Animation Source Forums

Now everybody has diffrent view but I'm thinking should we help nature or just go along our way? I say we help nature because we disrespect a lot of animals and we all part of it anyway. The enviroment is nature as well. Thean again life is short we live our comforts and leave, not caring for anything than ourselvles. I blame Man's egotiscal nature in this. I think if you have any appiation or know what is right about nature or animals, go on and help make a diffrence. Then, it will be gone anyway...

My views on nature and Animal rights

They say that wild animals need to have their population controlled. I honestly and very strongly believe that humans need to have their population cotrolled. I mean, China's policy about children, which is one child per family or you get privelages taken away, is an example that is a bit extreme, but the root of the destroying nature problem is human population and how we need houses to live in. "Culling" human population would be too extreme, yes, but it should at least be regulated to a moderate degree.

The question are willing to give our ways or comforts that destory nature? I personally think it's ironic that humans think animals are doing damage and they should be the ones go rather than us. As for me, I'm not perfect, I guess humans at least try to fix things, but the ultimate answer is too hard for us to do. The question is if we dissapered, would the earth be better without us? It's the ultimate question? Sad for the human (Which is egotistacal creature). Yeah this is based on feelings on views of this.

Oh aye, I agree 100%

That's why we have the Eco Comittee in our school, to make everyone aware of the changes going on on our planet ^^

Well, about animal populations that need to be regulated - yes... we need to regulate them. Yet the irony in it all is, that it's us who set that requirement - we severely damaged the equation that keeps our ecosystem in balance, and we have to do now what's normally been done by predators.

Would the world be better without us? If we define "better" by a natural fairness, following natural cycles, definately yes. But if we define "better" by attributes set through morality, definately no. Animals don't distinguish wether it's wrong to bring another species to extinction... as it simply doesn't touch their life. They aren't less egotistical, after all, it's just us that figure out what's wrong or right to do to beings that don't belong to our own kind. Only that fact allows us to figure our own egotistical behavior - and one might think that we could take the responsibility of caring for the entire biodiversity. However... we seem to be too primitive to handle that.

Is nature worth to be protected? Definately yes. All my efforts go into that direction. I love natural environments, allowing me to flee from the sad grey world created by mankind. I even find predatory animals to be my best friends - I respect them for their capabilities and very rational thinking... not only that - they are the most beautiful things in the world, with strong characters... of which we can learn a lot. No matter for what purpose you're going to do it - if it's for your own personal interest in them - for science - or for new technology: they are worth being protected.

Well, about animal populations that need to be regulated - yes... we need to regulate them. Yet the irony in it all is, that it's us who set that requirement - we severely damaged the equation that keeps our ecosystem in balance, and we have to do now what's normally been done by predators.

Yeah, I guess we don't realize it, and human actions tend to disrupt the enviroment, we give up an animals population and increas ours.

Would the world be better without us? If we define "better" by a natural fairness, following natural cycles, definately yes. But if we define "better" by attributes set through morality, definately no. Animals don't distinguish wether it's wrong to bring another species to extinction... as it simply doesn't touch their life. They aren't less egotistical, after all, it's just us that figure out what's wrong or right to do to beings that don't belong to our own kind. Only that fact allows us to figure our own egotistical behavior - and one might think that we could take the responsibility of caring for the entire biodiversity. However... we seem to be too primitive to handle that.

Yeah, a better natural enviroemn, and that animals don't know right from wrng good point. The last part, I see to see that you bealive that we are not ready to take care of the whole natural earth, and we not sure how to treat animals.

Is nature worth to be protected? Definately yes. All my efforts go into that direction. I love natural environments, allowing me to flee from the sad grey world created by mankind. I even find predatory animals to be my best friends - I respect them for their capabilities and very rational thinking... not only that - they are the most beautiful things in the world, with strong characters... of which we can learn a lot. No matter for what purpose you're going to do it - if it's for your own personal interest in them - for science - or for new technology: they are worth being protected.

On the last part, I can completely relate with you, to an animal lover that's what any preadator is (Lion wolf, cat, aht every your a fan of). Smarts (Is that what you mean by rational thinking?), traits, bueatiful? In many ways yes (The wolf is bueatiful sprituall), those species are bueatiful in some kind of way, and yes they have things we need to learn, preadators have all of that.

We can't just give up nature for just our soceity, animals are intresting and most people like something about them. I have clubs about saving animals, giving them their rights, not to be abused. I will continue to find involvment that will help these creatues and the enviroment, but I think the reason of doing this is because I like certain preator species, plus the fact that nature needs to undder stood, enviroment needs to be saved.....
[/quote]

If we destroy it we also cannot live because we need the nature. Who thinks nature isn't imoprtant doesn't understand soemthing of life!



Fieto

SAVE IT! SAVE IT! SAVE IT! without nature, we dont have our natural air filters. We need to preserve what we have and make ourselves more thankful to nature for what she does! More energy efficiant and stuff like that. RECYCLE RECYCLE!!!

I would have to agree on saving nature. But WE shouldnt be DOING the saving. The only thing WE can do is try to come up with the most efficient use of energy. New ways in using electricity, cars, and building.

Dont mistake me for an environmentalist, in fact, Im far from one, I come from a part of the USA that has seen HUGE decreases economically in EPA and in economic factors. In the last 60 years, this area has gone from the most densly industrialized and residental place ON EARTH to almost nothing or a shell of what it was.

Forgetting that, the EPA has helped clean alot up. It is a known fact that the USA pollutes the most. Why, cars. Simply put. Find a clean burning source. Unfortnently, Hydrogen is too far away from pratice then it is in theory. Electricity, well, thats all fine, but I dont feel like going just 50-200 miles away from my home before I have to charge the batteries.
The best source of current is corn, yes, corn. Or in liquid form, Ethanol.

About electricity, Im also here to distort a myth that coal burning power plants are dirty. In fact, most of the ash is pulled out of the air using electrostatic precipitators, Scruppers, and Nox reducers. All meaning, that smokestack you see at a powerplant billowing white smoke is steam, nothing more.

While Im on it, just because a plant has a cooling tower doesnt mean its Nuclear, it means that the used steam is being cycle to cool down into condensate to return to the boiler. Now if you see a 5 or so story building with a dome on top, that is probably Nuclear.
Finally, just because you all SEE a smokestack doesnt mean its being USED. They age and are retired, and if there is no reason to tear it down, it will be left up.

Finally, again, I dont think we should mess with nature too much in forms of trying to fix it. Nature has found a way of heeling herself. She will heel again. If you ask me, when we try to undo what we have done, we make it worse.

While predators indeed belong to the smartest animals, I don't necessarily mean their intelligence. What I really love in them, that's their rational thinking and acting - hence - they see a situation - do come to a conclusion - and react (in most cases correctly) on the situation. That sort of thinking is something mankind has lost (which is something I can't stand in humans, but I still can find in predatory animals).

The men destroyed the nature so hard that it needs the help.
But a first thing would be: Stop hunting! The hunters say it's important to hunt but they know it's a big lie. The nature doesn't need the people, this is right. But what the pople did wrong, they've to help what they are able to help.


Fieto