And I say AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Great photos though.
Ooh yiss. You truly always deliver.
Huh. It was only this post that I really thought about what colour are owl eyes and what variation we get.
This is like an alien head stuck on an owl. This is why I can't tell AI art immediately because my animal knowledge obviously isn't enough knowing we have such beauties.
Lol. You should do an owl list and say which species would be which font.
Sorry to pedant, isn't it aerial? Arial reminds me of the Little Mermaid haha. And is also a font now that I looked it up.
But the photo itself is great. Like catching ballet in flight.
Isn't this the basis of zomb100? Where his work life was so shit that when a literal zombie apocalypse happened he finally started living the life he wanted. And it wasn't that he dreamt of survival and shooting dead people,, just a bucket list of cool things to do.
Anyway, I can relate.
I was like, why did you post a photo of a dramatically falling back skeleton.
Then I realised it was meant to be the owl.
Yes, you get the comedic potential. Man it works Jane been hilarious.
Hey that image is totally classy.
Haha. Just imagining the prehistoric owls twisting their neck going "Okay. Okay. Nope, too far. There goes my neck."
And that one smug owl who of course got the biggest twist angle giving the smug owl look.
Went to a small sanctuary. Saw three types of owls. See photos below as my first humble contribution to this community. It was nice to see cool owls. Shitty photos though, sorry. But they were cool. The ~~burrowing~~barking owl was just the cutest little thing.
Erm, the whole article just seems like propaganda to argue for the rights of polluting industries. It feels very "won't anyone think of the billionaries" in tone.
Humans have not stopped the devastating environmental damage they have been causing. There is no more natural selection in the environment. Not that the process doesn't still happen. But it's in no way 'natural' because humans have changed the environments so drastically everything else just limps to catch up.
It also reminds me of like rabbits released in Australia causing major problems. And deer running wild in America because there's no apex predators to keep the population down. Humans caused the issues and now interventions are mitigation because they can't do anything about it.
Also reads like "what we're doing isn't working so obviously it's wrong and we should just throw our hands up". Like oil executives saying we're never gonna be able to clean up the environment so why bother. And plz don't jail me kthx.
The only thing I'm willing to concede is the species thing because I'm not familiar with species classification. Is this closer to breeds of dogs or wolves and dogs? Some breeds of dogs have gone extinct with time but humans did actively design breeds. I would argue wolves are a seperate species though despite cross breeding possibilities. There's more to it than just being able to successfully breed imho. (Also the fact that he decided on a completely racist analogy when even within the article he had so many better options makes me give the side eye. Like he just wanted an avenue to say this racist thing and couch it in 'science'.)
I think that's why this article makes you so uncomfortable. It's using the veneer of science to argue for a point rather than proving via data. Kinda like flat earthers using the scientific method to try to prove the Earth is flat but the proof isn't there but they somehow argue it totally was proof to them. Lots of convincing words and language but nothing of substance beyond listen to me. Bunch of woe is me in there too.
Anyway, that's just my layman rambling. I support conservation efforts because my view is that humans are the ones that fucked up the environment and have the responsibility to save as many animals as possible. If you want to start arguing feasibility and profitability we're in a different conversation.