• davidgro@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    19 hours ago

    I’m honestly ok with the ecosystem risk to eliminate the specific species that bite humans. Other species will likely fill the niche they have as food, etc. Mosquitoes are literally the deadliest animals, killing way more people than even other people.

    • otp@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      19 hours ago

      What exactly is the risk to the ecosystem? Since you’re okay with it, you should know what it is, right?

      The ecosystem is pretty important for things like us having food.

      • thanksforallthefish@literature.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        14 hours ago

        The ecosystem risk is that a reduction in A. Aegpyti population causes a collapse of the insectivores that depend on consuming it and thus starve, with a knock on effect up the food chain.

        While this may happen, a) predation is not currently any real constraint on the population, and b) other insects have been shown to be able to take up part of the niche and c) this already an ecosystem which been rebalanced - they are not naturally occurring in the US they have travelled over with humans

        Google is thoroughly evil, and I upvoted the cynical parent comment, but on this one subject they are on the right side of the ledger.

        Other non disease carrying mosquitos can take over the ecological niche for a net benefit to humanity.

        • otp@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 hours ago

          Thank you for the info! I’m still hesitant about unknown consequences, but I’m far from an expert in that area.

      • CodingCarpenter@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        18 hours ago

        How about this. I would rather the entire ecosystem including you and I collapse than keep putting up with the little vampires. For such a snarky prick I don’t see with any answers

        • otp@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 hours ago

          Lol! The point of asking questions is to learn, not to give answers.

          And I did learn from at least one or two other interesting answers!

          • thanksforallthefish@literature.cafe
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            9 hours ago

            NOT the person you’re replying to.

            You, rightly imnsho, got a snarky response because you weren’t just asking a question.

            This (below) is fine

            What exactly is the risk to the ecosystem?

            This (below) earned you the snark.

            Since you’re okay with it, you should know what it is, right?

            That reads very clearly as “I don’t think you know shit, prove it, and unless you do, you don’t have a right to an opinion”

            You didn’t know whether OP did or did not have a handle on the ecological impact. Either stop at the first bit, or word the second less aggressively.

            Feedback is being provided here because you are taking an overt “I was just asking a question why are you snarking stance”. If that’s fake then I’ll just block and move on.

            • otp@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 hours ago

              I know that I was being snarky and not “just asking a question”, because “I don’t care about consequences the ecosystem” is a silly stance to take.

              It’s likely they were making a joke, so yeah, my aggression was probably too heavy in retrospect.