An increasing percentage of animal-related shorts seem to be reposted content with an AI narrator spouting completely made-up bullshit clearly written by someone for whom English is a second language at best
One video mashed together several random videos featuring the same type of animal while the narration tried to pass it off as some heart-warming clickbait story about one individual animal
It's horrible. For example, I just googled "baby peacock" and 3 of the top 10 results are abominable AI-generated images that are just babified (by mammalian standards) peacocks instead of what an actual peacock chick looks like. It's not just "misinformation", it's actual sacrilegious. It's disgusting, it's offensive, it insults the natural genuine beauty and cuteness of these birds. I do not have words to express how vile an affront to the dignity, beauty, and adorableness of birds these abominations are.
I hate these vile AI concoctions as much as anyone, but this is a very anthropocentric way of thinking about other species. I know you're trying to say "appreciate them as they are" and that's great but in reality people having bad ideas is only an affront to aspects of ourselves, nature don't give a fuck and I worry that this kind of thinking is almost, paternalistic? Dignity is a very human idea; some vultures shit on their own legs to cool down, there's no way to describe them as "dignified" but they're as important and vital to protect as any "majestic" living thing. Plenty of organisms aren't particularly aesthetically pleasing but are still important, and I feel like projecting a human framework over them risks concealing that. I dunno, my education was in ecology, biology, Enviro science etc and it worries me that so much of the work that has to be done needs to be packaged up to appeal to human aesthetics even if that hurts the work itself.
I'm talking to humans about human concepts. The birds don't care, but humans do. It's probably necessarily going to seem anthropocentric to talk about how all life is beautiful and deserves to be preserved, therefore we need a better approach to the environment than "destroy it all and save a few individuals".
I don't think it's paternalistic to appreciate other creatures. I am certainly not coming at it from a paternalistic standpoint, more a stance of loving our fellow living creatures and appreciating them.
Aesthetics can be part of it but also I disagree, I think there's beauty to be found in the vast majority of organisms. You just have to look closely enough or consider more about them than how they look, but also their behavior, life cycle, or just how interesting they are evolutionarily. Absolutely true that it's not just appearance that matters. Their place in the ecosystem matters too. Beyond that and more importantly, the fact that other organisms exist and live is enough to make them matter. They live, therefore they have value and rights. I cannot think of a single species that is beyond appreciation. Even ticks and mosquitoes, which I do feel negatively toward for parasitism and being infection vectors, have redeeming qualities. Even blood flukes have things about them that can be appreciated.
Hard disagree. Vultures are wonderful. They're really cool, many (not all, but many) are super cute, and are absolutely dignified and majestic in their own way. The fact that they shit and vomit on themselves to keep themselves cool is just part of their charm.
I think I agree in that charismatic megafauna get more attention and support than more ecologically critical creatures, but the solution to me is to preach the gospel of loving all the creatures so that people care about the environment more as a whole rather than just isolated superstars. But I am interested in hearing you say more about that and your concerns. I am not trained in any of this.