Barbacoatl
Banned
Far cry 3OK what game is this so I can buy it.
Far cry 3OK what game is this so I can buy it.
We also help each other. We share our food, our ideas, our medicine, our homes.
As for the lions and tigers and bears, we own them, too. We train them in circuses and cage them in zoos for our children to point at and laugh.
So get rid of everything that cannot be tamed?
PS.There are wild tigers, lions, and bears that can and will kill just as easily as a shark.
Deeper, bluer, my hand is like a shark's fin. Deeper, bluer, my hand is like a shark's fin. Deeper, bluer, my hand is like a shark's fin. Deeper, bluer, my hand is like a shark's fin. Deeper, bluer, my hand is like a shark's fin. Deeper, bluer, my hand is like a shark's fin. Deeper, bluer, my hand is like a shark's fin. Deeper, bluer, my hand is like a shark's fin. Deeper, bluer, my hand is like a shark's fin. Deeper, bluer, my hand is like a shark's fin. Deeper, bluer, my hand is like a shark's fin.
Not really. Most instances of sharks feeding on orcas have been recorded and observed as scavenging.Yes, because in the right circumstance the opposite can be true.
Loan Sharks I bet.
Loan.
Sharks.
Ahhh thank you for the explanation.Heres a simple chain of events. Apex predator disappears. What ever they were feeding on (common example for sharks is sting rays) suddenly has a massive boom in population because they aren't being controlled. Now, sting rays gotta eat too. Unfortunately, there aren't enough clams, muscles, scallops for all the sting rays to eat to survive very long.
So the rays will eat the shellfish to extinction, which fucks over everything else that eats shellfish. Then the population of sting rays dies off because oh shit, no food. Congrats, you've just destabilized hundreds of years of an established ecosystem.
Well you can define apex as a predator without predators, or in the case of a marine ecosystem they are organisms that sit on a trophic level of at least four. All this means is that as you go up the food chain, it took three organisms to feed the shark in essence. Lets say, coral -> parrotfish -> marlin -> shark.
Protein the gif above is from Far Cry 3.
I have no pity for sharks. If they all went exinct today, I wouldn't be sad at all.
Not really. Most instances of sharks feeding on orcas have been recorded and observed as scavenging.
OK what game is this so I can buy it.
take an ecology class... it will help you be less dumb.
What's wrong with killer...ohhhGood fuck orcas.
We own this entire Earth, if I want to punch a shark I will!
It's time for some fin soup!
oh please
I have no pity for sharks. If they all went exinct today, I wouldn't be sad at all.
take an ecology class... it will help you be less dumb.
471 people have been killed by sharks within 500 years.
500 years
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shark_attack#Statistics.
Deer have killed more humans in histroy than sharks, lol
471 people have been killed by sharks within 500 years.
500 years
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shark_attack#Statistics.
Deer have killed more humans in histroy than sharks, lol
I already have. And what I've learned is that organisms have an amazing propensity to adapt to changes in their environment. The ocean is extremely diverse. To remove the shark would lead to negligible rises in the population of one organism and negligible drops in the population of another. No major ripple effects. It is only in environments with a short food chain where the absence of one species can lead to major breakdowns.
Let's exterminate both.I read somewhere that cows kill people each year way more than sharks.
Let's exterminate both.
No, cajunator. Every square inch of this planet, land or ocean, is man's territory. And I'm not trying to be biblical when I say that. I'm just pointing out mankind's dominance in the world. This shark fucked with one man. Guess what's going to happen to him and the next 20 sharks they find.
If you took an ecology class, and you seriously believe that removing all sharks from the ocean would literally impact nothing, or impact it negligibly so, then I'm inclined to believe that you got blazed every day before lecture and texted in class while throwing in your own baseless conjectures to fill in the gaps of what you couldn't understand from your professor.
I already have. And what I've learned is that organisms have an amazing propensity to adapt to changes in their environment. The ocean is extremely diverse. To remove the shark would lead to negligible rises in the population of one organism and negligible drops in the population of another. No major ripple effects. It is only in environments with a short food chain where the absence of one species can lead to major breakdowns.
You speak the truth. We shall follow your ideals, keyboard warrior.I already have. And what I've learned is that organisms have an amazing propensity to adapt to changes in their environment. The ocean is extremely diverse. To remove the shark would lead to negligible rises in the population of one organism and negligible drops in the population of another. No major ripple effects. It is only in environments with a short food chain where the absence of one species can lead to major breakdowns.
That's really interesting. As someone who studies marine science, I'm surprised, I've never heard or encountered this assertion when discussing keystone species. Since keystone species are defined by their disproportionate effect on their environment(s)...
I would love to read the literature that demonstrates removal of a keystone species has "no major ripple effect". That would be fascinating.
I already have. And what I've learned is that organisms have an amazing propensity to adapt to changes in their environment. The ocean is extremely diverse. To remove the shark would lead to negligible rises in the population of one organism and negligible drops in the population of another. No major ripple effects. It is only in environments with a short food chain where the absence of one species can lead to major breakdowns.
I disagree with the assertion that sharks are keystone species.
I disagree with the assertion that sharks are keystone species.
My fault, I'm referring to sharks like the Great White. Whale Sharks and leopard sharks, I have no problems with. Great Whites and their aggressive offshoots can disappear for all I care.
Anyway, it seems to me that you are the kind of person who really clings to information you learned in class without getting other perspectives. I've had multiple biology, ecology, geography, and environmental science teachers and professors with different opinions on things.
The Great White Shark is incredibly important for maintaining the health of marine ecosystems. Because it is a top predator, it plays an important role in hunting out prey that are not as healthy as others, which keep the stocks that it feeds on in a healthier state. If you remove the top predator from the ecosystem, the repercussions can be quite dramatic. In some cases where sharks have declined there has been a wholesale decrease in all the species in the ecosystem. Ecosystems have evolved over millions of years in a very delicate balance, one in which the white shark as an apex predator has helped to maintain.
The shark faces a variety of threats. Commercially, it is targeted for its fins, jaws, teeth, liver oil, skin and meat. It is also targeted by recreational sports fishers. In addition, white sharks are also caught accidently by commercial fishing operations and discarded with the other bycatch.
Because of its wide range as a large predator, the white shark could serve as an umbrella species for the conservation of many marine species. Protecting the white shark could help protect whole marine ecosystems.
I just have no pity for them. I look at them, and see nothing redeemable about their existence. If they ceased to exist today, the ocean is diverse and adaptive enough to fill their void with something else - not necessarily something more aggressive.
No, cajunator. Every square inch of this planet, land or ocean, is man's territory. And I'm not trying to be biblical when I say that. I'm just pointing out mankind's dominance in the world. This shark fucked with one man. Guess what's going to happen to him and the next 20 sharks they find.
I have no pity for sharks. If they all went exinct today, I wouldn't be sad at all.
Bombadil said:Every square inch of this planet, land or ocean, is man's territory. And I'm not trying to be biblical when I say that. I'm just pointing out mankind's dominance in the world. This shark fucked with one man. Guess what's going to happen to him and the next 20 sharks they find.
Okay so I found this.
From this. http://www.stopextinction.org/top10/withoutanet/173-great-white-shark.html
I don't think it's as serious as the website claims. But it's not like I'm out there hunting sharks so it doesn't matter what I think.
Yeah Im not gonna try to argue with someone that thinks like this. You're beyond crazy and you have a hint of not being a good person from this thinking.
Yeeaaah...
Yeah Im not gonna try to argue with someone that thinks like this. You're beyond crazy and you have a hint of not being a good person from this thinking.
Yeeaaah...
I have no pity for sharks. If they all went exinct today, I wouldn't be sad at all.
We also help each other. We share our food, our ideas, our medicine, our homes.
As for the lions and tigers and bears, we own them, too. We train them in circuses and cage them in zoos for our children to point at and laugh.
Good god thank you.
If sharks had nukes they would nuke the shit out of us as well.
But seriously i really cant stand it when people keep shitting on the (their) human race. There is so much more good stuff among the bad. Bad shit just stands out.