Help End the Cruel Harp Seal Hunt
in [Vegetarian]
|
Prev: SpayVac� Managing wildlife without slaughter?
Next: Most early humans ate primarily plant foods...
From: 10x on 13 Mar 2007 20:39 On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 16:43:41 -0000, "pearl" <tea(a)signguestbook.ie> wrote: ><10x(a)telu�s.net> wrote in message news:86gdv25vcvg63a7pbnkbdlejdg7auft5fe(a)4ax.com... >> On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 12:06:30 -0000, "pearl" <tea(a)signguestbook.ie> >> wrote: >> >> >"Chom Noamsky" <e(a)t.me> wrote in message news:y0hJh.38687$lY6.20732(a)edtnps90... >> >> > "pearl" <tea(a)signguestbook.ie> wrote in message >> >> > news:et3pe6$v67$1(a)reader01.news.esat.net... >> > >> >> > Omnivores are carnivorous. Where are meat-eating adaptations? >> >> >> >> The brain. >> > >> >'Anthropologies 'Man The Hunter' concept is still used as a >> >reason for justifying the consumption of animal flesh as food. >> >This has even extended as far as suggesting that animal foods >> >have enabled or caused human brain enlargement. >> >> It is man, the hunter gatherer. Humans utilized every food source >> they could in the past. There are some places in the world where even >> rodents are considered for the menu, along with all the edible plant >> species.. > >'Ethnographic parallels with modern hunter-gatherer communities have >been taken to show that the colder the climate, the greater the reliance >on meat. There are sound biological and economic reasons for this, not >least in the ready availability of large amounts of fat in arctic mammals. >From this, it has been deduced that the humans of the glacial periods >were primarily hunters, while plant foods were more important during >the interglacials. ' >http://www.phancocks.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/naturalhistory/devensian.htm > >"Studies of frugivorous communities elsewhere suggest that dietary >divergence is highest when preferred food (succulent fruit) is scarce, >and that niche separation is clear only at such times (Gautier-Hion >& Gautier 1979: Terborgh 1983). " Foraging profiles of sympatric >lowland gorillas and chimpanzees in the Lop� Reserve, Gabon, p.179, >Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences vol 334, 159-295, >No. 1270 > >'Kortlandt concludes this section on primate diets by saying that >the wealth of flora and insect fauna in the rain-forest provides >both chimpanzees and orang-utans with a dietary spectrum that seems >wide enough to meet their nutritional requirements, without hunting >and killing of vertebrates being necessary. It is in the poorer >nutritional environments, where plant sources may be scarce or of >low quality where carnivorous behaviour arises. Even then he says >that the meat obtained are minimal and perhaps insufficient to meet >basic needs. Finally he adds "The same conclusion applies, of course, >to hominids . . . it is strange that most palaeoanthropologists have >never been willing to accept the elementary facts on this matter >that have emerged from both nutritional science and primate research." >..' >http://venus.nildram.co.uk/veganmc/polemics.htm > So what do those who hunt seals turn to for food and income when they can no longer hunt seals? And where are the rain forests on the coastlines where the seal hunters live? What are the alternative food sources. What are the alternative sources of income? What happens if the seal population goes unchecked? take the � out of 10x(a)telu�s.net to email me
From: 10x on 13 Mar 2007 20:43 On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 16:28:33 -0000, "pearl" <tea(a)signguestbook.ie> wrote: ><10x(a)telu�s.net> wrote in message news:cqfdv2l4qdgp8su4gn873cqvvo05ujkbnn(a)4ax.com... >> On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 11:00:46 -0000, "pearl" <tea(a)signguestbook.ie> >> wrote: >> >> ><10x(a)telu�s.net> wrote in message news:phlbv29ppf723or9qebur7nvfaf6itc4ug(a)4ax.com... >> >> On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 14:53:36 -0000, "pearl" <tea(a)signguestbook.ie> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> ><10x(a)telu�s.net> wrote in message news:rk58v2ph2vkmn7t9b9une3ia7d66638trl(a)4ax.com... >> >> >> On Sun, 11 Mar 2007 12:02:24 -0000, "pearl" <tea(a)signguestbook.ie> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >"Chom Noamsky" <e(a)t.me> wrote in message news:cNKIh.62340$Du6.1198(a)edtnps82... >> >> >> >> "pearl" <tea(a)signguestbook.ie> wrote in message >> >> >> >> news:esvdt6$67m$1(a)reader01.news.esat.net... >> >> >> >> > "Chom Noamsky" <e(a)t.me> wrote in message >> >> >> >> > news:uwDIh.62113$Du6.116(a)edtnps82... >> >> >.. >> >> >> >> >> It's perfectly ethical, legal, humane, moral, and sustainable to harvest >> >> >> >> >> seals for fur and meat. >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > It is none of the above. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> That certainly was a compelling argument. >> >> >> > >> >> >> >If there is absolute necessity (for survival), it may be justifiable. >> >> >> > >> >> >> >This isn't. >> >> >> >> >> >> Could you please show some data to prove your statement. >> >> >> >> >> >> If folks stop producing food, then what do they eat? >> >> > >> >> >'Most of the meat is wasted and left on the ice. Some if it is >> >> >sold to fur farms and some is ground up into animal feed. A >> >> >few thousand seal flippers are sold for human consumption in >> >> >Newfoundland. There is also a growing black market demand >> >> >for the seal penis bone in the Far East as some sort of voodoo >> >> >quack remedy for impotence. >> >> >...' >> >> >http://www.harpseals.org/hunt/faqs.html >> >> > >> >> >> >> I'm sorry, that is as somewhat vitriolic and biased website. >> > >> >Not a valid argument. Show otherwise. >> >> Compared to what is published by the department of Fisheries and >> Oceans the information on that site does not reflect reality. > >This? > >'Seals have been hunted for food, fuel, shelter, fur and other >products for hundreds of years. DFO is no longer involved in >product support or promotion activities, but the department >does encourage the fullest possible commercial use of seals. >Seal products consist of leather, oil, handicrafts, and meat for >human and animal consumption as well as seal oil capsules >rich in Omega-3." >http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/seal-phoque/faq_e.htm > >I don't see "all of the meat..", or even "most of the meat.."? > >Here neither: >http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/seal-phoque/reports-rapports/facts-faits/factsheet_e.htm > >Do you? > >'There are few indigenous peoples involved in the commercial >seal "hunt". Inuit or Native people in the North hunt mostly in >the arctic and primarily ringed seals. Most of the sealers in the >Gulf of St.Lawrence are residents of the Magdalen Islands >of Quebec. These are French speaking people. Most of the >sealers of the Newfoundland Front are descendents of the >European immigrants. > >There are about 4500 Inuit in Newfoundland. ..... >...' >http://www.harpseals.org/hunt/faqs.html So you would take away a traditional lifestyle and income away from folks who have lived of the fare of the ocean for at least tens of centuries? What would they turn to for food and income if this is denyied them? So what if these folks speak French. It is their lifestyle and lively hood you attack. They don't attack you for being vegetarian. Vegetarians are responsible for a great deal of loss of wildlife habitat to the plow. They eat, wildlife starves. take the � out of 10x(a)telu�s.net to email me
From: Ian MacLure on 13 Mar 2007 22:43 "pearl" <tea(a)signguestbook.ie> wrote in news:et6d7b$1ij$21(a)reader01.news.esat.net: [snip] > Anthropocentric ignoramus. > > "My goodness they're cute!" Those are the words one usually > hears at the first sight of a Harp seal pup. Hunted for centuries > to feed families and boost local economies the seals have been > at the center of controversy for years. Now, thanks to local efforts, Spreading cod worms and putting pressure on already weakened fish stocks. > (and modern transportation), they offer wildlife enthusiasts a > chance to witness nature in an unforgettable setting. The Magdalen > Islands, form a small archipelago located in the gulf of the St. Well d'uh. I could take you to Cap Aux Meules and show you a monument to a close relative. > Lawrence, north of Prince Edward Island, which is part of the > province of Quebec. The ice floe that forms in the Gulf is one of > the major birthing sites for the Harp seal, and provides us an They give birth anywhere there's an iceflow. Of course with glowbull warming there won't be any iceflows for the seagoing rats to spawn on. It'll make them easier to whack. IBM
From: Chom Noamsky on 14 Mar 2007 02:17 "pearl" <tea(a)signguestbook.ie> wrote in message news:et6d6h$1ij$3(a)reader01.news.esat.net... > 'The adjective unethical has 2 meanings: > > Meaning #1: not conforming to approved standards of > social or professional behavior And you're "the" judge of what constitutes these approved standards, right? That's the problem with the ARAs, there is only one acceptable ethic (theirs), period. It amounts to a kind of religious fanaticism, or at the very least, it's autocratic and dictatorial. > They show that the majority of Canadians oppose the seal "hunt". Depends on the poll. If an equal amount of effort went into educating Canadians about the facts, opinion would swing way back in favour of the hunt. Unfortunely, working people don't have a lot of free time, unlike the ARAs seem to have endless amounts of it to meddle in other people's affairs. >> The Golden Rule exists in all major religions, it's a very good rule when >> applied to human relationships. It falls apart when applied to >> human-animal >> relationships and animal ethics. > > For whom? Those wishing to selfishly exploit non-humans. Mankind has been selfishly exploiting animals since the dawn of recorded history. Is there something you missed in your high school texts? You won't find many instances of past peoples practicing the Golden Rule with animals. The closest you will get is 'sacred' status, like certain animals associated with religious beliefs. And the only reason you have the luxury to sit there and 'defend' animal rights is because you sit upon the shoulders of millennia of technological advancement. This advancement never would have come about if mankind did not exploit animals for his purposes. Of course, the alternate is you could live like a gorilla or a chimpanzee or an orangutan... but you ARAs aren't quite that desperate to live up to your radical ideologies. >> > There could be symbiotic, that is, mutually beneficial, association. >> >> Sealing is mutually beneficial. They get less competition for food, we >> get >> products to sell. > > Nonsense. Perfectly true. >> > Whatever is not required for survival is not absolute necessity. >> > Logic. >> >> That eliminates just about 99.9% of what we know as civilization. Humans >> are not creatures of pure need, we have wants and desires and the >> intelligence to achieve them. That's what separates us from the animals. >> What you're delving into are theoretical that only exist in the minds of >> naive idealists. > > 'hu�mane (hyu-man') > adj. > Characterized by kindness, mercy, or compassion: Absolutely. That's why seal hunters use hakapiks and .22 shells to kill seals. It's humane. >> Something is right or good when society deems it to be. If laws are a >> continuance of tradition that is because society has not seen fit to >> reform >> them. Therefore, in this case what is old is also current and >> contemporary; >> it passes the truth test. > > "The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged > by the way its animals are treated." - Mohandas Gandhi Absolutely. In Canada our pets and other domesticated animals live better than most people do in third world countries, and when it comes to slaughtering/harvesting/hunting animals we use methods considered humane by society. Animal welfare is a strong Canadian value. >> >> I see that PETA also reserves the right to life and death over >> >> animals considering it routinely practices euthanasia. >> > >> > Very wrong, in mine and many other ARAs' view. >> >> This proves the rules of animal ethics are not absolutes, even among the >> ARAs. > > PETA hovers between animal welfare and animal rights. And of course, your definition of animal ethics is the only one possibly acceptable. End of discussion. Right? >> For credibility a claim should be supported by some supporting evidence. >> Which veterinarian experts said this? How come no names of individuals >> or >> the name of the group? > > Surely you can click on the link provided and find out. I did, that's why I asked - there is no reference to any 'who' in the link. It's just hearsay unless there is something to back it up. >> You can corroborate my 98% claim with the Canadian >> Veterinary Medical Association. > > I've seen the abstract. It says 98% "at best". That's good enough to discount the unsubstantiated claim in your link. >> Now, you do realize theses anti-sealing sites deal more in >> emotionally-charged hype than facts? > > Of course not. You've given us no valid reason to. Of course I have, but for a "true believer" there is only one acceptable way to think. Thus, no matter what evidence I provide you will deem it invalid. >> The ARAs can't even agree on whether euthanasia is ethical, thus you'll >> have >> to save your judgment for future date. > > Euthanasia of healthy animals is an animal welfare position, not AR. U-huh... so animal rights have nothing to do with animal welfare. What a cheeseball copout. >> > Can you show us this evidence. >> >> Argumentum ad absurdum. > > How so? "On present evidence". Give us some real facts. I did, I gave you a link complete with references and stuff. You do know what references are and how to use them? Is it your refusal to consider something that might break your dearly-held (and clearly mistaken) ideological beliefs? >> Ever heard of Google? > > Ever heard that the burden of proof is upon those making claims? Too bad that burden doesn't apply to ARAs. >> > '.. disease rates were significantly associated within a range of >> > dietary plant food composition that suggested an absence of a >> > disease prevention threshold. That is, the closer a diet is to an >> > all-plant foods diet, the greater will be the reduction in the rates >> > of these diseases.' >> > http://www.news.cornell.edu/releases/Nov98/thermogenesis_paper.html >> >> Non-sequitur argumentum ad absurdum. > > Evidence that humans are not naturally carnivorous omnivores. > > 'Campbell TC, Junshi C. Diet and chronic degenerative diseases: > perspectives from China. > Am J Clin Nutr 1994 May;59(5 Suppl):1153S-1161S. No such conclusion can be drawn from that item... all it amounts to is a cultural variation in diet. Tell me, why do North Americans live longer than Chinese?
From: Chom Noamsky on 14 Mar 2007 02:28
"pearl" <tea(a)signguestbook.ie> wrote in message news:et6d6m$1ij$5(a)reader01.news.esat.net... > "Eric Gisin" <gisin(a)uniserve.com> wrote in message > news:1173726518.724066(a)netadmin1.interbaun.net... >> "Chom Noamsky" <e(a)t.me> wrote in message >> news:y0hJh.38687$lY6.20732(a)edtnps90... >> >> "pearl" <tea(a)signguestbook.ie> wrote in message >> >> news:et3pe6$v67$1(a)reader01.news.esat.net... >> >> Omnivores are carnivorous. Where are meat-eating adaptations? >> > >> > The brain. >> Leading to technology, like stone tools 2M years ago and fire over 1M >> years ago. > > What came first.. the "meat/brain/intelligence", or the > means to acquire and actually eat it... ? ...duuuuh... . "The primate order includes a handful of species that live entirely on meat (carnivores) and also a few that are strict vegetarians (herbivores), but it is composed chiefly of animals that have varied diets (omnivores). The carnivorous primates are the four species of tarsiers, which live in Southeast Asia. Using their long back legs, these pocket-sized nocturnal hunters leap on their prey, pinning it down with their hands and then killing it with their needle-sharp teeth. Tarsiers primarily eat insects but will also eat lizards, bats, and snakes." http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761569210/Primate.html |