4 ms·

> The only reason that it isn't apparent to you It is apparent to me that no other species (ever) has been implicated in a mass extinction event. I notice bot

> The only reason that it isn't apparent to you It is apparent to me that no other species (ever) has been implicated in a mass extinction event. I notice both commenters referenced cats - a domesticated and invasive species. > Humans are simply better at resource extraction than other animals. Claiming that humans are 'better' ignores my point that bacteria will happily exhaust whatever resources are given to them.

Amezarak 6y ago
> Claiming that humans are 'better' ignores my point that bacteria will happily exhaust whatever resources are given to them. So will most other animals. This isn't something unique to humans. > I notice both commenters referenced cats - a domesticated and invasive species. Foxes and coyotes, which I mentioned, aren't. Most predators do this (gratuitous killing) to some degree or another. Even some none-predators engage in "pointless" violent aggression towards other species. > It is apparent to me that no other species (ever) has been implicated in a mass extinction event. Only because most other species (since cyanobacteria) are drawing from a more limited pool of resources. Other species certainly do radically transform their local ecosystems which leads to disruption until other species move in to fill the new niches. What makes humans different is that our "resources" encompass a much broader area and array of material than other animals. There is no steady state in the absence of human intervention. I am not claiming that humans are 'better.' They aren't. They're just another animal, just one unusually adaptable thanks to big brains, language, and thumbs. I'm not assigning any more value to that. In the long run, it might be a 'bad' thing, in that, as the comments here show, we tend to be much too proud of those big brains.
taneq 6y ago
> It is apparent to me that no other species (ever) has been implicated in a mass extinction event. Not for lack of trying. Usually another species or the limited size of its habitable area will stop a species before it has a global impact, but if you focus on smaller ecosystems, you get the typical rabbit-and-hare boom-and-bust cycle resulting in extinction of both fairly regularly.

Amezarak 6y ago

> Claiming that humans are 'better' ignores my point that bacteria will happily exhaust whatever resources are given to them. So will most other animals. This isn't something unique to humans. > I notice both commenters referenced cats - a domesticated and invasive species. Foxes and coyotes, which I mentioned, aren't. Most predators do this (gratuitous killing) to some degree or another. Even some none-predators engage in "pointless" violent aggression towards other species. > It is apparent to me that no other species (ever) has been implicated in a mass extinction event. Only because most other species (since cyanobacteria) are drawing from a more limited pool of resources. Other species certainly do radically transform their local ecosystems which leads to disruption until other species move in to fill the new niches. What makes humans different is that our "resources" encompass a much broader area and array of material than other animals. There is no steady state in the absence of human intervention. I am not claiming that humans are 'better.' They aren't. They're just another animal, just one unusually adaptable thanks to big brains, language, and thumbs. I'm not assigning any more value to that. In the long run, it might be a 'bad' thing, in that, as the comments here show, we tend to be much too proud of those big brains.

taneq 6y ago

> It is apparent to me that no other species (ever) has been implicated in a mass extinction event. Not for lack of trying. Usually another species or the limited size of its habitable area will stop a species before it has a global impact, but if you focus on smaller ecosystems, you get the typical rabbit-and-hare boom-and-bust cycle resulting in extinction of both fairly regularly.