|
TheHeretic
68,270 posts
124 months
|
Halb said: No I must surely not. You can make a thread about farming if you like, that is not what I am discussing. What balance? What does that mean? Seems to me to not even be an argument, you can't discuss column a, so switch to column b. I do not have an ad hom like 'lentilist' to use in this arm waving 'argument', not that I would use one.  Well, your edit just shows it. The emotive way a 'mother and her calf' are killed. Well, I presume you have no issues eating lamb, veal, and so on? The point is that there are certain things that people get emotive about, especially when it comes to animals. I am an animal lover. I have 2 cats and a dog, and would kill any f  ker who wished them harm. That is me being emotive about my own animals, amd others. However, I am not daft enough to be one of these people who get upset because animals they deem as 'worthy' should be protected, whilst millions of others are put on a conveyer belt with no particular overwhelming concern. A whale is an animal, and it is supposed to be intelligent. So is a pig. The arguments put forward by those who seem to have a special place in their mentality for whales, (non-endangered ones), there seems to be very much a one sided view. This is the balance I am talking about. Complaining about whales whilst munching a sausage roll seems disingenuous.
|
|
|
Halb
17,870 posts
52 months
|
TheHeretic said: Well, your edit just shows it. The emotive way a 'mother and her calf' are killed. Well, I presume you have no issues eating lamb, veal, and so on? The point is that there are certain things that people get emotive about, especially when it comes to animals. I am an animal lover. I have 2 cats and a dog, and would kill any f ker who wished them harm. That is me being emotive about my own animals, amd others. However, I am not daft enough to be one of these people who get upset because animals they deem as 'worthy' should be protected, whilst millions of others are put on a conveyer belt with no particular overwhelming concern. A whale is an animal, and it is supposed to be intelligent. So is a pig. The arguments put forward by those who seem to have a special place in their mentality for whales, (non-endangered ones), there seems to be very much a one sided view. This is the balance I am talking about. Complaining about whales whilst munching a sausage roll seems disingenuous. No it does not. I added the edit to show the response of the Ozzie government to the so called 'science' of the IWC. The point is that you can try and label or direct the debate to something else, and if you wish then create a thread about it, that is fine. I am talking about whaling. Not farming, not consumption of meat. You're an an animal lover, thank you for telling me. It is not for me to say you are daft or not, or to tell you why you post or what you should believe in. A whale is a smart animal, very smart. The views for the protection of whales don't seem one-sided to me. I do not think that it is disingenuous. There are some people who think it's OK to eat human, there are some people who think it's OK to eat any old thing. People draw the line at different places, for different reasons. What is disingenuous is saying IWC is about science. Or the other crap it comes out with. edited because it sounded too confrontational.
|
|
|
freecar
4,194 posts
56 months
|
Which is more humane?
Keeping an animal for its entire life in an artificial environment and killing them as soon as they get to appropriate size, or...
Letting an animal live its natural life in its own environment and only plucking them from their home when they can catch them.
Personally I don't like the idea of whaling but wont condemn it as we do far worse to millions of pigs, chicken and sheep every year.
The Sea Shepherd on the other hand should be sunk with all hands for extreme stupidity and needless risking of lives for a cause that they have no genuine right to try to force the Japanese to get behind.
|
|
|
Paddy_N_Murphy
Original Poster
15,163 posts
53 months
|
freecar said: Which is more humane?
Keeping an animal for its entire life in an artificial environment and killing them as soon as they get to appropriate size, or...
Letting an animal live its natural life in its own environment and only plucking them from their home when they can catch them.
Personally I don't like the idea of whaling but wont condemn it as we do far worse to millions of pigs, chicken and sheep every year.
The Sea Shepherd on the other hand should be sunk with all hands for extreme stupidity and needless risking of lives for a cause that they have no genuine right to try to force the Japanese to get behind. I agree to pretty much all of that !
|
|
|
TheHeretic
68,270 posts
124 months
|
Paddy_N_Murphy said: I agree to pretty much all of that ! Same here. He said it far simpler than I managed to as well! 
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Halb
17,870 posts
52 months
|
freecar said: Which is more humane?
Keeping an animal for its entire life in an artificial environment and killing them as soon as they get to appropriate size, or...
Letting an animal live its natural life in its own environment and only plucking them from their home when they can catch them.
Personally I don't like the idea of whaling but wont condemn it as we do far worse to millions of pigs, chicken and sheep every year.
The Sea Shepherd on the other hand should be sunk with all hands for extreme stupidity and needless risking of lives for a cause that they have no genuine right to try to force the Japanese to get behind. You equate the catching of the whales to farm practises onland, OK, I guess that's your view, it's not mine. There is a debate to be had on animal welfare, but for me it has nothing to do with whaling. The more we learn about whales (and we are still very ignorant) the more advanced their societies appear. Scientists are already aware than their societies are memetic, and not genetic. They learn new things and teach each other. On Planet Earth Live recently there was footage caught of some humpbacks trying to save a grey mother and calf from a pod of killer whales. In my estimation, there isn't just the human and the other animals, it's closer than that. The genuineness of the right is also for me debatable. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cetacean_intelligence
|
|
|
TheHeretic
68,270 posts
124 months
|
I bet you eat sausage rolls though. 
|
|
|
carreauchompeur
10,656 posts
73 months
|
TheHeretic said: I bet you eat sausage rolls though. Not Minke rolls though!
|
|
|
TheHeretic
68,270 posts
124 months
|
carreauchompeur said: Not Minke rolls though! No... Because unlike whales, pigs are not considered intelligent. Oh, wait.
|
|
|
Halb
17,870 posts
52 months
|
TheHeretic said: I bet you eat sausage rolls though. I did once. TheHeretic said: carreauchompeur said: Not Minke rolls though! No... Because unlike whales, pigs are not considered intelligent. Oh, wait. Not as intelligent as whales.
|
|
|
TheHeretic
68,270 posts
124 months
|
Halb said: Not as intelligent as whales. Ah. So there is a district, and tangible line of intelligence for eating, and non-eating? Gotcha.
|
|
|
Halb
17,870 posts
52 months
|
TheHeretic said: Halb said: Not as intelligent as whales. Ah. So there is a district, and tangible line of intelligence for eating, and non-eating? Gotcha. Distinct, black and white? If that is how you see it then fine and most humans see it I suppose, the line where the human animal is above everything else. It's not so clear cut for me (and others), it's more a grey (realistic) world as we learn more about the intelligence and capabilities of other creatures; bonobos, cetaceans, octopussies etc. And that line is more wavy as we see some of the other animals are a lot closer than we thought, probably overtaking some.
|
|
|
TheHeretic
68,270 posts
124 months
|
It is not how I see it, but you were the one talking about intelligence. Where is your line? Apparently pigs are 4th on the scale of intelligence, with humans, primates, (which we are part of), whales, then pigs. I am merely curious why it is bad and terribly nasty to eat a whale, but perfectly fine to kill pigs by the billions.
|
|
|
freecar
4,194 posts
56 months
|
Halb said: freecar said: Which is more humane?
Keeping an animal for its entire life in an artificial environment and killing them as soon as they get to appropriate size, or...
Letting an animal live its natural life in its own environment and only plucking them from their home when they can catch them.
Personally I don't like the idea of whaling but wont condemn it as we do far worse to millions of pigs, chicken and sheep every year.
The Sea Shepherd on the other hand should be sunk with all hands for extreme stupidity and needless risking of lives for a cause that they have no genuine right to try to force the Japanese to get behind. You equate the catching of the whales to farm practises onland, OK, I guess that's your view, it's not mine. There is a debate to be had on animal welfare, but for me it has nothing to do with whaling. The more we learn about whales (and we are still very ignorant) the more advanced their societies appear. Scientists are already aware than their societies are memetic, and not genetic. They learn new things and teach each other. On Planet Earth Live recently there was footage caught of some humpbacks trying to save a grey mother and calf from a pod of killer whales. In my estimation, there isn't just the human and the other animals, it's closer than that. The genuineness of the right is also for me debatable. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cetacean_intelligence Nicely emotive but completely irrelevant. We didn't decide to eat meat by playing rock, paper, scissors with the animals and eating the losers. I don't want to bring the debate down to here but if they were so smart, you'd think they'd learn to avoid ships at all costs. Octopusses, pigs and chickens are all intelligent and exhibit behaviour that reaches beyond merely existing but again, that's not how we decide what to eat. What if a whale gave his bank details to a Nigerian scammer, would it be ok to eat him then?
|
|
|
Halb
17,870 posts
52 months
|
TheHeretic said: It is not how I see it, but you were the one talking about intelligence. Where is your line? Apparently pigs are 4th on the scale of intelligence, with humans, primates, (which we are part of), whales, then pigs. I am merely curious why it is bad and terribly nasty to eat a whale, but perfectly fine to kill pigs by the billions. You do an awful lot of assuming. Never said it was OK to kill billions of pigs and I have stated quite clearly several times this isn't about farming. There is a thread opening there I am sure if you feel the need. I talked about intelligence as a factor. I suppose it is the intelligence of the whales that give them the ability to have such humanlike societies. As I also said, the line is not rigid, as we learn more. Being self ware might be a good place to start. As far as we aware now, only a few show this ability, but the tests are biased towards vision. The cetacean controls are patchy as it says, due to the difficulties of trying to understand such an alien creature. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_cognition#Cons...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_cognition#Cogn...Whales aren't alone in this. And I do not think it is as simple as a line in the sand or a 'top ten'. "A common image is the scala naturae, the ladder of nature on which animals of different species occupy successively higher rungs, with humans typically at the top. A more fruitful approach has been to recognize that different animals may have different kinds of cognitive processes, which are better understood in terms of the ways in which they are cognitively adapted to their different ecological niches, than by positing any kind of hierarchy."
|
|
|
Halb
17,870 posts
52 months
|
freecar said: Nicely emotive but completely irrelevant.
We didn't decide to eat meat by playing rock, paper, scissors with the animals and eating the losers.
I don't want to bring the debate down to here but if they were so smart, you'd think they'd learn to avoid ships at all costs.
Octopusses, pigs and chickens are all intelligent and exhibit behaviour that reaches beyond merely existing but again, that's not how we decide what to eat.
What if a whale gave his bank details to a Nigerian scammer, would it be ok to eat him then? Emotive to you maybe. There may be whales who learn to avoid ships. I think of it as the same way that humans may learn to avoid a predator that exists beyond their dimensions. Intelligence exists everywhere yes, and that's not how you decide to eat, good for you. I'll have to ponder that one.
|
|
|
silverthorn2151
3,559 posts
48 months
|
I much prefer it when we complain about the bearded smelly people on the boats because their seamanship is f kwittery personified that arguing about their cause. Shallow, but there you are. Peace brothers! 
|
|
|
TheHeretic
68,270 posts
124 months
|
it is not about farming. You know the point I am making about killing billions of pigs, but hurting a whale is bad. You mentioned intelligence, but now it is about being self aware? It sounds like you are not sure why whales hold such a special place for you.
|
|
|
Halb
17,870 posts
52 months
|
TheHeretic said: it is not about farming. You know the point I am making about killing billions of pigs, but hurting a whale is bad. You mentioned intelligence, but now it is about being self aware? It sounds like you are not sure why whales hold such a special place for you. The point you are making seems a strawman argument. You believe a, so you must believe c and not believe d!! Hahah! I mentioned intelligence, yes. It is a factor. Being self-ware is a level of how we can measure intelligence. It's not black and white, it's difficult to do. The societal structures may also be a way we can measure intelligence. I have explained why I don't think whales should be killed, sounds to me like you cannot understand it. That's fine
|
|
|
TheHeretic
68,270 posts
124 months
|
Halb said: The point you are making seems a strawman argument. You believe a, so you must believe c and not believe d!! Hahah! I mentioned intelligence, yes. It is a factor. Being self-ware is a level of how we can measure intelligence. It's not black and white, it's difficult to do. The societal structures may also be a way we can measure intelligence. I have explained why I don't think whales should be killed, sounds to me like you cannot understand it. That's fine It is not a strawman at all. You seemed aghast at the Japanese killing whales. I have been asking why, and what makes you arrive at that decision. When YOU mentioned intelligence, I asked why is killing whales bad, but eating pigs, etc, OK? All my questions have been arrived at by your responses. NOT. Strawman, sorry, you'll have to do better.
|
|
