The Naked Mage

Seems to me as though you're trying to switch meat-eating (which isn't even the topic anyway) from a moral issue to a reasoning issue. Since I'm a good sport, I'll pretend I didn't notice.

Awww - I never CLAIMED that my medical bills were anyone's responsibilty but my own. In fact, I never even claimed I'd seek medical treatment in the first place. Nice strawman all the same.

That's research for the millions of people who already HAVE heart disease AS WELL AS everyone thinking about developing it. They'll contiue to research heart disease, colon cancer, liver failure, lung cancer, and all those other "irresponsible" afflictions regardless of my actions as a person, because the afflictions will develop in some people regardless of bad habits. It's not my perogative.

And hey, those millions would likely have just gone to develop nuclear weapons anyway.

Actually, it originated in Africa as a result of eating sickly lesser primates due to ignorance on the subject of the disease. Whatever. Just wing these muthas, Seraphim.

You don't not pity them? Gosh, dat's pretty cold, youse guys.

Yeah, since the tigers would've built walls across the land bridge and blockades around the shores.

I should think that man-eating tigers would've been a pretty good explanation for early man's desire to get the hell OUT of Africa, rather than covering himself in steak sauce and tying himself to a tree. But according to you, the early humans with their larger brains and capacity for reason would've stood no chance against the ninja-like killing prowess of ancient carnivores.

Your theory is correct, of course. Ancient tigers would've had no desire to go after tender, two-legged prey with no natural defenses. Sure.

Yup. Two hundred thousand years later, they're in the same boat we were in. I still don't quite buy into your idea that only a starving tiger would attack and eat lone unwary humans, however.

Sorry. Didn't know it was your turn again.

Amen-Moses

I'll just play pedant and say that Tigers come from Asia not Africa.

My family suffers from genetic heart problems my grandmother and two of her siblings, my grandfather and several of his siblings all died young from various heart complaints. My grandmother never smoked or drank and with five children to bring up during the war overeating was not a problem, she died at 74 after over 20 years suffering from herat problems. Her younger brother died suddenly at 55 from a massive heart attack, he was a non-smoker except for a cigar at xmas but liked a glass of the strong stuff after dinner. Her older brother died at about 70 from a brain embollism following several heart attacks, he was a fit ex-serviceman who didn't drink or smoke. My grandfather diead at 42 from an Aortic Aneurism, again he was neither a smoker or drinker.

The longest living sibling was my great aunt, she eventually succumbed at 79 after a second operation on a heart valve, her surgeon suggested that if she hadn't been a chain smoking alcaholic she may have lived longer, go figure!

Anyhow as you can imagine I'm not planning for a long retirement.

Edited to add something on topic, i.e I still think that Whales are cool and that is a good enough reason not to hunt them.

Amen-Moses

[ November 17, 2002: Message edited by: Amen-Moses ]</p>

Liquidrage

Lets go here.

I object to whale hunting because in my estimation they are of too high an order, too intelligent and too unique to hunt when other food options are available.
The fact that people really like their meat is not justification in my mind for the killing of an animal that.

I don't see the relevance of rats.
Properties of rats should be used to judge rats, not Cetaceans. Cetacean properties should be used to judge them.

No matter what the intelligence of rats, I feel Cetaceans should not be hunted by humans.


Related links:
<a href="http://mindprod.com/intel.html" target="_blank">http://mindprod.com/intel.html</a>
<a href="http://www.emory.edu/college/scienceandsociety/scienceinyourlife/cetaceanlinks.htm" target="_blank">http://www.emory.edu/college/scienceandsociety/scienceinyourlife/cetaceanlinks.htm</a>

The Naked Mage

True.

Sabine Grant

I thought all along that what "justified" the killing of whales was to harvest oil to use in cosmetics and other industries. I did not realize that whaling was primarly to produce meat.

No doubt that we can find other nutritional resources than whale meat. Some species are already extinct and others will follow the same death sentence if the ban is lifted. Raising whales as we raise cows for human comsumption is not realistic. I am not sure the comparaison stands in earlier posts.

I personaly do not consume any beef for health reasons. The recent ongoing recalls of ground beef and after 6 years in Italy, my taste for beef has gone down hill.

If there is any risk to jeopardadize the survival of any species, hunting and killing should be prohibited (of those particular species). The cruel whaling methods are not new. Greenpeace has raised the red flag and attempted to protect them even to the risk of their own lives.

I support the ban 100%. I'd even say " make it a worldwide ban". Let those creatures be as they deal for their survival also with pollution.

Doubting Didymus

Liquidrage: I later clarified my argument about rats. See my post about pigs. They must satisfy at least the 'intelligence' category, and I am not sure what you mean by 'higher order' and 'unique'.

Seraphim: as per your last post to me, I feel I should point out that I have not posted any links. Perhaps my confusion is due to you thinking I am someone else?

You ask why vegetarianism is not the issue, and my answer stands as before. This thread is specifically about whaling. To object of the grounds that ALL hunting is wrong is, as I have said, rather like participating in a thread about something like the morality of homosexuality and objecting on the grounds that all sex is wrong. It is simply not the issue.

Seraphim

"Seems to me as though you're trying to switch meat-eating (which isn't even the topic anyway) from a moral issue to a reasoning issue. Since I'm a good sport, I'll pretend I didn't notice."

My reply : There never a moral issue to begin with. You made it a moral issue, I just made it a reasoning one. While you pretending it doesn't exist, why don't you pretend this post doesn't exist as well?

"Awww - I never CLAIMED that my medical bills were anyone's responsibilty but my own. In fact, I never even claimed I'd seek medical treatment in the first place. Nice strawman all the same."

My reply : I was talking in general terms. The society had to "pay" by doing research and finding cure for disease which could be otherwise never appeared in the first place if a person (such as yourself) had a better way of life. Its a fact, no need to deny it.

"That's research for the millions of people who already HAVE heart disease AS WELL AS everyone thinking about developing it. They'll contiue to research heart disease, colon cancer, liver failure, lung cancer, and all those other "irresponsible" afflictions regardless of my actions as a person, because the afflictions will develop in some people regardless of bad habits. It's not my perogative. "

My reply : Good habits starts with ONE person. You say, WHY should I be good while others don't and continue with your lifestyle, other will say, he is being bad, so why should we be good?
In the end, your whole society will crumple around you as it is happening now.

"And hey, those millions would likely have just gone to develop nuclear weapons anyway."

My reply : You will never know that for a fact, now do you? You can only make assumptions, but you will never know.

BTW, here's a link to American Heart Association, try reading a bit about abuse of your lifestyle taking toll on your body.

<a href="http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=1200009" target="_blank">http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=1200009</a>

"Actually, it originated in Africa as a result of eating sickly lesser primates due to ignorance on the subject of the disease. Whatever. Just wing these muthas, Seraphim."

My reply : ... result in eating sickly lesser primates? That made me laugh.
AIDS is Sexual Transmitted Disease ... not one to be transfered by food. Any good medical student could tell you that. Unless you humans had sex with "lesser primates", I don't see how it could be transfered from them in the first place.

"You don't not pity them? Gosh, dat's pretty cold, youse guys. "

My reply : WHY should I pity someone who never pity their own body to beginning with? I'm no virgin myself, but I don't go around poking needles into myself nor visiting prostitutes for that matter. If you don't bother living, do ask other to help you live.

"Yeah, since the tigers would've built walls across the land bridge and blockades around the shores. "

My reply : Funny ... Not.

"I should think that man-eating tigers would've been a pretty good explanation for early man's desire to get the hell OUT of Africa, rather than covering himself in steak sauce and tying himself to a tree. But according to you, the early humans with their larger brains and capacity for reason would've stood no chance against the ninja-like killing prowess of ancient carnivores."

My reply : The cold weather (due to approaching Ice Age) and migrating of animals was one of (and better) reason for humans to leave Africa, NOT some tigers. And tigers hunt ONLY when they are hungry, not when they are in mood to kill.

"Your theory is correct, of course. Ancient tigers would've had no desire to go after tender, two-legged prey with no natural defenses. Sure."

My reply : I rather think that Tiger get sick of looking at tender, two-legged mammals, much less eating them.

"Yup. Two hundred thousand years later, they're in the same boat we were in. I still don't quite buy into your idea that only a starving tiger would attack and eat lone unwary humans, however."

My reply : When a farmer cut a forest down and make plantation, that will not change the fact that it is still a hunting ground for a tiger. Tigers usually choose a hunting area and stay there for most of it's life, so it will still hunt in that area even so it is become a farming area. And I never said starving tigers eat humans alone, but compare to other animals, humans are much weaker in speed and defence and more suitable to be hunted than a cow (with sharp horn) for example.

Seraphim

"Seraphim: as per your last post to me, I feel I should point out that I have not posted any links. Perhaps my confusion is due to you thinking I am someone else? "

My reply : No, you should post link. What you should add as well is clear indication of what you wanted the readers to voice out. Do you want them to discuss about hunting and killing of animals such as whales? Or justify such killing? If you said "Whaling" alone, it is too general for a discussion since such activity such as whaling is happening everywhere as well. Cause and Effect is one issue which goes along with it which cannot be separated in this issue.

"You ask why vegetarianism is not the issue, and my answer stands as before. This thread is specifically about whaling. To object of the grounds that ALL hunting is wrong is, as I have said, rather like participating in a thread about something like the morality of homosexuality and objecting on the grounds that all sex is wrong. It is simply not the issue. "

My reply : You equalies Sex with Whaling, I don't see why such analog exist since both is very different.
In sex, you and your partner have choice to have sex and as long as both of you agree to do have it, whatever consequence you two face is yours to deal with.
In Whaling however, you DO NOT have the whale's consent to poke a hole in it's side and pour half a tonne of an explosive into its stomach and fry it to hell.

To equalies analog such as Sex and Homosexuality to Whaling is a POOR and ignorant statement and example.

Liquidrage

DD:

My post was stating that it doesn't matter how intelligent pigs/rats/cheese is.

Do we hunt other people? No. Why? Does it have anything to do with how intelligent pigs are? Could pigs be "smarter" then cetaceans? Sure, does it matter?

If we discover an alien species slightly smarter then humans, does this mean it becomes OK to eat people from Kentucky? I say no.
For the record I admit upfront that this is hyperbole.

By higher order I mean that they are high in the natural food chain and serve an imoprtant part in that food chain.

Just because the same arguements can be made for pigs/rats/etc is irrelevant. Care to debate pigs? Start a new thread.

By unique I mean that outside of intelligence, outside of their purpose, they inspire humanity. They communicate by making songs, they are gigantic and distinct.

I believe it is absurd that people believe they can jutify killing other creatures that they know do not wish to be killed when said killing is not needed.

The Lone Ranger

The evidence overwhelmingly supports the conclusion that AIDS (Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome) is caused by infection by one of two viral strains: HIV-1 and HIV-2. ["HIV" stands for "Human Immunodeficiency Virus".] The general consensus is that both HIV-1 and HIV-2 are derived from viruses that infect other primate species.

HIV-2 is nearly identical to -- and apparently derived from -- SIV-sm, a "Simian Immunodeficiency Virus" which infects a western African monkey known as the sooty mangabey monkey or green monkey.

HIV-1 is nearly identical to SIV-cpz, which infects chimpanzees. However, there is evidence that chimpanzees were not the original hosts of SIV-cpz. There is considerable debate as to whether humans acquired HIV-1 from chimpanzees, or from some other as-yet-unidentified primate species.

HIV can be transferred in blood and saliva, and AIDS is by no means entirely a sexually-transmitted disease. A common practice in parts of Africa even today is to kill gorillas, chimpanzees, and other primates for food. (These animals are referred to as "bush meat.")

It's not difficult to see how the practice of capturing and killing an animal as large and powerful as a chimpanzee could lead to the transfer of a blood from a chimp to a human. If the hunter has any open cuts, he's likely to be infected. Eating uncooked bush meat could also cause the virus to "jump" to a human host.

In any event, there's very good evidence that AIDS arose when viruses "jumped" from at least one species of non-human primate to humans.

Cheers,

Michael

[ November 17, 2002: Message edited by: The Lone Ranger ]</p>