Killing Whales, Why?

[Tormod]

Sorry have been out and about.. fact that I cant post links etc until I've made some silly posts elsewhere is not my kind of thing:) Do have a couple of funnys I might try tho".

 

A good way to reach 10 posts without post padding is to participate in the Community Polls section, or stroll through the science forums one by one and respond to the topics that interest you. The easiest are probably the "Books/Movies/Games" forum and the Watercooler, though. You'll hit 10 posts in no time.

[chrissy]

Just watched an interesting news report on the ICR admitting finally that they are abandoning the hunt for this year on Al-Jazeera. Not a channel I normally

have on all the time, but it happens to be on where I am. Was a very long

and complete report - but still can't post link yet(I'm almost there tho')

 

Am waiting for the build up and shenanigans called the IWC.

Still find the voting system ( how can Nauru with 12000/13000 inhabitants

-definitely Japanese vote bought- have a vote with the same clout as , say, Brazil)

 

Also the dolphin drive hunt is underway again in Japan, and that makes me

feel pretty sick seeing the "bloody" pictures

 

Chrissy

[Michaelangelica]

 

Also the dolphin drive hunt is underway again in Japan, and that makes me

feel pretty sick seeing the "bloody" pictures

 

Chrissy

What?

Why?

Are they going to eat them too?

Don't they kill enough in their long lines?

 

My next-door neighbor said he had to eat whale meat in UK in WW2.

He said it was awful

 

Bloody hell, I did not know, what an abomination.

The Japan Times Online

J

Thursday, Sept. 11, 2003

 

DEADLY DEBATE

Dolphins: To kill them or let them be

 

By ERIC PRIDEAUX

Staff writer

 

Japanese, just like anybody else, love dolphins.

Japanese kill almost 20,000 dolphins every year for food. (Though it is difficult to compare Japanese demand for dolphin meat with other consumer countries, Japanese are likely the largest overall buyers of cetacean -- or whale and dolphin -- meat, according to officials at the agriculture ministry.)

so they will need more this year because of the aborted 2007 whale hunt?

Ironically, Japanese demand for dolphin meat -- highest among fishing-community old-timers -- at first rose after whale meat went off the market as a result of the country's 1988 enforcement of the International Whaling Commission moratorium, say experts.

There is some local opposition

"Killing dolphins is simply outdated," said Izumi Ishii, a sunburned 54-year-old fisherman who, after hunting dolphins for decades, finally called it quits in 1996 and became a leading campaigner for the protection of dolphins.

 

Wednesday, Nov. 30, 2005

 

'Secret' dolphin slaughter defies protests

 

By BOYD HARNELL

Special to The Japan Times

 

Japan's annual slaughter of thousands of dolphins began Oct. 8 in the traditional whaling town of Taiji on the Kii Peninsula of Honshu's Wakayama Prefecture. These "drive fisheries" triggered demonstrations, held under the "Japan Dolphin Day" banner, in 28 countries. The protests went almost entirely unreported in Japan, where only very few people are aware of what goes on.

News photo

Dolphins being lanced in an undated photograph as they thrash around in the shallows on Iki Island, Nagasaki Prefecture. A similar fate awaits almost all those rounded up in ongoing "drive fisheries."

 

The culling, spanning a period of six months, is officially condoned as part of traditional culture, and is described as "pest control" by practitioners.

The Japan Times Online

[chrissy]

I think a lot of people don't know about the dolphin drive hunts, whilst the most dolphin slaughter happens in Japan it is not exclusively Japan

SEE HERE

 

As with whale hunting there are number of organisations / petitions

trying to bring a stop to this butchery. This is one of the reasons why Japan

and cohorts at the IWC would like to see the small cetaceans taken out

of IWC "care" ( I use the word with some hesitation).

 

I ask myself what in Gods' name has" flipper" done to deserve this treatment.

 

Chrissy

 

 

"s.o.s."

[Michaelangelica]

I think a lot of people don't know about the dolphin drive hunts, whilst the most dolphin slaughter happens in Japan it is not exclusively Japan

SEE HERE

 

As with whale hunting there are number of organisations / petitions

trying to bring a stop to this butchery.

It was news to me. I was surprised and shocked.

 

20,000 dolphins anywhere on the Australian Coast would be a tourist gold mine.

One famous place "Monkey Mia" in WA is worried that too much human contact may not be a good thing for the dolphins.

Australian Adventure tours, tours to Western Australia, Australian tours

(bit of an add but you get the idea)

Don't the Japanese realize what tourism value (apart from anything else) these animals have?

 

Are they going to eat gorillas and chimps next?

 

Are there any on-line petitions?

[chrissy]

HERE'S A SITE with links to a couple of on line petitions. There are some more, I'll

look them up and post later.

 

Chrissy

 

this is my little friend "Poppet", she gets very angry sometimes about how her

kind are treated

[Michaelangelica]

HERE'S A SITE with links to a couple of on line petitions. There are some more, I'll

look them up and post later.

 

Chrissy

 

this is my little friend "Poppet", she gets very angry sometimes about how her

kind are treated

Soon as I get them i will start posting the addresses to my friends and ask them to do the same

 

This article is worth reading. The Japanese did kill a lot of whales before they stopped

Australia, NZ vow to fight humpback hunt

 

 

Australia and New Zealand have vowed to continue the fight to end Japan's annual whale hunts, warning its plan to kill humpback whales in Antarctica in December could spark outrage.

Australia, NZ vow to fight humpback hunt - Breaking News - World - Breaking News

[chrissy]

I've seen this article and somehow the "good" guys are going to have to stand up & throw all their weight into this.

Humpbacks..beautiful giants it's crazy.

 

Today is Greenpeace action day on Denmark see HERE

I sent an email to the Danish Embassy in the Hague, as I couldn't get there today, which was a beautiful picture I took of a whale fluke and then added my personal plea for them to side with the whales this time at the IWC. Problem with Denmark is that population seems to be against whaling but Greenland and Faroe Islands are the flies in the ointment , although they do have "aboriginal like' rights for traditional whaling . Problem is it's not guys in canoes with a harpoon any more... it's more modernised.

 

[freeztar]

Maybe the US military will catch on and go "rescue" the dolphins to use as "soldiers".

 

Armed and dangerous - Flipper the firing dolphin let loose by Katrina | International | The Observer

[Boerseun]

Whales are adventurous creatures. They used to be browsing land-based mammals, but it seems they got bored with it and took to the sea. So now they are enormous, gigantic marine creatures roaming the seas. If you look closely at their facial expressions, they seem to be getting bored again.

 

Therefore, answering the question posed in this thread, we have to kill them, every last one of them, before they undertake their next adventure and take to the air.

 

Our monuments will never be the same again. And if you think the Brazilians are bad, once the whales take to the air they will destroy entire forests just to build their nests in trees that will promptly collapse the moment the whale cow gives birth. This will increase the greenhouse effect and add to global warming.

 

So - in order to save our planet we have to kill all the whales. Or give them something interesting to do, at least.

[Neuro]

I am not worried about the seas that the next generation will inherit, that is not my problem at all. If I had a button that would kill 500,000 whales but provide me with a free tank of petrol or a fresh cup of coffee, I would press that button several times a day until there were no whales left.

 

Giant elephants with fins turning into beach decorations does not phase me in the slightest.

[Boerseun]

I am not worried about the seas that the next generation will inherit, that is not my problem at all. If I had a button that would kill 500,000 whales but provide me with a free tank of petrol or a fresh cup of coffee, I would press that button several times a day until there were no whales left.

 

Giant elephants with fins turning into beach decorations does not phase me in the slightest.

Well, you'll be able to press your 'free petrol' button roughly once and then you'll run out of petrol. Also, you'll put quite a lot of people involved in the marine tourism business outta work, which will increase the load on welfare which will increase your tax load. You'll also screw with the plankton balance because you're eliminating the biggest filter feeders out of the equation. This, in turn, will screw with the rest of the ocean's biome in ways you can't even imagine. And all this for a free tank o' gas.

 

It's this sort of short-sightedness that'll be the End of the Human Race.

[Neuro]

So what if the human race ends? I want a cup of coffee and a tank of gas, free, now. I am not worried about taxes going up in the future, why should I plan my life around earth's future sixty years down the line when I am dead?

 

I don't want to die and have alot of money left over or have been deprived of a luxury such as a free tank of gas for the sake of a few living sea blimps.

 

For all intents and purposes, mankind does not know if we are giong to make it into the next fifty years. If the morality doctrine of the century dictates that it is ok to use a condom or get an abortion, why should they be protecting people that are years away from ever being fertilized when there are people such as me who are alive today and want simple luxuries while they are still alive?

 

To argue against that you have to create some BS reason why loving animals is great and god is going to reward you for it; Or you can simply disagree and thus there is no debate to be had because this is not a topic that can be debated.

[Buffy]

I want a cup of coffee and a tank of gas, free, now. I am not worried about taxes going up in the future, why should I plan my life around earth's future sixty years down the line when I am dead?

 

To argue against that you have to create some BS reason why loving animals is great and god is going to reward you for it; Or you can simply disagree and thus there is no debate to be had because this is not a topic that can be debated.

Or you could care about something other than yourself! :eek:

 

Karma kills,

Buffy

[Neuro]

Or you could care about something other than yourself! :eek:

 

Karma kills,

Buffy

Why are people who do not exist and do not even have an opinion more important than me?

 

Why should I think about others and not myself?

 

Why should I care about the lives of whales if their extinction does not phase me?

 

Lastly, what makes your moral system better than mine?

[Boerseun]

So what if the human race ends? I want a cup of coffee and a tank of gas, free, now. I am not worried about taxes going up in the future, why should I plan my life around earth's future sixty years down the line when I am dead?

Instant gratification, eh? Ever heard about the ant and the grasshopper?

I don't want to die and have alot of money left over or have been deprived of a luxury such as a free tank of gas for the sake of a few living sea blimps.

The mere fact that you are alive *at all* is due to an incredibly complicated ecosystem which we don't fully understand. So, were we to err, we should rather err on the side of caution and not destroy species wholesale for such short term luxuries as what you seem to crave.

For all intents and purposes, mankind does not know if we are giong to make it into the next fifty years. If the morality doctrine of the century dictates that it is ok to use a condom or get an abortion, why should they be protecting people that are years away from ever being fertilized when there are people such as me who are alive today and want simple luxuries while they are still alive?

Okay... you're saying that protection of your right to resource-destroying instant gratification should supercede that of child protection because there are such things as abortions? I'm not sure I'm quite following your logic here, but it does seem as if you're a bit on the selfish side. Did you ever have brothers and/or sisters? Are you a lone child? Were you spoilt rotten when you were a child? If you didn't get that lollipop *NOW*, did you throw a floor-fit? Did mommy come running with a lollipop because her baby got used to his demands to instant gratification being unquestioningly met? I honestly don't get you, Neuro.

To argue against that you have to create some BS reason why loving animals is great and god is going to reward you for it; Or you can simply disagree and thus there is no debate to be had because this is not a topic that can be debated.

I don't have to create any BS reason for 'why animals is great'. As I stated earlier, we shouldn't be destroying species wholesale in a system we are dependent on, without fully understanding that system. Which we don't, by the way. And that's a very valid reason. And of course this is an issue which can be debated. Issues such as sustainable whale farming comes to mind. Issues such as what exactly is the benefits of scientific whaling against the drawbacks of it. Use your brain, Neuro.

[Neuro]

Instant gratification, eh? Ever heard about the ant and the grasshopper?

Ever heard of the grasshopper that had fun all summer and fall and then was caught by a child and burned alive? I’m sure he had no regrets that he lived life to the fullest.

 

Besides, we aren’t talking about what happens to me in the winter, we are talking about what *may* happen to a generation that *may never* or *may one day* exist after a period of time in which *anything* could happen. When we live in a society that considers abortion and contraception legal, I think that sets the precedent for taking the side of the people who *do in fact* exist over the side of the people that *may never exist at all*.

 

The mere fact that you are alive *at all* is due to an incredibly complicated ecosystem which we don't fully understand. So, were we to err, we should rather err on the side of caution and not destroy species wholesale for such short term luxuries as what you seem to crave.

I don’t quite understand the err bits, but I think you understand that there is no divine reason why I should be both respecting and protecting an ecosystem that isn’t going to effect me after I’m dead.

 

Okay... you're saying that protection of your right to resource-destroying instant gratification should supercede that of child protection because there are such things as abortions? I'm not sure I'm quite following your logic here, but it does seem as if you're a bit on the selfish side. Did you ever have brothers and/or sisters? Are you a lone child? Were you spoilt rotten when you were a child? If you didn't get that lollipop *NOW*, did you throw a floor-fit? Did mommy come running with a lollipop because her baby got used to his demands to instant gratification being unquestioningly met? I honestly don't get you, Neuro.

I suppose I can refer you to my introduction thread or my morality thread.

 

If you know my morals are where they are, then either convince me how it is best for me to save the whales, or simply don’t. If you are going to ridicule me on moral grounds because my morality is different than yours, then how would you be any different from any religious devout that has ever shunned science?

 

I don't have to create any BS reason for 'why animals is great'. As I stated earlier, we shouldn't be destroying species wholesale in a system we are dependent on, without fully understanding that system. Which we don't, by the way. And that's a very valid reason. And of course this is an issue which can be debated. Issues such as sustainable whale farming comes to mind. Issues such as what exactly is the benefits of scientific whaling against the drawbacks of it. Use your brain, Neuro.

Why shouldn’t we destroy this system that we don’t quite understand? Why uphold such a stance?

 

If I am one of 6 billion people and you are one of 6 billion people, what divine morality gives your stance of protecting the future generations that do not exist more validity than mine that suggest I be allowed to live how I like because when I am dead I won’t be able to enjoy anything every again.

 

The fact is, the species continuing past my life is both not my problem and not a goal protected by any divine creator that simply wants to see mankind stick around until the universe implodes. There is no reason for mankind to live that long and there is no reason why your morality is divinely superior to mine.

 

This entire thread and style of debate is anti-scientific because it is debate about morals and not a debate about science.