Anti-Zoofags

>>2347432
Some zoos do suck shit, but they're pretty important for getting the general public interested in animals and caring for some endangered animals.

zoos outside of america and europe and australia should honestly be shut down.

>>2347442
Nah, he's just removing a pest. Should of used a proper separating knife though.

>>2347452
>posting fake shit

I'm just saying using a bread knife to kill a cat is making things much harder than necessary.

>>2347463
I wish Chinese fetal soup was real, would solve a lot of problems.

>>2347474
Chinese fetal soup is fake though, despite the actual cannibalism. Albert fish was pussy and didn't even fuck the kids he ate.

>>2347438
The local zoo here is really fucking shitty, the only enclosures that were a decent size were the lion and snow leopard enclosures. everything else was small.

>>2347438
From a moral perspective, saving species does not matter in the slightest. Species don't fell pain and don't die.

>>2347605
>from a retarded perspective

>>2347605
how the fuck are pain and death moral issues but an irreversible decrease in diversity isn't?

>>2347432
I thought of something totally different when I saw anti zoofag

>>2347605
Species don't feel pain. Including the human species.

>>2347605
>allow species to go extinct willy-nilly
>fuck up ecosystem
>now many other species suffer and die

>>2347609
I think his perspective is "fine", he's just missing something very important (see >>2347645 ).

>>2347612
Why does diversity matter? (if you don't count the suffering and pain caused by the lack of it)

>>2347727
>Why does diversity matter?
Earth life is unique, arguably in the entire universe. If you want to argue why life matters, you can argue about why anything matters, why do your life matter?
All manifestations of life contribute to the endless war against entrophy.

>>2347732
He's just going to revert to muh nihilism. You shouldn't even bother arguing with the philosofag, they're too busy jerking off to the sound of their own thoughts to ever practically apply them anyway.

>>2347732
>war against entrophy
>endless
heh, let's see you say that in a few trillion years

>>2347732
Thanks for the answer.

>>2347735
>revert to muh nihilism

I never was never a nihilist in the first place, I just was genuinely curious and asked to get an answer.

>You shouldn't even bother arguing with the philosofag, they're too busy jerking off to the sound of their own thoughts to ever practically apply them anyway.

lmao what? I'm not even a "philosofag", I'm more interested in biology but that doesn't mean I don't want to know about anything else. Also I don't think philosophy isn't applied, it's important to many areas related to biology like the conservation of species. (oh and also remember that science came from philosophy and it too uses logic)

>>2347727
because everything in an ecosystem depends on everything else in the ecosystem directly or indirectly. the diverse species all evolved to fit into a delicate balance

>>2347432
Nope. Close 'em.

>>2347741
>say that in a few trillion years
>heat death is real even though I could never know

>>2347860
Read a book on thermodynamics, nigger. Entropy has never been observed to get smaller in a closed system over a significant timescale. Even if the universe stops expanding, energy will eventually become evenly distributed and tied up in heavy elements to the point where stars can't function.

>>2347880
Unless we reverse it, go read The Last Question

>>2347612
>how the fuck are pain and death moral issues but an irreversible decrease in diversity isn't?
Decrease in diversity is not irreversible. As one species go extinct, another species may flourish. And with evolution, new species branch out.
Sure, in this time of history species are going extinct much faster than new species are evolving. But decrease of diversity will never be irreveraible as long as there is at least some life that can evolv. You put too much emphasis on the importance of already existing species.

>>2347614
>Species don't feel pain. Including the human species.
Of course. Not sure what's your point though?

>>2347645
>>allow species to go extinct willy-nilly
>>fuck up ecosystem
>>now many other species suffer and die
It may be true and it may not be true depending on a particular species that you're trying to save. Take Pandas. They were already nearly extinct. If ecosystems are getting fucked because of that, they have already been fucked. What is our moral obligation to revive pandas? Is panda a holy saviour of bamboo forest ecosystem? Don't think so. Any reason to care more about a particular panda (as opposed to any particular bear of non-endangered variety) is completely self-interested. We like to look at pandas, so we pour enormous resourses to preserve them. But that has literally no consequence to ecosystem. Even if I'm ignorant and it does, in fact, have impact on the ecosystem, the same money would be more effectively spent lobbying against deforestation or something like that.

But in any case, you're not arguing against my original point. Any ethical reason to save species will have to do more with the damage that individual animals experience in the process, not the fact of the extintion itself. Extinction is just a way to measure the harm we're doing, not a problem in and of itself. Therefore focusing on species preservation is not the optimal way of thinking about preservation of animal life.

>>2347732
>Earth life is unique, arguably in the entire universe. If you want to argue why life matters, you can argue about why anything matters, why do your life matter?
Nobody's arguing that life doesn't matter. But I would argue that a member of non-endagered species matters just as much as a member of endangered species, disregarding how they affect other beings.

>All manifestations of life contribute to the endless war against entrophy.
A member of non-endagered species does it the same way as a member of endangered species.

>>2347888
>Go read sci-fi with a premise based in hopeful magic.
Terrible trips. Instead how about you go read Maxwell's demon. You can't reverse entropy through computation. The only way to reduce entropy in a system is to move that entropy out of the system or otherwise store the entropy in another form.

>>2347432
No. Set the animals free from the pimpin zoo.

>>2347432
>keeping exotic animals is no long profitable
>depending on (((government funding))) to run habitats
>loss of a major source of education and inspiration for the population
Good idea senpai.

File: 1490934635896.jpg (60KB, 580x461px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 580x461px

>>2347605
>From a moral perspective
>Species don't matter because they don't feel pain and don't die
>one of the definitions of die it to go extinct
>because a species dying out doesn't cause others pain
>it's not like ecosystems aren't fragile or anything
>this is moral, a highly subjective idea on what is good
>and even then by what you define as moral, you are encouraging immorality by insisting that a specie's death won't cause pain

However, I will give you some leeway. A species that has little importance or structure providence in an ecosystem or is easily replaceable (i.e. panda, too inept to even fuck and spread) shouldn't be focused upon as much as something that something we and other species rely on (i.e. bees.)

File: 6217466+_2851c27385bee63977fce9d5c747ec51.jpg (17KB, 236x370px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 236x370px

>>2347605
>Local cat is fucking invincible.

>>2347432
My zoo has an Amur tiger. I think there's only like 45 left in the world or something. Without the zoo it would be extinct. Checkmate anti-zoofags.

File: dancing with a doge.gif (2MB, 360x414px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 360x414px

>>2347605
From a moral perspective, animals don't matter.

>>2347925
non endangered species aren't in danger of going extinct you dumb dumb

>>2347924
>I don't know what the fuck I'm talking about, but if I make my post long enough it will sound like I do

>>2348107
Do you value your own feelings and the feelings of others?
If you do, and you or anyone you care about feels that animals matter, then they do.

>>2348110
It can be hard to tell sometimes. By the time people realized the blue whale was endangered it was nearly gone.

>>2348054
You're just nit-picking on my phrasing. Wiping out a species is bad because wiping out a species implies killing a bunch of animals. However, what I'm arguing against is the notion that making a species go extinct has any kind of "higher" meaning besides the fact that you killed a bunch of animals and the void in the ecosystem will distress other animals.

What you're "giving as a leeway" is precisely my point. But preservationists would believe that we should preserve any species just because. They believe that killing the last 1000 pandas is worse than killing 1001 bears. Not because of any consequences to the ecosystem, but just because there will be no more pandas.

I'm not saying that species going extinct don't disturb the ecosystem - of course they do. I'm just saying that this collateral damage is the only reason to preserve species as opposed to just saving animals - any animals. When the last member of a species dies, morally that is just good or bad as the death of any other animal.

It's like you people can't follow the argument through without inserting your assumptions. All I said was that saving species does not matter in and of itself.

>>2348110
Your point? Mice might not be in danger of going extinct, by a mouse is still very much in danger of being eaten by a predator.

>>2348111
Something something.

>>2348107
I won't argue with that. However, most animal lovers aubscribe to the notion that causing pain and killing is morally objectionable. When I was speaking about morality, I was speaking with this framework in mind. I guess I should have been more explicit.

>>2347432
I've had this debate within myself many times. It starts with seeing an animal in a cage and thinking "that animal should be in its habitat", then ends with me remembering if that animal weren't in this zoo, it would be consumed until it was extinct. But there are many angles here, like Sea World and its Orca program.

>>2347432
I generally agree. A zoo that provides adequate living conditions to its animals is financially unsustainable. At this point we might as well put conservation efforts into a separate program and just dazzle kids with holograms. Shitty as the technology is right now, a single projector probably costs less than an enclosure plus upkeep. And it doesn't stink to high heaven.

File: fragmentation.jpg (244KB, 1001x1280px) Image search: [Google]

244KB, 1001x1280px

>>2348168
holograms will only increase the level of detachment in society and lead to further disinterest in ecology by the younger generations.

>b-b-but it's like muh video game

The fact remains that no matter how hard you spout "IT SHUD BE IN ITS HABITUT" (which btw can't be substantiated in anyway. animals live longer in captivity no matter how many muh appeal to emotion documentaries you pump out), "its habitat" is declining every single year and none of your conservation efforts have done fuck all to revert it. Earth is becoming a managed ecosystem, and no matter how hard you spout your techno-utopian nonsense, we are in control of all now. Earth itself is going to become a zoo and there is nothing you will be able to do to stop it, short of reverting to terrorism. All you're proposing is separating man and nature even further and increasing the level of detachment in overall society - that's worked out real well for you, hasn't it? We're an ecological paradise now, right! lol

>>2348156
goddamn you're "morality" is just arbitrary nonsense

>>2348211
What has straw ever done to you?

>>2348286
>refuting a central point is now a strawman

holograms are shit. You're a retard with utopian fantasies. Go back to /his/ where you belong.

>>2348296
Promoting a suggestion into a point in an argument so you could reply with an unsubstantiated claim, then pulling half a dozen other 'points' out of thin air so you could attack them and call me names is not good form. It's a five star general of autism conducting a strawmen genocide.

>>2347432
Zoos/private collections are the sole reason Addax and Scimitar oryx aren't extinct and may have an opportunity of future reintroduction.And there are many examples of captivity breeding helping endangered species.
Zoos that are made well contribute more to conservation than the average anti-zoofag. Shitty zoos should be either modified hard or destroyed.

>>2348474
>use holograms as a central point
>backpedal when holograms get BTFO'd

okay, what suggestion do you have besides holograms?

nothing?

inb4 more ivory tower logical fallacy fallacy circlejerk arguments that continue to dodge the argument because anon thinks debate is a game of shouting fallacies over and over again until the other guy gets tired

ITT Cancer

>We should close most Zoos
Fixed! Some Zoos are pretty cool, the treat the Animals pretty good, have breeding programs and promote preservation of endangered species.

Zoos that are just animals in hot tiny boxes should be closed.

>>2349245
>Some Zoos are pretty cool, the treat the Animals pretty good, have breeding programs and promote preservation of endangered species.


Yep. If your local zoo is a good one that does research and endangered species preservation work, make sure to support it.

>>2347924
counterpoint on the pandas - while the species itself does shit-all for the ecosystem, the fact that they are cute and adorable is what rakes in the money which is what makes it possible to restore their habitat which also helps the other animals that also live in that habitat.

>>2349216
Seriously, did a scarecrow rape your sister or something?

>>2347605
Yeah same with the holocaust

>>2350404
/thread

File: 1491501953609.jpg (2MB, 2448x3264px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2448x3264px

ITT: navel-gazing

I'm going to the zoo on Tuesday, it's supposed to be nice outside. I'm excited.

What are your favorite zoos, /an/?

File: 06514144919f7167746c59cf01933979[1].jpg (9KB, 236x236px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 236x236px

>>2347924
>>2349564
>le pandas don't have any le environmental role may may XD

this board is for pseuds to navel gaze with their pop sci knowledge

>22 years old
>never been to a zoo
Is it really that much different than seeing pictures and videos of animals on the internet?

>>2348156
Then word it better next time, like what you did. I "nitpicked" because you gave me two sentences to figure out what you meant.

>>2352057
>>2352068
wow bro you really love the word "navel-gaze"

>>2352217
>lmao those pathetic guys want to see naked girls
>you can just look those up

>>2347432
small economic menagerie zoos should be shut down. a large wild-life preserve is okay though, even better if you can visit if you pay taxes.

>>2347732
>endless war against entrophy
are you one of those people that thinks life breaks the 2nd law of thermodynamics?

File: ZPM.jpg (29KB, 410x585px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 410x585px

>>2348041
We just need to get ourselves one of these bad boys