this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2024
667 points (91.3% liked)

solarpunk memes

2615 readers
1323 users here now

For when you need a laugh!

The definition of a "meme" here is intentionally pretty loose. Images, screenshots, and the like are welcome!

But, keep it lighthearted and/or within our server's ideals.

Posts and comments that are hateful, trolling, inciting, and/or overly negative will be removed at the moderators' discretion.

Please follow all slrpnk.net rules and community guidelines

Have fun!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Wilzax@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

Aedes mosquitos serve no known ecological purpose. They are purely parasitic, are not unique pollinators (as in, any plant they do pollinate is also pollinated by other species), and do not make up a substantial portion of the diet of any species.

I would venture to say their extinction would have a positive effect on the Ecosystem by closing that transmission vector for the diseases they carry.

[–] Gsus4@mander.xyz 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

So basically disease wifi, then :)

Could it possibly act as a form of reservoir for diseases that control the size of certain fauna, like...apes?

[–] Wilzax@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

All I could find as a positive for their existence is that in the past they have kept humans from inhabiting rainforests and marshlands, and more generally control where grazing animals can feed.

[–] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

Good to know we are not alone!

[–] 2pt_perversion@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

I don't advocate human death obviously but with the specific comment you're replying to:

humans = bad for the environment

mosquitos = less humans overall

so mosquitos may be good for the environment in the most assholish of ways.

[–] Wilzax@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

Humans are not bad for the environment. Capitalism is bad for the environment. Before imperialism and capitalism, most places on earth were populated by indigenous humans who actually protected the land they relied on to survive. There was no drive to exploit the land for all its resources, and there was an existential motivator for preserving nature as best as possible.

See OP's comment in a different thread: https://lemmy.world/comment/11768484

[–] 2pt_perversion@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

Yeah sure, humans outside of current realities don't have to be bad for the environment...but we do live in that reality where most humans are really bad for the environment and mosquitos are killing tons of us.

Again I'm firmly on team human, fuck mosquitos. Hopefully some day we can get to a point where less humans isn't good for the environment.

[–] KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

arguably, if we're talking about what's bad for the planet, you could easily just make the argument that humans are over populated due to our advances in science and engineering allowing us to both live longer, and protect ourselves from the various threats in the environment meant to keep is at a reasonable level of population.

Presumably, mother nature never intended for species to be consciously countering her very own playbook at every fucking turn possible.

[–] Wilzax@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Mother nature never intended anything because mother nature is just random chance and multiplication of the best fit

and we abused the mechanisms underlying that random chance in order to bypass the best fit line, like extremely aggressively.

We're essentially the worlds worst invasive species.

[–] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

humans have invented capitalism

[–] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

how many billionaires have mosquitoes killed so far? that is the correct question 𓆤