Poll: Should We let pandas become extinct?

[Custard_Angel]

It's one of the cutest animals I've ever seen.

Definitely not allowing them to become extinct.

I forbid it.

 

[Woodsey]

Much as I think humans are one massive collective parasitic organism and pity the animals they wiped out just to fufill their own desires, yes.

Yeah well, someone had to stop the mice.

OT: It seems a bit of a futile effort. From my understanding they won't fuck each other, and even though they eat bamboo, they're not actually supposed to.

There comes a point where nature has to take its course - its unfortunate, but its happened to plenty of species before. Having said that, I don't think the ones that are being looked after now should simply be dumped back into the wild again.

 

[Gammaj4]

Hei Bei disapproves.

 

[flare09]

Creatures go extinct. They have been long before humans, and they will still be going extinct long after humans are gone themselves.

There is no point in trying to preserve things that can't stand on their own. Especially when they don't exactly provide much for anything else on this planet.

 

[Andothul]

Quite honestly Panda's ridiculous diet has doomed them to extinction eventually.

Humans just sped up the process.

 

[Baldry]

Nope. They're cute, that's my only logical reason to keep them around!

 

[Someone Depressing]

You know what people SHOULD SAY?

Fuck it.

It's the Panda's fault they're going extinct, it's their fault they don't fucking know how to have sex. Not our's.

Let the stupid, fat, boring, un-reasonable bastards die in peace.

 

[Jim-a-Lim]

Duty of care to animals. I think that it's an essential human quality.

 

[Sanglyon]

Spoiler

Pandas are a slap to Darwin's face (guess anything can exist if there isn't something to eat it or destroy their home)

Wait, what? "Anything can exist if there isn't something to eat it or destroy their home" is a slap to Darwin's face, why?

How does the existence of an animal without predators invalidate that those with predators only survive if they are fit to do so?

If they are fit to do so than so they should exist. However, can something not exist which precludes an environment that is hazardous to them? if there are no hazards, they can exist, is it not logical to think that? It doesn't invalidate them.

Pandas are a niche animal. If their niche is taken away, they shouldn't exist anymore. So their continued existence is whats strange not that they existed at all (probably should have been more clear, but this is the internet, if you don't clarify everything with a 12 page thesis statement some one is going to find fault in what you type regardless.)

In hindsight, i should have said slap to Darwin's Theories rather than slap to Darwin himself as he would most certainly approve of humans doing everything in their power to ensure the survival of a specie.

p.s. you probably should refrain from out of context partial quoting in the future.

Mmmh, I think this is just a misunderstanding. I didn't use partial quoting to change the meaning of your post, only save space.

I took that "a slap to Darwin" for "a rebuttal/proof against to Darwin", but it seems it was more in the sense of "an anormality". Sorry, cultural differences at work.

that'll teach me to hastily comment on this forum while at work. >_>

 

[DTWolfwood]

Spoiler

Pandas are a slap to Darwin's face (guess anything can exist if there isn't something to eat it or destroy their home)

Wait, what? "Anything can exist if there isn't something to eat it or destroy their home" is a slap to Darwin's face, why?

How does the existence of an animal without predators invalidate that those with predators only survive if they are fit to do so?

If they are fit to do so than so they should exist. However, can something not exist which precludes an environment that is hazardous to them? if there are no hazards, they can exist, is it not logical to think that? It doesn't invalidate them.

Pandas are a niche animal. If their niche is taken away, they shouldn't exist anymore. So their continued existence is whats strange not that they existed at all (probably should have been more clear, but this is the internet, if you don't clarify everything with a 12 page thesis statement some one is going to find fault in what you type regardless.)

In hindsight, i should have said slap to Darwin's Theories rather than slap to Darwin himself as he would most certainly approve of humans doing everything in their power to ensure the survival of a specie.

p.s. you probably should refrain from out of context partial quoting in the future.

Mmmh, I think this is just a misunderstanding. I didn't use partial quoting to change the meaning of your post, only save space.

I took that "a slap to Darwin" for "a rebuttal/proof against to Darwin", but it seems it was more in the sense of "an anormality". Sorry, cultural differences at work.

that'll teach me to hastily comment on this forum while at work. >_>

lol join the club i use this here forums to waste time at work it looks like im working hard with all the typing im doing XD

A nation would lose its national symbol. So there is no way China is gonna let that animal go bye bye anyhow.

 

[Shoggoth2588]

Of course not: Where else will I get my panda meat? Every other bear is too full of ichor and, maggots (they being soulless killing machines and all).

In all seriousness, I don't care. Why don't we bring back Tasmanian Tigers instead?

 

[Arkhangelsk]

If we're the cause, we should at least help the poor guys. If we had nothing to do with it, then it's the course of nature.

 

[Sporky111]

As much as I love pandas, I think they should be let go. It's really pointless, people only want to save them because they're adorable and look cute in zoos. I tell you what we should do: take some DNA from the ones we have left, store it away, and then release them all into the wild. If they can't keep themselves from going extinct, it wasn't meant to be. And we'll have a bit of them for future generations.

Also, George Carlin had the right idea (as usual):

 

[Arkhangelsk]

It's one of the cutest animals I've ever seen.

Definitely not allowing them to become extinct.

I forbid it.

And I read that post in the voice of a British gentleman shark.

 

[TheBelgianGuy]

So we humans destroy their habitat... but it's their own fault? WTF is wrong with you people.

When I see this, first I like to quote Cracked.

But it concludes that, in this particular case, the best way to respect nature is by donating money to save panda bears from extinction -- despite the fact that nature has expressed in no uncertain terms that it wants pandas dead like yesterday.

Source: #8 in this article [http://www.cracked.com/article_19087_the-9-most-offensive-911-references-in-pop-culture.html#ixzz1JE4gA176]

Then I like to point them to #1 in this article. [http://www.cracked.com/article_16054_6-endangered-species-that-arent-endangered-enough_p2.html]

To quote it, since few will probably read it.

"Not the cuddly, wuddly panda!" you exclaim, possibly chewing on a gender-neutral flax-soy bar. Well guess what? The panda is nature's loser, an animal so far gone that it won't even have sex without the aid of several Chinese zookeepers. When a species' sole responsibility is to "get busy" and it still doesn't bother, then we, as people who have to go to goddamn work every day, lose sympathy.

So yeah, we need to just let the panda go the way of the dodos. We're only keeping it alive because we think it's cute, and because China makes a killing renting pandas out to zoos around the world.(yes China owns all the pandas and any panda you see outside of China is just a rental.)

Wow yes, if Cracked.com, a humor and video site, says it's so, then it MUST be true, right? Cuz after all, Cracked.com, a humor and video site, is being run by scientists, not comedians.

 

[mew4ever23]

Hmm... Question: Why is the Panda Bear so near extinction?
If the answer to that question is Natural Selection, perhaps we should let it occur. Heaven knows the steps we're already taking to help restore Panda populations clearly aren't working very well.

If, however, we (humans) are the problem, then we should take further steps to save the species. Might as well try and fix what we broke, right?

 

[Cid Silverwing]

Whoever answers yes to this has no soul.

Save the pandas!

 

[bz316]

Look, if this was just a case of humans fucking everything up, then I'd say it was something we should try to prevent. On the other hand, they seem reluctant to actually bone each other, and I'm pretty sure a species becoming reluctant to bone is a species that is just asking for the end to come...

 

[Ralen-Sharr]

They're a species that's too stupid and fat to have sex, even they don't want to continue existing.
I say yes, let's focus on another animal to save, maybe this cute little guy.

Spoiler

D'AAAAAWWWW He wants a hug.

Endangered or not...

KILL IT WITH FIRE!

more OT: I think pandas are cool, but I also believe that they are doomed.

 

[JMeganSnow]

If people want to spend their money on "saving" pandas, then they can save their money on "saving" pandas. It's their money.

Anyone who wants to spend MY money for same better think again.