Whale Wars

[mtnman]

I said "Disagree..it's possible to not touch the environment..

I call BS here!  That's like saying it's possible for a fish to not touch the water, lol!

Everything you do "touches" the environment.  The only way to not effect it is to not be a part of it.  

Just because we're the only species so far to be able to have an "opinion" of our impact on the environment doesn't mean we're not a part of it, or that our opinions on our impact are correct, or that our opinions matter one way or the other.

"nature" was on a roll long before "man" arrived, and will continue to be on a "roll"...

For which species is that not applicable?  Is nature crippled due to the loss of the mammoth?  Dinosaurs? Dodo bird? Passenger pigeon?  Will it be crippled if a few species of whales go extinct?  The polar bear? Man?

Extinction is "natural", and is caused by many factors- one of which is conflict with other species.  Man has aided the extinction of many, so has "natural" weather change.

IMO, extinction caused by man's "misuse" of the environment is a bad thing.  Does our opinion matter?

FYI, "straw-man" tactics won't work. 

Call me what you want- you're argument lacks any vertabral support.

dentin has left the building   

Don't leave on account of me...

[Elfie]

Hunting "using scientific methods" is not going to guarantee the survival of any species...there will always be a "scientific group of idiots" that will make the incorrect decision on how to manage the species in question.  The vast majority of decisions made by the aforementioned scientific groups are most often influenced by greed/monetary gain.

The Fish and Game departments of the various states do a very good job of managing the wildlife populations. I don't know of a single species that has gone extinct or become endangered because of mismanagement by a Fish and Game department.

You're correct, people have been eating Whales for quite some time, however, hunting Whales with Whaling ships, either present or past was strictly "for profit"...not for survival.

Tell that to the native people in Alaska who have hunted whales for thousands of years for food and never made a single penny of profit off their kills. I'm sure there are other groups as well that have hunted whales for food, the people in Alaska are the just ones that came to mind first.

[dentin]

I call BS here!  That's like saying it's possible for a fish to not touch the water, lol!

Everything you do "touches" the environment.  The only way to not effect it is to not be a part of it.  

Just because we're the only species so far to be able to have an "opinion" of our impact on the environment doesn't mean we're not a part of it, or that our opinions on our impact are correct, or that our opinions matter one way or the other.

For which species is that not applicable?  Is nature crippled due to the loss of the mammoth?  Dinosaurs? Dodo bird? Passenger pigeon?  Will it be crippled if a few species of whales go extinct?  The polar bear? Man?

Extinction is "natural", and is caused by many factors- one of which is conflict with other species.  Man has aided the extinction of many, so has "natural" weather change.

IMO, extinction caused by man's "misuse" of the environment is a bad thing.  Does our opinion matter?

Call me what you want- you're argument lacks any vertabral support.

Don't leave on account of me...

Your statement

Call me what you want

?? Where in bloody hell did that come from?   

OK, one more time. please read my quote below...

"FYI, "straw-man" tactics won't work.  This conversation is off to a bad start, so rather than get into a wizzing contest, I'll just end it now."



edit:

[dentin]

The Fish and Game departments of the various states do a very good job of managing the wildlife populations. I don't know of a single species that has gone extinct or become endangered because of mismanagement by a Fish and Game department.

Tell that to the native people in Alaska who have hunted whales for thousands of years for food and never made a single penny of profit off their kills. I'm sure there are other groups as well that have hunted whales for food, the people in Alaska are the just ones that came to mind first.

I wasn't aware of the fact that the "native people in Alaska" used Whaling Ships, ie, Ships that displace >200 tons.

[mtnman]

Your statement  ?? Where in bloody hell did that come from?   

OK, one more time. please read my quote below...

"FYI, "straw-man" tactics won't work.  This conversation is off to a bad start, so rather than get into a wizzing contest, I'll just end it now."
edit:

Sorry- I should have said "Call my tactics what you want".

Your position seems to be that an organism (man, or "humans" in this case) doesn't have to be a part of (or "touch") its ecosystem.  I called BS to that, to which you claim I'm using "straw-man" tactics.  Which part of your position am I misrepresenting?

The fact that the ecosystem works fine with/without a particular organism doesn't mean that that organism doesn't "touch" or "effect" the ecosystem.

The idea that many people have that we (humans) aren't, or don't have to be, or are "above", being active participants in the earth's ecosystem is ridiculous fallacy.

[Curlew]

I wasn't aware of the fact that the "native people in Alaska" used Whaling Ships, ie, Ships that displace >200 tons.

Are you saying that a native alsakain can not be a modern day sailor?

[dentin]

Your statement  ?? Where in bloody hell did that come from?  FURIOUS!

OK, one more time. please read my quote below...

"FYI, "straw-man" tactics won't work.  This conversation is off to a bad start, so rather than get into a wizzing contest, I'll just end it now."
edit:

Sorry- I should have said "Call my tactics what you want".

Your position seems to be that an organism (man, or "humans" in this case) doesn't have to be a part of (or "touch") its ecosystem.  I called BS to that, to which you claim I'm using "straw-man" tactics.  Which part of your position am I misrepresenting?

The fact that the ecosystem works fine with/without a particular organism doesn't mean that that organism doesn't "touch" or "effect" the ecosystem.

The idea that many people have that we (humans) aren't, or don't have to be, or are "above", being active participants in the earth's ecosystem is ridiculous fallacy.

Ok, allow me to sum up my philosophy on Wildlife..Let Nature take it's course!  Take note on the fact that I have singled out WILDLIFE....NOT the whole Ecosystem! 

Now then, here is what I meant by straw-man...and you have done this in your previous reply's, intentional or Unintentional...guess in the long run, it doesn't really matter, fact is it happened.

A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "set up a straw man," one describes a position that superficially resembles an opponent's actual view, yet is easier to refute. Then, one attributes that position to the opponent. For example, someone might deliberately overstate the opponent's position. While a straw man argument may work as a rhetorical technique—and succeed in persuading people—it carries little or no real evidential weight, since the opponent's actual argument has not been refuted.

I've already wasted way to much time on this topic....time to move on to other Windmills. 

[dentin]

Are you saying that a native alsakain can not be a modern day sailor?

Awww, geeze, where did I say that!? I said: "I wasn't aware of the fact that the "native people in Alaska" used Whaling Ships, ie, Ships that displace >200 tons."...Like in Commercial Fishing.

[iTunes]

Big grand statements aside, the average joe in this world is not to keen on Bunches of whales being harpooned to death and all that goes with it, I happen to share that point of view also, I'm willing to bet that the same folks on here saying it's ok to go around harpooning whales are probably the same ones who will pontificate for pages on global warming is a natural occurence and that it's not man made,

[wooly15]

Big grand statements aside, the average joe in this world is not to keen on Bunches of whales being harpooned to death and all that goes with it, I happen to share that point of view also, I'm willing to bet that the same folks on here saying it's ok to go around harpooning whales are probably the same ones who will pontificate for pages on global warming is a natural occurence and that it's not man made,

I guess I should have added this in my statement earlier....I wish they would go about it in a better way because I would really like to seen them be successful.  There is no reason to hunt endangered species.  It's not like Minke whale blubber cures cancer.

[MORAY37]

Being possibly the only one on this BBS that is actually a biologist, I would like to state my side.

This show, is a very sorry attempt at nobility.  Paul Watson (the Captain) is a whack job (in more than one circle), and the crew is as inept as any there has ever been.  The only natural ending for this endeavor will be the loss of one or more of the crew in some inanely stupid accident, which will no doubt be left at the foot of the Japanese.  (Which is also, I surmise, what Watson is truly and ultimately attempting to do) The "Sea Shepards" do their own cause a disservice simply by their existence, and their tactics.  I am completely unsympathetic to these morons.  This show is legitimately harming the very ideology they are out to spread.  When people ask me what I think of them, I simple term them as "irrational and clueless". 

I swear that the helicopter pilot thinks he's Maverick, walking around the ship with a patched out flight suit.(He wasn't a pilot, but an avionics technician in the USMC)  I suppose that might work on some clueless eco-tail on that ship, who knows.  I've watched the show in disbelief at the lack of seamanship dispalyed by nearly every member of the crew, and the zealot nature displayed by nearly every member of the command staff.  The only peron that appears to have a rational side among them is the doctor.

That being said...
  The Japanese are skirting the ban on commercial whaling, by claiming more than their "share" (as designated by the IWC moratorium) of whales for "scientific" purposes.  They are killing these animals that are protected, and illegally profitting from the loophole in the maritime law that states the "entire animal must be used or consumed" after killing.  It's honestly one of the largest jokes in marine biology, what the Japanese term "cetacean research".   And don't be mistaken, they wouldn't send a fleet if it wasn't profitable.

Whether or not whaling should be legal is not up for discussion anymore. The IWC moratorium has been in place for many years.  If, for example, a group went around killing bald eagles, (under the guise of research) then selling and making a profit from them, people would be absolutely horrified.

I honestly hope whoever is funding them (the Sea Sheppards) runs out of money. Neither continuation of their sorties into the Antarctic, nor the sinking of their ship and death of any or all of their crew, is good for anyone.  I really just wish they would go away.... they aren't helping.

[oakranger]

what kind of biologist are you?

[mtnman]

Ok, allow me to sum up my philosophy on Wildlife..Let Nature take it's course!  Take note on the fact that I have singled out WILDLIFE....NOT the whole Ecosystem! 

Now then, here is what I meant by straw-man...and you have done this in your previous reply's, intentional or Unintentional...guess in the long run, it doesn't really matter, fact is it happened.

A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "set up a straw man," one describes a position that superficially resembles an opponent's actual view, yet is easier to refute. Then, one attributes that position to the opponent. For example, someone might deliberately overstate the opponent's position. While a straw man argument may work as a rhetorical technique—and succeed in persuading people—it carries little or no real evidential weight, since the opponent's actual argument has not been refuted.

I've already wasted way to much time on this topic....time to move on to other Windmills. 

I understand what a straw man argument is.  Essentially, your assertion that I'm using straw man tactics is a straw man tactic itself.

Quite simply, you said-

"Hunting "using scientific methods" is not going to guarantee the survival of any species...there will always be a "scientific group of idiots" that will make the incorrect decision on how to manage the species in question.  The vast majority of decisions made by the aforementioned scientific groups are most often influenced by greed/monetary gain. 

Mother Nature, on the other hand has no use for "monetary gain", and therefore is the best method of natural management."   

Which looks to me like you're saying scientists have no clue, are mainly out for money, and are less effective than an imaginary entity (Mother Nature) at managing resources.  Did you mean something other than that?

I'll admit I thought you were using "Mother Nature" as a way of referring to the Ecosystem.  Although now you seem to be claiming to only be talking about wildlife?

Why do you keep tossing out vague, accusatory "straw-man", rude "now go outside and play, Dick", inaccurate "it's possible to not touch the environment" statements, and then attempt to close the door for anyone to have a discussion- "dentin  (from Planet Earth)  has left the building" "dentin has left the building" "I've already wasted way to much time on this topic....time to move on to other Windmills."???   

If you feel threatened by someone disagreeing with your statements, why post them?

[Elfie]

I wasn't aware of the fact that the "native people in Alaska" used Whaling Ships, ie, Ships that displace >200 tons.

Your statement was that whaling, is and always has been a venture for profit. Just because the Alaskan natives didn't and still don't use ships that displace 200 tons does not negate the fact that they have been whaling for subsistence for thousands of years.

[dentin]

I understand what a straw man argument is.  Essentially, your assertion that I'm using straw man tactics is a straw man tactic itself.

Quite simply, you said-

"Hunting "using scientific methods" is not going to guarantee the survival of any species...there will always be a "scientific group of idiots" that will make the incorrect decision on how to manage the species in question.  The vast majority of decisions made by the aforementioned scientific groups are most often influenced by greed/monetary gain. 

Mother Nature, on the other hand has no use for "monetary gain", and therefore is the best method of natural management."   

Which looks to me like you're saying scientists have no clue, are mainly out for money, and are less effective than an imaginary entity (Mother Nature) at managing resources.  Did you mean something other than that?

Nope...thats EXACTLY what I meant..see the problem lies with you not keying on the words "scientific group of idiots"and "decisions made by the aforementioned scientific groups are most often influenced by greed/monetary gain."/i] Where did I say ALL SCIENTIFIC GROUPS...huh!? 

I'll admit I thought you were using "Mother Nature" as a way of referring to the Ecosystem.  Although now you seem to be claiming to only be talking about wildlife?

Guess your "thoughts" were incorrect

Why do you keep tossing out vague, accusatory "straw-man",

Exactly what you were doing AND continue to do.[/quote]

rude "now go outside and play, Dick",

Innuendos tossed from rich46's yap...."Turnabout is fair play"...read the thread. 

inaccurate "it's possible to not touch the environment" statements,

Perhaps I should have explained further..really didn't think you'd have a difficult time grasping the meaning..my mistake.

and then attempt to close the door for anyone to have a discussion- "dentin  (from Planet Earth)  has left the building" "dentin has left the building" "I've already wasted way to much time on this topic....time to move on to other Windmills."??? 

I should have dropped this WOT at the start..remember when I said "FYI, "straw-man" tactics won't work.  This conversation is off to a bad start, so rather than get into a wizzing contest, I'll just end it now". I certainly made a mistake, by continuing this thread.   Oh, and you DID ask "what planet are you from"?.

If you feel threatened by someone disagreeing with your statements, why post them?

Now that's funny.."threatened"..surely you jest. 

As I said above...re: wizzing contest. This is no longer about "Whaling" it's become a contest.  So, before I change from my gentleman demeanor into my nasty demeanor and get booted from this BBS...I'll leave ya with this: Keep the Straw-man away from flames...you'll be lost without it.

  Dentin (from planet earth) has wasted enough time in pixel land and has left the building.