Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cosmicforce who wrote (7544)	3/6/2001 11:16:56 AM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

I don't have a cavalier attitude towards species extinction. I want to avoid it it most cases. Its just that the desire to avoid extinction is atleast as much from the benefits that these species might provide humans as it is from a concern about the species itself. As you said "You might be sorry that the species bearing the cure to cancer was wiped out in an Indonesian gold mining operation". I don't want such cures to be wiped out. On the other hand I don't want a person to be heavily fined for shooting a threatened (not endangered but one step below) species, a grizzly bear, in self defense. I don't want the Stephens' Kangaroo Rat to go extinct, but if it would cost a 100 billion dollars in lost development to prevent this I would say goodbye to the rat. (the $100bil added to the economy would be more likely to find a cure for cancer or any number of other good things then the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat). I don't want the American Crocodile (another endangered species) to become extinct but I would shoot one to save myself or another person. Does this bother you, or was what bothered you a belief that my opinion was more extreme and that I just didn't care about extinctions or loss of animal habitat at all? Tim