>This isn’t some species that was obliterated by deforestation, or the building of a dam. Dinosaurs had their shot, and nature selected them for extinction.
How does that even make sense? We humans as a species are a force of nature. In a way, condors dying out because of human expansion is also some sort of natural selection.
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
 CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
Natural selection isn't a conscious decision by a set of beings that subsequently impact other species.
>In a way, condors dying out because of human expansion is also some sort of natural selection.
Correct, not that I condone killing off species
Reddit
underaged newbie
No but humans didnt consciously try to wipe out condors through deforestation. We just needed the materials like a bunch of beavers.
They consciously chose to destroy the environment for a range of factors. They weren't adhering to any natural instinct that a beaver is by building a dam.
You could argue that the accumulation of scarce resources is a natural instinct and environmental destruction is a natural consequence of that instinct.
says who, homosexual
Everyone, homosexual.
Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet. They are a plague.
So what's actual cancer?
You think theres no other hyperadundant species on the planet? But muh balance! All bs
humans aren't "hyperabundant." their impact is disproportionate to their population.
God put the dinosaurs on Earth then made them go extinct in order for the humans to learn from it. Humans need to take care of the earth otherwise they’ll experience the same fate. Another objective that humans must complete is the exploration of the solar system and the rest of the universe, to create a backup of humanity in case of disaster.
>Humans need to take care of the earth otherwise they’ll experience the same fate
>If humans don't stop climate warming change a frick huge rock will clap Earth's cheeks so hard that the debris will block out the sun for years
>So close the nuclear plants and build a bunch of windmills that only work for a couple of years
Climate change can bring some big surprises.
I’ve been thinking about an idea for a movie. In this movie climate change turns the USA into perpetual winter while Russia begins to get warmer, this switch changes the superpower and leads to the world’s destruction.
fine with me as long as the summers arent so fricking hot god damn
It depends on whether or not you consider anthropogenic forces as "natural". It's purely semantic
>extraterrestrial object
>"""""natural selection"""""
what a fricking moron
>In a way, condors dying out because of human expansion is also some sort of natural selection.
Correct
It's not 'natural selection' in the sense of Darwinian 'Natural Selection'.
Yes, of course anything that humans do could technically be said to be the result of nature, but Ian is appealing to the sense that the forces of nature prior to or up to the point of human civilisationhistory exercised 'intelligence' or even 'wisdom' in selection, that natural processes are vastly larger and on a much larger scale than a single human mind or a bunch of humans deciding to bring a species back from extinction. The speech is about the 'hubris' of "scientists" and that sort of thing vs the actual complexity and 'wisdom' of forces well beyond easy human understanding.
The argument could also be applied to a lot of things like the covid RNA 'vaccines', these corporations are driven by profit and they think that they can mess with the human organism because they have some CONFIDENCE that they understand enough of the human organism to make that choice - but in reality we have a very limited understanding of the complexities of the human body.. in fact it's possible that viruses don't even exist.
what's the difference between 'natural selection' in the sense of Darwinian 'natural selection' and 'natural selection'?
Sorry, what I meant to say is that the way the OP is defining "natural selection" as inclusive of human actions, isn't really the 'natural selection' that Darwin described.
I think Darwin was describing very very long processes that occurred 'naturally' outside of human influence, where the environment is the main factor. 'Survival of the fittest' for the context, and this didn't really take into account human influence.
Obviously human action and choices ARE are a result of nature and could easily be said to include that - but I think this is the point Ian is trying to make here, he's appealing to a sense of the 'wisdom' of nature and these experiments taking place in many cases over millions of years... vs a single human with a lifespan of maybe 85 years using a technology to bring back a species that's been extinct for millions of years. Even selective breeding of animals and so on is a much more passive process than what Hammond was doing.
As an observant human being, I noticed that the posts in this thread were coming in in a suspicious manner. You can’t fool me bots. Especially when silly humans are manning said bots.
Gone the way of the Dodo, they have.
He was a mathematician, not an evolutionary biologist. Crichton loves to present experts as ignorant in areas outside of their expertise. Some of that trickled into the watered down movie.
Dinos ruled the world for 165 million years. We humans only existed for 200,000 years. Too early to gloat.
Dinosaurs had billions of years to make something of themselves and they couldn’t even make rudimentary tools. No structures, no actualization, no identity. Just mindless consumption and lazy adherence to the status quo. Cows eating cud for millions of years, unthinking and unbelieving
The meteor was God getting fed up with the monotony and clearing the board to give other beasts a crack at attaining sentience.
We thought Troy didn't exist up until a few decades ago. That was just a couple thousand years old. Dinosaur cities are millions of years old, we'll find them eventually.
In what way is dinosaurs going extinct because an asteroid hit the earth "natural selection"? That sounds more like a freak accident than dinosaurs themselves unfit to live and nature weeding them out.