Society/Culture Snake eats Wallaby - outrage ensues

[Copernicus]

Why should anyone have to interfere with a fact of nature? I can't really understand the (possibly manufactured) furore with this story from Cairns.

http://www.news.com.au/national/fam...-joey-from-snake/story-e6frfkvr-1225815081731

Sometimes I think folks aren't aware that it's kill or be killed in the animal world, and there isn't anything we can or should do about it.

 

[PunyHumans!!!]

Yep, its nature, dont interfere with it. If they had've intervened, it just would have happened elsewhere away from veiw...people are a little bit wacko

 

[corsock]

"She also said the family armed themselves with long broom handles and sticks but gave up after realising the joey was dead."

What??

So the python was going to regurgitate a half devoured joey in order to slay the filthy human interloper?? (Which is imposssible btw).

Oh paleese.

Seriously, if people are truly up in arms over this, then the meat eaters among them should be given a week long induction as a slaughterman in their local abbatoir.

And the vegetarians/vegans among them should....hang on....I wonder who is up in arms about this again?

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Can I play devil's advocate here? Are human beings part of nature? Are we just another animal in the kingdom? I know that most on the S&C board are not religious, so can't really subscribe to this being our planet where we are entrusted to take care of the animals around us and so forth. If it is in a human being's nature to attack an animal trying to kill another animal, then aren't we just following our own instincts and just as entitled as any other animal in the kingdom? I know we consider ourselves highly evolved and have developed an intelligence that allows us to rationalise the food chain situation in the animal kingdom, but we have also developed a sense of compassion that some of us feel we must act upon.

Food for thought I guess.

 

[Ron]

I know that most on the S&C board are not religious, so can't really subscribe to this being our planet where we are entrusted to take care of the animals around us and so forth.

So by saving the wallaby and saving it's life we are denying the snake a meal which may cause it to starve and die.

Why does the wallaby deserve to live more than the snake? Because it is cuter? By leaving the situation alone we are not hindering the snakes chances of survival.

 

[Dont be a lemon]

They've made a news story about comments on their news story?

You've got to be shitting me...

 

[Chief Ten Beers]

A mother wallaby gets eaten by a snake? So what? PC bots in this country are getting louder and louder and that should be the real concern.

 

[campbell]

Hope they aint got toddlers or cats or dogs in that household.

 

[Wahooti Fandango]

Can I play devil's advocate here? Are human beings part of nature? Are we just another animal in the kingdom? I know that most on the S&C board are not religious, so can't really subscribe to this being our planet where we are entrusted to take care of the animals around us and so forth. If it is in a human being's nature to attack an animal trying to kill another animal, then aren't we just following our own instincts and just as entitled as any other animal in the kingdom? I know we consider ourselves highly evolved and have developed an intelligence that allows us to rationalise the food chain situation in the animal kingdom, but we have also developed a sense of compassion that some of us feel we must act upon.

Food for thought I guess.

When humans do as they please we end up destroying the planet. The world would be a much better place without us.

 

[Wallaby]

When humans do as they please we end up destroying the planet. The world would be a much better place without us.

I get sick of this mindless statement being spouted by hippies and greenies ad nauseam. Humans have made the world far more liveable - it produces far more food, the human population is many times bigger and many times healthier than it has been at any time in the past.

Sure, humans dominate to the extent that some other animal species haven't survived alongside us. But over history, probably 99.99% of specied that have existed have become extinct - most without human help.

What did the dinosaurs ever do? Sure they were around for 150 million years - but during that period, the rise and development of new species was pretty low. Mammalian evolution was kept very limited. After the dinosaurs disappeared there was a great increase in the evolutionary rate of new species across the board - including grasses which really changed the way the world was.

Sure, we have changed the earth significantly via pollution - the dinosaurs only produced pollution via poo. But all the dinosaurs did was stand around munching cycads and each other. If you want medicines, fresh water, internet discussion boards etc - you will get pollution. We are getting better at managing it, now.

If every nuclear bomb and bacterial weapon ever made on earth exploded simultaneously, there would be a massive extinction, and in a couple of million years there would be new species (some old would survive) and the cycle would start again - maybe with a completely different outcome.

We are not 'destroying the planet' - because the planet is always changing anyway. We just have the ability to make more changes than any other animal in history.

 

[Copernicus]

They've made a news story about comments on their news story?

You've got to be shitting me...

They've done it before. Regularly, actually.

 

[DeanoT]

Would anyone care if the wallaby killed a snake ?

 

[likka]

So by saving the wallaby and saving it's life we are denying the snake a meal which may cause it to starve and die.

Why does the wallaby deserve to live more than the snake? Because it is cuter? By leaving the situation alone we are not hindering the snakes chances of survival.

Very similar to how most blokes treat beautiful women as opposed to fugly beached whales.

The old women with heavy bags asking for help in a train station experiment proves this point perfectly.

 

[B_GLassi]

Humans have made the world far more liveable

We've made it more liveable for ourselves not for any other species. What does it matter to a snake if we've made World Trade centre and Burj Al Dubai?

 

[AG]

People can find anything to complain about these days.

 

[Wahooti Fandango]

I get sick of this mindless statement being spouted by hippies and greenies ad nauseam. Humans have made the world far more liveable - it produces far more food, the human population is many times bigger and many times healthier than it has been at any time in the past.

Sure, humans dominate to the extent that some other animal species haven't survived alongside us. But over history, probably 99.99% of specied that have existed have become extinct - most without human help.

What did the dinosaurs ever do? Sure they were around for 150 million years - but during that period, the rise and development of new species was pretty low. Mammalian evolution was kept very limited. After the dinosaurs disappeared there was a great increase in the evolutionary rate of new species across the board - including grasses which really changed the way the world was.

Sure, we have changed the earth significantly via pollution - the dinosaurs only produced pollution via poo. But all the dinosaurs did was stand around munching cycads and each other. If you want medicines, fresh water, internet discussion boards etc - you will get pollution. We are getting better at managing it, now.

If every nuclear bomb and bacterial weapon ever made on earth exploded simultaneously, there would be a massive extinction, and in a couple of million years there would be new species (some old would survive) and the cycle would start again - maybe with a completely different outcome.

We are not 'destroying the planet' - because the planet is always changing anyway. We just have the ability to make more changes than any other animal in history.

No other organism has so negatively impacted the earth as ourselves. If we ceased to exist tomorrow then most organisms on earth would be far better off. Humans have an inflated sense of their own importance. We have so fundamentally changed the environment that the forces of natural selection no longer really act on us. Some may view this taming of the forces of natural selection as some sort of accomplishment, but ultimately we are just destroying ourselves. By the way I am no hippie.

 

[TheBloods]

I get sick of this mindless statement being spouted by hippies and greenies ad nauseam. Humans have made the world far more liveable

... for humans...

We are not 'destroying the planet' - because the planet is always changing anyway. We just have the ability to make more changes than any other animal in history.

And make things worse for many other inhabitants of the planet.

 

[TheBloods]

The 'outrage' over this 'story' is unbelievable - how stupid can people be!!

 

[Play by Numbers]

Mehbe it is a brave new world we live in.

Is the outrage real though? Or is it like the North Melbourne chicken video, where media outlets told the public they were outraged, then wrote articles commenting on this supposed outrage.

Everytime you click on the link or post comments on an article like this it merely validates the idiocy with web hits.

Good or bad reaction I don't think it matters, only that there is a reaction.

 

[lemon chicken]

Would anyone care if the wallaby killed a snake ?

This exactly.

 

[dmc333]

Jesus, they should be on the side of the highway with their brooms, waving them at cars. Dead wallabies everywhere.

 

[campbell]

http://www.cairns.com.au/article/2010/01/01/85765_local-news.html

awful lot of weird animals up cairns way. haha.

 

[Ron]

http://www.cairns.com.au/article/2010/01/01/85765_local-news.html

awful lot of weird animals up cairns way. haha.

Surprise surprise no outrage over this.

****ing hypcrites people are.

 

[corsock]

http://www.cairns.com.au/article/2010/01/01/85765_local-news.html

awful lot of weird animals up cairns way. haha.

Pretty sure the Cairns paper is ripping off the NT News.

 

[Fire]

I get sick of this mindless statement being spouted by hippies and greenies ad nauseam. Humans have made the world far more liveable - it produces far more food, the human population is many times bigger and many times healthier than it has been at any time in the past.

At the cost of virtually everything which isn't human. When you are arguing against a quote that is about how Humans are destroying the planet that comment has no relevance.

Sure, humans dominate to the extent that some other animal species haven't survived alongside us. But over history, probably 99.99% of specied that have existed have become extinct - most without human help.

Neither does this. I don;t understand your logic? I assume you could argue that I can kill whoever I want because everyone will die wihout my help.

Sounds rediculous but I can't see how it doesn't apply to the argument you just posted.

What did the dinosaurs ever do? Sure they were around for 150 million years - but during that period, the rise and development of new species was pretty low. Mammalian evolution was kept very limited. After the dinosaurs disappeared there was a great increase in the evolutionary rate of new species across the board - including grasses which really changed the way the world was.

Ignoring the continuing total irrelevance of your argument to the post you are responding to, The rise of development of new species was low?

Bullshit. It was during this period that all three mammalian taxa were evolved, it was also the period where avian species did likewise. And thats ignoring the continual evolution of evey other category of animal you would like to name.

Yes, it wasn't until the dinosaurs died out that other animals could be come the terrestrial 'dominant species' (first birds then mammals after the evolution of grass allowed them to grow much larger than they were previoulsy able to). But you are 100% dead wrong to claim that the rise of development of new species was low.

Sure, we have changed the earth significantly via pollution - the dinosaurs only produced pollution via poo. But all the dinosaurs did was stand around munching cycads and each other. If you want medicines, fresh water, internet discussion boards etc - you will get pollution. We are getting better at managing it, now.

I don't understand what you are arguing or what point you are refuting.

Are you saying that the life of dinosaurs lacked meaning? If so then the world awaits your answer to the meaning of life, since we as Humans must know it.

If every nuclear bomb and bacterial weapon ever made on earth exploded simultaneously, there would be a massive extinction, and in a couple of million years there would be new species (some old would survive) and the cycle would start again - maybe with a completely different outcome.

Again, are you suggesting I can go out and kill billions of people since there will be new people to replace them in a few generations?

We are not 'destroying the planet' - because the planet is always changing anyway. We just have the ability to make more changes than any other animal in history.

I agree with this point. The concept of 'destruction' is subjective. While we can't physicallyd estroy the planet and we probably couldn't physically destroy life itself, its not a liscense to act irrationally and not give a shit about the effects we have, if only for purley selfish reasons. We effect the planet and the planet effects us. Its a dependancy loop. What we put in we get back. If we make it less 'healthy' then we in turn will be less healthy. And I'm not talking about medicine... I'm talking about us effecting our ability to continue living as we do now.