When is the "no intervention" rule logical and when is it just pompous shit?

>>5002937 (OP)
When you're just some media company going there to get footage and aren't some legitimate scientific organization studying these animals.

>>5002937 (OP)
What kind of intervention was taken?

>>5002937 (OP)
>When is the "no intervention" rule logical
when humans have put them in danger

>>5002937 (OP)
We reduced most animals natural population by 90%. Any "no intervention" rule is pompous shit.

planet earth is fake scripted shit anyway. green screens, sound effects

>>5002937 (OP)
Intervening is pompous shit too. You're asserting that nature shouldn't transpire in a way outside your own personal ideal at that moment. Like saving some mammal from its predator because you like them, when in the end the predator has to eat too or starve.

>>5002937 (OP)
It's just mental gymnastics. Humans never left nature, they just started altering parts of it.

>>5002969
A group of penguins were trapped and after a few days and some deaths they decided to dig a small ramp to let them walk out

>>5002937 (OP)
No intervention is always logical and never pompous. Let the penguins do what they want.

>>5003087
>let the penguins starve to death in situation out of their control

>>5003089
Natural selection.

>>5003090
There was nothing natural about it though

>>5002937 (OP)
when lion a hunting a zebra, you dont stop the lion, they need to eat too, otherwise its just white guilt stemming from imperialism/colonialism and a storied history of british hunters going across the world to shoot something, its sad when america is more british than the british

>>5003099
No one was eating here, just a bunch of penguins dying.

>>5003142
scavangers, insects and microorganisms

>>5003099
>when lion a hunting a zebra,
>you dont stop the lion, they need to eat too
>otherwise its just white guilt
???

>>5003145
It's Antarctica. None of those exist. You'd just wind up with a bunch of frozen penguin corpses that are more or less perfectly preserved.

>>5002941
That isn't answering either question retard.

>>5002937 (OP)
If you aproach a wild animal will enter panic mode and do stupid shit

>>5003082
Humans are animals in the environment
Everything we do is a natural action, so it's in no way against nature to assist animals

We are meant to be good shepards for them, that's our niche in the global ecosystem

>>5003206
>ankles get attacked by mad penguin

>>5002937 (OP)
if the animals are in danger because of human intervention in the first place (like fishing nets or boat motors or man-made fires etc) then it's fine

>>5003206
Antarctic Penguins have zero fear of humans, Antarctica doesn't have any land predators so the concept of fearing predation on land literally doesn't exist for them

>>5003611
What if I pick one up and shake it?

>>5003082
but now the "too retarded to not get stuck in a ditch" gene will flourish amon penguins

>>5003628
It will glow in the dark

>>5003628
>Yes
>No
>Maybe
>I don't know
or
>Can you repeat the question
will appear on it's stomach

>>5003018
>humans aren't part of nature

>>5003090
So we let natural selection act against beautiful creatures that protect biodiversity but we stop it to save dumb niggers shits who know nothing else to do but eat each other and ruin everything they touch ?

Humans are certainly one thing

>>5003210
Lol yeah, that's our niche, to help animals. You're a fucking idiot.

>>5003099
This is why nobody will ever take you seriously, you just can't help but say retarded shit

>>5002937 (OP)
Why is it pompous? If you help some weak sick talentless animal that just gives it and opportunity to spread its genes weakening the species in the long run.

>>5003744
exactly we aren't part of nature

>>5003150
Think of all the awesome father's day paperweights we could make with those corpses.

>>5003767
As far as I know we aren't some alien or some fabricated species and we didn't invent nature but we came from it, so yes, we are part of nature and we do have a say in it, that we destroy everything we touch or not is irrelevant to that concept.
Should we temper with shit that's not our concern? No. Does that mean we aren't part of nature? Neither.
It's weird to have this god complex, we bleed like the rest of them.

>>5002937 (OP)
No intervention is important when you're dealing with a fragile ecosystem where stopping an animal from hunting another can have a drastic effect on their population.
In this case, it was justified to break it since it was just penguins getting stuck in a hole and dying in there for no ones benefit.
Yeah sure scavengers benefit from death, but scavengers aren't likely to run out of food as long as the earth spin, and this sort of situation is hardly the norm.
A single action isn't necessarily bad on its own, but humans tend to do stupid shit in bulk, and have a dozen/hundred/thousand/million/billion humans doing the same thing ends up having a significant impact.

>>5003758
I can't wait for British documentary crews take up arms and remove the blacked plague from their lands as an intervention to save some squirrel or something.

>>5003759
God literally gave humanity dominion over animals, it's our divine purpose