• Wilzax@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    28 days ago

    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
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      28 days ago

      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
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        28 days 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.

    • 2pt_perversion@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      27 days ago

      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
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        27 days ago

        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
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          27 days 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
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          27 days ago

          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
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            27 days ago

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

            • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              26 days ago

              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.