Unpopular Opinion: F#@k the pandas

The Stripy Bag·Nov 7, 2019·32 votes·11,488 views

They take up a bunch of the world's conservation money but the thing is they can barely eat they're limited diet,can't fend for themselves in the wilds,don't f#@k,and when they do f#@k during the one of two times a year they can have babies if they have more than one baby then their lazy asses will leave all but one of them to die. I mean the last one even counts for ones in captivity where this one panda recently had twins but they have to swap one out for the other like some BS sitcom so she doesn't get one of them killed. So yeah in conclusion fuck the pandas because it just seems like they wanna die. I mean there are animals that have no brains (Jellyfish),sleep for 20 hours a day (Koalas),or live in basically Hell (Penguins) who manage to survive more than these a$$holes. "Oh but people like to keep them around since they're cute and to breed them" No you only keep them around to look cute because pandas don't f#@k.

47 Comments

JamareeNov 7, 201917 votes

I'm like 99% sure that if humans didn't exist, pandas would have naturally gone extinct.

OleandervineNov 7, 20191 votes

{quoted}

I'm like 99% sure that if humans didn't exist, pandas would have naturally gone extinct.

And the Dodos would be running wild in the Carribean. So yeah, that's natural selection for ya.

JamareeNov 7, 20191 votes

{quoted}

And the Dodos would be running wild in the Carribean. So yeah, that's natural selection for ya.

My great grandmother ate Dodo apparently, stories passed down through my family said that it was better then chicken.

NyarlathοtepNov 7, 20193 votes

{quoted}

I'm like 99% sure that if humans didn't exist, pandas would have naturally gone extinct.

Well humans actually contribute to panda's extinction. Their natural habitats are in danger thanks to human activity. So yeah.

JamareeNov 7, 20192 votes

{quoted}

Well humans actually contribute to panda's extinction. Their natural habitats are in danger thanks to human activity. So yeah.

Oh yeah, we aren't helping, but if we as a species didn't exist, I don't think pandas would be able to survive on their own, they just like...don't put up the levels of power to actually survive in the wild.

NyarlathοtepNov 8, 20191 votes

{quoted}

Oh yeah, we aren't helping, but if we as a species didn't exist, I don't think pandas would be able to survive on their own, they just like...don't put up the levels of power to actually survive in the wild.

I dont think so. They have very few natural predators when they are fully grown (i imagine tiger might be the most dangerous). The biggest threat they have is the loss of their natural habitat because they rely heavily only in bamboo. Take that away (or deplete it) and they will have trouble feeding themselves.

If humans didnt exist, pandas would most likely remain around just fine, albeit they would have very low numbers thanks to their specalization to eating bamboo and being you know, panda. They are very weird behaviour wise.

JamareeNov 8, 20191 votes

{quoted}

I dont think so. They have very few natural predators when they are fully grown (i imagine tiger might be the most dangerous). The biggest threat they have is the loss of their natural habitat because they rely heavily only in bamboo. Take that away (or deplete it) and they will have trouble feeding themselves.

If humans didnt exist, pandas would most likely remain around just fine, albeit they would have very low numbers thanks to their specalization to eating bamboo and being you know, panda. They are very weird behaviour wise.

Aren't they designed to be carnivores but for some reason still think eating mostly bamboo is cool for some reason? I can't see an animal like that surviving naturally.

MogarlNov 8, 20191 votes

{quoted}

Aren't they designed to be carnivores but for some reason still think eating mostly bamboo is cool for some reason? I can't see an animal like that surviving naturally.

On one of the various educational channels I watch I think a theory that Pandas heavy bamboo diet is evidenced to have possibly come about when human ancestors first started competing with them.

Of course that would imply that humans have been pushing Pandas out of niches since before we started deforesting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXRha4U7gb0

Found the video talking about it. It's kind of just an offhand comment in the video, and doesn't go much into it.

JamareeNov 8, 20191 votes

{quoted}

On one of the various educational channels I watch I think a theory that Pandas heavy bamboo diet is evidenced to have possibly come about when human ancestors first started competing with them.

Of course that would imply that humans have been pushing Pandas out of niches since before we started deforesting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXRha4U7gb0

Found the video talking about it. It's kind of just an offhand comment in the video, and doesn't go much into it.

I thought they have been eating bamboo since like millions of years in the past when they split off to what we now know as pandas? Idk though, a lot of things I have heard is likely second hand anyway.

NyarlathοtepNov 8, 20191 votes

{quoted}

Aren't they designed to be carnivores but for some reason still think eating mostly bamboo is cool for some reason? I can't see an animal like that surviving naturally.

Eh i cant say for certain but apparently while giant pandas (because there are also red pandas) have a taxonomic classification as a carnivoran they are adapted at eating almost exclusively bamboo.

Also according to good ol internet giant pandas emerged some million years ago. So its very likely that, despite having such a weird lifestyle, you can survive just fine provided your natural habitat isnt destroyed.

LankPantsNov 8, 20193 votes

{quoted}

Oh yeah, we aren't helping, but if we as a species didn't exist, I don't think pandas would be able to survive on their own, they just like...don't put up the levels of power to actually survive in the wild.

They literally did for tens of thousands of years. Their strategy of survival hasn't changed. The main thing that changed was human activity severely limiting their range.

Pandas have a really good general survival strategy, contrary to popular belief. They eat something that nothing else can eat. The fact that it's 97% of their diet isn't overly restrictive without human deforestation because bamboo is a fast growing and environmentally dominant plant that only a few species on earth and none other in the giant panda's range can eat. Their mating strategy also makes complete sense in a scenario where pandas aren't excessively rare. Limited mating help to avoid competition and in a relatively common species (as pandas were for tens of thousands of years) is and always has been a solid survival strategy.

The idea that pandas are bad at surviving is a myth and completely misunderstands how natural selection actually works. Natural selection forces animals to adopt unique niches. Pandas have a very strong unique niche. There's almost no non-human environmental pressure on them. Nothing else eats bamboo and nothing predates on fully grown giant pandas. The only thing that removes bamboo from their environment is humans and the only thing that can remove pandas from their environment is humans. The decline of the giant panda is 100% because of humans.

JamareeNov 8, 20191 votes

{quoted}

They literally did for tens of thousands of years. Their strategy of survival hasn't changed. The main thing that changed was human activity severely limiting their range.

Pandas have a really good general survival strategy, contrary to popular belief. They eat something that nothing else can eat. The fact that it's 97% of their diet isn't overly restrictive without human deforestation because bamboo is a fast growing and environmentally dominant plant that only a few species on earth and none other in the giant panda's range can eat.

Doesn't help they have the digestion tract set for being carnivores and instead it something that gives them so little nutrition they need two different types of it in an area or they would starve. I feel like without humans around, they would die out from having to constant subsist on food their bodies literally aren't designed to process.

Their mating strategy also makes complete sense in a scenario where pandas aren't excessively rare. Limited mating help to avoid competition and in a relatively common species (as pandas were for tens of thousands of years) is and always has been a solid survival strategy.

That's fair.

The idea that pandas are bad at surviving is a myth and completely misunderstands how natural selection actually works. Natural selection forces animals to adopt unique niches. Pandas have a very strong unique niche. There's almost no non-human environmental pressure on them. Nothing else eats bamboo and nothing predates on fully grown giant pandas. The only thing that removes bamboo from their environment is humans and the only thing that can remove pandas from their environment is humans. The decline of the giant panda is 100% because of humans.

Equally fair.

KiwiFlavor ZiggsNov 8, 20191 votes

{quoted}

I'm like 99% sure that if humans didn't exist, pandas would have naturally gone extinct.

And if we didn't exist, thousands of species that did go extinct would not be extinct. But you're right, Pandas suck

Moody PNov 8, 20191 votes

{quoted}

I'm like 99% sure that if humans didn't exist, pandas would have naturally gone extinct.

all of the pandas problems are directly caused by humans

p a t r i o tNov 7, 201915 votes

Finally a good thread

Jesi OniNov 7, 20198 votes

Whaaaat?

https://media.tenor.com/images/13270f048ebca774801ce7bcb69dd5db/tenor.gif

Rallen320Nov 7, 20198 votes

Sometimes a sloth will grab its own arm, thinking it's a branch, and fall to its death. Also its metabolism can slow down so much that it starves to death on a full stomach.

AquariusGineNov 7, 20197 votes

Koalas aren't any better. They won't eat anything besides eucalyptus leaves, which are very low in nutrients and energy hence their 20hour sleep cycles. They are also the stupidest of all the mammals as their brains are smooth with no ridges. Just an example of their intelligence: they won't eat eucalyptus leaves if said leaves aren't attached to a branch.

But I still support the panda and koala programs because they're cute [slayer-jinx-catface] Good looks is advantageous everywhere.

The Stripy BagNov 7, 20194 votes

{quoted}

Koalas aren't any better. They won't eat anything besides eucalyptus leaves, which are very low in nutrients and energy hence their 20hour sleep cycles. They are also the stupidest of all the mammals as their brains are smooth with no ridges. Just an example of their intelligence: they won't eat eucalyptus leaves if said leaves aren't attached to a branch.

But I still support the panda and koala programs because they're cute [slayer-jinx-catface] Good looks is advantageous everywhere.

Ah f#@k intelligence and brains in general. I mean look at the jellyfish and the slime creatures. They don't have brains at all yet they are basically immortal with one constantly self reincarnating to avoid old age and the other one can get bisected but regenerate from it. Besides unless you're a Wizard or a Rogue Intelligence is basically a dump stat anyways and it's not like it helps since Humans just go around killing themselves in as many ways as possible.

ZackTheWaffleManNov 7, 20193 votes

[{quoted}](name=The Stripy Bag,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=4ZEGHvUa,comment-id=00050000,timestamp=2019-11-07T09:11:26.330+0000)

Ah f#@k intelligence and brains in general. I mean look at the jellyfish and the slime creatures. They don't have brains at all yet they are basically immortal with one constantly self reincarnating to avoid old age and the other one can get bisected but regenerate from it. Besides unless you're a Wizard or a Rogue Intelligence is basically a dump stat anyways and it's not like it helps since Humans just go around killing themselves in as many ways as possible.

We use our intelligence to kill ourselves in creative ways

Darius StradaNov 7, 20191 votes

{quoted}

Koalas aren't any better. They won't eat anything besides eucalyptus leaves, which are very low in nutrients and energy hence their 20hour sleep cycles. They are also the stupidest of all the mammals as their brains are smooth with no ridges. Just an example of their intelligence: they won't eat eucalyptus leaves if said leaves aren't attached to a branch.

But I still support the panda and koala programs because they're cute [slayer-jinx-catface] Good looks is advantageous everywhere.

Koalas are actually worse than pandas. Fuck them

The Stripy BagNov 8, 20191 votes

[{quoted}](name=Darius Strada,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=4ZEGHvUa,comment-id=00050001,timestamp=2019-11-07T17:53:21.508+0000)

Koalas are actually worse than pandas. Fuck them

Yet they are only listed as Threatened. Most likely since unlike pandas they manage to during the 4 hours they're awake to bone and eat. Plus they live in Australia where everything wants to kill you. Where it's either way to dry or way too wet and fish rain from the sky.

CaptainAntiHerozNov 7, 20193 votes

next thing you know they'll be calling for bees to stop existing because they make an annoying buzzing sound

save the pandas kill the teemos thats what i say

The Stripy BagNov 7, 20193 votes

{quoted}

next thing you know they'll be calling for bees to stop existing because they make an annoying buzzing sound

save the pandas kill the teemos thats what i say

Naw bees can stay since they help pollinate plants and make honey. Fuck the wasp because they don't do shit but cause misery and they're annoying with their buzzing.

Dorans PantsNov 8, 20191 votes

[{quoted}](name=The Stripy Bag,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=4ZEGHvUa,comment-id=00080000,timestamp=2019-11-07T20:37:38.255+0000)

Naw bees can stay since they help pollinate plants and make honey. Fuck the wasp because they don't do shit but cause misery and they're annoying with their buzzing.

But.... wasps pollinate too. [sg-soraka]

The Stripy BagNov 8, 20191 votes

[{quoted}](name=Dorans Pants,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=4ZEGHvUa,comment-id=000800000000,timestamp=2019-11-08T18:53:11.608+0000)

But.... wasps pollinate too. [sg-soraka]

Barely since unlike bees the skinny little bastards don't have that fur from bees to do it efficiently and it's only because they just so happen take a break from stabbing stuff and being nature's xenomorph on a flower.

Autrah FangNov 8, 20191 votes

{quoted}

save the pandas kill the teemos thats what i say

What about the Panda Teemos?

CaptainAntiHerozNov 8, 20191 votes

[{quoted}](name=Autrah Fang,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=4ZEGHvUa,comment-id=00080001,timestamp=2019-11-08T02:03:38.862+0000)

What about the Panda Teemos?

just a disguise we good get the teemo

BladeSteelNov 7, 20192 votes

Nice copy paste. I’ve seen this exact same post like 50 times already.

Handy Sandy Nov 7, 20192 votes

There's not an actual reason to save unnecessary endangered species like pandas, koalas, wolves, that 1 specific kind of tortoise, or those 2 white rhinos other than the reason "because we can". Knowing that hundreds of species go endangered each year because of human cause isn't something conversationalists want on their conscience.

It sucks that the actual species we need, like coral, we can't do much to help.

VoidbringersNov 7, 20192 votes

Yeah, Pandas are pretty dumb, but they’re pretty good at being a mascot for environmental issues for the masses. Basically, the funding goes into protecting pandas, which happen to live in a biodiversity hotspot, but these pandas actually create an umbrella effect across all the species in the area. A lot of the measures they take to protect and save pandas are also saving lots of other species.

The Stripy BagNov 8, 20191 votes

{quoted}

Yeah, Pandas are pretty dumb, but they’re pretty good at being a mascot for environmental issues for the masses. Basically, the funding goes into protecting pandas, which happen to live in a biodiversity hotspot, but these pandas actually create an umbrella effect across all the species in the area. A lot of the measures they take to protect and save pandas are also saving lots of other species.

But because they are mascots for it they wind up taking up way more money and resources from other animals.

Tomoe GozenNov 7, 20192 votes

I think humans were responsible for exterminating a few of the species (due to poaching) but to actually try and help pandas survive by having to do their living for them, is literally as stupid as they come. If the specie is facing an evolutionary dead-end, something's going to kill you - you're going to be eliminated from the gene pool either by the environment or by the predators of that environment. Evolution means adaptation.

Pandas are cute, do doubt about it. But cute doesn't cut it when we're talking about Darwinism.

OtakuBurritoNov 7, 20192 votes

Pandas are more useless than most of my ADCs in solo queue and that's big facts.

IAintDariusNov 8, 20192 votes

The entire concept of preserving animals from extinction is pointless. Extinction is as natural as wildfires.

LankPantsNov 8, 20192 votes

{quoted}

The entire concept of preserving animals from extinction is pointless. Extinction is as natural as wildfires.

Mass extinction at the rate that is currently occurring in the absence of global catastrophe is not normal. There is a background rate of extinction but the current rate is 100-1000x that.

4 of the 5 mass extinctions in history were probably caused by geological activity. They were caused by the formation of volcanoes that make Yellowstone look small spewing molten rock and ash into the atmosphere for thousands of years. The other was caused by a mix of volcanic activity and a large asteroid hitting the earth. In the absence of an event like this organisms should not be going extinct at the rate they are now.

The Stripy BagNov 7, 20191 votes

P.S. Paris Blob creatures for next dominant species!

RockmanNov 7, 20191 votes

My Gym Partner is a Monkey is oddly appropriate for this post

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNjAY2jjCtM

TerozuNov 7, 20191 votes

{quoted}

My Gym Partner is a Monkey is oddly appropriate for this post

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNjAY2jjCtM

Can I take a wild guess and say that panda was actually the raccoon?

RockmanNov 7, 20191 votes

{quoted}

Can I take a wild guess and say that panda was actually the raccoon?

how did you figure it out

The Stripy BagNov 7, 20191 votes

{quoted}

how did you figure it out

Raccoons are trash pandas. Or they saw it before.

TerozuNov 7, 20191 votes

{quoted}

how did you figure it out

cant tell if sarcasm.

Nami Want SalamiNov 7, 20191 votes

Pandas suck at being Pandas

Akali is SO HOTNov 7, 20191 votes

Pandas are cool, but they are mostly useless

Beacon AcademyNov 8, 20191 votes

Someone has been watching Animalogic

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IToO8mlYXzY

Pierce The VealNov 8, 20191 votes

The ACTUALLY unpopular, but truthful, cut your ignorant bullshit response: https://sciencemadeeasy.kinja.com/we-need-to-stop-blaming-the-giant-panda-for-its-own-ext-1686782579

A good read if you want to realize the stupidity behind blaming the panda for going extinct. If you want to continue blaming an animal that has been around for 2-3 million years but only mysteriously started going extinct after a few huge deforesting events that were lead by humans, then I don’t have any words to tell you.

Your opinion is fairly popular. Because for every complex problem there is a solution, (or in this case a conclusion/“unpopular” opinion) that is clear, simple, and wrong.

Blue Moon WolfNov 8, 20191 votes

To be fair. the Panda population has grown to the point where it got taken off the endangered species list and has been upgraded "vulnerable" species. https://nationalzoo.si.edu/animals/news/giant-panda-status-upgraded-endangered-vulnerable

Not looking to dissuade opinions or anything, just a fun fact I learned a while ago that I thought was neat.