What is Digg?71 Comments
- Cwo655321, on 10/11/2007, -3/+16its those damn dirty apes, and their damn dirty suv's.
- redlemon, on 10/11/2007, -3/+14"doesn't sound like your much smarter...."
i love these comments. - lahar, on 10/11/2007, -3/+9Most people don't live in developed countries, really.
- Poco, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Did you read the article?
The issue isn't saving them from our pollution, it is saving them from us trying to save ourselves from our pollution. I noticed how almost all of the comments on this page missed that part. That isn't the whole story, but the issue is more about deforestation than about pollution (though deforestation can result in more pollution).
It is refreshing to see a conservationist pointing out problems with oil alternatives. Not only does Bio Diesel still cause pollution, but you have use land to grow it. Yes it is renewable, but why is a renewable carbon fuel a good thing? - frieddonuts, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7Yes we are "the" next
- AlexWills, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7Wouldn't a rise in global temperatures bode well for an animal that lives in a tropical environment? Or is every possible animal species and every possible climactic event going to occur for the worse instead?
Our planet is not static. - faithhealer, on 10/11/2007, -7/+12There is one great ape species that is not in danger of extinction: humans.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_ape - OreosRgood4me, on 10/11/2007, -5/+9You're an idiot. It's called preserving biodiversity. We rely on almost every organism found in every ecosystem to survive, destroying their habitats =/= a good thing.
When will humanity learn that we don't 'own' this planet, that we rely on everything in our ecosystems, and that we are part of it, not above it. - magicjava, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6@babakshiraz Um no. One of the things we've evolved from evolution is compassion. Another is common sense.
- Diggrock, on 10/11/2007, -7/+11Yea, lets switch from fossil fuels to biofuels to save the earth... Oh wait, the burning of biofuels produces CO2 and so do the vehicles used for production. So switching to biofuels would actually increase CO2 levels throwing our world into more of a hell hole. Yay for ignorance!
- whatsthatsmell, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5Dr. Richard Leakey A.K.A. Dr. Dick Leakey?
Some people's parents are so cruel. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4The great apes have to worry about deforestation (slashing and burning mostly) and human poaching more than anything else. Will global warming destroy their habitats? I doubt it, they're mostly (all?) a tropical species, so warming would expand their habitat. The world will not turn into one giant desert, and even with somewhat extreme climate shifts great apes should be able to survive so long as humans stay the ***** away from them.
- leffunov, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5it's not like the human species is on seven continents or anything? / sarcasm
- Avataren, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3@diggrock: burning bio-fuel release the exact amount of CO2 that the plants absorb when they grow, so no, it doesnt add CO2 to the atmosphere in the way fossil fuels does.
- 28dayslater, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5We are hardly great.
- DrunkenPirate34, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4@diggrock
Actually, thats wrong. If you burn things that were created using carbon from this era, then its not too bad. (E.G. Wood), but if you burn carbon that has been taken out of the ecosystem, its bad. (E.G. Fossil Fuels) - parkermauney, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4The answer issssssss... No
- magicjava, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2@avataren One thing that needs to be considered is the processing required to make the fuel. For example, every major ethonol plant in America has its own coal plant to provide it energy.
And then there's fertilzer, which I believe is made from oil, there's land use where the dark moist ground used to grow the corn absorbs heat and contributes to urban heat islands, and so on.
No free lunch. - gback2000, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Climate change is getting so bad that even "vowels" are becoming extinct.
- mykos, on 10/11/2007, -3/+5There are millions of species on earth. If one disappears, another will take its place. Roles will change, but nature always finds a balance. Sink a ship in the ocean, life thrives in it. Abandon Pripyat after a nuclear meltdown, it turns into a pristine deciduous forest converting carbon dioxide into oxygen round the clock.
People are so afraid of anything changing in the environment and that is just ridiculous. I don't mean ridiculous in the cliched sense that everyone uses it; I mean that people who mindlessly fear environmental adaptation are worthy of ridicule. - esotericguy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2@ sagags
say it with me, "irony". - merlingen, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Another victory in the war on nature! We shall kill their men, ravish their women and enslave their children as spoils of war!
- redlemon, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4well... we aren't from monkeys. we're from apes.
- jim45804, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4Grape Apes?
You mean these are going extinct?
http://members.shaw.ca/gorillagallery/myweb2/grapeape4.jpg
Oh noes! - fantasticFlan, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Well, since bonobos and common chimps split after the split from humans, they're both the most closely related extant species. Point remains though.
- LeeSoong, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Humans are creatures - part of Nature, one possible outcome of Evolution.
If other species die off, it is their shortcoming in evolutionary terms.
New species will (slowly) rise to take the place of those that vanish,
including humans if they wipe themselves out - or get wiped out by the environmental changes,
and go the way of the dinosaur...
I'm voting for squirrels - they are everywhere, they have small hands, curiosity, and can be very clever!
Dinosaurs, Humans, Squirrel-people: next on the chain of land animal evolution,
maybe the whales will make a comeback in the oceans,
as long as the dolphins that evolve hands live peacefully with one another. - Erfman, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4The bonobo species of chimps are the one most closely related to humans. They numbered 100,000 in 1984 now some 5000 remain. Worst yet they are mainly being eaten to death by humans. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11689127/
- yujie, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Didnt they learn from Planet of the Apes?
- OreosRgood4me, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Direct heating isn't the only issue, infact it's far from it.
- jim45804, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2"Eaten to death"? Thats a humorous tautology. I think you mean "eaten to extension."
- abcdefghij, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3I can blame one ape on the Northern Hemisphere that keeps saying no to Kyoto Protocol. I do believe that this beast has quite the power of say to change the course, whether to reduce the use of fossil fuel, or to promote tree-planting in developing world (carbon offsetting).
But hey, it's stipulated on the Great Digg Terms and Conditions to digg down all comments degrading the Great White Texan Ape. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1No, we have air conditioning.
- Xeth, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1These damn dirty apes should just man up and learn to live outside of a tree, like we did.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1"eaten to extension" should be eaten into extinction.
- mykos, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Why are some people so adamant that environmental change is bad? Sink a ship and the undersea life thrives in it. Nuclear meltdown near Pripyat? No biggie--it's now becoming a green, oxygen-producing forest.
Did primates not survive an ice age without any indoor climate controls whatsoever? We are now more equipped than ever to handle environmental change, and yet people scream in fear like we're all going to die.
People who have convinced themselves that environmental change is horrible ignore repeated historical anecdotes to the contrary. - Error601, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Humans are far more adaptable than apes. That whole planning ahead thing works pretty good.
- Stegg, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I give you: The Law of Unintended Consequences!
- thefaithful, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0What we need is a vehicle that runs on cat.
Seriously though, why can't these apes evolve into a less hairy species? Or evolve some biological mechanism to more efficiently regulate their body temperature? - Cutkomp, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2Order out of chaos. The apes are obviously getting complacent in life and not adapting as well as they should be. Perhaps they are engaging in homosexual acts, orgies and smoking pot. They had better get their ***** together and stop flinging it at each other, for they face destruction.
I suppose all these folks that want to save every damn species on Earth still wish the dinosaurs were around too.
If you can't see the sarcasm, well... - joshmcconaha, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1I really wish Dr. Leakey was a math professor from MIT.
And if you get that reference, you've got great taste in useless trivia. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1100 thumbs up
NoSystem?NoScience? - weoh, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2We ARE apes.
- bobcrotch, on 10/11/2007, -4/+4Dug for sensationalist title of the day
- Sagags, on 10/11/2007, -9/+9doesn't sound like your much smarter....
- m2paper, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1we are apes.
- gamebittk, on 10/11/2007, -8/+8If the government didn't back the oil companys, we'd be fine, and we'd be using better, more efficient and renewable energy solutions - Like wind, water, or even nuclear. I hope the next presidnt doesn't receive financial support from oil companies, 'cuz that would suck.
- meowme, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0You forgot a letter
- merlingen, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1If "Dr" Leakey is so smart, WHY DOESNT HE HAVE LEGS ANYMORE????
- withoutashovel, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3We possess the technology to survive longer than most animals, so why can't we invent the technology to save them from our pollution?
-
Show 51 - 65 of 65 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 