Sad news: baby elephant has died.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by Beverly

The only animal that is as aggressive as humans are is other humans. So the question can only be, do we mourn the loss of others we kill in war? Personally, overall, I don't think so.

I guess to answer this one, we would have to ask someone who has actually killed someone else in a war. I don't want to keep answering for other people but I think you will find some very sobering responses from our war veterans. Even though it is not a popular thought in our hollywood-violence society, throughout every war prior to Vietnam, the recorded fireing rate for soldiers on the front line was 15-20%. That means that 80% of the soldiers would not even FIRE their weapons at the enemy - even to save their own lives. There have been other studies which have shown that even those who did shoot could not possibly have missed their mark as many times as they did unless it was intentional. Of the rifles recovered on civil war battlefields over 20% of the unfired ones were loaded with multiple loads, some loaded with as many as 16 differnt ball and powder charges. This suggests that many of these soldiers merely went through the motions of loading and firing their guns, not wanting their companions to know that they were in fact concientios objectors.
The only way that fireing and killing rates were increased (90%) in Vietnam and subsequent wars was though intensive training that most closely resembles behavioral conditioning ie "Pablo's" ( ) dog. And the prevalence of PTSD amongst these soldiers may indicate the high costs that must be payed for overcoming this natural aversion to killing a member of your own species. (Note: not my own thoughts. Plagerized from a pulitzer prize winning book called "On Killing" by LT Col. Grossman).

- Chad

[Fish]

Originally Posted by christyf5

WoW!

I thought the Lounge was for aquarium related topics

Sorry everyone, Iguess that I mistook this "Lounge" for being the same idea as Reef Central's "Lounge" which is really the opposite. I'll be quiet now.

- Chad

[muck]

Looks like chad has doubled his post count from this thread...

[Fish]

ha!... ok ok
I'll be in the nano forum if anyone needs me

Cheers,

- Chad

[muck]

Originally Posted by Fish

ha!... ok ok
I'll be in the nano forum if anyone needs me

Cheers,

- Chad

no worries Chad.
It was actually a very interesting read. Its great to see people actually discussing their point of views, beliefs with an open mind. I wish more people would do that as opposed to the great "Im right and thats final" philosophy.

[trilinearmipmap]

Whether you believe God created all the animals, or whether you believe evolution is responsible, or whether you believe like me that God created the conditions necessary for all life to evolve, doesn't matter.

Yes we are more intelligent than other animals, most of us anyways. It is clear that animals have demonstrated intelligence and not just simple repetitive behaviours. Many people by the way seem to have no intelligence but are just "along for the ride", letting others do all their thinking for them.

It is interesting the way the logic goes: We are more intelligent than other animals, therefore intelligence is a measure of superiority, therefore we are superior to other animals.

If zoos do everything they can to keep animals like elephants healthy and thriving, then OK. Some animals will die despite this, as they do in nature. But if a zoo is not able to provide the best possible environment for these creatures, then leave them alone. Animals were not put on this earth for our entertainment.

Anyway I have no use for the "tree hugger" environmental types who are generally a bunch of unemployed hippie pot smoking feminist types who could use a good bath and a firm kick in the butt. At the same time if we do not clean up our act and take better care of our environment, we will all be worse off in the future in many ways.

Well that is my opinion, go ahead and blast away now.

[christyf5]

Hehe, Chad I was just kidding.

I just found it interesting reading through the 5 pages of this thread that it went from the sadness of a baby elephant dying to whether baby elephants should be referred to as infants since infants can apparently only be human, then of course captive breeding/keeping zoos, "I hate tree huggers", instinct vs. conditioning, evolution, much bickering and name calling (all in good fun no doubt ), a few things out of left field, and finally the ethics in keeping reef tanks.

I find it amazing how you can start with such a seemingly harmless topic and incite such hot debate on such a wide range of topics.

Way to go!!

I love 5 page threads. They make for a good break from reading stupid microscope slides at work

Christy

[Doug]

Originally Posted by Fish

Sorry everyone, Iguess that I mistook this "Lounge" for being the same idea as Reef Central's "Lounge" which is really the opposite. I'll be quiet now.

- Chad

He,he. This thread would have been closed on RC already. Politics and religion threads are not allowed in the lounge there.

They do have another board where it all hangs out. Or one can get entertained on RDO lounge. I would not be able to argue on either and not lose. Cant keep up to them.

[Fish]

I agree this has been really entertaining and thought provoking!
But I am not coming out of retirement to comment anymore in this thread...
not even to bump my post count to 200...


- Chad

[Fish]

... and that's final!

- Chad