Blake, You have dismissed every one of my cites and have not provided one. I cannot argue with you any further.
When did you get to decide that a research association that researches a subject is not allowed in GD.
I admit to not being completely rational on this subject. But you are just making up your own rules.
Jim
Utter bullshit.
You asked for three references.
Two of them were strawmen, you were asking for references for claims that I never made. I pointed out they were strawmen and so of course I was not required to provide references for a position I never held.
The third was a request for a reference that many whales are on par with cattle in term of intelligence. I provided a refernce to a world-renowned zoologist.
So your claim that I have no provided any reference is utter bullshit.
And I did not dismiss every one of your references (note the word is references, not cites). I dismissed two references to obviously biased sources (the Whale conservation Movement FFS). The other references I read and critically assessed. I noted that none of them are actually support for your claims.
Dude, this is GD, Those are the rules. We don’t just accept any ‘cite’ you provide because you claim it agrees with you. We analyse the references to see if they do agree with you, or what their basis is. That’s not dismissing. Far from it.
That much is quite clear. You are clearly totally ignorant of this subject. When your very first claim in a debate is that every single whale, dolphin and fish population on the planet is in dramatic decline it’s pretty obvious how much you actually know and how much is simply Conservationist propaganda you have swallowed wholesale.
I have never made any such decision.
You are not only not rational. You are propagating ignorance. On this message board that is unforgivable. We are supposed to be fighting ignorance. Not propagating it.
No, I am pointing out that unreferenced baseless opinion from a biased source (“The Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society” fer cryin’ out loud) presented to a conference of a biased audience (“Compassion in World Farming”, come on) is not a valid reference in GD. That isn’t a rule that I made up, it’s the normal level of debate you can expect in this forum.
Look, dude, I’m sorry if you wasted years of your life or something trying to stop tuna netting based on lies. But that doesn’t mean that those lies are any less ignorant. And it certainly doesn’t mean I’m going to let you repeat those ignorant lies here unchallenged.
All whale fish and dolphin populations are not declining dramatically. That claim was ignorant tripe.
Cetaceans as a group are not second only to apes in intelligence. That was claim ignorant tripe. Many cetaceans are as dumb as cattle.
Dolphins do not have ““great wisdom and discernment”. That was claim ignorant tripe.
You have admitted that you are unable to argue with me on this topic at a level where facts and references are required. I hope that means that you will now depart this thread and stop making ignorant statements. The decent thing to do, in keeping with the spirit of the boards, would be to admit that those statements have no basis in fact. But realistically the best I can hope for is that you simply stop propagating such ignorance.
The Australian whaling industry ceased operation in 1978 with the closure of the whaling operations based in Albany in Western Australia.
Putzen.
I think the same would be said of you. You are ahead on points for presenting information, but it is hard to see with all the spittle sprayed over the monitor.
Calm down. There is no need (and little point) to throwing “bullshit” and “crap” and “bollocks” and “talking shite” into every couple of lines. Some of your generalizations easily lent themselves to misundertandings, so responding to those misunderstandings with hostility seems a bit unnecessary.
[ /Moderator Mode ]
looks like someone took their cranky pills today.
uh…I don’t believe that I made the assertion that all pigs that are eaten are domestic. Go ahead and double-check. I’ll wait.
O.K.? Good.
I’m afraid you missed my subtle use of irony. I said that domesticated pigs were meant to be eaten. Your response to this wild supposition, was that many people eat wild boar. I’m sure that many do, and I’mreally, really happy for them and all, but I was attempting to point that this has sweet, sweet, fuck-all to do with the fact that lots of people-lots and lots of people-eat domesticated swine.
Why do we feel that we’re talking at cross-purposes? What is it with you and wild pigs? I believe that people eat wild boars, but as far as this thread goes…so what?
Pork tenderloin will run you about 3-4 dollars a pound. Farm-raised Salmon will run you between $5-$7 a pound (unscientific survey of my co-workers). How much is a pound of Dolphin?
It tastes like spotted owl, but with the texture of a snail darter.
Blake, I’m not going to argue with you, because I’ve better things to do with my life, and it is my belief that you are Eric Cartman just trying to wind up tree-hugging hippies.
The way I look at it is this: You can gauge the level of civilisation of a society by the way they treat their animals. Enlightened societies legislate against cruel practices, which in this particular debate would be a ban on the hunting of cetaceans. Not because of any perceived inteligence, just because it’s not possible to slaughter such large marine mammals humanely, and also because of the endangered status of most species.
Assertion: It is only Japan that pressures for a resumption of commercial whaling, and it does this by publicity campaigns at home - like promoting whale burgers and feeding whale to schoolchildren - to essentially bribing small IWC nations to support them in pro-whaling votes. Norway and Iceland are the only Western countries to hunt whales for food, and then only to supply to Japan. All the other whaling nations are aboriginal, and the small numbers caught this way are strictly controlled.
This year, Japan plans to make its biggest whale catch for 20 years, mostly minke, Bryde’s and sei, but next year they’re after humpbacks too. Sometimes very rare whales are caught too. This is known because there are whale-preservation organisations that monitor the Japanese whale meat market, and take DNA samples of meat. One particular whale steak was found to have come from a species that numbers only 100 individuals worldwide. Now there are only 99. Fucking well done, Japan.
Good morning Blake,
As you dismiss every research group that studies Cetacean, it would leave me with only cites from people who don’t study Cetaceans. These would by definition be uninformed opinions and not theories based on research. By your logic I need to ignore research by Dinosaur experts because it is in their interest to promote research into dinosaurs.
I admitted to being irrational in my early posts and have set about defending as much of my position as I can. You have gotten more insulting and shrill.
I provided cites that both supported and contradicted my point of view and you claim I am still irrational. How does presenting cites for both sides of the argument still leave me looking irrational?
Besides the point that your debating style is to browbeat and bully, you still have not provided any cites on anything you claim. (Except % of body fat)
Please provide your Cite for the Nations that Whale, you were already called out on Australia and I would like to see the details on the US.
Please provide some cites on the intelligence of Pigs.
Please provide cites on the fact that some Dolphins are as dumb as cows, your argument is valid here, but please cite it as I cannot take your word on it.
Please provide the cite to back up this claim.
You failed to provide name, link and credentials.
Further if you look at my exchange with Bricker, you will see that I provided details and research to back it up. You have only made claims and been abusive.
Jim
I have no profound insights into this discussion, but did find it interesting to listen to Frank DeFord on NPR this morning talking about how horribly we Americans treat our retired, losing, often gelded racehorses and other horses by allowing them to be sent to slaughterhouses where they are slaughtered and the horsemeat is shipped to Europe (or possibly Asia) where people think of horsemeat as a delicacy.
The thing which he said which I am not sure that I agree with is that we should first stop slaughtering horses and then figure out more humane ways of treating rejected racehorses. It seems to me that one should perhaps do things the other way around. I’m also not quite sure what (besides the export portion) is different between slaughtering horses bred for racing, and raising horses (or cattle) intended for eating from the beginning.
The ads in this thread are kind of interesting.
That’s a pretty narrow gauge you’re using there. Never mind art, human rights, system of government, scientific achievements, education, etc. when we can just gauge a civilization’s advancement based on how animals are treated. Nice to know that Americans are so much more civilized than the Japanese or Norweigans.
Marc
In terms of treatment of animals and equal rights for women and racial minorities, the US doesn’t do so badly relative to the rest of the world. Norway is fairly civilised, apart from the occasional bit of whaling and taking death-metal too seriously. Japan has a long way to go in terms of humane animal treatment, equality of gender and freedom from race discrimination. A shame, because it’s an enlightened culture in many other respects.
A culture of respect and humanity seems to pervade into all areas of life. Treating animals with respect doesn’t do any harm to anyone, except those who exploit animals with no regard to anything but their own ends. And they can go take a flying fuck at the moon.
Where does the morally acceptable eating of animals end, and exploitation of animals begin in your opinion? What yardstick do you use in judging acceptable vs exploitative consumption?
OK, if we’re talking pigs, then let’s examine the extremes of pig farming for food. At one end of the scale, we have pigs out in the open, grubbing around in old apple orchards for acorns and truffles. They have a sty to sleep in at night or for shelter during bad weather, and a farmer tends them carefully every day and feeds them quality food. When it’s time for slaughter, a mobile slaughterhouse truck rolls up to the farm.
At the other end, we have pigs crammed into big concrete bunkers in tiny pens, never seeing daylight or fresh air, and fed a diet of cheap food, growth promoters and antibiotics. When it’s time for slaughter, they’re crammed into a big truck and transported to a huge slaughterhouse, sometimes 1 or 2 days journey away.
The first method produces tasty meat in a humane fashion, but is more expensive. The second method produces mediocre but cheap meat. Guess which cuts most consumers prefer?
Prefer to buy or prefer to eat? I totally agree with your sentiment, BTW.
People do not always make the all-round best choices.
As for morally, I dunno. Are dolphins kosher?
Killing is a very bad thing and will likely result in a lengthy prison sentence or worse. Eating a pig and a dolphin will give you heartburn.
Unfortunately you forgot to answer the question astro asked.
On that hypothetical scale of yours where does the morally acceptablity of eating animals end and exploitation begin? If it’s ok to eat pigs that have lived a relatively cruel free life then why not dolphins or whales who lived in the wild?
Marc
Not that this has any bearing whatsoever on the morality of eating dolphins, but the above statement is not completely correct. Whale meat is eaten in Norway, and there’s advertising to encourage people to eat more. See for instance this site with recipies (warning: Contains photos of pieces of dead whales), sponsored by the fishery industry. There were also a poster board campaign on the same theme here some time ago. There’s some export (to Iceland and the Faeroe Islands, and maybe Japan), but economically we’re talking about peanuts. My own theory about the reasons for Norwegian commercial whaling, from a previous thread:
I see hunting of endangered species as immoral – doesn’t matter whether they are cute or disgusting, intelligent or dumb as stone. And if in doubt, don’t hunt. (That said, speaking of Norwegian commercial whaling, I doubt that a few hundred individuals from a population of more than 100 000 is going to make much of a dent.)
I also see killing of beings that have close-to-human intelligence as morally problematic. I wouldn’t eat chimpanzee meat. If dolphins are as intelligent as pigs, they are dumb enough to be eaten for me. But again, if in doubt, it seems better not to eat. It’s not as if there’s any shortage of other sources of food.
I see eating of wild animals as morally better than eating the unfortunate results of industrial animal husbandry. Better a nasty end than nastiness without end.
So, all in all, I conclude that I’d rather not eat dolphins, unless given some solid research that shows that the dolphin species being eaten isn’t endangered, and that it’s not much smarter than pigs.
And I’d rather not eat minke whales, but that’s mainly because from what I remember from my childhood, it doesn’t taste very well.
I also see the Norwegian (and Icelandic and Japanese) whaling as morally problematic from another point of view: International agreements. To quote myself once more (because I’m darned proud of my subtle 
political satire here):