My terrible reason I want a Tasmanian Wolf so we can see what a doodle variant would be like. Would it be all stripes or have a pouch? Sounds even more banal now that I’ve written it, which somehow makes me want it all the more now. 
The History Guy did an episode on this subject for those who prefer video:
The phrasing of such questions has always seemed strange to me. In a case like this, where neither the questioner nor the respondents are capable of performing or preventing the task, why should it phrased as though “we” can? The implications are unclear; are commenters to debate the morality, pragmatism, feasibility or consequences of the act, or are we really talking about the morality of preventing others from exercising their free will? Is this about condemnation and accolades, or about organizing a gofundme or a lynch mob? Why are “we” given such primacy in the verbiage if all we are doing it sharing our limited perspectives? (Don’t get me wrong, I am all in favor of sharing our personal viewpoints, and I love that about the Internet, but it doesn’t grant one any sort of authority over anyone else 
)
That bit of maundering aside, I want the Tasmanian Tiger back. 
If they eat every single rabbit in Tasmania, then I’d reconsider my position.
(Why do I want to read this in Elmer Fudd voice?)
Slow down there, chief. That may not be such a bad idea for fighting climate change:
We know that Tasmanian Devils won’t get the job done.
Maybe they can resurrect the Original Mammal
Yeah, let’s just start over…
I’m not sure if they ever established that he was an ally of Tasmanian wildlife.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
