"It is time to let the Panda go"

[karohemd]

Interesting viewpoint and I think quite valid as "survival of the fittest" applies here and the panda is, quite frankly, too stupidill adapted to survive. It would be entirely different if all it took was to conserve or expand his habitat.

I'd be interested to hear what my naturalist/conservationist friends think about this.

(thanks to raggedy_man for the link)

Comments

[undyingking.livejournal.com]

we're just postponing the inevitable

It is we who made it inevitable in the first place. Pandas were doing perfectly well for millions of years until humans came along, and would most likely have continued doing so in our absence. The only way Nature "selected it to die out" was by inflicting humans upon its habitat.

[colonel-maxim.livejournal.com]

Millions of years? Really? So that is why donosaurs were wiped out, eaten by pandas, it all comes clear. :-)

[undyingking.livejournal.com]

We never even found the fossils of Bambooasaurus, so thoroughly was it munched.

[eryx-uk.livejournal.com]

It may sound harsh but survival of the fittest. I think nature selected the panda to die off because lets face it, they don't breed very well.

[undyingking.livejournal.com]

It may sound harsh but survival of the fittest

On that basis, there's no point trying to preserve any species that's become endangered as a result of human activity. By letting themselves get predated to endangerment by us, or by letting us take over their habitats, they have proven themselves not as fit as us.

Which is a perfectly valid position to take, but it seems a pretty extreme one.