What do you think about Japanese whaling

[Nuke]

And the Japanese are only killing a very small number a year, well below the restocking levels (dirty little secret: all the species they're hunting are increasing in numbers).

Mostly I think they take a few humpbacks and minkys, both of which are not critically endangered, and close to not being endangered at all.

Strangely the same people who scream at the Japs for killing whales and using 99% of the animals think very little of the Chinese killing tigers and using only a few teeth, claws and bits of grease.

hunting whales is a buisness. you just cant run a buisness if you make the thing your buisness is based on go extinct. there are few enough players so that wont happen with whales. if everyone suddenly developed a taste for whale, or other food sources died out you might have a problem, but as it stands whaling today is just too small scale to make a major dent in the population.

cant say the same thing about tigers. if china gave the cats as much attention as their pandas, they could turn that around. but when you are dealing with a large predator and all the people in rural communities want it dead (its either a direct threat to them or costs them livestock or is competition for hunters), there is a black market for tiger that pays more than farming or other rural jobs, and you have a government and society that turns a blind eye to all that, its going to be hunted to extinction. which is unfortunate (im a cat person). eventually practitioners of eastern medicine are going to wonder why they cant get the tiger bits they need for their ancient traditional healing practices.

[SargeRho]

Our digestive tract is best adapted for eating meat. It's not as good at digesting plants. And our teeth are clearly adapted for an omnivorous diet.

Ps:

You are confusing evolution with intelligent design.

Leave. Now.

[Nuke]

There's a lot more to it than "meat makes you smart, broccoli makes you dumb". The change to a meat-eating diet came as a change from foraging for plants, and isn't particularly relevant to today's society. Farming is a wonderful invention.

and do you think the agricultural revolution would have happened without that hunter gatherer brain? i think not.

the way i understand it it was bipedalism that allowed protohumans to look for prey and wield weapons. the subsequent increased consumption of meat fueled brain growth, and the need for more complex group interaction is what selected for those traits. this allowed for things like complex language and passing of knowledge. which was neccisary to develop agriculture.

Edited January 18, 2014 by Nuke

[peadar1987]

and do you think the agricultural revolution would have happened without that hunter gatherer brain? i think not.

the way i understand it it was bipedalism that allowed protohumans to look for prey and wield weapons. the subsequent increased consumption of meat fueled brain growth, and the need for more complex group interaction is what selected for those traits. this allowed for things like complex language and passing of knowledge. which was neccisary to develop agriculture.

Yes, that's pretty much my understanding of it too, but that doesn't mean that today, under a completely different environment, that abstaining from meat will make people stupid, unhealthy, or grow horns and cloven feet.

[Duxwing]

I think Japanese commercial whaling criminal because Japan voluntarily entered the International Whaling Commission, which has passed a moratorium on commercial whaling. The international community therefore must, until Japan enforces the agreement upon its own whalers, by law or force reduce commercial whaling; e.g., by embargoing Japanese whale products, encouraging Japanese enforcement of the whaling moratorium, or deterring whaling ships from entering whale habitats.

-Duxwing

Edited January 18, 2014 by Duxwing

[Drunken Hobo]

To be honest, I find these sorts of "outrages" to often be thinly-veiled racism. Much easier to criticise & attack a culture & society that's 1000s of miles away rather than look at your own. See it a lot with the Chinese - the BBC seems to have a particular hatred of them. Constantly vilified for their use of ivory, tiger genitalia and other such things (rightly so), but conveniently turn a blind eye to the bloodsports carried out by the aristocracy, or the history of the Royal Family's hunting expeditions.

Pigs are relatively intelligent, but we slaughter millions of them. Canadians hunt seals in a brutal manner, Spain has bullfighting, UK has fox hunting, Mexico & many other countries have cockfights... the list goes on.

We're also destorying stock of cod, anchovies and numerous other sea life, why do only whales matter? I'm not exactly for whaling, but to criticise it when we're wiping the Atlantic clean seems more than a little hypocritical. Best you can ask is that it is done sustainably.

(And for the record, I have eaten both pig & fish today).

[SargeRho]

There's a slight difference between Whaling and eating Pig. There are several billion pigs, but only a few thousand Whales. One's in no danger of going extinct any time soon, the other one is heading for extinction (and humans are undoubtably responsible for it). Whales are highly intelligent creatures, some Cetaceans - namely Bottle Nose Dolphins - are very close to us in regards to their intelligence.

[Nuke]

the differences are bigger than that. pigs are livestock. if demand for pork goes up we can breed more pigs. if you want to compare whaling to something compare it to commercial fishing. we have a rough idea of how many there are, but no accurate count. limits are imposed (and frequently exceeded) that will prevent us from taking animals at a rate greater than can be naturally replaced. we just sorta hope the relationship between the two is linear. domesticate the damn whales and farm them like any other species. problem solved (oh wait, japanese real estate is too expensive to make that an economically viable buisness model).

[Jacob01]

I don't really mind the killing on animals, I mean, we're the dominant species here, right? If a whale, or any animal, was dominant like us it would be killing us. Therefore, in theory, its okay. However, I do think there should be laws which all countries have to apply to about killing endangered species, such as whales, tigers etc. Even if we are dominant, we don't really need whales to eat, because we have pigs, cows, sheep and other animals which we can breed easily and slaughter.

However, using the same dominance evolution theory, maybe you could say that we should help protect them, as they cannot themselves.

All in all, I think it should be allowed, but only to a certain extent. There should only be a few whales being killed, and they should only be killed for food. Whales found dead, such as the ones which get beached and die, should be used for research.

[peadar1987]

Well, dominance is no justification for killing something. I'd be pretty dominant over a 5 year old child, but that doesn't mean it's in any way moral for me to go around killing 5-year-olds. I'd like to think that humans have a better moral standard than sharks, wolves, and especially nature's most awful creatures, cats.

[dharak1]

Why should we have better morals? We are animals and so are they. We have laws for a reason. So we have a group moral supposedly higher than other animals. We are dominant we have a right to do what we want.

[Holo]

Why should we have better morals?

Because we can. Our advanced brains allow us to consider long-term matters affecting a wider scope than the self or even the species.

We are animals and so are they.

So? We may be animals, but we're smarter animals. We're conscious animals.

We have laws for a reason.

To standardise the enforcement of morals decided by humans.

[Nuke]

Well, dominance is no justification for killing something. I'd be pretty dominant over a 5 year old child, but that doesn't mean it's in any way moral for me to go around killing 5-year-olds. I'd like to think that humans have a better moral standard than sharks, wolves, and especially nature's most awful creatures, cats.

cats are indeed writhing death machines who love to torture-murder small animals. thats why i love them.

[peadar1987]

Why should we have better morals? We are animals and so are they. We have laws for a reason. So we have a group moral supposedly higher than other animals. We are dominant we have a right to do what we want.

So if I came up behind you with a gun, shot you in the spine and took your wallet, would I have the right to do that? In that situation, the fact that I have a gun and the jump on you would make me "dominant". If not, then why not? And how would it be different to us doing whatever we want to animals just because we're "dominant"?

[dharak1]

It's pretty damn fair. If we had no laws that's what I would start doing. You earned the money for the gun or earned it by robbing a store.

[Klingon Admiral]

Homo homini lupus est.

[peadar1987]

It's pretty damn fair. If we had no laws that's what I would start doing. You earned the money for the gun or earned it by robbing a store.

In that case, you're a frankly terrifying human being. I hope you realise the reason most people don't go around raping, stealing and killing isn't just because we're afraid of getting caught.

[Klingon Admiral]

Because they are afraid of the Leviathan. Most of modern western civilization is built on his thoughts.

[theend3r]

In that case, you're a frankly terrifying human being. I hope you realise the reason most people don't go around raping, stealing and killing isn't just because we're afraid of getting caught.

I don't know, just look at the internet. Most people say things they would never have just because they feel intouchable. Morals and other principles are relative, there were times when not believing in god was a worse crime than theft.

[dharak1]

If you want support for my argument look at third world countries that are essentially lawless. Plenty of crime, murder and theft. If you are ok with killing one animal you should not value the life of another. If you do something the group disagrees on then the hammer comes down.

[peadar1987]

If you want support for my argument look at third world countries that are essentially lawless. Plenty of crime, murder and theft. If you are ok with killing one animal you should not value the life of another. If you do something the group disagrees on then the hammer comes down.

Have you ever been to a third world country? The vast majority of people there are not thieves, rapists or murderers. Most people have empathy, and if given the choice, won't do those things.

To be honest, I'm struggling to get my head around the fact that you seem to think it's perfectly okay to murder someone and take their stuff, so long as you don't get caught.

[Klingon Admiral]

Time for a bit on-topic:

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/01/19/world/asia/japan-dolphin-hunt/