>video about endangered animals >comments are full of

How to reply:
"Good point! Why don't you go first and show us how it's done?"

>bringing up a very valid point
Go away dumb frogposter

>>2447994
>humans drove some species to extinction
>this obviously means all humans are evil and should be killed

Two wrongs don't make a right.

>>2447995
I agree. I also agree with your original statement in the OP.
Those kind of people annoy me more than people who start threads with that meme frog, but respectfully, fuck off.

File: 130104081845-hong-kong-roof-shark-fins-horizontal-large-gallery-800x433.jpg (155KB, 800x433px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 800x433px

>implying Chinese poachers aren't subhuman

There shouldn't be a genocide. But, human breeding should be much more strictly regulated

>>2448016
That's the same as genocide you fucking tard

>>2447993
No, that's a meme reply

>>2448041
>The term "genocide" did not exist before 1944.
>It is a very specific term, referring to violent crimes committed against groups with the intent to destroy the existence of the group.

Regulating breeding is an extremely violent crime!!!

kek

It's not your work to educate them OP, get a script to hide or filter the comments.

>>2447991
desu they're kinda right, humans are a cancer

>>2447991
>3rd world chinks, spics, and nigger subhumans are the only ones doing this shit
>"OMG humans are the worst, we are so bad!"

>>2448250
fucking this, its always a nig or some chink doing terrible shit to animals
>inb4 some "1 in a million" example of a kid who tortured a cat like 9 years ago

File: Muh_Frog.jpg (810KB, 1704x1394px) Image search: [Google]

810KB, 1704x1394px

i breed tree frogs bitching dose nothing

Humans don't need to die, they just need to exist on a different planet if you value biodiversity at all.

People are vain, selfish, and short-sighted creatures who mostly cannot care for any issue that does not directly impact them. The only way the majority of people will care about an endangered animal is

1. It's humans that are endangered
2. It's some cute mammal that's endangered
3. Shit already hit the fan, the animal is declared extinct, but even then most don't care
4. Shit really hits the fan, one or more animals go extinct, and it actually has an impact on human wellbeing, but by then it's too late

Jews and commies should be sent to concentration camps. Fascist Aryans will preserve nature and the animals just like in NS Germany

Fascism is necessary. Strict codes of honour enforced by an iron fist is the only way to keep the subhumans in line. Subhumans are naturally pieces of shit. NS Germany had stricter animal welfare laws than any government in history, and faggot leftists tell me Fascism is wrong? Idiots

We don't need to cull humans, we just need to educate the retarded ones who are responsible for poaching. Why should the last rhino on Earth have to die because starving nigger #15608732 thinks its horn gives him sexual powers?

>>2448041
No it's eugenics. Different method, similar goals.

File: 075fe61edafae6835650bc16f7d9c8ce.jpg (81KB, 574x748px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 574x748px

>>2447991
But Master... Humans are part of nature too.

>>2447991
99% of species that lived are now extinct.
Humans only killed about 2% of them.
Animal Species will continue to die out as other species replace them,that's how mother nature works,and that's how its been since forever

>>2447995
>two

>>2448535
I'd argue that humans have come so far, that we may as well be treated as aliens compared to other animals.

>>2448536
I don't think you undertsand what mass extinction means
I'm not one of these "humans should die" cunts but the rate at which species are disappearing is very concerning for our own well-being

"Our estimated “highly conservative” (that is, using data for EX species only) and “conservative” (that is, by including EX, EW, and PE) modern extinction rates for vertebrates varied from 8 to 100 times higher than the background rate (Table 2). This means, for example, that under the 2 E/MSY background rate, 9 vertebrate extinctions would have been expected since 1900; however, under the conservative rate, 468 more vertebrates have gone extinct than would have if the background rate had persisted across all vertebrates under that period. Specifically, these 468 species include 69 mammal species, 80 bird species, 24 reptiles, 146 amphibians, and 158 fish."

http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/1/5/e1400253.full

life will continue, yeah, but what's concerning is our future in this dying ecosystem we're a part of

>>2448559

Not nearly as bad as a meteor

>>2448016
Most civilized populations are leveling out on birth rates.

It's brown people in the third world who keep squeezing kids out.

>>2447991
>Youtube comments
Reading those are like going to /pol/ to get angry

>>2448561
it will be worse than a meteor if we don't change our habits though

>>2448609
Meh, were close to perfecting cloning. Once we get a population too low, we'll just make another thousand in a lab.

>>2448558
We've tried so hard and got so far but in the end it doesn't even benis

>>2448010
Fuck

>>2448041
Eugenics != Genocide since it seeks to control the population in question inste of eradicating it

>>2448272
Thank you, senpai

>>2448611
>we're close to perfecting cloning
not at all boi
moreover, biodiversity isn't just about genes, cloning isn't an appropriate answer to the problem

>>2447991
maybe not genocided but we should get rid of 90% of population especially niggers

>>2448548
I guess we should inclue you, but we don't want to make a left.

>>2448611
No, no we're not. Cloning is still barely into it's infancy. At best you can produce proto-designer babies and three way parentage.

>>2448609
Nah not even close

>>2448669
K/T extinction took a few thousand years. We're not as locally destructive but we're in the same league as asteroid-senpai.

File: 1501606472275.jpg (72KB, 636x778px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 636x778px

>>2448681

Pollution is bad but its not meteor Apocalypse bad

>>2448692
keep telling yourself that, garbage-sama

>>2448697
Whatsoever you say,treelover

>>2448692
It's not pollution that's the big issue. It's habitat destruction.

>>2448710
habitat isn't being destroyed, it's being changed.

File: thinkery.png (9KB, 112x112px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 112x112px

>Video about hunting
>Comments are full of faggots hoping that the hunter gets cancer while they're snacking industrially farmed animal products

I can see how someone could argue that. If humans are really an existential risk to whole ecosystems then maybe it's just not worth having humans.

Animals may suffer just as much as humans, and we can't replicate the lost biological complexity due to our footprint on our environment. Compared to what we can create, a frog is orders of magnitude more intricate and impressive than an SUV.

It's possible that humanity will one day become a lot smarter and more considerate about the suffering of all living things and loss of all the impressive things about the biological world.

But if we don't get to that point then it's certainly conceivable that from an unbiased perspective, maybe it's better if we just didn't exist or only existed in minimal numbers and exerted a negligible impact on our world. Like if we stayed tribal. There could be less suffering overall and the world would be a lot more interesting (although with nobody around to appreciate its beauty; maybe some of the more intelligent animals like higher mammals, probably not other living things).

>>2449644
>I enjoy concrete everywhere instead of trees that make oxygen

Ever notice how edgy antienvironmentfags are also boring as fuck in personal tastes?

>video tutorial on how to kill mice, roaches, or spiders trespassing in your home
>animal rights faggots in the comments and thumbing down the video
>"wow dude just build this even more expensive and elaborate contraption to capture them so you can set them free in your yard so they can crawl back in your house the next day!"

I seriously hope nobody on this board thinks household pests don't deserve to be genocided

>>2449991
This is basically how i feel. I love technological progress, economic productivity, living a high quality of life and all the cool things humans have built.

But a lot of the times it just doesn't compare to what I find in the natural world. The pyramids are really impressive to me, but take just about any species of animal and the more I learn about it, the more impressive it is.
Living things in general are a whole lot more intricate and complex than our most sophisticated feats of engineering.

I think it would be nice to have both but when it comes to a choice between destroying a one of a kind ecosystem to build more suburbs and produce more electricity then I don't understand what good comes of making human settlement more sprawling than it already is. Every country needs to moderate their population size and footprint on the environment.

>>2449805
If he killed an endangered animal its deserved hate

>>2449805
please stop using the thinking emoji. it was never funny.

>>2449991
>muh oxygen

Even if every single plant on the planet disappeared right now, our atmosphere has enough oxygen stored up to last another few thousand years. Also, you don't need plants anywhere near you to supply you with oxygen, there's this thing called wind that blows it all around the globe no matter where the trees are.

>>2447995

In mathematics, a negative number multiplied with another negative number makes a positive number.

>>2449986
Worth is a human concept. Without humans nothing would have any context about its value to existence.

>>2450082
But why would you want to replace forest with asphalt. So we can have more "economic growth"? Growth in what? More suburbs and restaurants and hotels? We have enough of that shit, they look identical everywhere and add to raw numbers of our GDP but they don't add anything new or interesting to the world.

>Also, you don't need plants anywhere near you to supply you with oxygen, there's this thing called wind that blows it all around the globe no matter where the trees are.
Great, so we'll encroach onto every bit of wild land and ocean and just expect other countries will preserve enough flora and fauna.

>>2450082
>last another few thousand years
A few thousand years isn't long...

I think we should just kill all the poachers

File: 1501447608924.gif (165KB, 800x550px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 800x550px

>>2447991
Huh... seems like a good idea.

>>2450297
Agreed

>>2447995
>Be human
>Kill shit off
>Get mad
>React by killing shit off
Apelets, when will they learn?

>>2450666
nice comic calvin

File: 1495068801277.jpg (273KB, 962x920px) Image search: [Google]

273KB, 962x920px

>>2448310
Because brutal authoritarian regimes always last and never devolve into civil wars.

>>2452546
There were no civil wars. Everyone loved Hitler (except jews). There would definitely be civil wars today with all the melting pot mix.

>>2448048
>restricting breeding isn't violent
lol
>>2448536
humans killed far, far less than 2% of all species.

File: Benito_Mussolini_Duce.jpg (636KB, 2015x3000px) Image search: [Google]

636KB, 2015x3000px

>>2452594
>There were no civil wars

>>2447994
>>2448000
>>2450041
I appreciate your efforts at self moderation and share your sentiments about the ridiculous extent to which these unremarkable images get posted by impressionable people.
NB