A Fishkeeping forum. FishKeepingBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » FishKeepingBanter.com forum » rec.aquaria.freshwater » Plants
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

glow in the dark fishies



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old July 2nd 03, 01:14 AM
Chuck Gadd
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default glow in the dark fishies

On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 23:42:11 +0100, Skunky
wrote:
thing I am sure of is that nearly all the species lost and the habitat
destroyed brings us ultimately back to one cause.....HUMANS


Sorry, not even close. If you want someone or something to blame,
point to nature.

According to the 1995 United Nations Environment Programme Global
Biodiversity Assessment, over 95 percent of all species that ever
existed are now extinct. Even figures for the number of species known
to have existed vary greatly, ranging from between two million and
80million - while some scientists estimate that only about 1.6million
species have ever been recorded.

440 Million years ago, 20 - 50 % of families wiped out.

360 million years ago, 20 - 30 % of families wiped out.

250 million years ago, 50 % of families wiped out, Greatest mass
extinction ever.

213 million years ago, 20 - 35 % of families wiped out. Dinosaurs and
mammals had just recently evolved; both live through this extinction.

66 million years ago, 15 % of families wiped out. Dinosaurs
become extinct. 65 million of years after this mass extinction, early
humans evolve.

About 11,000 years ago, many species of animals went extinct across
north america. Some people try to point to human hunting as the
cause, but evidence of human hunting exists only a few of the hundreds
of species that were wiped out. A more credible explanation points to
a changing climate, long before man was having a big impact on the
climate.



Chuck Gadd
http://www.csd.net/~cgadd/aqua
  #12  
Old July 2nd 03, 05:39 AM
LeighMo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default glow in the dark fishies

I believe that to interfere to the extent of physically removing a creature
from its natural environment is the ultimate abuse. The percentage that die
is unacceptable- how big is that pile of dead Cardinal Tetras in the sky?
Plus the trauma of being yanked from your home and being slapped into a
plastic bag?
Simply so they can live in a box in your home?
As humans can we really *be* that presumptuous?


Well, yes, obviously. g

I'm curious, though. If you feel this way, why do you have an aquarium?
Especially with wild-caught fish like cardinal tetras, otos, and farlowella
catfish? You could, if you wanted, keep only captive-bred fish, and not be
party to the "ultimate abuse."


Leigh

http://www.fortunecity.com/lavender/halloween/881/
  #13  
Old July 3rd 03, 12:53 AM
LeighMo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default glow in the dark fishies

You're right of course.
It's a slippery slope and I'm hopelessly conflicted.


LOL! Well, at least you're honest. :-)

I'm somewhat conflicted, too. I don't really have a problem if people know how
to care for the fish, and are willing to make a commitment to do it properly
for the fishes' entire lives. But the vast majority of fish are bought by
people who don' t have a clue. Heck, that's probably what keeps pet stores in
business. It would probably be better for the fish if there were no fish
stores. True hobbyists would find a way.

I try to be environmentally aware when I choose my fish. I won't buy bala
sharks, for example. But a lot of the time, you just don't know how endangered
the fish is, or if the method of harvesting does environmental damage.

Leigh

http://www.fortunecity.com/lavender/halloween/881/
  #14  
Old July 4th 03, 08:53 PM
Lee Clemmer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default glow in the dark fishies


"Skunky" wrote in message
...

To be honest this topic could go on forever and cause some folks to fall
out! I could write about this stuff forever and moan about it. One
thing I am sure of is that nearly all the species lost and the habitat
destroyed brings us ultimately back to one cause.....HUMANS,


Um, no.
Major extintions are generally caused by changing environmental conditions
that have little or nothing to do with human beings. This is a fact. Were we
responsible for the dinosaurs going bye-bye? Of course not. I'm not
downplaying the Amazon basin deforestation, etc. We definitely should take
care in our treatment of the environment, but to presume that we're the one
big "problem" is a bit ignorant.

Lee


  #15  
Old July 5th 03, 11:35 AM
Skunky
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default glow in the dark fishies


As I said, 'the past few hundred years' eg, the loss of over 42 species
and 44 subspecies of bird lost in the past 280 years! Causation;
habitat loss, deliberate hunting and the introduction of non native
species! Ignorant I'm not, arrogant you would appear!


--
Skunky

'Peace On Earth.....And In The Water'
------------------------------------------------------------------------
posted via www.GardenBanter.co.uk



----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
  #16  
Old July 5th 03, 01:38 PM
Lee Clemmer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default glow in the dark fishies

" You do realize that there were no humans when the dinosaurs roamed,
right?

Of course, that's exactly my point. We couldn't have had anything to do with
it, because we didn't exist yet. It was a bit of a joke.

I don't think any other species in the history of the Earth has been
responsible, directly or indirectly, of so much damage to ecosystems and

thus
of the extinction of species, both plant and animal.


Tough to say, since we weren't around to see if there were species that were
more destructive, for most of the earth's history. You may be right, we
might be the most destructive. But so far all that we've done has been very
mild compared to what nature has done and can do. Again, I'm not making
excuses for our behavior. We shouldn't be destructive if we can avoid it.

Read Chuck's post. (if you didn't)

Lee


  #17  
Old July 5th 03, 01:43 PM
Lee Clemmer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default glow in the dark fishies

There's vastly more forest habitat in this state now than there was 100
years ago, even with the increase in urban sprawl.

Massive increase in habitat for lots of critters.

We've also created an excellent roach and rat habitat here in the city

Lee


  #18  
Old July 5th 03, 02:14 PM
Jim Brown
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default glow in the dark fishies

It's nice to know that your state is increasing forest area, but what about
marshes, rivers, and meadows? All of these support unique life forms too.
The bigger problems exist in areas such as Madagascar, the Amazon basin,
Australia, even Central America. Places where we have just barely scratched
the surface of learning about, yet which are being extremely pressured by
interference by man.
Mankind is a problem, but also the only chance at restoration.

Jim

Lee Clemmer wrote in message
news:[email protected]
There's vastly more forest habitat in this state now than there was 100
years ago, even with the increase in urban sprawl.

Massive increase in habitat for lots of critters.

We've also created an excellent roach and rat habitat here in the city

Lee




  #19  
Old July 5th 03, 06:05 PM
cindy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default glow in the dark fishies

For those interested in GFP modification of rabbits, dogs, etc. check
out this link: http://www.ekac.org/transgenic.html

Personally, I think Kac is a kook and that this technology shouldn't
be used for "art" and amusement.
  #20  
Old July 7th 03, 04:40 PM
Luca Brazi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default glow in the dark fishies

Skunky wrote in message ...
Unfortunately Chuck, my memory doesn't go that far back! As you
pointed out 'these are some of the recent ones' I should have been more
specific, the past few hundred years! We have no hard evidence of what
went on 460 million years ago to give a clear picture, just fossils and
a lot of 'maybe's from our guessing scientists.

All I know, of the 33 years I've been around, species declines and
habitat loss have been as a direct result of human interference and are
continuing right now.

Stuart


--
Skunky

'Peace On Earth.....And In The Water'
------------------------------------------------------------------------
posted via www.GardenBanter.co.uk



----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---


Ah, but Chuck's research demonstrates a respect for nature's
complexity that alarmists pointing to recent "trends" don't share
because it wouldn't yield the sort of hyperbole that keeps such groups
afloat with dollars and impressionable "activists." If you must look
to "recent" history, remember "global cooling"? In the 1970's
activist science was up in arms about the "man-made" cooling trend
that was engulfing the planet. Now fast forward to today and global
warming and the shrill voices that say we've sealed our doom by not
signing the Kyoto treaty. According to James Schlesinger "We cannot
tell how much of the recent warming trend can be attributed to the
greenhouse effect and how much to other factors. In climate change,
we have only a limited grasp of the overall forces at work.
Uncertainties have continued to abound--and must be reduced. Any
approach to policy formation under conditions of such uncertainty
should be taken only on an exploratory and sequential basis. A
premature commitment to a fixed policy can only proceed with fear and
trembling." Now compare climate modeling to modeling the biological
health of the planet, to include sustainability, evolution and species
extinction. Wow. If we need to be humble about climate change, then
uproar over a glowing fishie or "species decline and habitat loss"
really does need to be put in context. The point is, ethical
stewardship of the environment demands that we, have sufficient
humility regarding our own ability to understand and model something
as complex as evolution, and accept that we are part of the process
and not an alien interloper.
Granted, this position doesn't fit well on a protest sign and won't
let you sound earnest enough when chatting up that Radford undergrad
at the antiglobalization rally, but maybe the world would be better
off without another puppet-filled parade of upper middle class angst.

off topic, but now off my soap box and for the record, I probably
wouldn't buy one of the glowing fishes unless I was going for a "mod"
tank filled with castles and air bubbling divers and skeletons with
treasure chests.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Glow in the dark Happy'Cam'per Reefs 4 January 28th 04 09:14 PM
Dark red coraline ?? --BS-- Reefs 2 January 27th 04 09:38 PM
Sources for dark gravel in Toronto, Canada? Harry Muscle General 2 December 30th 03 04:30 PM
Dark reddish/brown algae Travis Reefs 2 November 27th 03 03:33 PM
Glow in the dark fish! Stilgar[bbs.isca.uiowa.edu] General 2 July 1st 03 10:43 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:03 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2017 FishKeepingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.