Wait, it’s not for whales?
No, silly. It’s for us to be able to watch the pretty whales as they break above the water and flip their big ole tails. That’s the only reason any species of animals exist on this planet; to amuse and entertain us. Duh.
C- at best. Clarity, brevity and choice of topic all count, and all this effort could’ve been spent on a subject that people want to read.
I just had to explain to an angry mom that yes, her darling had awesome written skills, but that I had to grade him down because his witty, creative ramblings had nothing to do with the assigned topic.
Come to think of it, I’ll have to check and see if her little Jakey is or has ever been a pizza guy…
Hey, if the world ain’t for us, it’s for the bacteria and archaea, and they don’t care what the place looks like, because they already live in the Marianas Trench, the Yellowstone paint pots, and deep within the Earth’s crust.
Save the whales because we like whales. Saving the whales to save life on Earth is biologically illiterate.
But what if the whales (or whatever species being discussed as endangered) play a vital role in that bacteria’s role in the health and condition of this planet? Take bees, for example. You don’t think that an extinction of bees would have an adverse effect on the human population?
I understand that we can’t go chasing after every single species that is nearing extinction. That is the cycle of life; species come and species go. But, just like the climate change issue, what is the cause of some of the extinctions or endangerments and, if we are causing them, what can we do to mitigate that destruction. We really don’t know (or maybe we do, I’m no expert in the matter) what the global impact is of killing off entire species of animals due to entirely man-made causes; as opposed to natural cycles of life.
You’re making my case for me now. We don’t know a whole lot about how the ecological webs interact (because what a tangled web they weave, when they practice only to conceive!) so we should preserve as much as possible to ensure the planet as a whole remains nice for the lifestyles of the bipedal and sophont. This kind of ecology is still blatant humanism.
Anopheles mosquitoes, on the other hand, are useless. Says so right there on the label. Mosquito species are diverse enough and numerous enough that knocking one out won’t collapse the web, and only anopheles can carry malaria, which is harmful to humans. Therefore, extincting all anopheles mosquitoes fits the bill, ecologically-speaking.
You mean the “scientists” who were given money to “find” the “evidence” that the money givers want the public to believe?
Like studies to find out that yes shrimp can walk/run on treadmills? Studies funded by the shrimp mafia aka the government?
Science can and is reviewed even by the money people that are against the original public research, and when they come with the same result…
About that, you really need to clean up your misleading sources of information:
Tell Papa Smurf to give you some hypnotherapy for that drunkenness.
nm
Did this ass-hat poke back in here yet to discuss the word salad he just excreted? Fuckin’ OP man…
What was the point of all that bitching and moaning? Seriously? Concision. OK? Look it up. If you can’t get your point across quicker than that…well shit man, no wonder you’re stuck where you are in life.
And then we’ll learn that an enzyme in anopheles saliva is key to the human reproductive cycle, and we follow them down the Dodo trail in one long, sad generation.
Cool Twilight Zone premise, eh? 
Fuckin’ controversy, how does it work?
Fucking white people, how do they work?
I may be wrong, but I think that is the point of this forum.
S/he’s pissed. And venting. And ranting.
I liked it.
While that is categorically true, there are other ways of looking at education that make the OP a good idea. I don’t really know the state of things in the outside world, but in the US we could do with some basic education in critical thought. History facts, math, basic science, and even social studies are all at your fingertips when you need them–on the internet. I don’t remember dookie from high school, but it’s just as well because most of what I learned has either been rethought (science) or was distorted through the cold-war propaganda lens. Critical thinking, the ability to look at a situation and know what questions to ask in order to cut through a bunch of emotional pressure or deceptive marketing is far more important. Plus, when you hit the interwebs for the data they didn’t teach in school, it’s easier to identify unsupported bullshit.
ICP riff?
It works because they’re growers, not showers.
The idea of actually educating young people about past controversy, especially science based ones, is a very profound one. It would introduce skepticism, as well as giving the next generation a healthy disrespect for authority.
Of course it might also make them question religion, political nonsense and the social order, so fuck it, not going to happen in mass education. Can’t have young people learning about the past, it might give them ideas. Thoughts.
Hell, they might even think for themselves.
I’m proud to have guessed AGW before opening the thread.
Okay, fine, it was obvious. Allow me my small victories.