# endangered species **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 6, 2018, 11:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/endangered-species/822559 "2018-10-06T11:42:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![senoy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dbc845/32.png) [@senoy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/senoy)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2018, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/endangered-species/822559/61 "2018-10-09T18:22:41Z")
> [@Babale](#): > > And it would have been one thing if you let us know that you are playing devil’s advocate here, so we could respond accordingly. Like **Darren Garrison** I’m not sure what the rules about this are (and that might be a worthwhile thread for ATMB) but it’s frustrating in the sense that I certainly, and possibly others, would not have gotten nearly as invested in this debate if I know that you didn’t actually believe the points I was debating against. See, that’s what confuses me. I’m just a guy on the other end of a computer. I happened to like where the OP was going and I just didn’t feel there was a voice for that side of things. I argued it in good faith and put forward what I hope were compelling arguments, so what difference does it make for the purpose of the ‘Great Debate’ whether I wrote those arguments or whether someone who was a ‘true believer’ wrote them. The substance of the debate wouldn’t have changed. The arguments used wouldn’t have changed, so really what’s the difference? I’m open-minded about such things. Maybe the arguments I was advancing were changing my mind and your arguments pulled me back. In this case probably not because I didn’t find either mine or yours particularly compelling, but the possibility certainly existed. ---
**Author:** ![Babale](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/babale/32/15666_2.png) [@Babale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Babale)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2018, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/endangered-species/822559/62 "2018-10-09T18:26:37Z")
> [@senoy](#): > > See, that’s what confuses me. I’m just a guy on the other end of a computer. I happened to like where the OP was going and I just didn’t feel there was a voice for that side of things. I argued it in good faith and put forward what I hope were compelling arguments, so what difference does it make for the purpose of the ‘Great Debate’ whether I wrote those arguments or whether someone who was a ‘true believer’ wrote them. The substance of the debate wouldn’t have changed. The arguments used wouldn’t have changed, so really what’s the difference? I’m open-minded about such things. Maybe the arguments I was advancing were changing my mind and your arguments pulled me back. In this case probably not because I didn’t find either mine or yours particularly compelling, but the possibility certainly existed. I don’t want to hijack this thread any more than we already have, so I’ve created a thread in ATMB. I will respond to this post there. [https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=21257255#post21257255](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=21257255#post21257255) ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2018, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/endangered-species/822559/63 "2018-10-09T20:43:55Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > I support protection of endangered species in large part because I’m a selfish and greedy H. sapiens. > > It’d be bad to see extinction of the spotted whosis frog and then find out later that its skin secretions cure cancer. Mostly this. Too many of our pharmaceutical arsenal is inspired by stuff we find in nature. Of course it may also one day create a zombie virus that turns us all into brain hungry undead. With that said, lets eliminate the mosquitoes that attack humans. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2018, 10:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/endangered-species/822559/64 "2018-10-09T22:27:34Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Of course it may also one day create a zombie virus that turns us all into brain hungry undead. Nature already took care of [that](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ophiocordyceps_unilateralis), too. It would just take a little tweaking in the lab… ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2018, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/endangered-species/822559/65 "2018-10-09T22:30:33Z")
Personally I don’t give a rip whether endangered species die. This isn’t because I believe in evolution though - that doesn’t have anything to do with it. It’s because I don’t care about the specific animals in question. In other words it’s an “I’m an asshole” thing. What I do care about, though, is that most of the ways humans go about extinctifying species also have lots of other effects on the environment which are clearly and obviously going to come back and bite us in the ass. Some specific species of arctic dodo vanishes from the earth? Boo hoo. But if your stripmining/clearcutting/overfishing/wastedumping operation is extinctifying species left and right, that’s a pretty clear indicator that we’re painting ourselves into a corner and then setting fire to the corner. ---
**Author:** ![Babale](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/babale/32/15666_2.png) [@Babale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Babale)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2018, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/endangered-species/822559/66 "2018-10-09T22:52:53Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > Personally I don’t give a rip whether endangered species die. This isn’t because I believe in evolution though - that doesn’t have anything to do with it. It’s because I don’t care about the specific animals in question. In other words it’s an “I’m an asshole” thing. > > What I do care about, though, is that most of the ways humans go about extinctifying species also have lots of other effects on the environment which are clearly and obviously going to come back and bite us in the ass. Some specific species of arctic dodo vanishes from the earth? Boo hoo. But if your stripmining/clearcutting/overfishing/wastedumping operation is extinctifying species left and right, that’s a pretty clear indicator that we’re painting ourselves into a corner and then setting fire to the corner. Another good reason to be environmentally conscious. Don’t fight Global Warming to save the polar bears – do it to save your own ass. ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2018, 6:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/endangered-species/822559/67 "2018-10-10T06:52:43Z")
> [@Babale](#): > > The original question was, “why should we protect endangered species?” And the answer is “because species provide us with various benefits, like practical economic considerations such as potential uses in medicine, as well as the intangible benefit of living in a world full of astounding creatures”. Whether the extinction is natural or unnatural is irrelevant. Well I’d say it’s relevant in that the OP is posing the question from the perspective that extinction is _natural_ so why oppose it? But whether you consider human actions to be natural or not, you run into a contradiction. If human actions are not natural, then the current wave of extinctions is largely not natural, thus contradicting the premise. If human actions are natural, then playing inverse-Pokemon (gotta let 'em all roam free) is also natural. ETA: This is in addition to committing the naturalistic fallacy ---
**Author:** ![naita](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/naita/32/5862_2.png) [@naita](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/naita)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2018, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/endangered-species/822559/68 "2018-10-10T20:39:28Z")
> [@senoy](#): > > what difference does it make for the purpose of the ‘Great Debate’ whether I wrote those arguments or whether someone who was a ‘true believer’ wrote them. The substance of the debate wouldn’t have changed. The arguments used wouldn’t have changed, so really what’s the difference? You don’t know what a ‘true believer’ would have posted, you just assume you do. You also presented yourself as a rather extreme outlier, derailing the discussion because we thought it unlikely you actually meant what your post implied. Playing devils advocate is generally better accomplished by starting your first sentence with “To play devil’s advocate”. ---
**Author:** ![PastTense](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pasttense/32/14550_2.png) [@PastTense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PastTense)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2023, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/endangered-species/822559/69 "2023-10-21T17:40:41Z")
**Fish and Wildlife Service Delists 21 Species from the Endangered Species Act due to Extinction:** Action signals a ‘wake-up call on the importance of conserving imperiled species before it’s too late’ [https://www.fws.gov/press-release/2023-10/21-species-delisted-endangered-species-act-due-extinction](https://www.fws.gov/press-release/2023-10/21-species-delisted-endangered-species-act-due-extinction) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/endangered-species/822559.md?page=3)