Not Logged in.
Book Jacket

Migrations


A breathtaking page-turner and an ode to our threatened world.
Summary and Reviews
Excerpt
Reading Guide
Author Biography

Scientists at MER argue over the best way to protect birds. Which argument do you find more convincing?

Created: 08/05/21

Replies: 6

Posted Aug. 05, 2021 Go to Top | Go to bottom | link | alert
davinamw

Join Date: 10/15/10

Posts: 2710

Scientists at MER argue over the best way to protect birds. Which argument do you find more convincing?

Niall and the other scientists at the Mass Extinction Reserve (MER) argue over the best way to protect birds. Niall believes that migration is inherent to their nature, while Harriet counters that they should learn to survive without migration, as a necessary adaptation. Whose argument do you find more convincing?


Posted Aug. 05, 2021 Go to Top | Go to bottom | link | alert
gvieth

Join Date: 02/26/21

Posts: 25

RE: Scientists at MER argue over the ...

Both, actually. I think, if it’s possible, nature ought to be left as it is because it works. Although, people/animals, etc.. have always had to adapt to different things throughout life.


Posted Aug. 05, 2021 Go to Top | Go to bottom | link | alert
julianna

Join Date: 10/10/13

Posts: 36

RE: Scientists at MER argue over the ...

Both because we must try a variety of ways to protect our environment and living things in it.


Posted Aug. 05, 2021 Go to Top | Go to bottom | link | alert
alisonf

Join Date: 01/31/13

Posts: 106

RE: Scientists at MER argue over the ...

The birds must adapt but whether they can entirely give up their instinctive migration is a whole other thing. The arguments both have validity.


Posted Aug. 05, 2021 Go to Top | Go to bottom | link | alert
mceacd

Join Date: 07/03/18

Posts: 18

RE: Scientists at MER argue over the ...

Birds should be birds. An attempt to eliminate migratory behavior would be full of unintended consequences. Assistance should be given to support the integrity of the birds by aiding the wildlife, not forcing a change made by a committee who believes it can decide what is best.


Posted Aug. 06, 2021 Go to Top | Go to bottom | link | alert
cville

Join Date: 08/06/21

Posts: 15

RE: Scientists at MER argue over the ...

"Saving" the birds by artificially altering what they are and how they are in the world is really not saving anything. It's just more of the human-centric way of seeing the world.


Posted Sep. 05, 2021 Go to Top | Go to bottom | link | alert
scottishrose

Join Date: 07/24/11

Posts: 114

RE: Scientists at MER argue over the ...

Animals may have to adapt to survive, but we should not be the ones in control of that adaptation. It doesn't make sense for us to force them into a new reality. I don't think changing their natural instincts is to their benefit. I would fall more to the side of letting animals/birds in the wild follow their natural instincts and try to do less to destroy the environment they need to survive.


Reply

Please login to post a response.