Endangered Species Slaughterhouse, and Man as an Extinction Event

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Somehow I suspect you do not include yourself or your loved ones in that 50-60%

I think my cold and heartless mind would have no trouble with getting inline... I would use a simple weighted scale to pick the best and brightest to stay and drop the rest from the gene pool... Just as we need to make that same scale for health care... The money the government has wasted on my 83 yr old mother-in law would give heath care to hundreds of others that will give back to mankind...

Jim...
 
As someone who works with the elderly in care facilities I find that POV rather sad but you are free to have it - largely because your mother probably spent a good chunk of her life caring for you.

But how does that translate into any concern for the well being of the planet. Are there any other species you would advocate decimating by 50-60%? Sharks, dolphins, whales? Do you think any of them give a sh_t about their eco-systems or conservation in general? Do you think any of them would not consume every last food source available to the point of extinction if they had the opportunity?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Man is capable of great harm but also of great promise. More so than any other species on the planet because we are the only ones who can look beyond our own circumstances and interpret the consequences of various actions beyond the immediate moment. Sadly, few of us, including many environmentalists, make the effort to do so.

Most people in North America who get mad at island, sea going cultures for harvesting marine mammals are hypocrites. The ocean is to them what pasture land is to us. Their marine mammals are our cows and pigs. Do we not herd them with ATV's and Quads, induce fear when we load them into trucks, slaughter them? I've helped butcher cows in a farmyard and I could graphically describe what that was like. Fortunately (or unfortunately depending on ones POV) we do our best "killing" out of sight in factories - which is the only difference between us and them.

The biggest arguments that come back against the above are:

That cows and pigs are domesticated and bred for consumption. Hold on, What about hunting? Even so, would we be happier if island nations captive bred and domesticated marine mammals for consumption. Where are the "No whales or dolphins in captivity!" people on this?

That cows and pigs are not intelligent like sea mammals. Anyone who knows cows and pigs knows this is not true. But anyways, what is the defining characteristic that determines whether you get eaten or not?

That hunting is a right and part of our heritage. Hey, that's what they say.Where are the "Anti globalization/corporatization" groups on the destruction of indigenous food gathering practices and enforced reliance on foreign food sources by outside influences?

That the oceans are "special". As special to them as a farmers field is to us.

That we manage our pasture land. This is true. It is harder to control the oceans. But would environmentalists be happier if the Japanese or Faroese built whale and dolphin factories? Would they support farming the seas, building fences and creating sustainable harvests of marine mammals?

No. We don't want them to modernize, mechanize or improve their killing. We want those people, over there, to just stop, while we carry on merrily with our own way of doing things. No wonder they think we are full of crap. Perhaps they would take more notice if we shut down our beef and pork industries and outlawed deer and moose hunting.

Does this mean I support whale dolphin/killing, shark finning? No, I personally dislike it immensely. But I think the righteously indignant need to take a look in the mirror and do some changing themselves. Human beings are capable of great good but that requires self reflection and the willingness to make hard, uncomfortable admissions/corrections. True game changers lead by example (Gandhi, Mandela, King etc...). Currently, what I see, are spoiled self indulgent people who want to bully others with petitions and economic boycotts.
 
Last edited:
As someone who works with the elderly in care facilities I find that POV rather sad but you are free to have it - largely because your mother probably spent a good chunk of her life caring for you.

But how does that translate into any concern for the well being of the planet. Are there any other species you would advocate decimating by 50-60%? Sharks, dolphins, whales? Do you think any of them give a sh_t about their eco-systems or conservation in general? Do you think any of them would not consume every last food source available to the point of extinction if they had the opportunity?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Man is capable of great harm but also of great promise. More so than any other species on the planet because we are the only ones who can look beyond our own circumstances and interpret the consequences of various actions beyond the immediate moment. Sadly, few of us, including many environmentalists, make the effort to do so.

Most people in North America who get mad at island, sea going cultures for harvesting marine mammals are hypocrites. The ocean is to them what pasture land is to us. Their marine mammals are our cows and pigs. Do we not herd them with ATV's and Quads, induce fear when we load them into trucks, slaughter them? I've helped butcher cows in a farmyard and I could graphically describe what that was like. Fortunately (or unfortunately depending on ones POV) we do our best "killing" out of sight in factories - which is the only difference between us and them.

The biggest arguments that come back against the above are:

That cows and pigs are domesticated and bred for consumption. Hold on, What about hunting? Even so, would we be happier if island nations captive bred and domesticated marine mammals for consumption. Where are the "No whales or dolphins in captivity!" people on this?

That cows and pigs are not intelligent like sea mammals. Anyone who knows cows and pigs knows this is not true. But anyways, what is the defining characteristic that determines whether you get eaten or not?

That hunting is a right and part of our heritage. Hey, that's what they say.Where are the "Anti globalization/corporatization" groups on the destruction of indigenous food gathering practices and enforced reliance on foreign food sources by outside influences?

That the oceans are "special". As special to them as a farmers field is to us.

That we manage our pasture land. This is true. It is harder to control the oceans. But would environmentalists be happier if the Japanese or Faroese built whale and dolphin factories? Would they support farming the seas, building fences and creating sustainable harvests of marine mammals?

No. We don't want them to modernize, mechanize or improve their killing. We want those people, over there, to just stop, while we carry on merrily with our own way of doing things. No wonder they think we are full of crap. Perhaps they would take more notice if we shut down our beef and pork industries and outlawed deer and moose hunting.

Does this mean I support whale dolphin/killing, shark finning? No, I personally dislike it immensely. But I think the righteously indignant need to take a look in the mirror and do some changing themselves. Human beings are capable of great good but that requires self reflection and the willingness to make hard, uncomfortable admissions/corrections. True game changers lead by example (Gandhi, Mandela, King etc...). Currently, what I see, are spoiled self indulgent people who want to bully others with petitions and economic boycotts.

Look... The problem is " WE " are able to stop the natural selection and the normal checks and balance that keep populations in check... We can't keep growing the population .... We are very close to the tipping point... we're at 7+ BILLION and growing ...

And I'm sorry that my outlook is not socially acceptable... But that's where we are headed.... LIKE it or NOT.... :idk:

Jim...
 
I agree that overpopulation is a big problem. It's what makes most of what we do so destructive. But the idea of intentionally culling our own herd isn't going to be accepted by anyone. It's a non solution. That being the case, the more workable solution (if there is one) would seem to be minimizing the impact our current population has. To do that we need to change the notion that we can do as we please while expecting someone else to change. The emerging third world sees our standard of living and wants it. If we don't demonstrate a different direction they will pursue it the same as we did/do. The Chinese, Japanese and Faroese see us enjoying our choice of food sources without consideration and likewise want to pursue theirs.

The problem with not taking a leadership role is that we leave ourselves open to be followers. What other culture do North Americans want to have dictated to them to follow? Protesting others and demanding they change is not leadership.
 
We just got a bill from the hospital for the last 6 weeks..... $ 385,964.56 What a deal... So she can **** in a diaper and have a feeding tube for food... But, She's alive.... I think maybe someone is making a little money on this....:hm:

Jim...
 
I am with DrBill, I find many of the attitudes expressed in this and other forums depressing. You would think that divers would be better environmental stewards but largely that is not the case. It is a typical case of "as long as I have mine".
 
This may have been mentioned already, but I plan to dive this morning and don't want to read through the entire thread.

Extinction is a natural process. Species go extinct all the time. However, what distinguishes an extinction event from the normal process of extinction is that it involves a large number of species in a relatively short (by geologic time standards) time. There is no question that extinction is occurring at a faster rate than the normal background level and that much of it is related to human activity and impact on the environment. So the rate of extinction currently is high. Of course in some natural extinction events such as the Permo-Triassic (which is estimated to have killed off 96% of marine species) and the K-T (Cretaceous–Paleogene), extinction rates were extremely high due to catastrophic natural events such as extreme vulcanism, collisions with extra-terrestrial comets or meteors, etc.
 
You are wasting your breath DrBill, they are too stupid to understand basic biology or ecology and see the planet as theirs to sh*t on.
 
You are wasting your breath DrBill, they are too stupid to understand basic biology or ecology and see the planet as theirs to sh*t on.

What I've read in this thread sounds like good ole fashion common sense. What's stupid is to think we can destroy this planet. Ask youself if we wanted to destroy the earth how would we do it? We can't even get to the moon or the bottom of the ocean anymore! We are a fly on a bugs arse. If we are indeed doing harm globally we will be the ones going extinct. As someone posted we are puny compared to the forces of nature, to think otherwise is the height of arrogance. As individuals we need to do what's right so as not to pollute locally, global is beyond our pay grade.
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/swift/

Back
Top Bottom