Slashdot Mirror
Galapagos Islands Environment "In Danger"
cagrin writes "On Tuesday the UN's World Heritage Committee added the Galapagos Islands to the list of sites in danger from environmental threats or overuse. From the article: 'The Galapagos Islands, an Ecuadorian territory situated in the Pacific Ocean some 1,000 kilometers (625 miles) from South America, helped shape Charles Darwin's theory of evolution and in 1978 was the first site placed on UNESCO's World Heritage List.' Here is some background from Sea Shepherd on the insults facing the Galapagos."
Great. Darwin's islands in danger...... what more could the anti-global-warming-no-separation-of-church-and-st ate-neocons want?
Those of us who think they know everything annoy those of us who do.
Here is some background from Sea Shepherd on the insults facing the Galapagos.
Did someone fart in the islands' general direction?
Those huge turtles should email their congressman.
Finally, this disproves the false science of evolution! God is punishing the islands for having led so many of the faithful astray. I bet Jesus personally came down and kicked a turtle in the ass for good measure.
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
Taking a cruise around the islands changed the way that I think of biology. The sheer diversity of unusual life-forms is astounding: flightless cormorants to marine iguanas to sea lions that don't flinch as you walk by them to the vast fields of blue footed boobies to the elegant but absurd courting dances of the albatrosses: it truly is a land of wonders.
But you get a sense of fragility walking around: from the bees infestation of an island to the sad lack of giant tortoises: the entire island is a tribute to an environmental sense, an acknowledgment that by changing the environment slightly, entrenched endemic species alter, die, dissipate.
Stricter controls are needed in order to help prevent this slide into desolation, but I hope even more that those that wish to take in the marvels of the land can, I have their minds changed and their appreciation of the world expanded.
In some ways it's like the Heisenberg principal: we change it by viewing it. I just hope we have the sense to remember that we should be careful at how much we kill as we gaze.
Nice violent post by the way...
Ok, there are, admittedly, some grey areas over how Sea Shepherd have handled some situations. They do not, however, "think any form of violence is justified". They have been careful not to harm anyone physically, although they have rammed other ships and sabotaged property. Got proof to back up your unsubstantiated claim of "any form of violence", Mr Scientist? No, thought not... (sorry, I guess that should be "Dr Scientist", I should show you more respect than you have others.)
They do have scientists on their board of directors, and they do consult with scientists.
They are an activist group, and as such are pushing an agenda -- usually for fundraising purposes. This alone means that their position does have to be questioned and considered before taking any action. In that though, they are no different from every other pressure group or NGO on the planet, of any type, political leaning, no matter how accepted, conventional, conservative or tame that group may appear to be.
At the end of the day it's just about money.
...I guess the inhabitants of the islands will have to, umm, adapt?
And fundraising to boot. Agree or not, this doesn't belong in science, and probably doesn't belong on /.
It never ceases to amazes me that people as narrow-minded as you exist.
That bird that "merely views [the Galapagos Islands] as a place to land, eat,shit and fuck" is part of the natural ecosystem of this islands.
In its small way, it's a vital part of the food chain and the environment of that area, yet your personal right to a pleasure cruise is more important than the survival of the local ecological community?
I'm sorry, but you have an inflated sense of your own worth, or a lack of appreciation of the order of things, or both. How would you like it if I destroyed your home and your way of life for personal pleasure? Would that be OK with you? After all, that's no different to what you're proposing, right?
The eradication of a species just for the convenience of fishermen, or the destruction of a unique and irreplaceable wildlife habitat for the convenience of tourists are selfish and short-sighted acts. But I suppose that those are moral and ethical arguments that are wasted on you.
"Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
Your god does not exist, but mine does. Now we shall all go to war to settle the matter.
If you do not go, it does not mean there will be one less person visiting the island.
The tourism slots are there regardless of your going. If you do not go, someone else who may be less environmentally aware may go in your stead and litter or reward bad native behaviour otherwise alter the environment more than you would.
I say, if you can go go, and appreciate what is there, while it is still there. What is something happens to it even totally natural in nature? The best way to preserve it in that case, is through memory.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
What? You think throwing money at the starving of Africa is going to solve their problems?
1 8,363604,00.html]. They need economic, agricultural, political, and health aid. Also, in Africa you have crazy war mongers creating extremely unstable environments in numerous African nations, committing genocide and human rights violations left and right. I don't know what sort of aid will solve this, but trust me, I don't think anyone is going to be willing to give it.
t p://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudden_oak_death]. And, whatever an environmental psychopath society will spend to solve the issue, I think it will certainly be vastly less than what is needed to help the rest of the world. I'm sure that people are still donating towards causes like Africa, and on top of that there will be donations/funding for the protection of the Galapagos Islands. I realize the severity of both issues are different, but I'm certain we're not going to end up sending 50 million to the Galapagos and 1 million to Africa; rather, people will spend what is needed in the Galapagos, but whatever is going to Africa will most likely dwarf that.
Africa's got a shitload of problems that, in order to be solved, need more than rich fucks funneling money in their direction. Billions have already been poured into Africa, and damn near ZERO (I exaggerate, but it feels like it) progress has been made [http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,15
With it's problems, Africa needs more than money. It needs help from the international community/UN. All that will probably require a gross monetary sum larger than what would be required for the restoration of the Galapagos, and if we really want to fix things in Africa, it'll probably cost lives too. Even helping 3rd world countries develop infrastructure is going to be a bitch. You can't just develop it for them; you have to teach them a whole lot of shit too. Like the saying goes, give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day, but teach a man to fish and he'll eat every day for the rest of his life.
Lastly, you can't just write off the loss of the Galapagos animals as non issue. You have no idea how this will impact the overall ecosystem. Time and time again, we have been shown that biological changes in a location have vast impacts, usually negative, on the surrounding ecosystem [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coral_bleaching][ht
Oh Yeah. Stupidity gets people killed, sure, but it also wastes money by throwing it at a problem and hoping it will go away.
From http://www.activistcash.com/organization_overview. cfm/oid/347
============
Overview
Sea Shepherd Conservation Society "We're not a protest organization, we're a policing organization," Paul Watson has said of his Sea Shepherd Conservation Society (SSCS). A pirate organization is more like it. Sporting the skull and crossbones, his black or battleship-gray ships sail menacingly through the waves. They are painted with the names of the boats Watson has rammed and sunk.
The ships are fitted with water cannons, a concrete-filled bow made for ramming, and an attachment dubbed the "can opener" that can tear open a boat's hull. In his book Earth Warrior, David Morris writes that Watson wears a long bowie knife at his side and carries AK-47s on board. He blasts Richard Wagner's rousing "Ride of the Valkyries" to herald his arrival and terrify his victims.
SSCS's mission is to stop fishing of which it disapproves. Its preferred methods? Ramming and sinking fishing ships, throwing butyric acid on their decks, and firing machine guns. Watson argues that United Nations resolutions authorize him to commit violent acts. But he regularly interferes with fisherman and hunters who are committing no crime. He serves as judge, jury, and executioner -- while enjoying the same tax-exempt status as universities and churches.
Some of the animal-rights movement's most notorious terrorists got their start with SSCS. One of them, convicted arsonist Rodney Coronado, had Watson's approval to plan and execute an attack on Iceland's whaling industry. He and a colleague sank two of the fleet's four ships and destroyed a processing facility.
The Birth of Violence
SSCS is run with an iron fist by its founder, "Captain" Paul Watson. "When this ship becomes a democracy," he likes to say to his crew, "you'll be the first to know." Watson is a dyslexic who "progressed from deckhand to able seaman without knowing how to tie a knot" with the Canadian Coast Guard and Norwegian and Swedish merchant marines.
In Vancouver, Watson joined a group of anti-war activists who attempted to forcibly shut down American nuclear tests. These radicals branched out into environmental activism and became Greenpeace, of which Watson was a founder. But Watson's violent tactics became too much for Greenpeace, which kicked him out in 1977, after he assaulted seal hunters. Watson now assails his old comrades for being too wimpy, calling Greenpeace "the Avon ladies of the environmental movement."
Soon after Watson's eviction from Greenpeace, Sea Shepherd and its ship-ramming philosophy were born. SSCS's band of pirates have disrupted the legal Canadian seal hunt, attacked whaling ships and fishing boats using driftnets, and taken credit for spiking (inserting large nails into) thousands of trees. The group has sunk at least ten ships in Iceland, Norway, Spain, Portugal, South Africa, and the Canary Islands. Watson has even sunk his own ships rather than let the authorities take them. And he has spent time in the jails of Canada and the Netherlands. "Any whaling ship on the ocean is a target for the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society," he has said.
Watson's love for marine life doesn't stop him from eating fish. "Paul, who likes hamburgers and grilled cheese sandwiches equally, interprets veganism as a form of philosophical lunacy," David Morris writes in Earth Warrior. Morris's book details often-hilarious disputes between Watson and the vegan crewmembers. One standoff ensued when Watson ordered the vegans to retrieve a driftnet left by an escaped fishing vessel. The crew took an agonizingly long time, trying to free every squid caught in the net, about which Watson couldn't care less. He didn't even mind profiting from the work of the ship he threatened -- Morris reports that he later sent his chef over to the net to "requisition a few squid for dinner."
On the Fringe
Paul Watson has used his aggres
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
such as oxygen, for example? or such as something of which you are ignorant?
Here we go. Your argument is flawed. Oxygen DOES exist. If I take it away, you die.
Ignorance? You want to fill that "gap" with God go right ahead. There's a damned good chance that there's nothing there, however, because THERE IS NOTHING THERE. NOTHING is actually more likely than an undetectable being with magical powers that requires convoluted reasoning and non sequiturs to justify its existence.
Far more straigtforward to admit that the whole concept of God, heaven and hell were created by man to keep the plebe in line and to force political alliance based on "moral" convictions. Not to mention it's a huge source of revenue since the world is FULL of stupid people.
God = Santa Claus for adults. Psst, I have news for you - there's no Santa Claus either.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.