this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2024
264 points (98.5% liked)

science

14678 readers
110 users here now

just science related topics. please contribute

note: clickbait sources/headlines aren't liked generally. I've posted crap sources and later deleted or edit to improve after complaints. whoops, sry

Rule 1) Be kind.

lemmy.world rules: https://mastodon.world/about

I don't screen everything, lrn2scroll

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 4lan@lemmy.world -2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Maybe people shouldn't be living there if they can't survive without poisoning their prey

[–] Ashelyn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Wow, please tell me you're trolling

[–] 4lan@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

The same reason people shouldn't be living in Arizona and expecting other states to divert their water to them. There is no water there you shouldn't live there. No one is forcing anyone to live there

Just live in a habitable climate there are so many. Just live in a biome with plentiful game, there are many

[–] Ashelyn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 months ago

The Inuit/Eskimos are some of the more self-sustaining peoples on the planet. They don't depend much on imports from elsewhere, at least not to my knowledge. They had to figure out many adaptations for the area but they make it work and have done so for a long time.

To compare them with a city representing the pinnacle of mankind's hubris is a bit of a reach imo