Pro-lizard, pro-science, anti-human

The Austin American Statesman has an article in Wednesday's paper on the unwise words of the herpetologist at the University of Texas (Austin), which included suggesting the specific virus needed to eliminate 9 out of 10 humans on earth.

As a sort of defense (equally unwise, in my opinion) one of the lizard man's UTAustin colleagues defends the herpetologist with,

"There's a strong anti-science sentiment in the country right now," Hillis said."

Oh, good grief!

The only identification that is necessary for those of us who object is the identification with the humans around us. We have a concern for our own species that seems understandable to me.

After all, we are the only species that provides Pianka with enough calories, the means to travel around the world, and the various protections that allow him to sit safely in Austin in his old age, playing with lizards all day.

It's funny that the professor doesn't seem to be bothered by the lengthened life span that has accompanied our population growth. That could be because he is 67 years old.

Humans, besides adapting the environment to our needs and a concern for the well-being for even the lives of those (human and non-human) who cannot help us and our own offspring, are also different from all other animals because we learn, record and share what we learn, and are able to learn from those records.

That's how the professors make their living, so I would think they could see a pattern: Intelligence means that lessons and other messages can be shared without resorting to fear and implied or real violence.

Too bad they're not smart enough to see that.