Next Great Extinction Around The Corner?

chimpkin said:
I suspect (and some biologists suspect) the reason Chronic Wasting Disease-a prion disease-is propagating in the deer and elk in the Western U.S. is the elimination of wolves.
Click to expand...
The North American population of wolves is regaining its numbers quite quickly, and they are resuming their proper place in the ecosystem - namely, taking out the diseased and weak prey, including deer.

This doesn't even touch on the coyote population, which has now learned to cohabitate with humans, even in urban areas. I'd have to check to get accurate figures, but I'd take a chance on betting that a larger population of coyotes is in existence today than, say, 1800. They also perform some of the tasks that wolves would normally do, but they are more of a scavenger then a hunter.

We just need more wolves and coyotes and less humans. The current "overpopulation" problem of deer would then take care of itself...


@Fraggle
Surprised you didn't catch this one...
 
The North American population of wolves is regaining its numbers quite quickly, and they are resuming their proper place in the ecosystem - namely, taking out the diseased and weak prey, including deer.
Click to expand...

nature is not selective or as intelligent/wise in the way we like to romanticize or give credit to it. it's not neat or that smart. 'weak' can mean the young not just diseased. that's what is usually the slowest is the very young or the very old. if you think about it, it's rather stupid to take out the young since that is the next generation but nature works on averages, not intelligence.
 
birch said:
'weak' can mean the young not just diseased.
Click to expand...
Yeah, so?

birch said:
that's what is usually the slowest is the very young or the very old.
Click to expand...
Correct

birch said:
if you think about it, it's rather stupid to take out the young since that is the next generation
Click to expand...
Why?

birch said:
but nature works on averages, not intelligence.
Click to expand...
Oh, that's why. Well, nothing left to discuss here. The wolves weed out the weak - old, young, diseased, crippled - nature is red of tooth and claw.

Thanks for playing...
 
Randwolf said:
Yeah, so?

Correct

Why?

Oh, that's why. Well, nothing left to discuss here. The wolves weed out the weak - old, young, diseased, crippled - nature is red of tooth and claw.

Thanks for playing...
Click to expand...

asking why it's stupid of nature to take out the next generation is stupidity itself or denial. of course it's stupid. that's why it can only work on averages. averages is the easy way so it just goes for anything 'weak'. of course it's weak, it's younger as it hasn't had a chance to get as strong as adult animals.

do you have a problem with that assessment?
 
Last edited:
birch said:
just like i thought, it's typical to have a romantic view of nature.
Click to expand...
Stop doing such, then.

birch said:
asking why it's stupid of nature to take out the next generation is stupidity itself or denial. of course it's stupid. that's why it can only work on averages.
Click to expand...
So you are unable to provide an answer. Why does that not surprise me?

birch said:
do you have a problem with that assessment?
Click to expand...
None whatsoever. Except you really shouldn't be so hard on yourself.
 
Randwolf said:
Stop doing such, then.

So you are unable to provide an answer. Why does that not surprise me?
Click to expand...

really? so it's not self-evident to you why it's stupid to take out the next generation? how it's rather dumb and lazy of nature to not make distinctions? if you look at most animal packs, there are few young to begin with. 'weak' is generalized which means anything that can't run faster which are the old, crippled, diseased and the young. if it was the first three only, then one could say that it makes sense and nature is efficient and wise but the young indicates it's just totally objective to be intelligent with what it created. also, the young usually don't even have enough meat to feed the pack of the predator either. thus nature doesn't usually work past the general and it usually destroys what it creates because it's faulty and short-sighted.

what i said is correct and that is nature takes the easy way out by averages. it's not that intelligent.
 
Last edited:
birch said:
really? so it's not self-evident to you why it's stupid to take out the next generation? how it's rather dumb and lazy of nature to not make distinctions? if you look at most animal packs, there are few young to begin with. 'weak' is generalized which means anything that can't run faster which are the old, crippled, diseased and the young. if it was the first three only, then one could say that it makes sense and nature is efficient and wise but the young indicates it's just totally objective to be intelligent with what it created. also, the young usually don't even have enough meat to feed the pack of the predator either. thus nature doesn't usually work past the general and it usually destroys what it creates because it's faulty and short-sighted.

what i said is correct and that is nature takes the easy way out by averages. it's not that intelligent.
Click to expand...
Word salad.

Furthermore, where do you keep getting this "intelligent" concept from? Please post a link to where I claimed nature was "intelligent".

Plus, if you're feeling exceptionally frisky today, please provide your definition of "intelligent" as it applies to the context at hand...
 
Randwolf said:
Word salad.

Furthermore, where do you keep getting this "intelligent" concept from? Please post a link to where I claimed nature was "intelligent".

Plus, if you're feeling exceptionally frisky today, please provide your definition of "intelligent" as it applies to the context at hand...
Click to expand...

it's not 'word salad', it's a legitimate point. it seems you are the one using word salad. i never said you made the claim. you are just arguing against my statement which indicates that you have a problem with it but not directly saying so. if not, then why are you arguing over it?

i was just making the point that most assume or would like to believe that nature makes sense in everything it does but that's not necessarily the case. it is common to say nature takes out the weak (usually assumed to be adult animals that are less agile or less stronger) and diseased but the fact it takes out the young or newborns means, as it pointed out, too objective to be that intelligent. therefore, 'average' is what it aims for.

the real question is, why are you arguing this point? isn't it rather immature to do so? didn't like i made that point or what?
 
Last edited:
We just need more wolves and coyotes and less humans. The current "overpopulation" problem of deer would then take care of itself...
Click to expand...

Pretty much, yep. Mainly wolves, coyotes can take down calves and deer but mostly prefer smaller stuff-a full-grown deer's too big to be their preferred prey. Too dangerous for them, too likely to get injured that way.

Oh, bears too-a grizzly can run down elk. And people.:eek: That happens.

'weak' can mean the young not just diseased.
Click to expand...

Yes, that happens too. We had a drought last year and the coyotes started in on the housecats. Because kitties aren't hard for the coyote to catch.

Note that we have plenty of deer here, but they went for the cats and got my neighbor's chickens and ducks.

That's why we need wolves back. And considering they are now allowing wolf hunting, I suspect that they won't be allowed to continue to increase.:mad:

Predators go for whatever's easiest, it's just that, except during fawning season, the diseased ones are the easiest to catch out of the deer population.

Nature tends to favor herd animals all dropping their young at once-the prey animals play the numbers game too.
 
Last edited:
Human extinction is in progress

I think it's been pretty clear to everyone who isn't a blind, brain-dead zombie (which unfortunately most people seem to be in the general public) that the human species is on its way out and that it began in the 1970s when there was a tremendous upsurge in the destruction of the rainforests... from then on we've progressively got worse and worse as a species and seem hellbent on not only destroying ourselves, but also taking the whole planet with us!

I've thought it was odd lately that we seem to be living in a giant SIMS game, because everything that's been happening is just the same... all we need now is an attack by a giant monster like Godzilla! LOL!

I think the planet is trying to shake us off her back like a dog bothered by fleas!
 
UKJoy said:
...

I think the planet is trying to shake us off her back like a dog bothered by fleas!
Click to expand...

and it will...

What is it they say on Torchwood - "The 21st Century is when it all changes, and you better be ready."
 
Human consciousness has outwitted nature.
It cannot do its usual balancing act to remove overpopulation.

Such dense populations would naturally be reduced by disease, starvation, and competition for resources, but we have overcome that by medicine and hygiene, farming and industry.

Don't worry, nature will win eventually.
It's got a lot more time available for its blind solutions than we have for our smart ones.
It is also working on millions of them at once.
 
Last edited:
Fraggle Rocker said:
More Americans are killed by bison. I think they are currently the most deadly wild mammal in the country.
Click to expand...
Ironically, deer kill even more - like 20,000 + (because of car accidents)...

Also, while not mammals, bees and wasps top the killer animal list by far in the US. Then next, we have man's best friend, canis familiaris - the house dog.
... the wolf's "tamer" cousin does not always live up to the motto of man's best friend. From 1979 to 1996, dog bites killed 340 people in the United States, with most of the fatalities involving children 14 and younger, according to the Centers for Disease Control. While Rottweilers and pit bulls were responsible for more than half of those deaths, experts stress that it's not fair to condemn a breed for what's usually the sin of its owner. Dozens of breeds, from dachshunds to Yorkshire terriers have caused deaths.
Click to expand...

Bison don't even appear on this list, so I'm curious where you got your data. Seems like they should be there somewhere... Fraggle?

  • Bee/Wasp - 53
  • Dogs - 31
  • Horse - 20
  • Spider - 6.5
  • Rattlesnake - 5.5
  • Bull - 3
  • Mountain lion - 1
  • Shark - 1
 
Enmos said:
Excuse me? Deer kill people by getting run over? :bugeye:
Click to expand...
Cute, Enmos. I'm trying to be a smart ass to Fraggle and you come along and spoil it... :mad:

How about "More human deaths involve deer"?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top