Baiji River Dolphin May or May Not Be Extinct 175
ozmanjusri writes "Major news outlets are reporting that after 20 million years, Baiji (Yangtze River Dolphin) are now officially extinct. This is apparently actually old news; it was announced on a Baiji conservation website in December of last year. One outlet, though, is claiming they may not quite be completely dead yet. The same scientist that filed the report leading the the declaration of extinction is still hopeful: '"This is only one survey and...you can't have a sample in a survey, so you cannot say the baiji all is gone by the result of only one survey," he said. "For example, there is some side channels or some tributaries [where] we cannot go because of a restriction of navigation rules, and also we don't survey during the night-time so we may miss some animals in the Yangtze River." Professor Ding says based on anecdotal evidence, he remains confident the dolphins are still out there. "I'm pretty much sure there are a few of them left somewhere in the Yangtze River," he said. "I keep receiving reports from fishermen, they say they saw a couple of baiji somewhere, sometime."'"
You Idiots (Score:2, Insightful)
This is apparently actually old news; it was announced on a Baiji conservation website in December of last year.
I'll do you one better than that, it was apparently reported on fucking Slashdot too [slashdot.org].
Seriously, what is wrong with you people? Are you purposely making fun of yourselves? Because to those of us who aren't in on the joke, which is most of us I guess, it looks like the site is run by a bunch of fucking dumbasses.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but we keep coming back. Who is more the fool
Re:You Idiots (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/08/
On the efficacity of propaganda models (Score:2)
This is apparently actually old news; it was announced on a Baiji conservation website in December of last year.
I'll do you one better than that, it was apparently reported on fucking Slashdot too [slashdot.org].
Seriously, what is wrong with you people?
They're the victim of sublime propagandistic obfuscation. On the very next day that the extinction was announced [bbc.co.uk], China flooded the world with this so-called news: "World's tallest man saves Chinese dolphins".
Of course, no one force-fed plastic to those captive Dolphins, that was a totally real and coincidental event that involved a spectacular circus freak, warm-fuzzies for all, and the words "china dolphin" to clog the news tubes. You would have to be some kind of conspiracy nut to think China would look
A tautology! (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
I was hoping I wasn't the only one who read the headline and went, "Yep, everything may or may not be extinct..."
I mean... Boolean logic is relatively well known, and used quite frequently by those who frequent this site...
Nephilium...
Re: (Score:2)
And the eternal battle between linguists and set theorists continues.
Schrödinger's Dolphin? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Really?"
"We'll have to call it early quantum state phenomenon. Only way to fit 5,000 species of mammal on the same boat."
i read somewhere (Score:2, Insightful)
please, please, please someone tell me the chinese have some of those tissue samples in liquid nitrogen. given some technological progress then, we might be able to bring the baiji back to life in a century or so
otherwise, the chinese deserve international sanctions for losing some of our shared world species diversity. it should be a un mandate with economic consequence
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
It might do you some good to educate yourself on these kinds o
yes, education is needed (Score:2)
and yes, there should be international sanctions against china for this crime. yes, there probably won't be. because of course, if a crime is committed
Re: (Score:2)
Re:yes, education is needed (Score:5, Informative)
Hi. Chinese guy here. And yeah, you are being patronizing.
It's true that the baiji are somewhat significant in Chinese culture, but to the point you seem to think it is. Personally nobody I knew ever thought about them, or indeed were aware of them outside of field trips to some science museum. The whole "ancestors placed importance in baiji" and "Chinese venerate ancestors" is just one big non-sequitor I'm not even going to touch.
Keep in mind that the significance of the river dolphins was limited to an isolated geographical region, where the vast majority of Chinese did *not* reside. Maybe there are people living on the banks of the yangtze mourning their loss, but for the other 99.99% of Chinese people out there, things haven't changed a bit.
Now... Regarding your previous comment. While it's certainly unfortunate and sad that the baiji have been killed off due to human actions, in the end who is responsible? Want to dig Mao out of the ground and put him on trial for instituting the Great Leap Forward that encouraged such reckless killings? Good luck with that. In the end, commercial fisheries, massively increased boat traffic, and the construction of the Three Gorges Dam were primary contributors to the extinction of these dolphins. IMHO all of these have been critical to raising the standard of living and quality of life for the Chinese people. I wish we could have both (human prosperity and ecological conservation), and perhaps we could have under more effective leadership or more resources, but those were the cards we were dealt.
What would a serious conservation effort require to preserve these creatures? Stop using the Yangtze as an industry shipping lane? Spew even more toxic gases into the atmosphere by constructing the huge number of fuel-burning power plants that the Three Gorges Dam could replace? Stop fishing the Yangtze and deny a critical food source for the local population? I hate to be so human-ist about everything, but between the survival of humans the the survival of a bunch of dolphins, it's pretty clear which I pick.
So now the baiji are (probably) all dead. What did we receive out of that deal? Millions of Chinese are now far more prosperous than they were before. Remote regions are no longer starving, and many now have access to proper food, shelter, and medicine. The situation in China, especially the rural areas, is not pretty, but for the most part it's a lot better than it was before.
So how where they cooked? (Score:2)
straw man (Score:3, Interesting)
you seem to say that economic development, the three gorges damn, etc.: it required the dolphin go extinct. really? so china can exert great effort to build a damn, but not the tiniest of effort to save a dolphin?
fact is, it is now the eternal shame of the chinese for killing this creature. not according to this westerner. don't ask me, ask your grandchildren
they won't mind at all that your poor choices means the
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
There are similarities between China and America of the 50s, but they're not as analogous as you might think.
America in the 50s was in an economic boom like never seen before, but for the most part its population was already relatively prosperous. Education, shelter, food, and medicine were generally available, which is a far cry from China in the present (or worse, in the past).
China has a ludicrous number of people who still do not have access to food, medicine, and shelter. There are still villages s
which americans regret doing to the indians (Score:2)
the death of the baiji is obviously a mistake. it would have required the slightest of attention and effort to prevent it. except china didn't do that. and now china has eternal shame for that
but don't bother responding to me. i'm obviously an arrogant american
you should be worrying about what your grandchildren are going to think about your poor choices
oops! sorry! china never makes poor choices!
Re: (Score:2)
Slightest of attention. Pray tell, Mr. Marine Biologist, what would it have honestly taken for the Chinese to preserve this species?
Obviously much effort was expended trying to breed the baiji in captivity, none of which to any success. So... Considering that the animals could not be bred in captivity and thus restored somewhat, the only way is to protect them in their environments. So... What does that mean? Denying (or at least greatly reducing) ship traffic along the Yangtze? Banning of all net fishing
Re: (Score:2)
yes (Score:2)
(snicker)
Re: (Score:1)
yes, the nihilist's game: "it doesn't matter" (Score:2)
1. if nothing matters, kill yourself. or at least shut up and stop posting on slashdot. it doesn't matter, right? so why are you talking about it if it doesn't matter?
2. okay, then it does matter. so keep talking. but stop saying statements that contradict your demonstrated desire to say something about the subject matter. namely "it doesn't matter"
on any ideological issue, there is being for it, being against it, and not caring about it
not
Re: (Score:1)
let me take you to right to the end game of the nihilist's position:
1. if nothing matters, kill yourself. or at least shut up and stop posting on slashdot. it doesn't matter, right? so why are you talking about it if it doesn't matter?
1. I don't claim to be a nihilist, but nice try.
2. okay, then it does matter. so keep talking. but stop saying statements that contradict your demonstrated desire to say something about the subject matter. namely "it doesn't matter"
2. Perhaps "it doesn't matter" is a valid point in the discussion. Resource A is being wasted on problem X. It may be worthwhile to discuss the validity of problem X in order to determine value lost of resource A. The entire discussion may, in fact, be irrelevant and by pointing that out I save those engaged in it a valuable resource, namely: time.
on any ideological issue, there is being for it, being against it, and not caring about it
not caring about an issue IS a valid position for you to take if you want. so prove you don't care. shut up and go away. otherwise, you do care. in which case, celebrate the death of the dolphin, or express your anger or sadness about it
but coming into a topic of discussion and announcing that the topic doesn't matter is not a logically coherent position. if you talk about it, it matters to you. if you don't talk about it, it doesn't matter to you.
but talking about how something doesn't matter to you. what the hell is that point of view supposed to mean to anyone else? it's hypocrisy at best. no one is tying you down to a computer terminal, holding your eyes open with toothpicks, putting your fingers on a keyboard, pointing a gun at your head and forcing you to comment on slashdot. so prove it doesn't matter: shut up, and go away
Or, I could seek to inform myself of other's opinions about the subject at hand with a question. "So what if th
Re: (Score:2)
There is a fourth option: perhaps he doesn't care about the particular subject, but just likes to argue.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, sorry, that's just a restatement of option four.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
what good are you? i mean, i don't need you, and i am pretty sure that pretty much 100% of the world population doesn't need you either.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
I doubt the US is saintly in this area. Be careful what you ask for.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I thought they've replaced that symbol with portraits of George Washington instead long ago -- replaced along with any concern for living in harmony with nature (Taoism) or compassion towards other living beings (Buddhism).
Re: (Score:2)
What universe are you living in?
Remember, this is the same country that once inspired mobs to slaughter these very animals en masse because their glorious leaders declared that they were enemies of the revolution or something (I'm not kidding) because they were magical sacred symbols of a decedent past. That's some scary crazy.
I'm not saying that the
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Note to parent poster: Death by natural causes is different from death by human intervention. The same goes for collective deaths, A.K.A. extinction.
mod parent up (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There's a big difference between me and a dolphin: I'm human. But I suppose you think it's a double-standard to believe that killing humans is wrong and killing animals is perfectly fine... and when you find a spider in your bathroom you gently cradle him in your arms and coo softly as you prepare a bed for him at night.
its a big deal (Score:1, Insightful)
but you go ahead and talk about it's all so like disconnected man... nothing matters dude, yeah
if you don't fucking care, then shut the fuc
Re: (Score:2)
Well shit, that's a great reason to get all worked up about it.
yes (Score:2)
exactly what is wrong with that observation? what do you not understand about it?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm by no means a greasy-haired wild-eyed foaming-at-the-mouth green-nazi hippie douchebag, pretty nearly the opposite in fact, and I certainly don't buy into the "stewards of the planet
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't remember signing up for that.
we're powerful enough to destroy it.
Yeah, but:
1) We're not stupid enough to,
2) and you've offered no evidence that the existence of some dolphin in China actually prevents the planet from being destroyed in some way.
but you go ahead and talk about it's all so like disconnected man... nothing matters dude, yeah
I didn't say nothing matters. I said I don't believe this matters. I hope you can see the difference.
Tomorrow's headline... (Score:2, Insightful)
Walruses may or may not be extinct!
Jellyfish may or may not be extinct!
The common house cat may or may not be extinct!
Triceratops may or may not be extinct!
Re: (Score:2)
Jellyfish aren't extinct. (Score:1)
We just call them politicians.
Re: (Score:1)
It's Heisingburg environmentalism. Maybe if we stop observing species, they won't dissappear.
Re: (Score:2)
No, logic. "Foo" and "not foo" are complementary statements--one of them is always true, because if either of them is false, the other is true by definition. If not foo, then "not foo". If not not foo, then "foo". Therefore, any statement of the form "foo or not foo" is guaranteed to be true.
spent the night with it once. . . (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
This kind of image comes to mind:
http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/IMA/
They're dead. (Score:2, Funny)
I thought it was a cat? (Score:5, Funny)
They're not dead (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
<Morbo>THE YANGTZE RIVER IS NOT A FJORD! GOODNIGHT!</Morbo>
(damn lameness filter!)
May or May not? (Score:5, Funny)
Exactly, they're just pining (Score:1)
Thanks for telling me (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
All it really does is gives us a way of accepting a tragedy such as this as 'inevitable, and not my fault'. Makes it easier to shrug our shoulders and go 'oh well'.
Maybe some things simply shouldn't be joked about. Or at least, maybe if we didn't joke about these things, and took them very seriously, we might as a whole b
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What do you mean by 'We're not responsible for it'? Us as a species? North Americans? You personally?
How would you feel if every macro species on the planet outside of north america were wiped out? Still hold the same viewpoint? Still be all high and mighty and giggly inside?
My point is, what is wrong with acting to stop these things from happening. Wouldn't that make more sense than giggling like a school girl when atrocities like
Re: (Score:2)
Further, a TRUE capitalist would be able to figure out how to MAKE money off of saving species like this.
What's a true capitalist? And what's your business model? And what's your market? The problem with your laughable statement is that you libs don't want to let true capitalists DO what capitalists DO. What if we could save that dolphin by farming it and turning it into a money m
Re: (Score:2)
That's the 2nd reply you've made to me in which you've made many assumptions about many things without knowing anything for certain.
You know nothing about me, and yet you act like you know everything about me.
Your problems are well outside the scope of this particular topic.
And as it would obviously be a complete waste of time, I won't respond directly to your presumptions.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
By your reasoning, if I have some blame in this, then so do you.
To redirect a bit, you seem to be taking this awfully personally for someone that has no guilty conscience...considering that I never once blamed you in any way shape or form. I actually did not condemn you for joking either. I was merely questioning our tendency to joke about these things, and wondering if that in itself may in fact be harmf
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not dead yet! (Score:1, Offtopic)
Re: (Score:1, Redundant)
Re: (Score:1)
Maybe that's what they are doing. They'll come back and say, okay, now its you human's time to feel the brink of extinction. zzzt zzzzt...
Holy Redundant Lasers, Batman! (Score:1)
(Oh, and he has a laser.)
I'm curious.... (Score:2, Interesting)
Miracle Max (Score:4, Insightful)
In all seriousness, with so few members of the species, they're effectively extinct, and that's what counts. There may be one or two, but there's zero chance they'll balloon into a viable population. Even if we save genetic samples, we're decades, if not centuries, away from being able to reproduce an entire species, if we can even do that. Even if we have tissue samples from twenty different dolphins, and reproduce them through some hypothetical cloning technique, I'm not convinced that's enough genetic diversity to sustain the species.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Further, the species is adapted to a particular ecological niche - in this case, the Yangtse River.
Further, particularly in mammals, there are learned behaviors that
Re: (Score:2)
I've heard this claim before. 10x times a pretty hard number to swallow without some real proof. Where's the study? Where's your source? I've never seen any a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In the case of these dolphins, getting a maintenance population the *hell* out of China seems more likely to work than refuge creation: china still doesn't seem to grok the 'canary in a coalmine' concept that rampant pollution and resource overuse has a limit that China is sprin
I stipulate that it is dead - so what? (Score:2)
So what?
As long as there is some life left, there will be a "what's next".
Do you really care who is at the top of the food chain a million years from now?
Heck yes. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
(not a Troll..) (Score:1)
.
Read and laugh.
Evolution? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
What really happened (Score:2)
A shameful tragedy (Score:2)
We destroyed it. We literally choked the life out of it.
Who are we to do this? Are we so confident in our superiority as to believe that a little temporary convenience to dump toxic industrial wastes is worth the complete loss of this life form?
We were up in arms when a islamic government destroyed man made statues of buddha merely hundreds of years
Not me (Score:2)
Think of all the kids that will never taste Baiji! (Score:2)
Fishermen (Score:2)
Ah, alcohol. May your wonders never fail to amaze me.
Only a matter of time (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Extinction is a myth (Score:2)
Y'all gotta have FAITH.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)