Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Protect the last of the wild

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 123 posts

Re: Protect the last of the wild

#31

Post by simoom22 »

village-idiot wrote: post #27
DennisP wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not a vegan, but my brother has been a strict vegan for a decade and is quite healthy. Plenty of other people do the same with similar results, including some professional athletes, so clearly it's possible. I just don't think most people can be persuaded to do it.

You’re ignoring what I’m saying. I also don’t believe that vegans are healthy. Sure, they don’t starve (omnivores, after all). But I want to see their regular glucose levels and their mortality rates. The way I eat (omnivore) is ancient, veganism is brand new.

Humans are primates, and most primates of the world are vegan, or nearly so, including our closest relatives. That's not something new.

Re: Protect the last of the wild

#32

Post by trax »

Guys, quickly, the world's in danger. Don't reproduce, organize mass killings with 0 carbon footprint weapons and commit an eco friendly suicide. The planet will be better for it -- The Ethical Vegan

Re: Protect the last of the wild

#33

Post by mc32 »

shinryuu wrote: post #14
hazz99 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I seriously think lab grown meats will save the world, if we can pull it off in a commercially viable fashion.

It's fascinating how human beings cling to old habits. It's like we as a species couldn't go vegetarian by choice.

It’s as much s habit as it is a habit for lions to hunt prey; or pigs. I understand we could choose to go vegetarian, but it’s more than overcoming “habit”. We’re omnivores, by nature, not by habit. My point is that being facile is detrimental to a cause. Yes, with effort we could become all vegetarians, but it’s more than overcoming habit (a habit is leaving the toilet seat up).

Re: Protect the last of the wild

#34

Post by taneq »

shinryuu wrote: post #14
hazz99 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I seriously think lab grown meats will save the world, if we can pull it off in a commercially viable fashion.

It's fascinating how human beings cling to old habits. It's like we as a species couldn't go vegetarian by choice.

"To deny our own impulses is to deny the very thing that makes us human." - Mouse, The Matrix

Re: Protect the last of the wild

#35

Post by ndnxhs »

zip1234 wrote: post #24
ndnxhs wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An absolutely massive amount of land could be saved by not eating beef. I don't see that ever happening in America though. And even if the land was saved from cow farming it would just be used to create more urban sprawl.

To be fair--a lot of the land in America used for beef is prairie. There wouldn't be massive rain forests there or anything anyways.

Other things could be put on that land instead of destroying nature to make more space.

Re: Protect the last of the wild

#36

Post by taneq »

ab71e5 wrote: post #23
village-idiot wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We evolved as omnivores. We are a predatory species. We can’t go vegetarian as a species because we aren’t a vegetarian species.

But we also evolved to have a large cerebral cortex that allows us to make decisions that go against certain impulses because we are able to see the bigger picture. We evolved to conserve energy when possible but we exercise anyway because we know that if we don`t it will be detrimental to our health. And many people are still healthy while on a vegetarian diet so it is possible.

Speaking as a life-long vegetarian here, I don't think most people are naturally suited to it. I don't eat meat because I don't want to. I know I'd hate to live my life wanting, say, cheese, or spinach, or whatever, and denying it to myself because of some imagined higher good. I feel like people should embrace their nature. Mine doesn't happen to include eating meat. Most peoples' does, and that's OK.

Re: Protect the last of the wild

#37

Post by taneq »

DennisP wrote: post #26
village-idiot wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What a silly assertion. You can ignore evolutionary impulses with your brain when said impulses come from your brain. Your brain can’t override how your metabolism and gut work. Your brain can’t change the bacteria in your gut, or the shape of your teeth. Omnivorism is not an impulse , it’s an attribute of the species. It’s part of who we are.

I'm not a vegan, but my brother has been a strict vegan for a decade and is quite healthy. Plenty of other people do the same with similar results, including some professional athletes, so clearly it's possible. I just don't think most people can be persuaded to do it.

It's possible to move around exclusively by hopping on one leg. Doesn't mean it's the best way to live your life.

Re: Protect the last of the wild

#38

Post by pofjer »

ivanhoe wrote: post #20

Problem here is that developed world has destroyed it's wilderness long time ago, used that land to produce food and resources, but now we demand that others don't do the same. Why don't we instead create a wilderness by giving up on our local agriculture land? Nature takes back the land very quickly and if you limit hunting and repopulate the animals you'll quickly have a full-blown wilderness back. It doesn't have…

This is literally what developed countries have been doing, at least in the last 6-7 decades. And besides, Europe still is ‘covered by forests end-to-end’.

So not sure what your rant is about… Just speculating, but maybe in your opinion the rates should be increased?

Re: Protect the last of the wild

#39

Post by galangalalgol »

dharma1 wrote: post #9
fractallyte wrote: post #3

I'd argue that humanity certainly requires huge tracts of wilderness for its long term survival. So far, we've successfully transformed diverse ecosystems into vast, but basic, mono-cultural 'deserts'. But - is it sustainable? In the century since the Haber process was introduced, the world has started to buckle at the seams from the results: huge population growth, with accompanying pollution (nitrates, pesticides,…

Could not agree more with this. Evolution on Earth has had a very long time to develop super advanced nanotechnology, which we understand and utilise very poorly and are destroying forever - for what? More beef on the plate, palm oil for products no one needs and a bit of money for one generation? Beyond being critical to the survival of deeply linked ecosystems, and ultimately ourselves, it's just really stupid to d…

Natural selection is a greedy algorithm. Being forward thinking or altruistic rarely produces more surviving progeny over the short term.

Re: Protect the last of the wild

#40

Post by japhyr »

I live in southeast Alaska, where we have a relatively healthy population of coastal brown bears. When we go into the woods, there is always a chance a bear could be nearby.

Your first encounter with a brown bear in the wild can be unnerving. It's a really different feeling to see an animal that could easily kill you in the woods, without a wall or a fence between you and that animal. It's really humbling, and makes the woods feel entirely different than most other woods I've ever been in.

It's not that hard to be safe. You make noise when you're in brushy areas, and you stay aware of your surroundings as long as you're in bear country. If you're camping, there are well-established routines that keep bears from messing with your camping area. You keep in mind where bears are in their annual cycles; are they relatively well-fed, or are they hungry and looking anywhere they can for food?

I like the balance of doing technical work with the experience of walking in the woods with bears. The projects I work on are important, but they're not life-safety-critical. If one of my servers goes down, no one's going to die. Having interacted with brown bears at close range, a server going down is a relatively low-stress event.

I wish there were more wild areas left. The woods in the lower 48 feel empty after living in forests that still have the top predators alive and healthy.

Post reply on HN