• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Two animals that build, which has greater value?

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
How do you say, "beauty, eh?" in Patagonian?
*sigh* it is too bad that the beavers are doing that. What is the right action to take now? The beavers are cute, and I don't want them to die.
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
Who is making who like what...

Nazi raccoons on the rampage as European population explodes

Raccoons, indigenous to North America but reportedly first released into the wild in Germany by Hermann Goering, the founder of the Gestapo, are marauding their way across Europe.
Raccoons are bad. They are from here. .
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
Neither has greater value, but I take the position that all things have precisely equal intrinsic value.

Whether or not I personally value one thing more than another is a different matter, but this only reflects my values, not the inherent worthiness and sacredness that all this possess. Destruction is as divine as construction; death as glorious as birth. Due respect granted to all things, even if I do not personally like them.
All things have value. Attributing respect to living things is a good practice. I think we have a responsibility to preserve good things. I don't know if we always can, but we can try. If we don't try then we are in the wrong I think.
 

sealchan

Well-Known Member
Compare two animals in our world. Both build but, one when they build improves the environment for life, increases water resources, and increases biodiversity supporting all forms of life. The other builds but at the expense of other life with no respect for other life, wasting recourses leaving a lifeless wasted world behind. Which animal has more value to our world the Beaver or the Human?
I recommend reading the book" Eager: The Surprising, Secret Life of Beavers and Why They Matter" by Ben Goldfar and then relook at what really matters. Are humans intelligent enough to respect the natural world.

Two thoughts...

Can a beaver save the planetary ecosystems from extinction via massive meteorite/asteroid collision through building space stations and space based or planetary based eco-domes?

I think that there is a mismatch in scale of intelligence here...sure we are making a mess of the planet but certainly our CO2 emissions will create a much larger pond than any coordinated effort of beavers will.
 

Bear Wild

Well-Known Member
Yeah they do.. and beavers can kill acres of trees.
Not so simple. Beavers do use trees to build but they create increased water availability for plants and animals and reduce erosion. They are also carful on the use of tree stems for their food sources as reported by the ecologist Bruce Baker who saw they selected willows that were at least three years old and were careful how the cut the stems allowing for stem to grow back and rotating the areas of the trees for their harvest that does not destroy the tree. Compare to elk who prefer the youngest willows and eat the whole seedling. In the west the elimination of the beaver has been far more devastating for trees compared to the minimal loss of trees from direct beaver action and is forgetting the benefit of controlled erosion and increased sediment and water retention from beaver action. Where beavers have been reintroduced there are profound benefits for the trees in the area that dwarfs what they use.
 

sooda

Veteran Member
Not so simple. Beavers do use trees to build but they create increased water availability for plants and animals and reduce erosion. They are also carful on the use of tree stems for their food sources as reported by the ecologist Bruce Baker who saw they selected willows that were at least three years old and were careful how the cut the stems allowing for stem to grow back and rotating the areas of the trees for their harvest that does not destroy the tree. Compare to elk who prefer the youngest willows and eat the whole seedling. In the west the elimination of the beaver has been far more devastating for trees compared to the minimal loss of trees from direct beaver action and is forgetting the benefit of controlled erosion and increased sediment and water retention from beaver action. Where beavers have been reintroduced there are profound benefits for the trees in the area that dwarfs what they use.

I have seen them destroy acres of pine forest in the Piedmont of South Carolina. They drowned the pine trees.
 

Bear Wild

Well-Known Member
They aren't destroying. They are terraforming to make it more like Canada.
Thank you. Beavers are restoring Canada where they are left alone to the benefit of the forests. The studies in Wyoming, Washington, Oregon, California, Nevada and other states that have begun to recognize the benefit just from decreased erosion and increased water tables replenishing the ground water for both plants and animals.
 

Bear Wild

Well-Known Member
I have seen them destroy acres of pine forest in the Piedmont of South Carolina. They drowned the pine trees.
Yes they do drown trees in their dams but the benefit ultimately is to improve ground water and prevent droughts. You cannot look at the limited view but look at the larger view of benefit to the entire environment. Read the book Eager and see if you view does not change.
 

sooda

Veteran Member
Yes they do drown trees in their dams but the benefit ultimately is to improve ground water and prevent droughts. You cannot look at the limited view but look at the larger view of benefit to the entire environment. Read the book Eager and see if you view does not change.

You think you have some universal truth regardless of the topography or the type of trees?
 

Bear Wild

Well-Known Member
I have seen them destroy acres of pine forest in the Piedmont of South Carolina. They drowned the pine trees.
Yes they do drown trees in their dams but the benefit ultimately is to improve ground water and prevent droughts. You cannot look at the limited view but look at the larger view of benefit to the entire environment. Read the book Eager and see if you view does not change.
Two thoughts...

Can a beaver save the planetary ecosystems from extinction via massive meteorite/asteroid collision through building space stations and space based or planetary based eco-domes?

I think that there is a mismatch in scale of intelligence here...sure we are making a mess of the planet but certainly our CO2 emissions will create a much larger pond than any coordinated effort of beavers will.
Our CO2 emissions will create an uninhabitable planet. Ok do we have space stations that could stop a meteorite now? If you have not noticed despite our overwhelming intelligence humans are not doing the things to preserve our world we depend on. What good is all the intelligence if it is used for the wrong things? Beavers may not be as intelligent but the are better at recovering water resources and environments than we have done so far.
 

Jeremiah Ames

Well-Known Member
Compare two animals in our world. Both build but, one when they build improves the environment for life, increases water resources, and increases biodiversity supporting all forms of life. The other builds but at the expense of other life with no respect for other life, wasting recourses leaving a lifeless wasted world behind. Which animal has more value to our world the Beaver or the Human?
I recommend reading the book" Eager: The Surprising, Secret Life of Beavers and Why They Matter" by Ben Goldfar and then relook at what really matters. Are humans intelligent enough to respect the natural world.

The difference between your two animals:

One can choose to do evil, the other cannot.
But then, only one can choose to do good as well.
 

Bear Wild

Well-Known Member
You think you have some universal truth regardless of the topography or the type of trees?
Not universal truth but evidence including evidence from the Carolinas of the benefits. Are they perfect creatures - no - but the historic record of the united states shows how much was lost when beavers were removed and how poorly humans have done with the land.
 

BSM1

What? Me worry?
Yeah, it is. The world could do with less humans.

The obvious question is which ones should we sacrifice for something as insignificant as a beaver? The second question to those who feel this way is would you be willing to volunteer to give up your seat on the bus, as it were?
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
Not universal truth but evidence including evidence from the Carolinas of the benefits. Are they perfect creatures - no - but the historic record of the united states shows how much was lost when beavers were removed and how poorly humans have done with the land.
That is not a good argument. I'm a human, and I'm going to value humans first, and I can also value beavers. I doubt a beaver could do better. The thread title is weird, extreme, almost genocidal against humans -- our own kind. Its a comparison that should not be made. Do beavers have value? Yes. Do they have intrinsic value? Yes. Does their value compare to human? No.
 

Saint Frankenstein

Wanderer From Afar
Premium Member
The obvious question is which ones should we sacrifice for something as insignificant as a beaver? The second question to those who feel this way is would you be willing to volunteer to give up your seat on the bus, as it were?
Humans are not more intrinsically significant than any other life form. That's just arrogant.
 
Top