6 ms·

This seems to me like a case of empathy gone awry. All that work and effort to bring back a species of insects? There is no balance to preserve; they've been go

This seems to me like a case of empathy gone awry. All that work and effort to bring back a species of insects? There is no balance to preserve; they've been gone for almost a century. Those resources could be spent preserving human life.

lhnn 15y ago
Why aren't you a doctor? Don't you care about people? We all have hobbies and passions.
justjimmy 15y ago
What if those insects somehow hold a scientific discovery that can be a boon to the human race? Like silk by spiders? Or because of their large size, we could farm and grow them as alternative food source? Possibilities!
- dvdhsu 15y ago
  There was an excellent article in the New Yorker about eating bugs some time back. http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/08/15/110815fa_fact_goodyear http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/08/15/110815fa_fact_... Unfortunately, it requires a subscription to read now.
- wisty 15y ago
  Yep, as I saw him coming out of his shell, one of the first things I though was "I wonder if it's good eatin'". Actually, it's probably not bad, and bugs can be very efficient to farm.
exch 15y ago
Playing the devil's advocate here but I believe humans do not need preserving. With 7 billion individuals and counting, it seems we're doing just fine. Regardless of how poor the living conditions are for many of us. For this particular species of insect however, having the last 24 remaining individuals of the entire species (presumably) be dependent on a single small shrubbery makes me think the effort put into this rescue was more than warranted. Specially considering their extinction was (indirectly) our fault and a mistake that could have been prevented with better education and oversight on who and what was brought along during our travels. Had their extinction been an entirely natural process, I might have agreed that their rescue would not have been such a high priority. Of course there is the question of us disturbing ecological balance somewhere is natural or not. We are after all natural beings ourselves. Whether we are intelligent or not and have the capacity to reason about our actions is irrelevant in a strictly biological sense. But this discussion opens up a whole different can of worms. edit: Fixed some grammar.
- jimrandomh 15y ago
  Humans are dying at a rate of 1.8 per second, and every human death is a tragedy of greater magnitude than the extinction of an insect species.
  - sitkack 15y ago
    Some of those dying humans would like nothing more than to research and save insects. What we do in our life defines us. We all die. On the scale of human activities to cease, preservation of an insect species isn't something I would stop. There are much more fruitful candidates.
  - derrida 15y ago
    Saving an insect species is human life.
  - schiffern 15y ago
    Destroying the results of a genetic program that's reached an optima after hundreds of millions of years seems like an incredible waste of biological knowledge. When we can duplicate those results in an hour on a desktop PC, I'll agree with you. I'm not holding my breath.
    - jholman 15y ago
      Aside from the nit-picking fact that "optima" is a plural and you use it with a singular indefinite article ("an") ... There is no reason to believe that this is an optimum. (That is, an optimum for its environment, or any extant environment. Since, of course, a very wide range of possible forms are optimal for SOME environment, like the environment with a mad god that kills all life forms that do not exactly match XYZ, but that sort of reasoning is obviously just silly). Anyway, blethering aside, my point here is that if you think existing species are at all likely to be "optimal" in any meaningful sense, you have likely misunderstood evolution.
  - y8af3 15y ago
    Why do you believe that ONE human life is more important than the extinction of an entire species?
nollidge 15y ago
And the time you spent reading a book or watching TV or programming could also instead be spent preserving human life.
bluedanieru 15y ago
What resources? Are you suggesting we should force entomologists to attend medical school or whatever you're on about instead? Are you sure social programs of that sort wouldn't decrease the quality of human life anyway? Have you given any of this any thought? Do you give anything any thought, or do you just drift through life as a collection of anthropomorphized knee-jerk reactions?
- Drbble 15y ago
  Your last question reads like a description of a giant insect, actually....
jeremyarussell 15y ago
These insects also don't go around murdering people (I'm about 99.9% sure of that, especially considering you see the people just holding them like it's nothing.) While on the other hand I see some people that murder, rape, burn and pillage the homes of people just trying to survive. Also, consider this, we are not messing with any balances or natural orders. We are in fact fixing a problem that we caused when we brought the black rats over in the first place. Also both people and black rats are overpopulating this planet.
- refurb 15y ago
  Lots of other animals have "negative" impacts on their ecosystems. Beavers build dams and flood habitats producing drastic changes to the ecosystem. Locust swarms clear entire fields of foliage. And you can't suggest violence is only a human activity. Check out Jane Goodall's work, apes will kill the offspring of rival females.

lhnn 15y ago

Why aren't you a doctor? Don't you care about people? We all have hobbies and passions.

justjimmy 15y ago

What if those insects somehow hold a scientific discovery that can be a boon to the human race? Like silk by spiders? Or because of their large size, we could farm and grow them as alternative food source? Possibilities!

dvdhsu 15y ago
There was an excellent article in the New Yorker about eating bugs some time back. http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/08/15/110815fa_fact_goodyear http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/08/15/110815fa_fact_... Unfortunately, it requires a subscription to read now.
wisty 15y ago
Yep, as I saw him coming out of his shell, one of the first things I though was "I wonder if it's good eatin'". Actually, it's probably not bad, and bugs can be very efficient to farm.

exch 15y ago

Playing the devil's advocate here but I believe humans do not need preserving. With 7 billion individuals and counting, it seems we're doing just fine. Regardless of how poor the living conditions are for many of us. For this particular species of insect however, having the last 24 remaining individuals of the entire species (presumably) be dependent on a single small shrubbery makes me think the effort put into this rescue was more than warranted. Specially considering their extinction was (indirectly) our fault and a mistake that could have been prevented with better education and oversight on who and what was brought along during our travels. Had their extinction been an entirely natural process, I might have agreed that their rescue would not have been such a high priority. Of course there is the question of us disturbing ecological balance somewhere is natural or not. We are after all natural beings ourselves. Whether we are intelligent or not and have the capacity to reason about our actions is irrelevant in a strictly biological sense. But this discussion opens up a whole different can of worms. edit: Fixed some grammar.

jimrandomh 15y ago
Humans are dying at a rate of 1.8 per second, and every human death is a tragedy of greater magnitude than the extinction of an insect species.
- sitkack 15y ago
  Some of those dying humans would like nothing more than to research and save insects. What we do in our life defines us. We all die. On the scale of human activities to cease, preservation of an insect species isn't something I would stop. There are much more fruitful candidates.
- derrida 15y ago
  Saving an insect species is human life.
- schiffern 15y ago
  Destroying the results of a genetic program that's reached an optima after hundreds of millions of years seems like an incredible waste of biological knowledge. When we can duplicate those results in an hour on a desktop PC, I'll agree with you. I'm not holding my breath.
  - jholman 15y ago
    Aside from the nit-picking fact that "optima" is a plural and you use it with a singular indefinite article ("an") ... There is no reason to believe that this is an optimum. (That is, an optimum for its environment, or any extant environment. Since, of course, a very wide range of possible forms are optimal for SOME environment, like the environment with a mad god that kills all life forms that do not exactly match XYZ, but that sort of reasoning is obviously just silly). Anyway, blethering aside, my point here is that if you think existing species are at all likely to be "optimal" in any meaningful sense, you have likely misunderstood evolution.
- y8af3 15y ago
  Why do you believe that ONE human life is more important than the extinction of an entire species?

nollidge 15y ago

And the time you spent reading a book or watching TV or programming could also instead be spent preserving human life.

bluedanieru 15y ago

What resources? Are you suggesting we should force entomologists to attend medical school or whatever you're on about instead? Are you sure social programs of that sort wouldn't decrease the quality of human life anyway? Have you given any of this any thought? Do you give anything any thought, or do you just drift through life as a collection of anthropomorphized knee-jerk reactions?

Drbble 15y ago
Your last question reads like a description of a giant insect, actually....

jeremyarussell 15y ago

These insects also don't go around murdering people (I'm about 99.9% sure of that, especially considering you see the people just holding them like it's nothing.) While on the other hand I see some people that murder, rape, burn and pillage the homes of people just trying to survive. Also, consider this, we are not messing with any balances or natural orders. We are in fact fixing a problem that we caused when we brought the black rats over in the first place. Also both people and black rats are overpopulating this planet.

refurb 15y ago
Lots of other animals have "negative" impacts on their ecosystems. Beavers build dams and flood habitats producing drastic changes to the ecosystem. Locust swarms clear entire fields of foliage. And you can't suggest violence is only a human activity. Check out Jane Goodall's work, apes will kill the offspring of rival females.