R Alexander Pyron Save Endangered Species Analysis

3. In class we read and critically evaluated an opinion article by R. Alexander Pyron in the Washington Post entitled “We don’t need to save endangered species. Extinction is part of evolution.” After summarizing our critique of the article (and this the article) how might Kolbert respond to Pyron? In this second part of your response please especially draw on Kolbert’s chapter 12 and 13. R. Alexander Pyron presents an article to the public in which he attempts to undermine the occurrence of extinction. What is important to understand from the article is that Pyron does not simply argue extinction occurs, but that even when it is human caused, there is no need to feel any guilt. What Pyron fails to comprehend is that when he says, “This is how evolution proceeds: through extinction. The inevitability of death is the only constant in life… as many as 50 billion, have already gone …show more content…
She does not see the actual species though, but sees their DNA in a frozen vial. Here she thinks to herself “Does it have to end this way?” and contemplates human affect over species. Both the article and our reading mentions Neanderthals and how we as homo sapiens killed them off and similarly to “dodo birds” or “saber toothed tigers” they go unmissed. Pyron attempts to relate this to the extinction of species in modern day and what is sad is that an average American citizen may see this article and believe it without thinking much about the reality of what he is saying. Pyron believes that humans have the right to live our life in anyway necessary and that is species of animals but die in the process it is all just part of the circle of life. Kolbert focuses on the Neanderthals and contemplates the relations of them with current humans and how if we did not come about then they, along with horses and wooly rhinos would still be present on