[CT Birds] Prime directive

Christopher Lovell ctlovell at gmail.com
Tue Dec 10 17:01:49 EST 2013

I never said that science fiction was my rule of life. I don't think that a
philosophical debate is indicated or appropriate on a list that focuses on
scientific matters, even if it "citizen science." Rather, the prime
directive was used as an analogy as to how I believe we should address the
birds who venture to our environs. If they were put on planes and flown
here to escape or were freed from an aviary then maybe we have an
obligation to help, but feeding Snowy Owls, as was suggested on this list,
and capturing and harboring naturally occurring birds over winter are
completely different things.

I agree that humans have totally destroyed this planet and I'm convinced
that we are well into the next great extinction. This one caused by humans.
We cannot turn back the clock to never cause the destruction in the first
place but we can stop causing more damage. My point is that maybe, rather
than continuing to affect the natural world, humans should just stop
interfering. A perfect example of this is the exclusion zone around
Chernobyl in Ukraine. It's been proven there that nature is a better healer
than humans are "fixers." I think we should just take a hands off approach
to some of these things.

Earth will be here, in one capacity or another, long after humans have
annihilated themselves. Mother Earth knows best.


On Tuesday, December 10, 2013, Dana Campbell wrote:

> Chris:  Forgive me for waxing philosophical but science fiction doesn't do
> it for me as a rule of life.
> :>)
> Guess you would have to say that I march to the beat of a different prime
> directive.
> We have never hesitated to kill off nature when it has suited our fancy.
> I for one applaud the impulse to do  little (very little in the great scope
> of things) acts of mercy when the opportunities present themselves.
> Interesting how much energy we can invest in Not interfering in one
> direction while not hesitating to interfere in the other direction.
> As an amateur theologian I would even go so far as to speculate on the
> abysmal nature of the human race in the future if we keep stifling the urge
> to show mercy.  Could have more effect on the quality of life in the long
> run than the potential negative effects of rescuing one flycatcher or
> hummer.
> Thanks for raising this question again.  It can only be good for us to
> continue to struggle with it.

Christopher Lovell
ctlovell at gmail.com

More information about the CTBirds mailing list