New Bush plan to gut the Endangered Species Act

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: manowar821
Progress of our country (IE MONEY MONEY MONEY) is more important than life, huh? Well then sir, you're no better than a rapist.

excuse me, but where is your house and how many pants, and animals were displaced for your neighborhood to be built?

Are the animals he displaced endangered? Are there protected habitats for these animals?

 

[Geocentricity]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
Good. The ESA is based on a lot of disproven junk science.

For real! We destroy their habitat and blame the species' inability to adapt to catastrophic changes to their way of living which existed before this nation was even settled. Please, GMAFB

 

[Slick5150]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
Good. The ESA is based on a lot of disproven junk science.

And I suppose you, as a trained scientist and not just a repeater of what you heard someone say on TV, have some better science for me to look at that justifies what you're saying?

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
Good. The ESA is based on a lot of disproven junk science.

LOL "Junk Science" Who coined that phrase, Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity?

 

[ShockwaveVT]

Originally posted by: Flyback
I don't mean to sound like an arsehole, but what good are endangered species to us? What is the value in saving the diverse life on earth?

Does saving endangered species benefit humans in any tangible way other than feeling good inside? Will the food chain collapse without them? Is the cure to xyz disease inside of the glands of some endangered critter?

I (seriously) want to know why people care so much. What "value" does it offer to save endangered species? I haven't given it much thought and cannot come up with the reasoning behind it so I would like to hear the views of those who are better versed with the idea of endangered species. I guess I've always looked upon it with a pragmatic tone.

/devil's advocate

Simply because if you let "insignificant" species go extinct, eventually species that have a significant relationship with us will go extinct, and negatively impact humanity. And who defines insignificant? There is a vast amount of information about the planet's ecosystem that we simply do not know or understand. Some species that seems totally useless may in fact be extremely important, or simply extremely useful to humanity at some point in the future. So for now its a good idea to maintain biodiversity as much as possible.

We as a species have huge amount of power, and its easy for us to damage our long-term chances of success as a species by focusing on short-term advancements that have collateral damage.

Some environmentalists want to protect the environment for the animals, I want to protect it for humanity.

 

[MrWizzard]

Originally posted by: Aharami

The draft regulations would:

* Remove recovery of a species or population as a protection standard;
* Allow projects to proceed that have been determined to threaten species with extinction;
* Permit destruction of all restored habitat within critical habitat areas;
* Prevent critical habitat areas from being used to protect against disturbance, pesticides, exotic species, and disease;
* Severely limit the listing of new endangered species; and
* Empower states to veto endangered species introductions as well as administer virtually all aspects of the Endangered Species Act within their borders.

why? does this administration not care about anything other than making a buck?
so sad 🙁

I find that statement sad.

 

[pontifex]

Originally posted by: Flyback
I don't mean to sound like an arsehole, but what good are endangered species to us? What is the value in saving the diverse life on earth?

Does saving endangered species benefit humans in any tangible way other than feeling good inside? Will the food chain collapse without them? Is the cure to xyz disease inside of the glands of some endangered critter?

I (seriously) want to know why people care so much. What "value" does it offer to save endangered species? I haven't given it much thought and cannot come up with the reasoning behind it so I would like to hear the views of those who are better versed with the idea of endangered species. I guess I've always looked upon it with a pragmatic tone.

/devil's advocate

so genocide is acceptable to you?

where does it stop? when we have no animals left? why can't we do it to humans? lets wipe out the bums and welfare people too. they aren't helping us.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: MrWizzard

Originally posted by: Aharami

The draft regulations would:

* Remove recovery of a species or population as a protection standard;
* Allow projects to proceed that have been determined to threaten species with extinction;
* Permit destruction of all restored habitat within critical habitat areas;
* Prevent critical habitat areas from being used to protect against disturbance, pesticides, exotic species, and disease;
* Severely limit the listing of new endangered species; and
* Empower states to veto endangered species introductions as well as administer virtually all aspects of the Endangered Species Act within their borders.

why? does this administration not care about anything other than making a buck?
so sad 🙁

I find that statement sad.

Well so far they've been wrong about everything else, what would give you confidence that they'd get this right?

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: spidey07
:thumbsup:

It's about time. This is great news.

When a protected species of rodent prevents the progress of our country, something is severely wrong.

-edit-
This should make all americans very proud...

"* Severely limit the listing of new endangered species; and
* Empower states to veto endangered species introductions as well as administer virtually all aspects of the Endangered Species Act within their borders."

What's your contribution to the progress of the country? Can I go ahead and kill you now? Let me take out all people related to you while I'm at it and remove your genealogy from the line. Sounds like a good idea to me.

For a forum filled with geeks, you would think that none of you had to take basic Biology pre-reqs.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: ShockwaveVT
Simply because if you let "insignificant" species go extinct, eventually species that have a significant relationship with us will go extinct, and negatively impact humanity. And who defines insignificant? There is a vast amount of information about the planet's ecosystem that we simply do not know or understand. Some species that seems totally useless may in fact be extremely important, or simply extremely useful to humanity at some point in the future. So for now its a good idea to maintain biodiversity as much as possible.

We as a species have huge amount of power, and its easy for us to damage our long-term chances of success as a species by focusing on short-term advancements that have collateral damage.

Some environmentalists want to protect the environment for the animals, I want to protect it for humanity.

What you really mean then is you do not believe in evolution or Darwinism? Because if you did you wouldn't have this line of thinking.

We can't control what species thrive or go extinct. Protectionism is the worst kind of eco-terrorism. Because by directly mucking with it you are influencing the natural order or life. Remember all the "good ideas" from the past? Using rabbits to fight a pest in Australia? That went over real well.

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: Flyback
I don't mean to sound like an arsehole, but what good are endangered species to us? What is the value in saving the diverse life on earth?

Does saving endangered species benefit humans in any tangible way other than feeling good inside? Will the food chain collapse without them? Is the cure to xyz disease inside of the glands of some endangered critter?

I (seriously) want to know why people care so much. What "value" does it offer to save endangered species? I haven't given it much thought and cannot come up with the reasoning behind it so I would like to hear the views of those who are better versed with the idea of endangered species. I guess I've always looked upon it with a pragmatic tone.

/devil's advocate

so genocide is acceptable to you?

you just didnt say genocide did you? PETA much?

Genocide is the mass killing of a group of people as defined by Article 2 of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG) as "any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; and forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."

 

[pontifex]

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: Flyback
I don't mean to sound like an arsehole, but what good are endangered species to us? What is the value in saving the diverse life on earth?

Does saving endangered species benefit humans in any tangible way other than feeling good inside? Will the food chain collapse without them? Is the cure to xyz disease inside of the glands of some endangered critter?

I (seriously) want to know why people care so much. What "value" does it offer to save endangered species? I haven't given it much thought and cannot come up with the reasoning behind it so I would like to hear the views of those who are better versed with the idea of endangered species. I guess I've always looked upon it with a pragmatic tone.

/devil's advocate

so genocide is acceptable to you?

you just didnt say genocide did you? PETA much?

Genocide is the mass killing of a group of people as defined by Article 2 of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG) as "any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; and forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."

no, no peta at all. so maybe genocide isn't the right word. what do you call the complete eradication of an entire species?

 

[FoBoT]

see? those nutjobs want animals=people

 

[Flyback]

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: Flyback
I don't mean to sound like an arsehole, but what good are endangered species to us? What is the value in saving the diverse life on earth?

Does saving endangered species benefit humans in any tangible way other than feeling good inside? Will the food chain collapse without them? Is the cure to xyz disease inside of the glands of some endangered critter?

I (seriously) want to know why people care so much. What "value" does it offer to save endangered species? I haven't given it much thought and cannot come up with the reasoning behind it so I would like to hear the views of those who are better versed with the idea of endangered species. I guess I've always looked upon it with a pragmatic tone.

/devil's advocate

so genocide is acceptable to you?

I thought genocide was only applicable to humans?

I have nothing wrong with cultural genocide or a race of people becoming "no more" (but NOT through the force of others ie. if they do not propagate or become too disperse/mixed with others to have a unique identity).

I don't view animals in the same light and so I don't understand what the "evil" is in destroying a species. I hope others can enlighten me because part of me thinks that ESA is worthwhile but I can't pinpoint -why- which is confusing.

I guess that begs the question: is diversity inherently "good" ?

 

[FoBoT]

Originally posted by: pontifex

no, no peta at all. so maybe genocide isn't the right word. what do you call the complete eradication of an entire species?

extinction , as in "the dinosaurs are extinct due to a comet hitting the earth"

or "the extinction of the dinosaurs is thought to have been caused by global cooling due to a comet hitting the earth"