▲ 114 ▼ Oh no!!! (mander.xyz) submitted 4 months ago by fossilesque@mander.xyz to c/science_memes@mander.xyz 31 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] HoneyMustardGas@lemmy.world 12 points 4 months ago (24 children) But they neutered it... permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 24 child comments replies: [–] driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br 38 points 4 months ago (2 children) I think is a reference to feral cats. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] SillyDude@lemmy.zip 10 points 4 months ago (1 child) At least in north America, domestic cats are far from the top of the food chain and have many predators. Which is why they don't live outside human civilization. Lionfish have no predators in the areas they're invasive, which is the problem. Though it looks like both sharks and grouper can be trained by humans to eat them so once that chain is established the lionfish might start declining. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] jdr@lemmy.ml 4 points 4 months ago How to Train Your Grouper permalink fedilink source parent [–] arctanthrope@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago (19 children) a neutered animal still consumes resources permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 19 child comments replies: [–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 11 points 4 months ago (11 children) Sure, but then it dies without having children, stopping the resource consumption. It might be delayed, but it's still a halting force. I'm also confused as to what the issue is - do they have some way of bypassing being neutered? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 11 child comments replies: [–] arctanthrope@lemmy.world 14 points 4 months ago* (3 children) if you want to remove them from the area entirely because they consume too many resources, why would you go to the trouble of performing surgery and re-releasing it to consume more resources instead of just killing it. the former solves the problem in the future, the latter solves the problem now permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de 36 points 4 months ago (1 child) There is some benefit to this in some cases: they compete with the others of their species for the same finite set of resources, causing fewer breeders to make offspring. They might also attempt to breed with a fertile mate (unsuccessfully), causing that mate to never produce offspring when they otherwise would have. The effectiveness of this is obviously very dependent on the species and their breeding habits, and I know nothing about this one. I'm just talking about the general case. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] AlligatorBlizzard@sh.itjust.works 4 points 4 months ago Works for insects. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 10 points 4 months ago Because a lot of people consider killing an animal to be unethical. permalink fedilink source parent [–] tyler@programming.dev 8 points 4 months ago (5 children) No but if you’re going to capture these it’s just a waste to neuter them. The problem is how many other fish have no defenses against them so in effect you’ve done nothing, the lionfish is going to continue killing for the rest of its life. The proper way is to just spearfish them and take them to a restaurant for them to cook for customers. You’ve then both “neutered” them and removed the destruction permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 0 points 4 months ago (4 children) Well, the reason some people don't kill them is because they consider it unethical to purposefully stop a life, but besides the 5-15 year offset for lifespan, it'll still be effective in stopping the problem. The issue with invasive species is that they breed quickly and outcompete the native species due to that factor, but that wouldn't happen if they prevented the invasive species from breeding. Killing them all or neutering them all barely makes a difference; given a few years, they both result in none remaining. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] anton@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 4 months ago (1 child) But you can kill hundreds for the price it costs to neuter a few. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 2 points 4 months ago Sure, and plenty of people do, but the people who don't want to kill them can neuter them - there's no drawback to gain their help when the alternative is that they simply wouldn't help. So I'm still confused about why this post is implying that a person who neutered one is somehow making a big mistake. permalink fedilink source parent [–] tyler@programming.dev 2 points 4 months ago (1 child) Incorrect. Neutering them will still result in massive loss of life or extinction of species on the reef. Anyone who cares about animals and the reef will kill them, not neuter and rerelease. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 0 points 4 months ago* Sure, and a lion being alive results in a "massive loss of life" as well, so long as you consider a single creature's influence to be "massive," but that doesn't mean we kill them. People don't want to kill things because they don't want to do it themselves, not because they specifically want to limit total deaths. Not saying it's better, but it's still an option, and it's still better to let the people who don't want to kill them neuter them instead, rather than not helping at all. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Redjard@reddthat.com 1 point 4 months ago It could be net positive by wasting mating attempts from other wild individuals, decreasing offspring amounts of the population. iirc some places airdrop sterile mosquitoes to reduce mosquito populations. permalink fedilink source parent [–] HoneyMustardGas@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (5 children) Just one won't impact anything substantial. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] Reborn_Mormon@lemmy.world -4 points 4 months ago* (4 children) You've written me before. One comment won't mean much, right? Chaos theory shows how the tinest input at any point can fundamentally change a system. However, people throw around this idea that "we're in a simulation." We are not in a simulation; each one of us are our own simulation of a parallel universe reality. The Earth does not exist. We are not featherless bipeds on an Earth, we are pockets of consciousness called monads in a monadic nodal communication system. I believe, in no hubris, that I can expand your perspective. Would you be willing to endure me to learn? The enduring will temper you to be stronger, I tell you, for it is what the CIA did to me, plus you will gain knowledge. My benefit will be to gain perspective of what "normative" is, as I've seen you, and I must say you are a good person, I just Know what I Know. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 4 months ago (1 child) someone forgot their meds permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Reborn_Mormon@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago Someone doesn't realize this is just who I am permalink fedilink source parent [–] HoneyMustardGas@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (1 child) Is this spam? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Reborn_Mormon@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago Is it? I'm sorry. I recognized your username and started a conversation. permalink fedilink source parent [–] chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago If your goal is to lower a population over time, neuter and release can be very effective. Neutered males will still try to mate but they will not succeed. The females they try to mate with might not mate with another male, so they miss the chance to create a new generation. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply)
[–] driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br 38 points 4 months ago (2 children) I think is a reference to feral cats. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] SillyDude@lemmy.zip 10 points 4 months ago (1 child) At least in north America, domestic cats are far from the top of the food chain and have many predators. Which is why they don't live outside human civilization. Lionfish have no predators in the areas they're invasive, which is the problem. Though it looks like both sharks and grouper can be trained by humans to eat them so once that chain is established the lionfish might start declining. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] jdr@lemmy.ml 4 points 4 months ago How to Train Your Grouper permalink fedilink source parent
[–] SillyDude@lemmy.zip 10 points 4 months ago (1 child) At least in north America, domestic cats are far from the top of the food chain and have many predators. Which is why they don't live outside human civilization. Lionfish have no predators in the areas they're invasive, which is the problem. Though it looks like both sharks and grouper can be trained by humans to eat them so once that chain is established the lionfish might start declining. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] jdr@lemmy.ml 4 points 4 months ago How to Train Your Grouper permalink fedilink source parent
[–] arctanthrope@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago (19 children) a neutered animal still consumes resources permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 19 child comments replies: [–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 11 points 4 months ago (11 children) Sure, but then it dies without having children, stopping the resource consumption. It might be delayed, but it's still a halting force. I'm also confused as to what the issue is - do they have some way of bypassing being neutered? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 11 child comments replies: [–] arctanthrope@lemmy.world 14 points 4 months ago* (3 children) if you want to remove them from the area entirely because they consume too many resources, why would you go to the trouble of performing surgery and re-releasing it to consume more resources instead of just killing it. the former solves the problem in the future, the latter solves the problem now permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de 36 points 4 months ago (1 child) There is some benefit to this in some cases: they compete with the others of their species for the same finite set of resources, causing fewer breeders to make offspring. They might also attempt to breed with a fertile mate (unsuccessfully), causing that mate to never produce offspring when they otherwise would have. The effectiveness of this is obviously very dependent on the species and their breeding habits, and I know nothing about this one. I'm just talking about the general case. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] AlligatorBlizzard@sh.itjust.works 4 points 4 months ago Works for insects. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 10 points 4 months ago Because a lot of people consider killing an animal to be unethical. permalink fedilink source parent [–] tyler@programming.dev 8 points 4 months ago (5 children) No but if you’re going to capture these it’s just a waste to neuter them. The problem is how many other fish have no defenses against them so in effect you’ve done nothing, the lionfish is going to continue killing for the rest of its life. The proper way is to just spearfish them and take them to a restaurant for them to cook for customers. You’ve then both “neutered” them and removed the destruction permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 0 points 4 months ago (4 children) Well, the reason some people don't kill them is because they consider it unethical to purposefully stop a life, but besides the 5-15 year offset for lifespan, it'll still be effective in stopping the problem. The issue with invasive species is that they breed quickly and outcompete the native species due to that factor, but that wouldn't happen if they prevented the invasive species from breeding. Killing them all or neutering them all barely makes a difference; given a few years, they both result in none remaining. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] anton@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 4 months ago (1 child) But you can kill hundreds for the price it costs to neuter a few. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 2 points 4 months ago Sure, and plenty of people do, but the people who don't want to kill them can neuter them - there's no drawback to gain their help when the alternative is that they simply wouldn't help. So I'm still confused about why this post is implying that a person who neutered one is somehow making a big mistake. permalink fedilink source parent [–] tyler@programming.dev 2 points 4 months ago (1 child) Incorrect. Neutering them will still result in massive loss of life or extinction of species on the reef. Anyone who cares about animals and the reef will kill them, not neuter and rerelease. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 0 points 4 months ago* Sure, and a lion being alive results in a "massive loss of life" as well, so long as you consider a single creature's influence to be "massive," but that doesn't mean we kill them. People don't want to kill things because they don't want to do it themselves, not because they specifically want to limit total deaths. Not saying it's better, but it's still an option, and it's still better to let the people who don't want to kill them neuter them instead, rather than not helping at all. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Redjard@reddthat.com 1 point 4 months ago It could be net positive by wasting mating attempts from other wild individuals, decreasing offspring amounts of the population. iirc some places airdrop sterile mosquitoes to reduce mosquito populations. permalink fedilink source parent [–] HoneyMustardGas@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (5 children) Just one won't impact anything substantial. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] Reborn_Mormon@lemmy.world -4 points 4 months ago* (4 children) You've written me before. One comment won't mean much, right? Chaos theory shows how the tinest input at any point can fundamentally change a system. However, people throw around this idea that "we're in a simulation." We are not in a simulation; each one of us are our own simulation of a parallel universe reality. The Earth does not exist. We are not featherless bipeds on an Earth, we are pockets of consciousness called monads in a monadic nodal communication system. I believe, in no hubris, that I can expand your perspective. Would you be willing to endure me to learn? The enduring will temper you to be stronger, I tell you, for it is what the CIA did to me, plus you will gain knowledge. My benefit will be to gain perspective of what "normative" is, as I've seen you, and I must say you are a good person, I just Know what I Know. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 4 months ago (1 child) someone forgot their meds permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Reborn_Mormon@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago Someone doesn't realize this is just who I am permalink fedilink source parent [–] HoneyMustardGas@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (1 child) Is this spam? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Reborn_Mormon@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago Is it? I'm sorry. I recognized your username and started a conversation. permalink fedilink source parent [–] chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago If your goal is to lower a population over time, neuter and release can be very effective. Neutered males will still try to mate but they will not succeed. The females they try to mate with might not mate with another male, so they miss the chance to create a new generation. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 11 points 4 months ago (11 children) Sure, but then it dies without having children, stopping the resource consumption. It might be delayed, but it's still a halting force. I'm also confused as to what the issue is - do they have some way of bypassing being neutered? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 11 child comments replies: [–] arctanthrope@lemmy.world 14 points 4 months ago* (3 children) if you want to remove them from the area entirely because they consume too many resources, why would you go to the trouble of performing surgery and re-releasing it to consume more resources instead of just killing it. the former solves the problem in the future, the latter solves the problem now permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de 36 points 4 months ago (1 child) There is some benefit to this in some cases: they compete with the others of their species for the same finite set of resources, causing fewer breeders to make offspring. They might also attempt to breed with a fertile mate (unsuccessfully), causing that mate to never produce offspring when they otherwise would have. The effectiveness of this is obviously very dependent on the species and their breeding habits, and I know nothing about this one. I'm just talking about the general case. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] AlligatorBlizzard@sh.itjust.works 4 points 4 months ago Works for insects. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 10 points 4 months ago Because a lot of people consider killing an animal to be unethical. permalink fedilink source parent [–] tyler@programming.dev 8 points 4 months ago (5 children) No but if you’re going to capture these it’s just a waste to neuter them. The problem is how many other fish have no defenses against them so in effect you’ve done nothing, the lionfish is going to continue killing for the rest of its life. The proper way is to just spearfish them and take them to a restaurant for them to cook for customers. You’ve then both “neutered” them and removed the destruction permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 0 points 4 months ago (4 children) Well, the reason some people don't kill them is because they consider it unethical to purposefully stop a life, but besides the 5-15 year offset for lifespan, it'll still be effective in stopping the problem. The issue with invasive species is that they breed quickly and outcompete the native species due to that factor, but that wouldn't happen if they prevented the invasive species from breeding. Killing them all or neutering them all barely makes a difference; given a few years, they both result in none remaining. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] anton@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 4 months ago (1 child) But you can kill hundreds for the price it costs to neuter a few. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 2 points 4 months ago Sure, and plenty of people do, but the people who don't want to kill them can neuter them - there's no drawback to gain their help when the alternative is that they simply wouldn't help. So I'm still confused about why this post is implying that a person who neutered one is somehow making a big mistake. permalink fedilink source parent [–] tyler@programming.dev 2 points 4 months ago (1 child) Incorrect. Neutering them will still result in massive loss of life or extinction of species on the reef. Anyone who cares about animals and the reef will kill them, not neuter and rerelease. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 0 points 4 months ago* Sure, and a lion being alive results in a "massive loss of life" as well, so long as you consider a single creature's influence to be "massive," but that doesn't mean we kill them. People don't want to kill things because they don't want to do it themselves, not because they specifically want to limit total deaths. Not saying it's better, but it's still an option, and it's still better to let the people who don't want to kill them neuter them instead, rather than not helping at all. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Redjard@reddthat.com 1 point 4 months ago It could be net positive by wasting mating attempts from other wild individuals, decreasing offspring amounts of the population. iirc some places airdrop sterile mosquitoes to reduce mosquito populations. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] arctanthrope@lemmy.world 14 points 4 months ago* (3 children) if you want to remove them from the area entirely because they consume too many resources, why would you go to the trouble of performing surgery and re-releasing it to consume more resources instead of just killing it. the former solves the problem in the future, the latter solves the problem now permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de 36 points 4 months ago (1 child) There is some benefit to this in some cases: they compete with the others of their species for the same finite set of resources, causing fewer breeders to make offspring. They might also attempt to breed with a fertile mate (unsuccessfully), causing that mate to never produce offspring when they otherwise would have. The effectiveness of this is obviously very dependent on the species and their breeding habits, and I know nothing about this one. I'm just talking about the general case. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] AlligatorBlizzard@sh.itjust.works 4 points 4 months ago Works for insects. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 10 points 4 months ago Because a lot of people consider killing an animal to be unethical. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de 36 points 4 months ago (1 child) There is some benefit to this in some cases: they compete with the others of their species for the same finite set of resources, causing fewer breeders to make offspring. They might also attempt to breed with a fertile mate (unsuccessfully), causing that mate to never produce offspring when they otherwise would have. The effectiveness of this is obviously very dependent on the species and their breeding habits, and I know nothing about this one. I'm just talking about the general case. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] AlligatorBlizzard@sh.itjust.works 4 points 4 months ago Works for insects. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] AlligatorBlizzard@sh.itjust.works 4 points 4 months ago Works for insects. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 10 points 4 months ago Because a lot of people consider killing an animal to be unethical. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] tyler@programming.dev 8 points 4 months ago (5 children) No but if you’re going to capture these it’s just a waste to neuter them. The problem is how many other fish have no defenses against them so in effect you’ve done nothing, the lionfish is going to continue killing for the rest of its life. The proper way is to just spearfish them and take them to a restaurant for them to cook for customers. You’ve then both “neutered” them and removed the destruction permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 0 points 4 months ago (4 children) Well, the reason some people don't kill them is because they consider it unethical to purposefully stop a life, but besides the 5-15 year offset for lifespan, it'll still be effective in stopping the problem. The issue with invasive species is that they breed quickly and outcompete the native species due to that factor, but that wouldn't happen if they prevented the invasive species from breeding. Killing them all or neutering them all barely makes a difference; given a few years, they both result in none remaining. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] anton@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 4 months ago (1 child) But you can kill hundreds for the price it costs to neuter a few. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 2 points 4 months ago Sure, and plenty of people do, but the people who don't want to kill them can neuter them - there's no drawback to gain their help when the alternative is that they simply wouldn't help. So I'm still confused about why this post is implying that a person who neutered one is somehow making a big mistake. permalink fedilink source parent [–] tyler@programming.dev 2 points 4 months ago (1 child) Incorrect. Neutering them will still result in massive loss of life or extinction of species on the reef. Anyone who cares about animals and the reef will kill them, not neuter and rerelease. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 0 points 4 months ago* Sure, and a lion being alive results in a "massive loss of life" as well, so long as you consider a single creature's influence to be "massive," but that doesn't mean we kill them. People don't want to kill things because they don't want to do it themselves, not because they specifically want to limit total deaths. Not saying it's better, but it's still an option, and it's still better to let the people who don't want to kill them neuter them instead, rather than not helping at all. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 0 points 4 months ago (4 children) Well, the reason some people don't kill them is because they consider it unethical to purposefully stop a life, but besides the 5-15 year offset for lifespan, it'll still be effective in stopping the problem. The issue with invasive species is that they breed quickly and outcompete the native species due to that factor, but that wouldn't happen if they prevented the invasive species from breeding. Killing them all or neutering them all barely makes a difference; given a few years, they both result in none remaining. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] anton@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 4 months ago (1 child) But you can kill hundreds for the price it costs to neuter a few. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 2 points 4 months ago Sure, and plenty of people do, but the people who don't want to kill them can neuter them - there's no drawback to gain their help when the alternative is that they simply wouldn't help. So I'm still confused about why this post is implying that a person who neutered one is somehow making a big mistake. permalink fedilink source parent [–] tyler@programming.dev 2 points 4 months ago (1 child) Incorrect. Neutering them will still result in massive loss of life or extinction of species on the reef. Anyone who cares about animals and the reef will kill them, not neuter and rerelease. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 0 points 4 months ago* Sure, and a lion being alive results in a "massive loss of life" as well, so long as you consider a single creature's influence to be "massive," but that doesn't mean we kill them. People don't want to kill things because they don't want to do it themselves, not because they specifically want to limit total deaths. Not saying it's better, but it's still an option, and it's still better to let the people who don't want to kill them neuter them instead, rather than not helping at all. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] anton@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 4 months ago (1 child) But you can kill hundreds for the price it costs to neuter a few. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 2 points 4 months ago Sure, and plenty of people do, but the people who don't want to kill them can neuter them - there's no drawback to gain their help when the alternative is that they simply wouldn't help. So I'm still confused about why this post is implying that a person who neutered one is somehow making a big mistake. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 2 points 4 months ago Sure, and plenty of people do, but the people who don't want to kill them can neuter them - there's no drawback to gain their help when the alternative is that they simply wouldn't help. So I'm still confused about why this post is implying that a person who neutered one is somehow making a big mistake. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] tyler@programming.dev 2 points 4 months ago (1 child) Incorrect. Neutering them will still result in massive loss of life or extinction of species on the reef. Anyone who cares about animals and the reef will kill them, not neuter and rerelease. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 0 points 4 months ago* Sure, and a lion being alive results in a "massive loss of life" as well, so long as you consider a single creature's influence to be "massive," but that doesn't mean we kill them. People don't want to kill things because they don't want to do it themselves, not because they specifically want to limit total deaths. Not saying it's better, but it's still an option, and it's still better to let the people who don't want to kill them neuter them instead, rather than not helping at all. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 0 points 4 months ago* Sure, and a lion being alive results in a "massive loss of life" as well, so long as you consider a single creature's influence to be "massive," but that doesn't mean we kill them. People don't want to kill things because they don't want to do it themselves, not because they specifically want to limit total deaths. Not saying it's better, but it's still an option, and it's still better to let the people who don't want to kill them neuter them instead, rather than not helping at all. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Redjard@reddthat.com 1 point 4 months ago It could be net positive by wasting mating attempts from other wild individuals, decreasing offspring amounts of the population. iirc some places airdrop sterile mosquitoes to reduce mosquito populations. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] HoneyMustardGas@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (5 children) Just one won't impact anything substantial. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] Reborn_Mormon@lemmy.world -4 points 4 months ago* (4 children) You've written me before. One comment won't mean much, right? Chaos theory shows how the tinest input at any point can fundamentally change a system. However, people throw around this idea that "we're in a simulation." We are not in a simulation; each one of us are our own simulation of a parallel universe reality. The Earth does not exist. We are not featherless bipeds on an Earth, we are pockets of consciousness called monads in a monadic nodal communication system. I believe, in no hubris, that I can expand your perspective. Would you be willing to endure me to learn? The enduring will temper you to be stronger, I tell you, for it is what the CIA did to me, plus you will gain knowledge. My benefit will be to gain perspective of what "normative" is, as I've seen you, and I must say you are a good person, I just Know what I Know. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 4 months ago (1 child) someone forgot their meds permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Reborn_Mormon@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago Someone doesn't realize this is just who I am permalink fedilink source parent [–] HoneyMustardGas@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (1 child) Is this spam? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Reborn_Mormon@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago Is it? I'm sorry. I recognized your username and started a conversation. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Reborn_Mormon@lemmy.world -4 points 4 months ago* (4 children) You've written me before. One comment won't mean much, right? Chaos theory shows how the tinest input at any point can fundamentally change a system. However, people throw around this idea that "we're in a simulation." We are not in a simulation; each one of us are our own simulation of a parallel universe reality. The Earth does not exist. We are not featherless bipeds on an Earth, we are pockets of consciousness called monads in a monadic nodal communication system. I believe, in no hubris, that I can expand your perspective. Would you be willing to endure me to learn? The enduring will temper you to be stronger, I tell you, for it is what the CIA did to me, plus you will gain knowledge. My benefit will be to gain perspective of what "normative" is, as I've seen you, and I must say you are a good person, I just Know what I Know. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 4 months ago (1 child) someone forgot their meds permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Reborn_Mormon@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago Someone doesn't realize this is just who I am permalink fedilink source parent [–] HoneyMustardGas@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (1 child) Is this spam? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Reborn_Mormon@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago Is it? I'm sorry. I recognized your username and started a conversation. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 4 months ago (1 child) someone forgot their meds permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Reborn_Mormon@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago Someone doesn't realize this is just who I am permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Reborn_Mormon@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago Someone doesn't realize this is just who I am permalink fedilink source parent
[–] HoneyMustardGas@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (1 child) Is this spam? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Reborn_Mormon@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago Is it? I'm sorry. I recognized your username and started a conversation. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Reborn_Mormon@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago Is it? I'm sorry. I recognized your username and started a conversation. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago If your goal is to lower a population over time, neuter and release can be very effective. Neutered males will still try to mate but they will not succeed. The females they try to mate with might not mate with another male, so they miss the chance to create a new generation. permalink fedilink source parent