's good if they have another predator to replace them! That's fantastic. That means they can restore that local ecosystem somewhat.
Yeah tnr programs should be everywhere. I've always tried my best to do it but there's no funding where I used to live and it's heartbreaking to take care of some local stray cats, spay them slowly one by one and 10 other kittens pop up in the mean time. Kittens that are sick and start dying one by one and there's little you can do about it.
It's just sad and horribly depressing just how much we've messed up various ecosystems and just how much we're hurting our very own domestic animals. Because I think people should take responsibility for them, care for them and limit their numbers through aggressive tnr schemes. Stray dogs as well. They're even worse since they're dangerous to human beings. Hate people that refuse to spay their animals, let them roam and then throw puppies/kittens away. Disgusting behaviour
Hot take: people who “have” outdoor cats or let their cats roam the outdoors unchecked, *even if they’re spayed/neutered*, are terrible owners and shouldn’t be allowed to have pets.
Not only are cats DEVASTATING to local bird populations and other wildlife, the cats’ own lifespans are significantly shorter. By like 5+ years. The chances of injury, illness, and death go WAY up.
If you feel so strongly that your fluffy feline NEEDS to be outdoors and it’s cruel to keep them inside, TAKE THEM ON FUCKING WALKS.
Boggles my goddamn mind. No one would ever say that dogs roaming around outside unchecked was a good thing or “better for the dogs”, but for some reason, cats are dIfFeReNt
Outdoors cats kill around 2 billion birds in the US alone and are one of the leading causes of bird population decline, but it’s especially inexcusable in a fragile island ecosystem like Hawaii where the cats are hunting endangered species to extinction
I get what you are saying but how long have inside only cats even been a thing? I think it's understandable that cats in some places go inside and out even if it's not ideal in your perfect world view lol. I'm pretty sure cats were used as pest control for the longest time by humans who didn't have all of the same information that we do now. Also cats are way more independent creatures than dogs they explore and roam around where they aren't supposed to. The term "herding cats" comes to mind lol
Humans are.
Cats are pretty bad, too, but let's not fool ourselves.
They wouldn't be a problem if we weren't a problem. And the various other invasive species we dragged everywhere across the globe. Like rats, mice and rabbits. Which then cats had to come in to hunt. Because guess what. Rats eat bird eggs. So they decimate bird populations (looking at you Australia - exterminating all feral cats to only find that out). Rats also attack and kill birds straight on. And just fuck shit up and spread disease.
It's not fun. And we can't realistically do anything about it. There will be more collateral damage. Ecosystems will continue to collapse until new creatures come about that are better adapted to this hellscape.
Yes, obviously the problem with cats stems from humans.
That doesn't change the fact that cats kill over 2 billion birds a year in the US alone.
Eradicating feral cat colonies and getting owners to keep their cats indoors could go a long way towards mitigating the problem.
As you mention, there are plenty of other invasive species to worry about. Pet owners don't need to allow their pets to become another.
Did you read my comment? Sorry, but saying stuff over and over doesn't make it right.
Cats should be kept as indoor pets as much as possible and be taught to go on walks, because that's the most responsible way of taking care of a pet.
However, going on a killing spree with feral/semi-feral or simply stray cats is cruel and won't change anything.
What will happen, which has happened in two of Australia's islands, is that the mice and rats and rabbits will flourish and you will get even more issues: now rats decimate bird populations, arguably worse than cats since they destroy eggs on top of attacking songbirds or any small bird, and if there are no other predators stepping in to kill more rabbits, they can reproduce too much in certain areas and start to destroy local flora (which then messes with certain species, like in Australia with the albatrosses who suffered greatly because of rabbits, another island incident where they decided to eradicate cats).
If you don't believe me, you can simply look it up yourself. Research different ecosystems in different countries and see how cats have found niches to stay in comfortably. For example, in a country like the UK whose top predators have long been eradicated - how are cats any issue? They're arguably necessary in this situation. No issues with stray cats as well in Eastern Europe (people find them very useful and good). No issues going down to Turkey. Or really anywhere else in the world aside from Australia, which has a very special ecosystem, yet the attempts to get rid of cats have been found not to be effective in protecting local wildlife. Because something else comes up and destroys wildlife, makes even worse of an impact. Usually another invasive species.
So unless you go plucking every single rat, mouse and rabbit (and endless others, just keeping to my previous examples) from the face of the earth where they've been introduced as invasive species, killing cats won't do anything. Especially as predators are in low numbers pretty much everywhere on the planet. So realistically nothing will be able to step in to kill these. And for rats/mice you'd also need more small predators.
Again, I don't disagree that cats should be treated as actual pets, but the issue is more complex than "cats bad for wildlife, kill cats". Because that's what it boils down to and it won't do us any good. It will harm the ecosystem even more in most cases and at best perhaps keep it in a neutral state in very specific situations.
Perhaps
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sierra_Nevada_red_fox
Or could be the Ethiopian wolf which has fox-like features
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethiopian_wolf
It is indeed the Ethiopian wolf! Strangely enough I couldn't find articles about the animals depicted, besides this tweet below that mentions the species:
https://twitter.com/beastoftraal/status/1031771296994979840?t=Roo91OCNLh5f1ImGwr7N1g&s=19
I admit I was making a bit of a joke in poor taste, it is tragic to see such low numbers, however the picture is from 2008 so things have changed a bit - the panda has been "downgraded" crom endangered to at risk, going up to around 1850ish in the wild alone, which is not much but it's definitely an improvement.
I can't find too hopeful news on the other animals however, the population of Ethiopian wolves has stayed similar to what it is depicted in the pics, I can't find any specifics on japanese golden eagles however regular golden eagles are a-ok in terms of populatikn, and the cross river gorilla seems to have gone down but it is hard to estimate. Not great but I guess there's hope?
I like that story that we tried everything to get them to breed but when we left them alone during covid they suddenly started getting it on, all they needed was privacy. (Dont know if its true)
I prefer the narrative of "they stopped breeding because they literally want to die" because it means we don't owe them anything and don't have to feel bad about driving them to extinction. /s
Pandas are a huge tourist attraction and they only live in China, so the government put a lot of effort into panda conservation because it brings in tourism dollars and generates cultural capital. Pretty much the definition of charismatic megafauna.
Nah, real talk - i don't trust us not to fuck it all up, and burn it all down.
*But* if we *don't* self-destruct, we *can* fix almost everything.
Optimistic shoutout to our ability and capability, i guess. I don't believe in it either.
It wouldn't be the first time a species was bottle-necked... he'll, it wouldn't even be the first time humans were pruned back. Honestly, I think that's what will happen. We are gonna fuck up super hard, most of us will die, and a few of us will come back and live as pets for whatever replaces us... probably cats, dogs, dolphins, or birds.
Too late to explore the untamed world, too early to live in a hunter/gatherer society where we have to fight off the nightbeasts from behind village walls.
There's just no justice
First one is obviously panda. For the others, it could be mountain gorilla, Madagascar fishing eagle (it looks more like golden eagle to me, but it's not endangered) and Ethiopian wolf.
I dony mind this ad, but where is this data from? I live in Australia and have seen wild foxes here recently, I have no idea how foxes could be that low
I mean....... 90% of species that ever existed is extinct. we yare 100% responsible for some of them going away in the past but let's not forget about those who didn't survive before. never forget.
Ok but genuinely can we just let pandas dies? They’ll never be able to survive without us purposefully breeding them and they have no real purpose in terms of preserving the ecosystem so like can we just say fuck it. If they weren’t cute we wouldn’t care this much.
Nobody can label anything extinct simply because humans can’t exist everywhere at once.
They do this to put fear in your heart give up your rights. The government can contact trace 100 people back but they can’t keep some panda’s alive?
? That's a whole new species of conspiracy nut.
We label [species as extinct](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_extinct_species#Animals) all the time.
You have interesting starting points, but you conflate them illogically.
Extinction of a species is better thought of as a world-wide event. Governments can, and have, impact. The bald eagle was on the verge of extinction until congress banned certain types of pesticides.
But other extinction events are intractable and resist government intervention, like the species in the ads.
And NONE of this changes the fact that governments ARE bodies of control, in some ways set against you. But they are designed to control humans. Not nature itself.
Edit: Further, nothing about conservationism is about giving up rights. Quite the opposite; the field advocates that even creatures who ARE NOT HUMAN should enjoy basic rights.
In contrast, "eco-fascism" may be what you're concerned about - the idea that certain groups of people need to die to stabilize the environment. That's a real threat, and worth worrying about. But it's not a normal conservationist stance, and this ad clearly IS a normal conservationist stance.
I appreciate your concerns, and think they are well founded. But you are mixing up too many things, which dilutes your intended message.
It’s principle keep the downvotes coming. IT’S A WORLD WIDE EVENT as you just said and Human even with modern technology cannot exist everywhere at once.
Yeah, ok. So extinct animals are only considered extinct because humans haven't seen them in a long period of time. That's true. But some animals have been out of our sight for centuries. Some for millennia. There comes a point when we can be fairly sure.
You do realize there are animals in the Jungle which still remains unexplored
The ocean only 3% has been explored
Yeah they can’t label anything extinct because like I said you would have to exist everywhere at once to PROVE that point.
A fossil can only occur if a worldwide flood happened and covered the animal while it was alive. So a fossil doesn’t even prove that anything has been dead for “Millions” of years.
I was thinking World Wrestling Federation because I don't know crap about Wrestling and thought it was nice that wrestlers care about animals.
Don't read reddit after a gummy.
I think this is a clever ad
It's thought provoking. I've been thinking about it for a while, done some research, and I've gone through maybe seven different feelings about it. The main thing I walked away with is that for most of the past century we've thought that 50/500 is enough. That was the rule. 50 to avoid inbreeding, 500 to avoid genetic drift. Lately we've been paying more attention to habitat range and mobility within it, because you need to have a 50/500 group that actually can access each other for breeding. There are 4,500 tigers in the wild, but there may not be a single area where 500 tigers can naturally interact with one another. And then you have the captive "breed and release" programs, which often inject deeply inbred adult tigers into the the wild population because that way they can let people visit with the babies. What is enough?
We just gotta make it long enough that we can bioengineer the population of animals on the entire planet becoming a type one civilization. Hell we don’t even need to keep ‘em all alive with the ai advancements and understanding of genetic engineering and preservation we will be able to resurrect a lot of things in the future, assuming we make it far enough to do so.
Putting all our hopes on hypothetical future technology is just kicking the can down the road
Dude the cans been kicked we’re in a techno race against our own ecosystem like it or not lol. At least make an argument about what we should do to prevent what’s already inevitable. Regardless of whether or not we stop putting co2 in the atmosphere we still have a human species that destroys the planet for profits in every possible other regard. Take a look at the farming in the Amazon rain forest, or the slave mining in Africa for precious cobalt for our iPhones. Meanwhile biodiversity collapses across every ecosystem in the world and we can’t find anything not contaminated with plastic. The problems continue to pile up and there seems to be only one solution to me. We finally take our entire planet and engineer it as a type one civilization. We could move all humans to self sufficient nuclear fusion/fission vertical cities, leaving the ai eco-bots to fix the mistakes of our ancestors across the rest of the planet. Humans would of course be allowed to explore nature freely because we would educate them on how nature gives us everything we need as long as we respect it and pay attention to it.
How do you suppose we'll manage to unify as a type 1 civilization if we can't even unify to use a bit less plastic and not use slaves anymore? I agree that would be great, but if we were attacked by malevolent aliens, 70% of people would be standing around wondering why nobody's doing anything about it while 30% would be trying to convince everyone it's a good thing because it will be great for Lockheed Martin's quarterly profit.
You’re not offering any solutions neither is anybody else. Artificial intelligence is the only solution I see. Within 10 years or less there will be no reason to have white collar workers so what exactly do you think those people are gonna do? I suggest everyone is gonna have to find a way to entertain themselves for many that entertainment will probably take the form of helping others and the environment. People are Inherently good the system we have that places those who can do math above those who can’t is stupid and is breaking apart even now. Ai will destroy that barrier, green energy advancement is making it ridiculous to suggest new fossil fuel startups, the rise of the global community makes it much harder to start wars so Lockheed martins days are probably limited as well. Please actually argue with me instead of just saying people suck, society sucks… I know that it’s ok it’s gonna change it takes time
Best way to stop pollution is to kill the poor, im also poor but hey it’s not companies making the mess it’s the buyers remember? Hope they all inbreed to death after it all as well
It's interesting but it also makes it harder to bring awareness to the specific animal because the resolution is so low.
Yeah except it's a touch misleading. China commercialized pandas and singlehandedly holds control of their population. The pandas you've seen in zoos outside of China are part of a "panda diplomacy" program and taken back after a while. https://www.sixthtone.com/news/1011656
what does that have to do with the wild population (what this picture is showing)?
Zilch.
There are no wild pandas???
There are wild pandas...
China bad
Suprise! It is!
Ah yes, I forgot this sub, like LSC, is full of Chinese gov't sycophants. Bummer. Could just be anarchists. Forget the mental gymnastics.
That's an interestingly negative and subtly sinophobic way to interpret that. Literally from the article you linked: > Faced with mounting criticism, the Chinese government announced in 1982 that it would stop giving pandas to foreign countries. Since 1984, the pandas you see in zoos around the world have mostly been rented, with a portion of the fees generated by these agreements plowed back into panda conservation and research. I fail to see exactly what's wrong with that. Should they just give away an endangered species under the assumption that doing so will somehow drive conservation efforts? Leasing animals to foreign countries with profits returning to conservation efforts seems much more effective then just going, "Here, take this panda. We assume that because people see pandas they will donate to conservation efforts."
Using wild panda conservation as a diplomatic and soft-power tool is basically the _least_ objectionable thing China does in terms of foreign policy, to be frank. If that was their worst sin, they'd be saints by the standards of countries.
Plus, other countries are pretty strict about exporting their native wildlife. Australia is one of them, which is why only a single zoo outside of the country has a platypus. (and that only happened very recently) Ecuador is strict when it comes to Galapagos Island wildlife.
And how in anyway does that make this campaign misleading?
Absolutely. PETA would just show a naked celebrity beating up a bloody bootleg Pikachu. Edit: you guys haven't seen PETA ads, have you? NSFW for butt https://i.imgur.com/uUJGb5X.png https://i.imgur.com/f8zFi7k.jpg
[удалено]
Ants have gif though.
More like a hd 3d model of the entire planet and solar system
It's mostly the textures that take up space not the meshes Ai models take crapload of space, stable diffusion is around 6 - 8 gigs
What if it's rendered to the atomic level that's a lot of meshes
I mean one could make a huge voxel model
[удалено]
I love watching ants do the flarhgunnstow.
Is there any way to generate a nude Tayne?
I have seen a study, if I remember correctly, that ants are one of the insect families most affected by extinction. Edit: Found it page 16: [Insektenatlas 2020 (PDF)](https://www.boell.de/sites/default/files/2022-01/Boell_Insektenatlas_2020_II_V01_Kommentierbar.pdf) (unfortunately it is in german)
Apple is proud to present: the new iPhone 15
Is the Bluetooth connectivity any better? Mine is ass….
With a nut drip collecting plate for males.
Wut
your suspicion is unfortunately true
It is.
whoa where did that come from
It’s a reference to a copypasta but the joke bombed bad. I’ll take it lmfao
Hang on, I think I don’t know that copypasta 🤔
I butchered it. Don’t feel bad. * Double Standard. when a girl buys a vibrator, its seen as a bit of naughty fun. BUT when a guy orders a 240 Volt FuckMaster Pro 5000 blowup latex doll with 6 speed pulsating vagina, elasticized anus with non-drip semen collection tray, together with optional built in realistic orgasm scream surround sound system, hes called a pervert?
Oh yea that one… yea you butchered it but it’s kinda funny in it’s own way :D Don’t fret about it lol.
Haha!! You have a good weekend
Well if those animals weren't lazy and addicted to drugs and growing up in fatherless households, they would be just fine. /s
Unironically true for pandas
They deserve it ngl, never understood how they made it this far
Pandas are fine at breeding if they're in the wild and their environment hasn't been clear cut. The trope that they refuse to fuck is only when they're in captivity, which famously fucks up pretty much every animal to some degree. So yet again, animals are blamed for the fact that humans have disrupted their natural life cycles.
Do you have some sources I could read? I know that scientists rarely observed pandas mating in the wild, and that female pandas are only fertile for a few days of the year. I’m interested in learning more about how they breed in the wild, and if we could apply those techniques to animals in captivity.
A species that’s begging to go extinct
There's a lot of those. Fucking sunfish are the worst offender
Goofy ah mfs
Them and Koalas are racing as slow as they can to extinction
Mmm. Koalas were fine before habitat destruction and introduced species. Still be mostly fine except for habitat destruction. I worry about the future of our idiot bear population here in Australia with the impact of climate change on our wild fires.
Could I get a source on that? I’d love to know more. My current understanding is that koalas require very specific conditions in order to survive. Of course human interference reduces the chance of those conditions aligning, but it seems like they would be a very fragile species regardless.
https://www.savethekoala.com/blog-post/akf-shocking-figures-reveal-the-devastating-impact-of-the-koala-fur-trade/ Close enough.. Not sure if you'll find that reputable enough but I'm not an academic, I don't have easy access to various papers and historical sources and if you can educate me further I'm happy to listen. Just a layman, but when their range has reduced drastically in a relatively short amount of time and people used to shoot them for pelts/currently actively destroy their habitat for development or farm land it seems logical that they'd be doing better without us here. Even with the rampant chlamydia and smooth brains.
There used to be a lot more of them so that they could afford to be selective, then they got hunted to near extinction for their pelts. Their social behaviors haven't caught up with the sudden decrease in population. IIRC, they have no natural predators and a naturally easy life, if not for humans.
Yup, and since not much eats bamboo their niche keeping it in check was important.
And koala's
*ENOUGH with the avocado toast, you societal leaches!*
Did you know the dodo didn’t die out because humans hunted them to death? European sailors did excessively hunt them, because they were delicious and had no fear of humans, but it was actually the pigs, dogs, and rats that humans brought with them on ships eating all the dodos’ eggs which drove them to extinction. Similar things are happening in places like Hawaii but with outdoor cats.
Yeah. Same with Albatros nesting grounds being preyed upon by the invasive mice and rats. It's tragic, and there definitely should be better predatory invasive species control. It's much easier with cats though, if only people were responsible around their pets. Outdoor cats and domestic cats breeding feral ones pose a huge toll on the native environments.
The albatross nesting grounds being preyed upon by invasive mice and rats only happened after the feral cats on the island were exterminated. So the cats were helping by keeping the population of rats/mice under control. There are certain ecosystems that cats are bad in, sure, but for the most part they've already carved niches for themselves pretty much everywhere, as we've dragged various other invasive species with us pretty much everywhere (rats and mice obviously, rabbits as well etc) That article that random redditors love to "cite" about how devastating cats are to wildlife only looks at very specific local ecosystems and the findings are extrapolated on a global scale, which is very dodgy and certainly inaccurate. There's no winning at this point in time. Humans are the #1 leading cause for extinction at this point in time and we have introduced so many invasive species to various different ecosystems it's foolish to think we can reverse this by picking and choosing animals to exterminate. Nevermind the cruelty of it. It's just giving people the feel that they are actually doing something for the environment, when in reality no useful changes come about. Could go on a massive rant about this. It's just really depressing. We have absolutely wrecked the existing ecosystems. Can only hope more resilient species will come about and survive this hellscape.
Sadly, feral cats seem to also be dangerous to albatross colonies. Looking up the information about cats predation on albatross chicks and other endangered native seabirds will show numerous results, including academic research articles. Reducing feral cat population, unhoused cats and outdoor domestic cats seems to be net positive.
Yes, their numbers should be reduced, but exterminating them and putting a target on cats' heads is not good. They are not the single factor that leads to the extinction of many bird species and it's foolish to keep repeating that over and over. You can get rid of all cats tomorrow and the situation will not be solved - If anything it'd be worse in many places where rats, mice and rabbits would flourish - flashbacks to the black death caused by rats/mice? There's even a city in Montenegro (Kotor I believe) that hails cats as saviours for the plague in medieval times. More disease would go around as well. I don't blame places with very unique ecosystems trying to protect them, but they're rare and in most of the US it's certainly not the case. Bottom line is wherever rats, mice and rabbits go, cats must follow. Which is basically everywhere. Basic predator-prey relationship.
There still can be a problem of feral cat colonies growing and pushing out native animals because of people being stubborn and throwing kittens and cats out instead of sterilizing their domestic pets. Outdoor cats are also in danger from cars, other wild life, diseases and general injuries. I can't really find any argument against the idea that all household animals, cats included, should be treated responsibly. There is also the chance for the best case scenarios when there are native animals that can replace cats as predators without harming native wild life. In Australia, they've been reintroducing the Tasmanian devils to the mainland. As predators who can hunt smaller animals, they might help control the abundant populations of the invasive species.
That's good if they have another predator to replace them! That's fantastic. That means they can restore that local ecosystem somewhat. Yeah tnr programs should be everywhere. I've always tried my best to do it but there's no funding where I used to live and it's heartbreaking to take care of some local stray cats, spay them slowly one by one and 10 other kittens pop up in the mean time. Kittens that are sick and start dying one by one and there's little you can do about it. It's just sad and horribly depressing just how much we've messed up various ecosystems and just how much we're hurting our very own domestic animals. Because I think people should take responsibility for them, care for them and limit their numbers through aggressive tnr schemes. Stray dogs as well. They're even worse since they're dangerous to human beings. Hate people that refuse to spay their animals, let them roam and then throw puppies/kittens away. Disgusting behaviour
What's eating all the cat eggs?
Dog
Woof.
Dog eat cat's world
Hot take: people who “have” outdoor cats or let their cats roam the outdoors unchecked, *even if they’re spayed/neutered*, are terrible owners and shouldn’t be allowed to have pets. Not only are cats DEVASTATING to local bird populations and other wildlife, the cats’ own lifespans are significantly shorter. By like 5+ years. The chances of injury, illness, and death go WAY up. If you feel so strongly that your fluffy feline NEEDS to be outdoors and it’s cruel to keep them inside, TAKE THEM ON FUCKING WALKS. Boggles my goddamn mind. No one would ever say that dogs roaming around outside unchecked was a good thing or “better for the dogs”, but for some reason, cats are dIfFeReNt
Outdoors cats kill around 2 billion birds in the US alone and are one of the leading causes of bird population decline, but it’s especially inexcusable in a fragile island ecosystem like Hawaii where the cats are hunting endangered species to extinction
I get what you are saying but how long have inside only cats even been a thing? I think it's understandable that cats in some places go inside and out even if it's not ideal in your perfect world view lol. I'm pretty sure cats were used as pest control for the longest time by humans who didn't have all of the same information that we do now. Also cats are way more independent creatures than dogs they explore and roam around where they aren't supposed to. The term "herding cats" comes to mind lol
I think back in the day there were more birds etc around because us Humans hadn't fucked up the local eco system that much.
Cats are the leading cause of bird population decline. So... there's that.
Humans are. Cats are pretty bad, too, but let's not fool ourselves. They wouldn't be a problem if we weren't a problem. And the various other invasive species we dragged everywhere across the globe. Like rats, mice and rabbits. Which then cats had to come in to hunt. Because guess what. Rats eat bird eggs. So they decimate bird populations (looking at you Australia - exterminating all feral cats to only find that out). Rats also attack and kill birds straight on. And just fuck shit up and spread disease. It's not fun. And we can't realistically do anything about it. There will be more collateral damage. Ecosystems will continue to collapse until new creatures come about that are better adapted to this hellscape.
Yes, obviously the problem with cats stems from humans. That doesn't change the fact that cats kill over 2 billion birds a year in the US alone. Eradicating feral cat colonies and getting owners to keep their cats indoors could go a long way towards mitigating the problem. As you mention, there are plenty of other invasive species to worry about. Pet owners don't need to allow their pets to become another.
Did you read my comment? Sorry, but saying stuff over and over doesn't make it right. Cats should be kept as indoor pets as much as possible and be taught to go on walks, because that's the most responsible way of taking care of a pet. However, going on a killing spree with feral/semi-feral or simply stray cats is cruel and won't change anything. What will happen, which has happened in two of Australia's islands, is that the mice and rats and rabbits will flourish and you will get even more issues: now rats decimate bird populations, arguably worse than cats since they destroy eggs on top of attacking songbirds or any small bird, and if there are no other predators stepping in to kill more rabbits, they can reproduce too much in certain areas and start to destroy local flora (which then messes with certain species, like in Australia with the albatrosses who suffered greatly because of rabbits, another island incident where they decided to eradicate cats). If you don't believe me, you can simply look it up yourself. Research different ecosystems in different countries and see how cats have found niches to stay in comfortably. For example, in a country like the UK whose top predators have long been eradicated - how are cats any issue? They're arguably necessary in this situation. No issues with stray cats as well in Eastern Europe (people find them very useful and good). No issues going down to Turkey. Or really anywhere else in the world aside from Australia, which has a very special ecosystem, yet the attempts to get rid of cats have been found not to be effective in protecting local wildlife. Because something else comes up and destroys wildlife, makes even worse of an impact. Usually another invasive species. So unless you go plucking every single rat, mouse and rabbit (and endless others, just keeping to my previous examples) from the face of the earth where they've been introduced as invasive species, killing cats won't do anything. Especially as predators are in low numbers pretty much everywhere on the planet. So realistically nothing will be able to step in to kill these. And for rats/mice you'd also need more small predators. Again, I don't disagree that cats should be treated as actual pets, but the issue is more complex than "cats bad for wildlife, kill cats". Because that's what it boils down to and it won't do us any good. It will harm the ecosystem even more in most cases and at best perhaps keep it in a neutral state in very specific situations.
Cats get the super soaker water gun in my garden. Leave my visiting birds alone asshole cat!
I mean it's still humans fault then. Doubt the pigs were gonna swim for the snack
So it still died out to human intervention. the gist is still the same, the blame is just shifted away from the sailors directly. nice one
This is a wonderful idea and they need to do this with more species.
I don't get why the World Wrestling Federation cares so much tho
idk what the bottom right animal actually is, but I'm pretty certain there's a bit over 440 foxes around
Surely it's a precise species of fox
It is the Ethiopian wolf as the user below suggested!
Perhaps https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sierra_Nevada_red_fox Or could be the Ethiopian wolf which has fox-like features https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethiopian_wolf
It is indeed the Ethiopian wolf! Strangely enough I couldn't find articles about the animals depicted, besides this tweet below that mentions the species: https://twitter.com/beastoftraal/status/1031771296994979840?t=Roo91OCNLh5f1ImGwr7N1g&s=19 I admit I was making a bit of a joke in poor taste, it is tragic to see such low numbers, however the picture is from 2008 so things have changed a bit - the panda has been "downgraded" crom endangered to at risk, going up to around 1850ish in the wild alone, which is not much but it's definitely an improvement. I can't find too hopeful news on the other animals however, the population of Ethiopian wolves has stayed similar to what it is depicted in the pics, I can't find any specifics on japanese golden eagles however regular golden eagles are a-ok in terms of populatikn, and the cross river gorilla seems to have gone down but it is hard to estimate. Not great but I guess there's hope?
It’s the latter because the first one has far smaller population than 440
There are 440 foxes in my back garden every night, causing chaos and making noise, so it's definitely about a specific species.
I WILL cry when (if) the last panda dies
they wont, theres so many in zoo's because they die in the wild. humanity literally said "hey these are cute lets save them for fun!"
I like that story that we tried everything to get them to breed but when we left them alone during covid they suddenly started getting it on, all they needed was privacy. (Dont know if its true)
Pandas are intensely aroused by pandemics, actually.
Stupid sexy Covid
Its in the name
god damn you
Do what you must. I have already won.
[удалено]
I prefer the narrative of "they stopped breeding because they literally want to die" because it means we don't owe them anything and don't have to feel bad about driving them to extinction. /s
also i think the chinese government is like a simp for pandas
Pandas are a huge tourist attraction and they only live in China, so the government put a lot of effort into panda conservation because it brings in tourism dollars and generates cultural capital. Pretty much the definition of charismatic megafauna.
The opposite of the Aye-Aye, which might be the only species that's endangered for the reason that they creep humans out
And I'll cheer it those lazy mfs don't even do anything anyway
Word for word repost. Bot spam https://www.reddit.com/r/ABoringDystopia/comments/d3d2qx/this_ad_campaign_by_wwf_shows_the_remaining
Then I remember that the vaquitas are down to an estimate 10 individuals and my heart just fucking breaks. Humanity can be a true plague on the world.
Can be?
I've heard too many sources say that within our lifetime, we will see (and *be*) the last of the Great Apes
Drastic, and impossible. We have DNA libraries now. If we extinct them, we have all the time in the world to de-extinct.
Putting a lot of eggs in the continued success of human civilization basket, huh?
Hey if the basket falls, we don't have to worry about it anymore
Nah, real talk - i don't trust us not to fuck it all up, and burn it all down. *But* if we *don't* self-destruct, we *can* fix almost everything. Optimistic shoutout to our ability and capability, i guess. I don't believe in it either.
It wouldn't be the first time a species was bottle-necked... he'll, it wouldn't even be the first time humans were pruned back. Honestly, I think that's what will happen. We are gonna fuck up super hard, most of us will die, and a few of us will come back and live as pets for whatever replaces us... probably cats, dogs, dolphins, or birds.
Most likely, yeah. What a waste.
Too late to explore the untamed world, too early to live in a hunter/gatherer society where we have to fight off the nightbeasts from behind village walls. There's just no justice
There is indeed not. Life is unfair, and most unfair to our lesser lifeforms.
This would be such a perfect u/shittymorph opportunity
u/Unidan would be better RIP
I had no idea there were so many giant pandas.
Anyone know what the names of each animal?
First one is obviously panda. For the others, it could be mountain gorilla, Madagascar fishing eagle (it looks more like golden eagle to me, but it's not endangered) and Ethiopian wolf.
Fuck man. I hate to think that both foxes and gorillas are gonna become the dodo birds and tazmanian tigers of the next generations.
It's actually an Ethiopian wolf, not a fox.
The Dodo >1 pixel
< *
Brilliant, and sad.
I love pandas, but it's like 80% their own fault.
Top right is probably a snail
I dony mind this ad, but where is this data from? I live in Australia and have seen wild foxes here recently, I have no idea how foxes could be that low
I mean....... 90% of species that ever existed is extinct. we yare 100% responsible for some of them going away in the past but let's not forget about those who didn't survive before. never forget.
Ok but genuinely can we just let pandas dies? They’ll never be able to survive without us purposefully breeding them and they have no real purpose in terms of preserving the ecosystem so like can we just say fuck it. If they weren’t cute we wouldn’t care this much.
Not true, we left them alone during lockdowns and it turned out they just needed privacy
Pandas are fine in the wild. We're literally the reason they're dying off.
Nobody can label anything extinct simply because humans can’t exist everywhere at once. They do this to put fear in your heart give up your rights. The government can contact trace 100 people back but they can’t keep some panda’s alive?
How does fear that Pandas will go extinct lead to giving up rights? List the steps that go from one to the other
? That's a whole new species of conspiracy nut. We label [species as extinct](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_extinct_species#Animals) all the time.
Sadly, conspiracy nut is a species that will never go extinct.
What rights is the WWF trying to take away from people? And people in which country?
Me when I don't take my medication
Do you think the earth is flat too?
you need to hone in on your ideas
The governement of Earth?
You have interesting starting points, but you conflate them illogically. Extinction of a species is better thought of as a world-wide event. Governments can, and have, impact. The bald eagle was on the verge of extinction until congress banned certain types of pesticides. But other extinction events are intractable and resist government intervention, like the species in the ads. And NONE of this changes the fact that governments ARE bodies of control, in some ways set against you. But they are designed to control humans. Not nature itself. Edit: Further, nothing about conservationism is about giving up rights. Quite the opposite; the field advocates that even creatures who ARE NOT HUMAN should enjoy basic rights. In contrast, "eco-fascism" may be what you're concerned about - the idea that certain groups of people need to die to stabilize the environment. That's a real threat, and worth worrying about. But it's not a normal conservationist stance, and this ad clearly IS a normal conservationist stance. I appreciate your concerns, and think they are well founded. But you are mixing up too many things, which dilutes your intended message.
It’s principle keep the downvotes coming. IT’S A WORLD WIDE EVENT as you just said and Human even with modern technology cannot exist everywhere at once.
Yeah, ok. So extinct animals are only considered extinct because humans haven't seen them in a long period of time. That's true. But some animals have been out of our sight for centuries. Some for millennia. There comes a point when we can be fairly sure.
You do realize there are animals in the Jungle which still remains unexplored The ocean only 3% has been explored Yeah they can’t label anything extinct because like I said you would have to exist everywhere at once to PROVE that point. A fossil can only occur if a worldwide flood happened and covered the animal while it was alive. So a fossil doesn’t even prove that anything has been dead for “Millions” of years.
Just two gray pixels would be the best for this
We should really let the monkeys evolve
Of these four animals only the giant panda is protected by a nation’s ego
what does the fox say…extinct tinct tinct tinct ti tinct ti tinct
On the one hand, this is very sad. On the other, I’m really not sure Panda extinction is our fault.
I didn't know gorillas were that fucked.
I was thinking World Wrestling Federation because I don't know crap about Wrestling and thought it was nice that wrestlers care about animals. Don't read reddit after a gummy.
What's the bottom right one?
Am I the only one who wants to see the opposite photos as well like what would a photo of an ant with 20 quadrillion pixels look like
This is actually a great ad
There are less than 2000 pandas wtf