So it wasn’t a factual answer and it doesn’t even make sense.
A statement typical of the Jew.
Gee, somehow that comes across as racist
That explains why the buffalo went to the water in the first place. It doesn’t explain why, even after being bitten, it just stood there and didn’t walk, much less run, away. I haven’t seen the footage, but that seems a little unnatural.
Interesting. You’re the first person I’ve ever heard make that statement.
His statement wasn’t baseless and illogical. He was trying to say that he believes the animals were used to being hunted in a certain way, by people or animals who hunted individuals or groups of individuals from the herd without decimating the population and that they were unprepared for European hunters who would each go on to kill hundreds if not thousands of bison as was the case with the infamous Buffalo Bill Cody. His use of quotation marks around “white man” led me to read it as him being facetious. In any case, no, I don’t particularly enjoy being referred to as “the white man” but it seemed as if your response was disproportionate to the (imagined?) offense.
And nothing. The last part was directed at him, not you.
The documentary in question is Life - presented by David Attenborough - I’d credit him (and the production team) with just a little more integrity than this, at least. They’re pretty upfront about the times when they have to interfere to make things happen for the camera - such as reproducing a setting in a tank in a studio (indeed in this particular case, they made a point of talking about it in the accompanying ‘making of’ shorts)
The documentary series took four years to film ten episodes - it’s one of the highest quality examples you mentioned, or nothing is.
That doesn’t surprise me, there’s a lot of nonsense talked about the peaceful, child of nature Indians and their relationship with the buffalo. The fact is that the Indians slaughtered several species of bison when they first arrived in the Americas, and only one ever recovered. Even that species never fully recovered while the Indians remained. The great herds of bison of myth were the result of two factors: Indians being decimated by disease, allowing the population to recover and the introduction of the horse forcing the herds to join up for protection.
As soon as a market was available for bison meat and hides the Indians, not surprisingly, made good use of their hunting skills and starting to supply the markets. At any given point in time there were more Indians involve din killing buffalo for market than Europeans. We have good records of several different tribal groups taking over a quarter of a million bison each annually, and many more Indians hunted as either individuals or as part of commercial outfits not associated with tribes. In fact one of the biggest, probably the biggest, sticking point in introducing limitations on the bison slaughter was the Indian slaughter, which the Indians didn’t want to stop and the whites would not tolerate if they were not allowed to take even much smaller numbers.
So while you could lay the blame for the slaughter of the bison a the hands of European market forces, to say that most bison where killed by white men just isn’t true.
You can have a look here for a decent summary of the situation in fairly plain language.
It was.
That’s not what he was saying at all. He was saying that animals have a race memory that actually means they don’t feel fear.
Very true.
Or maybe the fact that you saw what you deemed to be a racist comment blinded you to the actual meaning of what has been said. I offer as evidence the fact that you felt justified in violating the rules of this forum by calling the guy a name (i.e. personal attack), and that you deliberately used a racially disparaging remark.
---------Moderation intervention----
Blake–try to dial it back a notch or two. You get a bit too passionate in these kinds of threads.
As to what your comment about “A statement typical of the Jew” meant----I’m assuming you weren’t making a comment on the poster’s ethnicity but rather using it as a device? If so, you should have made it MUCH more clear.
[mod hat off]
Acceptable losses *can *play a part in evolutionary biology.
- For example, in the case of caterpillars that are brightly-coloured and nasty-flavoured, it is often necessary for predators to taste one of them (killing that individual caterpillar) in order to learn that they’re no good to eat - the group benefits from sharing genes that are only made useful if members of the group die - for the species, it’s an acceptable sacrifice (in statistical terms - there are of course no conscious decisions or logistics going on).
However, I’m not sure if such a thing can be said to be happening with buffaloes and dangerous water holes - they’ll drink when thirst overcomes caution, with the least cautious members typically going first and getting eaten (so in the long run, this should act to make the species more cautious, rather than breeding in an acceptance of the losses).
Really? The vast majority of European bison (one of the two extant bison species) were killed by Indians? I must have missed that part of European history.
The reverence we have the the Native Americans, about how they were in tune with nature, and how we emphasize how they used every part of the animals they killed (as if that somehow proved they were superior) is misplaced. North America was able to sustain a large population of buffalo type animals for a long time simply because Native American tribes were relatively small and immobile hunter gatherers who simply did not have the ability to eradicate the buffalo.
When horses were introduced to the continent and became widespread amongst Native American tribes, the area which they could hunt and gather on increased dramatically - they were able to be more nomadic, move to new areas and consume the resources. You hear the stories about how they only killed what they needed and used it all - but in reality, once they had horses, they were killing the buffalo on a pretty large scale. They’d force a herd off a cliff, killing dozens of members and perhaps only taking the meat and carcasses of a few, leaving the others to rot.
I can’t speak to the actual numbers killed by Native Americans vs Europeans, but what is clear is that it wasn’t some sort of connection with nature that kept the Native Americans from slaughtering the buffalo, and once they had horses, they were well on their way.
He walked away with a limp, but since the Komodo dragon’s bite is poisonous, it wasn’t healing. With a bite on the ankle, I suspect it’s hard to run very fast or far, and with the venom and bacteria in the victim’s system, he was probably weak and in pain. Hungry komodo dragons pretty desperate for a meal, will follow the smell of his blood. From what I recall during the show, they said the dragons (and the film crew) trailed the buffalo for days, waiting for it to finally die.
The ‘making of’ for that episode was pretty damn scary - the camera operators were pretty much as close to the dragons as was the buffalo - you could see the animals eyeing them up as potential prey.
The camera operators were protected, of course - by a local fellow equipped with a stick.
Um, probably because they are really, really thirsty. Not just “need a glass of water after working in the garden” thirsty, but “probably gonna die if I don’t drink from this, the only source of water for miles and miles”.
Bottom line: if you don’t drink you will die, and if you do drink, you only might die. The life of a wildebeest is a tough gamble.
The buffalo was as good as dead, why risk injury? A serious injury could take that dragon out of action, which would most likely lead to a premature death, or just make life really sucky.
IIRC the main weapon that that the dragon uses is infection delivered by biting, that was done, not much more to do but wait.
The buffalo that were smart enough to run away did. You didn’t see them on the show because that would be boring.
Although there is some basis for feeling that the Native Americans were more in tune with their environment than modern US society, that may be more because modern society is so horribly out of whack that the natives appear harmonious by contrast. Ask the Native Americans [why***[ /URL] horses had to be introduced to North America.
Well, this practice, at least, predates the (re)-introduction of horses by a [URL=“http://www.head-smashed-in.com/”]more than few thousand years]( "http: //www.livescience.com/animals/060501_extinct_horses.html).
NOTE ADDED BY MODERATOR
***The first link in this post has been reported as loading malware, although others have not apparently had this problem. (See posts below.) I have broken the link. Visit this site at your own risk.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator
For the wisent they used stealth Indians – from India! 
I was all set to nitpick this, since I had always heard that the only poisonous lizards were the gila monster and the Mexican beaded lizard. But it turns out that the Komodo was added to that list just last year. Cool. Short of discovering they can breathe fire too, this was the only way to make them better.
The Croc Hunter did a special on Komodo dragons. I recall him saying they were relentless hunters. They’d track pray for days. They can even swim to different islands to hunt. That was one of Irwins better specials.