It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Now_Then
But to say that they survived X amount of time - and coincidently we are here now to debate it? It's just a point in time... I would not mind if there was a Panda paradise that co-existed with the rest of the world, but it don't seem that there is... You snooze you loose, you can't always blame people - after all we have to grow.
Because of pollution and destruction of their natural habitat, along with segregation due to caging, reproduction of wild pandas was severely limited. In the 1990s, however, several laws (including gun control and the removal of resident humans from the reserves) helped the chances of survival for pandas. With these renewed efforts and improved conservation methods, wild pandas have started to increase in numbers in some areas, even though they still are classified as a rare species.
Originally posted by CosmicEgg
Do you really not know that they have had to show pandas film of pandas going at it to encourage them to get down to it themselves?
Original Quote by SKL
I fail to see how man's mismanagement of fiscal finances is somehow the blame of the wild animals these organizations claim they are trying to assist.
Since when did wild animals learn about the calculator, budgets, and profits verses losses?
The real predators are not those loose on the Serengeti, they are loose in the board rooms and their flagrant rape of your willing wallet is where their killing fields are really located.
The prey these salaciously criminal bastards hunt is the easily stroked and over-inflated ego, the extra heavy wallet, and the guile blinded ignorant fool who will give to a cause because it is good social manners, and belonging to an organization that deceives their sense of belonging to something more important than themselves when they are really only perpetuating the needless spending on that benefit that we drove towards necessity.
We can go easily go down the list of endangered animals and we'll soon see that very few - if any animals deserve to be on the list. Rhinos, elephants, cheetahs, whales, gorillas... Are any of these “weak” animals that deserve to go extinct because it’s “survival of the fittest”?t
Would that help? - They eat bamboo, they take ages to digest it for very little energy, they have to live where there are very few predators because they are a sitting target - evolutionary speaking they painted them selves into a corner a very very long time ago.
Originally posted by zazzafrazz
As for Now_Then, I am going to assume that he is being his usually cheeky self, he claims to do things like staple his cat, or panfry it to get a rise....
Originally posted by Gemwolf
reply to post by zazzafrazz
My point was (with that quote) that some of the strongest animals are on the endangered species list... Being weak has nothing to do with the "evolution" of a species going extinct (in this case).