Get your fill of sci-fi, science, and mockery of stupid ideas
http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/
Yes, the tiger was probably watching CNN and was seriously concerned about the possible socioeconomic ramifications of the American invasion. Good point.Axis Kast wrote:That's right. Yellowstone isn't a war zone. Iraq is.
The tiger was under fantastic levels of stress.
Blame doesn't matter. Get over it.
This is ridiculous. Do you seriously think that you could go to any zoo in the world and stick your hand in the cage and NOT be attacked by a large predator?Axis Kast wrote:Normal members of the public can do some pretty stupid things.
Concession accepted.
Actually, that's the fucking job of the zoo staff. But the requirement is that the inebriated somebody isn't a trigger-happy hick with an automatic rifle, who also happens to be part of an invasion force.Axis Kast wrote:And yet security precautions aren’t safe enough to ensure that an inebriated somebody can’t stick their hand into the enclosure to feed the animal.
Again I say, ordinary people can't easily get in, unless these people have a special key called M16 A2/M203 Combat Rifle.Axis Kast wrote:If people can easily get in, that’s a problem, too.
Fuck you.Axis Kast wrote:Normal members of the public can do some pretty stupid things.
Concession accepted.
He doesnt seem to get the "predator" part...Darth Wong wrote:Axis Kast logic:I can't believe this idiot can actually remember to drop his pants before taking a dump.
- Tiger bites idiot who offers his hand as a tasty meal.
- Tiger happens to be in Iraq.
- Iraq was invaded.
- Therefore, tiger bit idiot because Iraq was invaded and he was "under stress", not because HE'S A FUCKING TIGER AND THAT'S WHAT TIGERS DO.
Exactly.....end of story.Alyrium Denryle wrote:Fuck you.Axis Kast wrote:Normal members of the public can do some pretty stupid things.
Concession accepted.
A predator should not be punished(and when captive and undomesticated generally arent) punished when a human does something stupid
I mentioned the story of what a Tiger did at Dhaka. A Tiger will likely attack and kill you if you give it the chance to do so.Alyrium Denryle wrote:No, it wouldnt be. And that only applies to animals like Bears, that dont normally associate people with food. A tiger on the other hand, in the wild tey regularly take human prey. So his argument holds even less water.
Ah yes, the tiger was traumatized and left in a horrifying mental state where it would actually eat living creatures if presented with the opportunity, even months after the fact. Of course, it's also possible that TIGERS ARE FUCKING PREDATORS, you blithering idiot.Axis Kast wrote:Wong, they're called bombs. They fell throughout Baghdad. They cause stress for animals that have no fucking idea what they are. They cause stress for people who do know what the fuck they are. But obviously, that was too much. It escaped you, didn't it?
Except the thing did NOT escape on its own and stalk the Baghdad streets, moron. This is exactly like saying that it's OK to shoot a prisoner in his cell because you would have shot him if he escaped.Now, for everyone: stop fucking harping on blame. The animal still ends up with all the negative ramifications whether or not the human stuck his hand in the cage or the thing escaped on its own and stalked the Baghdad streets.
Sure, even if that "stress" consisted exclusively of the occasional loud noise in the distance which the tiger would not understand and probably confuse for thunder, months before the event in questionAnimals that attack human beings while under high stress are shot and killed as a matter of routine.
In situations which are totally irrelevant to this one. A small detail which apparently escaped your feeble mind.It happens. Others besides myself have made that much clear.
The psychological pressure of the bombing would have been significant. Perhaps you didn’t notice: Yellowstone deals with aggressive animals and predators not merely on the basis of the attack itself, but also the animal’s stress level.Ah yes, the tiger was traumatized and left in a horrifying mental state where it would actually eat living creatures if presented with the opportunity, even months after the fact. Of course, it's also possible that TIGERS ARE FUCKING PREDATORS, you blithering idiot.
A tiger is not a human being, moron. The same lessons are reinforced either way.Except the thing did NOT escape on its own and stalk the Baghdad streets, moron. This is exactly like saying that it's OK to shoot a prisoner in his cell because you would have shot him if he escaped.
Animals flee in fear from excessively loud, unusual noises. Successive bomb bursts probably would have caused substantial stress.Sure, even if that "stress" consisted exclusively of the occasional loud noise in the distance which the tiger would not understand and probably confuse for thunder, months before the event in question
The stress makes the impact of this situation far worse.Meanwhile, there have been many examples of tigers biting humans without this "stress" you seem to believe is so necessary. Maybe it's because they're fucking meat eaters, you idiot.
Not so fast. You’ve challenged that aggressive animals needed to be put down even outside the context of this particular case.In situations which are totally irrelevant to this one. A small detail which apparently escaped your feeble mind.
Oh right, some loud noises 3 months ago have left it in a permanently agitated, unnatural state, as proven by the fact that it actually behaved like a tigerAxis Kast wrote:The psychological pressure of the bombing would have been significant. Perhaps you didn’t notice: Yellowstone deals with aggressive animals and predators not merely on the basis of the attack itself, but also the animal’s stress level.
Nice way to evade the analogy; just point out that it's an analogy instead of a precise description. Did you learn this debate technique from Sesame Street?A tiger is not a human being, moron.Except the thing did NOT escape on its own and stalk the Baghdad streets, moron. This is exactly like saying that it's OK to shoot a prisoner in his cell because you would have shot him if he escaped.
Good thing no animal ever experiences nearby lightning strikes, then. Oh wait a minute ...Animals flee in fear from excessively loud, unusual noises. Successive bomb bursts probably would have caused substantial stress.
And now you're using your assumption of severe permanent stress in order to support your claim of severe permanent stress, making the animal dangerously psychotic rather than simply a NATURAL PREDATOR. Nice circular logic, Kast. I see you still think like a child.The stress makes the impact of this situation far worse.
I challenged that naturally dangerous animals in fucking zoos should be put down when some idiot enters their cage, moron. Learn to read.Not so fast. You’ve challenged that aggressive animals needed to be put down even outside the context of this particular case.In situations which are totally irrelevant to this one. A small detail which apparently escaped your feeble mind.
Stress, as in "now and immediate" stress. An animal that is not getting nough to eat, is under stress, an animal that was just ousted from its territory is under stress.The psychological pressure of the bombing would have been significant. Perhaps you didn’t notice: Yellowstone deals with aggressive animals and predators not merely on the basis of the attack itself, but also the animal’s stress level.
Animals flee in fear from excessively loud, unusual noises. Successive bomb bursts probably would have caused substantial stress.
I think it was obvious to most poeple that the relevant differnece between humans and animals that Kast was pointing out was that there are situations in which we'd kill animals in which we wouldn't kill people. To tell the truth, I don't have any problems with killing animals on the precautionary principle unless thye're primates or dolphins, but I would hesitate to kill a human just because I thought it was likely he'd commit violence a second time. Do you think you might be being deliberatly dense, Darth Wong?Darth Wong wrote:Axis Kast wrote:Nice way to evade the analogy; just point out that it's an analogy instead of a precise description. Did you learn this debate technique from Sesame Street?A tiger is not a human being, moron.
.
Except that this had nothing to do with the point being made, dumb-fuck. The point was that Axis treats "loose in the wild" and "caged" as equivalent, because a caged animal could theoretically get loose. Ergo, he figures you might as well kill the animal in the cage, because you would kill it if it was running around a campsite eating people. The analogy is used to illustrate how stupid it is to consider the two situations equivalent, not to argue that animals and humans are identical, you idiot.Symmetry wrote:I think it was obvious to most poeple that the relevant differnece between humans and animals that Kast was pointing out was that there are situations in which we'd kill animals in which we wouldn't kill people.
If a man is likely to commit violence, you would PUT HIM IN A CAGE, where he can't hurt anybody (hint: look up the word "prison" in a dictionary).To tell the truth, I don't have any problems with killing animals on the precautionary principle unless thye're primates or dolphins, but I would hesitate to kill a human just because I thought it was likely he'd commit violence a second time.
No, but you certainly are.Do you think you might be being deliberatly dense, Darth Wong?
Wow, it took all that to get you to insult someone. I've been reading this, waiting for you to lose you're temper, expecting it from the 3rd page, and this is all you say after 7 pages of being bullied by everyone else. I salute you.Axis Kast wrote: Wong, they're called bombs. They fell throughout Baghdad. They cause stress for animals that have no fucking idea what they are. They cause stress for people who do know what the fuck they are. But obviously, that was too much. It escaped you, didn't it?
Now, for everyone: stop fucking harping on blame. The animal still ends up with all the negative ramifications whether or not the human stuck his hand in the cage or the thing escaped on its own and stalked the Baghdad streets.