2007-07-20 04:29:37 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
The Animal Kingdom is virtually without it's own representation. Life is merely that...Life. We have to realize we share this planet with countless species and indeed we are but another species. To disregard life with a cavalier attitude is not a crime against a specie but a crime against all life. It's important to be humane as we seem to be the most technologically and morally advanced specie on this planet. To not become aware of our responsibility to others is to not become aware of our responsibility to us. All things are interconnected and interdependent.
2007-07-20 04:34:53 · answer #1 · answered by Don W 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I would say it depends on the reasons the species is threatened and just how small the population has become. I am a Zoologist and I know that any species with less than 200 or 300 individuals left does not have much chance of survival even without any human impact. A population that small is unable to survive an outbreak of disease or an environmental disaster. If it is possible to same the species, then I think we should try but we cannot force other people to change their behavior.
2007-07-20 11:37:21 · answer #2 · answered by gerafalop 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No. There have been hundred of species that have been so called "threatened" by man that turn out to instead be thriving or otherwise threatened by other species.... This is a waste of resources and energy...
2007-07-20 11:36:16 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
nope - The same people who will say yes, and who will demand that we do are the same ones who spout out Darwinism, and swear that it is not a theory, but the absolute truth . . . if that is the case, isn't the extinction of an animal being caused by the behavior of another animal merely a concept of evolution? Isn't this the "survival of the fittest" aspect of the Animal Kingdom?!?!
2007-07-20 11:35:27 · answer #4 · answered by vinsa1981 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
No. Species go extinct all the time. New species are discovered all the time.
2007-07-20 11:36:45 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Why not?
When they were vital for the survival and advancement of living human kind on planet earth.
The blunders and slip-ups with human errors .
When living human kind took for granted that the consumption of wild life as exotic food as aphrodisac were just ghostly stories living in misery with faulty sexual system in idol worshiping the dead Mummy of failures and horrors of the past in not worshiping God with loss of our creator's universal gifts of life and loss of fountain of youth.
The blunders and slip-ups with human errors in the destruction of wild life and marine life all for nothing with the blind blindly following the blind.
Luke 6.39-40,41-45,46-49
The blunders and slip-ups with human errors that could not be trace or solve with science and mathematics even with multi- billion dollars of latest or modern technology in outer space , on land and sea below.
When artificial intelligence was created by living human kind is not the creator of heaven and earth.
Ever wonder who were the bunch of educated idiots making a mess out there?
2007-07-20 11:41:55 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
No, it natural evolution. Who is harmed by a species going extinct?
2007-07-20 11:33:29 · answer #7 · answered by John Galt 2 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Yes.
2007-07-20 11:33:35 · answer #8 · answered by Joe M 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Not if that species is the yellow-bellied Fox News watching chickenhawk.
2007-07-20 11:32:25 · answer #9 · answered by George B 1 · 2⤊ 7⤋