Hacker News Reader

It's hilarious that the continued existence of all species presently on Earth at this very moment has become some sort of moral imperative in the minds of activists.

Let's flip the situation on its head: by not allowing species to go extinct today, we prevent new and better adapted species from evolving tomorrow.

View on HN

Would you like to provide a source for "the continued existence of all species presently on Earth at this very moment has become some sort of moral imperative in the minds of activists"? Because it's certainly not generally true.

The goal is to limit species loss due to human impact on the natural environment. Generally, no one's even suggesting that we stop impacting that environment; merely that we stop ourselves when our impact becomes great enough to threaten biodiversity loss.

Extinction does not drive evolution, reproduction does, and if a species' food goes extinct, they reproduce less, not more.

Secondly, these animals aren't abandoning their niches, they're losing them due to human activities. There is no room for another species to adapt to it, because there is nothing there to adapt to anymore.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com