6 ms·

Unintended consequences still manage to arise most of the time when people think they can play god and mess with nature in that way. Until relatively recently,

Unintended consequences still manage to arise most of the time when people think they can play god and mess with nature in that way. Until relatively recently, people didn't even know that hummingbirds relied heavily on eating small insects like mosquitos rather than just drinking nectar. Undoubtedly there are many things like that which we simply aren't aware of.

CamperBob2 10y ago
Everything in engineering is a compromise, and ecological engineering is no different. We still do it anyway. We get to do it because we're humans, and the other species aren't. It is not reasonable to demand assurances of complete safety, or freedom from all possible adverse consequences, before taking action in defense of our own species.
- rch 10y ago
  > We get to do it because we're humans, and the other species aren't. Beavers get to do a little ecological engineering now and again.
  - CamperBob2 10y ago
    True, and I'll bet they don't feel especially guilty about it.
    - rch 10y ago
      I bet coral is starting to wonder what it did wrong.
      - CamperBob2 10y ago
        Hard to see what relevance that has to mosquito eradication. Evidence suggests we've done a lot of harm to coral ecosystems around the world, but not as a result of the careful study and consideration that we're applying to the idea of wiping out certain harmful mosquito species.
        chr1 10y ago
        I believe the parent comment meant coral wonders what did it wrong to not count as a species doing ecological engineering :) So far i haven't seen any real argument against eradicating mosquito, and other species killing humans (ticks, tsetse kissing bugs)
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
      - rbanffy 10y ago
        Humans are starting to think about what we are doing wrong. The expansion of the regions afflicted by mosquitoes is largely our fault.
  - Nzen 10y ago
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4t0BKlICsk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4t0BKlICsk Motherboard report about how beavers imported to Chile have disrupted riparian forests.
enraged_camel 10y ago
I've never understood this argument. We have been "playing god" since we settled down 10,000 years ago and started practicing agriculture. The ways in which we selectively cultivate/breed plants/animals have do doubt caused major changes in ecosystems. Yet, if we had not done those things, we probably would not be here today. Furthermore, where do you draw the line? We are very close to eradicating the polio virus. Do we know ALL the consequences of doing so? No. Does that mean we should stop? No. We have, at some point, decided that it causes an immense amount of human suffering and decided to eradicate it. Same with certain species of mosquitoes.
- seanwilson 10y ago
  > Furthermore, where do you draw the line? We are very close to eradicating the polio virus. Do we know ALL the consequences of doing so? No. Does that mean we should stop? No. We have, at some point, decided that it causes an immense amount of human suffering and decided to eradicate it. Same with certain species of mosquitoes. It reminds me of the Trolley Problem with the exception that you can't be completely sure what the lever does: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem Basically, the easy option is to do nothing, avoid responsibility and potentially have the worst outcome happen that you could have prevented.
  - dmreedy 10y ago
    or, more colloquially, "the devil you know"
- Chathamization 10y ago
  > I've never understood this argument. We have been "playing god" since we settled down 10,000 years ago and started practicing agriculture. Yes, and as the above poster stated, often with unintended consequences - many of which have been disasterous. Even after thousands of years of agriculture we've still made monumental mistakes, such as the creation of the Dust Bowl. For an example involving pest elimination specifically, you can look at the Chinese effort to eradicate sparrows. That doesn't necessarily mean we shouldn't try to eradicate the mosquitoes that are harmful to humans. However, when people are unable to appreciate the problems that unintended consequences have had in the past, and the risks they may pose for the future, it doesn't seem like we're making the decision based on an honest and sober look at the facts.

CamperBob2 10y ago

Everything in engineering is a compromise, and ecological engineering is no different. We still do it anyway. We get to do it because we're humans, and the other species aren't. It is not reasonable to demand assurances of complete safety, or freedom from all possible adverse consequences, before taking action in defense of our own species.

rch 10y ago
> We get to do it because we're humans, and the other species aren't. Beavers get to do a little ecological engineering now and again.
- CamperBob2 10y ago
  True, and I'll bet they don't feel especially guilty about it.
  - rch 10y ago
    I bet coral is starting to wonder what it did wrong.
    - CamperBob2 10y ago
      Hard to see what relevance that has to mosquito eradication. Evidence suggests we've done a lot of harm to coral ecosystems around the world, but not as a result of the careful study and consideration that we're applying to the idea of wiping out certain harmful mosquito species.
      - chr1 10y ago
        I believe the parent comment meant coral wonders what did it wrong to not count as a species doing ecological engineering :) So far i haven't seen any real argument against eradicating mosquito, and other species killing humans (ticks, tsetse kissing bugs)
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    - rbanffy 10y ago
      Humans are starting to think about what we are doing wrong. The expansion of the regions afflicted by mosquitoes is largely our fault.
- Nzen 10y ago
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4t0BKlICsk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4t0BKlICsk Motherboard report about how beavers imported to Chile have disrupted riparian forests.

enraged_camel 10y ago

I've never understood this argument. We have been "playing god" since we settled down 10,000 years ago and started practicing agriculture. The ways in which we selectively cultivate/breed plants/animals have do doubt caused major changes in ecosystems. Yet, if we had not done those things, we probably would not be here today. Furthermore, where do you draw the line? We are very close to eradicating the polio virus. Do we know ALL the consequences of doing so? No. Does that mean we should stop? No. We have, at some point, decided that it causes an immense amount of human suffering and decided to eradicate it. Same with certain species of mosquitoes.

seanwilson 10y ago
> Furthermore, where do you draw the line? We are very close to eradicating the polio virus. Do we know ALL the consequences of doing so? No. Does that mean we should stop? No. We have, at some point, decided that it causes an immense amount of human suffering and decided to eradicate it. Same with certain species of mosquitoes. It reminds me of the Trolley Problem with the exception that you can't be completely sure what the lever does: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem Basically, the easy option is to do nothing, avoid responsibility and potentially have the worst outcome happen that you could have prevented.
- dmreedy 10y ago
  or, more colloquially, "the devil you know"
Chathamization 10y ago
> I've never understood this argument. We have been "playing god" since we settled down 10,000 years ago and started practicing agriculture. Yes, and as the above poster stated, often with unintended consequences - many of which have been disasterous. Even after thousands of years of agriculture we've still made monumental mistakes, such as the creation of the Dust Bowl. For an example involving pest elimination specifically, you can look at the Chinese effort to eradicate sparrows. That doesn't necessarily mean we shouldn't try to eradicate the mosquitoes that are harmful to humans. However, when people are unable to appreciate the problems that unintended consequences have had in the past, and the risks they may pose for the future, it doesn't seem like we're making the decision based on an honest and sober look at the facts.