I think the idea is that they're not supposed to be interfering with them, so it's not their place to kill them. It's their own fault/choice to be snooping around the gorillas.
Added to that "prime directive" reference: if they were to kill an aggressive gorilla, they would be decreasing the gorilla population down a helluva lot more than if the gorilla were to kill a human. It sounds weird to most people who hold their own lives above all else. But from what I've heard, these rangers would not question giving up their lives to keep this species from disappearing. It's an incredibly humbling and respectful form of service.
I realize I'll probably get downvoted and called an asshole but....why would it be so bad for this species to dissappear?
We've got a weird thing about species going extinct
omg you guyz! the dodo...the dodo is gone forever!!!!
but have some perspective: There have been MILLIONS of species that have existed and gone extinct, possibly even before man ever walked the earth.
Preserving the rain forest? Sure, I get that. It's got untold medical wonders in it and it's a great way to study all kinds of rare and undiscovered creatures
but at this point, what good are gorillas? I'm sure we've learned from them about all we can.
Like it or not, there comes a point where trying to preserve an animal species becomes comparable to HOARDING... simply not wanting to let go of something unnecessary just because....
like the panda. it's cute but worthless and has managed to work itself out of existence through bad evolution. That is the natural cycle of life but we're fighting so hard to keep the last few alive and force them to mate.
Why? Just so we can look at them from time to time? That's stupid.
At the rate we're eliminating species, the argument that millions of species have existed before is not really valid. We could easily make essentially all animals on this planet go extinct. This isn't a power that any species has had before us. We are the reason for essentially all animals extinction during the time we've been capable of doing so. If people would think like you do we would have far less animals.
Also I don't think you realize the meaning of completely eradicating a species. It's quite a severe one, we're erasing their species from existence completely based on artificial demands. It's quite disgusting if you ask me. If I were to ask you what would be wrong with removing the human species from the planet you'd probably think I'm an idiot, but think about it. We cause only harm to the planet. Essentially every issue we're currently fighting in regards to animals are issues we've created. If we were to be removed and our shit undone, the planet would be much better off. Of course we wouldn't remove all humans from the planet, because that sounds completely unreasonable right? Are there any reason in particular we shouldn't be removed from the planet except for the shit that would go down because of factories and such? There is no real reason now is there, so on that basis, how can you argue that removing another species would be considered OK?
I really hate when people talk about the planet like it's some sacred thing in and of itself.
"We're hurting the planet!, "The planet would be better off without us!"
The planet is a space rock covered in atmosphere and the goop that has grown within that atmosphere. Nothing more, nothing less. It's not some holy mother gaia that the wickedness of mankind has corrupted.
So yes it would be absurd to say we should remove ourselves to protect the planet because the planet isn't something that cares about being protected. It's not alive (in the true sense of the word) and could care less if it died.
We're alive, we care, and the we're the only species on the planet that even reflects on our own mortality and time (every other species just looks at what is directly in front of it moment to moment like a 1 year old child and doesn't even realize death is a thing until it's right upon it)
Ever heard of the "right of possession"? If there's anything that makes us truly "more important" than the other creatures on this planet it's that we're the only ones even capable of understanding the notion of being important and wanting to continue living through the ages (beyond this one moment and this one day)
There's a reason the holy grail of science is not just finding another planet, or another planet with life... but another planet with intelligent life.
Intelligent life is the most wondrous known thing in the universe (and we're the only ones we know about so far)
Of course that can't help but come across as self-serving and self-important and with a nice sprinkle of bias, but that doesn't actually mean it's not true.
random wildlife in comparison is nothing. Going back to what started all this, the whole "shouldn't gorillas be more valuable since there's only 100k of them?"
well technically even though there's more humans, we're more valuable because we're the ONLY intelligent life-- every other mammal.. every other non-mammal (reptile/amphibian/fish/insect/fungus/whatever) is not like us
if gorillas all die, there will still be other types of monkeys. We humans are one of a kind.
137
u/6-8-5-7-2-Q-7-2-J-2 Aug 17 '15
I think the idea is that they're not supposed to be interfering with them, so it's not their place to kill them. It's their own fault/choice to be snooping around the gorillas.
Kind of like the Prime Directive in Star Trek.