kangaroos to box humans

[devance]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...in_page_id=1770

http://rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src..._page_id%3D1770

Some stuff to get the animal rights activists blood boiling.

----------------------------------------------------------------------A bear struggles to retain its balance while gripping the two metal hoops, which look more like shackles than acrobatics equipment, as a wildlife park worker looks on and laughs.

[Gollum]

FUCK!!!! This makes me FUCKING FURIOUS!!!!!!

Didnt we just send 2 koalas over there recently? What next Koala boxing? I would gladly take the kangaroos spot in the ring.

This has really hit a nerve!! I am shaking with anger right now!!

Edited October 1, 2006 by Gollum

[foolsbreath]

Violence isn't the answer Gollum, but what is?, What more do you expect from the ignorant pricks with no respect for any life other than that of their own race and religion?

Same story with them, over and over again

I know not all asians are like that, but in general these countries flought international law on these issues such as whaling, mining, nuclear power, and have the audacity to do it very publicly, meaning they have no care for anyones elses opinion on these matters, very sad when we should be moving towards an age of enlightenment and understanding!

Edited September 30, 2006 by foolsbreath

[dqd]

What else do you expect from a country with an equally horrific human rights record? How many people of peace were tortured to death then had their bodies raped to feed the "organ donor" programs that net billions per year, whilst these "olympics" were held? I weep for animals and humans alike

[Gollum]

Violence isn't the answer Gollum, but what is?, What more do you expect from the ignorant pricks with no respect for any life other than that of their own race and religion?

Same story with them, over and over again

I know not all asians are like that, but in general these countries flought international law on these issues such as whaling, mining, nuclear power, and have the audacity to do it very publicly, meaning they have no care for anyones elses opinion on these matters, very sad when we should be moving towards an age of enlightenment and understanding!

Yeah I know violence is not the answer, and yeah my post is pretty full on (edited)but i have no time for this sort of behavour.

I should explain that i was a zookeeper for just on 7 years and it just make my blood boil seeing this appaulling treatment of animals. I just dont understand how they find this entertaining?

[Gollum]

edited

Edited October 1, 2006 by Gollum

[teonanacatl]

lets hope the kangaroo kicks his arse then, big kick.

[PD.]

Nasty, evil China................

Seriously, these animals are not being treated very nice but they all appear healthy and i DARE to say well looked after when they are not "performing".

Ever seen a circus in Australia??? Shock F**kin horror. They have Elephants that "perform" and monkeys and tigers and bears, oh my.

Those "huge" weights that chimp is lifting are no more than freakin cardboard and those "shakles" on the bear would just fall off if the bear wanted them too, they are not tight or restraining at all and where is the muzzle???

Also the boxing match where the kangaroo received a "fierce" blow to the head was witnessed by me on television. Nat called me into the lounge and said "check this dickhead out, he is gonna get killed". There were no fierce blows to the kangaroo but it was another story for the "clown" in the ring. I seriously thought he was gonna get his guts ripped out. It did piss me off though, dont get me wrong. What kind of sane person would get in the ring with a Grey and expect it to be funny when his stomach contents are spilled on the mat and the animal destroyed for doin what it thought right.?

Media loves this shit.

EVIL CHINA CRUEL TO ANIMALS NOT JUST HUMANS.

Now im not condoning animals performing in any way shape or form, or even having animals in captivity, i agree, it is Fu**ed, but it happens and alot of the time the animals ARE chained up and muzzled, something i READ in the articles but didnt SEE in the pictures. I have seen "performing" animals chained and muzzled, but that was in Australia.

China are evil commies and we are an angelic democracy.

[dqd]

Ever seen a circus in Australia??? Shock F**kin horror. They have Elephants that "perform" and monkeys and tigers and bears, oh my.

don't go to any 'animal entertainment' personally, here or otherwise. If we had a common language well understood by both animals and humans then the animals could voice their views on this subject... until then I'll go to an all-human circus that can honestly declare their performers made their decisions willingly and with no outside pressures involved, ie none that I have heard

China are evil commies and we are an angelic democracy.

what a load of s##t

don't know what any previous posts said pre-edit, but I can see no claims in this thread that can lead to this conclusion. If we were an 'angelic democracy' then our 'throne' would be occupied by a different arse

[occidentalis]

what a load of s##t

don't know what any previous posts said pre-edit, but I can see no claims in this thread that can lead to this conclusion. If we were an 'angelic democracy' then our 'throne' would be occupied by a different arse

I get the feeling PD may have been saying this in a somewhat sarcastic voice if you could have heard him DQD.

[foolsbreath]

I believe we are very close to banning all animal circuses in Australia, Yes it is cruel, but not as cruel as actively fighting them. I love all animals and find it hard to kill them, even when it is for their own good (badly injured), the good of their species (culling to limit the populations from attaining a critical mass), or to protect the environment (eg guy fawks horses)

Their past record indicates that these animals will not be well looked after and the fact that enough of the population, including the wildlife manager find it funny enough to put on TV indicates that these practices are socially acceptable there and likely to continue, it wouldn't happen here.

It is acts like this that devide people. I know I've thought about smakin around some poor Japenese guy in response to their stance on whaling, but that is not the answer, in truth only a small % of the japanese actually eat whale meat, and its probably only a small %age of the chinese that find the cruelty to animals amusing, but its the fact that they find it socially acceptable that gets on peoples nerves. These days its all about appearing to be politically correct.

[Green Chemist]

I had a look at that news item, and the funniest thing was reading the veiwers comments. This news piece is typical of gutter journalism. Here's why:

"An Australian kangaroo receives a fierce blow to the head by a man dressed in a clown suit (pictured below)"

"In the fight, the Australian kangaroo appears to reel backwards after receiving a right hook from its garishly attired opponent."

Now the viewers can be forgiven for their comments, after all *they* are from overseas and have no idea about Australian wildlife. For example: Do you all know that a kangaroo will instinctively throw its head back when a object like a hand or paw comes near it. This is to protect its eyes and ears from damage from its opponents claws. Try patting a joey on the head and see what happens. I doubt its head was knocked back by the boxers blow. I know I used to work in a zoo and have seen this.

Yes it is stupid and also sad. Stupid because the guy could get seriously hurt. Kangaroos can kick real hard and even if his guts are not torn open, he can suffer damaged organs and internal bruising. Sad because in China all life if cheap including human life.

However this no more cruel or barbaric then what happens in the meatworks in england, Australia, USA, or the damage done by deforestation, the prositution and child prositution that results from deforestation when ethic tribes are stripped of their homes and don't have the skills to survive in a modern society etc.

The worst thing about this article is it is a cheap attempt at making the Chinese people look bad. Kinda like those Tom Clancy novels out there. I really wonder how the western people would feel about America bombing China. Its like "ummm who do we hate more, those evil barbaric asians or America and George Bush. Damm, I can't decide, better go get a whopper and fries while I ponder it."

Oh, it has been my experiece that those who shout the loudest about animal rights and animal cruelty, are the ones who deep down don't give a shit about the animals themselves. It seems to be more about propping up a fragile ego then actually believeing in it. Like those idiots who think that it is cruel and barbaric to cull a few deer in the wilderness when they have no natural predators, yet don't mind thousands of them slowly starving to death when they over populate. Go figure

The more you think and crit analyse the news, the more you understand the amount of journolistic garbage that is been fed to the masses as factual and honest reporting.

[occidentalis]

It is acts like this that devide people. I know I've thought about smakin around some poor Japenese guy in response to their stance on whaling, but that is not the answer, in truth only a small % of the japanese actually eat whale meat,

On whaling

the shit we have been fed by our government and NGOs on whaling is just that

Populations of some whale species are at a point where they could be sustainably harvested

This could be managed through the IWC commercial whaling regulations and agreements and ensured to be OK ecologically. As things are Japan gets to hunt unlimited numbers under the scientific whaling clause and make a lot of noise about how it's being oppressed. Australia and other 'antiwhaling' nations get to take the moral high ground and win bullshit brownie points. In reality both nations have it exactly how they like it.

When you see the Australian federal govt and Greenpeace patting each other on the back and exchanging compliments you know you are being lied to.

[foolsbreath]

Populations of some whale species are at a point where they could be sustainably harvested

Creach, the only species that can be whaled sustainably is the minki, and this has probably only reached a high popn level due to the bigger whales being hunted to near extinction allowing the Minkis open access to the food supply. If you look at past figures of whaling, the largest whales have been hunted to near death, then the next largest, then the next largest.

The only time these popn's have recovered is during war time when the oceans are a dangerous place to be. The Minki's, or as the jap's fondly refer to them as the rats of the sea are now the biggest whales of a sizeable population and will be next to be hunted to near death if not preserved.

Killing animals at the meat works is a different ball park than boxing them for sport, can't compare.

In Autralia this year, over 3,000,000 kangaroo's will be killed under license by hunters in order to supply meat. I am all for this as it is the best way to keep these populations under control. But in doing so, you are ensuring the populations survival. Animal populations grow in the form of a parabolic curve. By keeping the population on the upslope of the parabolic curve through culling, it ensures that there will be an adequate food supply to encourage the exponential growth of the populations seen on the upwards slope of the curve. If you didn't cull the populations would explode, destroying their resources and eventially decline either to extinction or to level out at a much reduced population size through several oscillations in a similar manner, ie explode, die back etc etc in ever decreasing magnitude.

[occidentalis]

Creach, the only species that can be whaled sustainably is the minki, and this has probably only reached a high popn level due to the bigger whales being hunted to near extinction allowing the Minkis open access to the food supply.

This might be the case

but it only strengthens the rest of my argument. If whale populations are so low, why are we allowing the japanese free reign with 'scientific' whaling? Why not regulate and control it under the commercial whaling agreements that IWC is meant to create and manage?

Because our government doesn't actually give a shit about whales.

Edited October 1, 2006 by creach

[nothinghead]

On whaling

the shit we have been fed by our government and NGOs on whaling is just that

Populations of some whale species are at a point where they could be sustainably harvested

This could be managed through the IWC commercial whaling regulations and agreements and ensured to be OK ecologically. As things are Japan gets to hunt unlimited numbers under the scientific whaling clause and make a lot of noise about how it's being oppressed. Australia and other 'antiwhaling' nations get to take the moral high ground and win bullshit brownie points. In reality both nations have it exactly how they like it.

When you see the Australian federal govt and Greenpeace patting each other on the back and exchanging compliments you know you are being lied to.

I'd love to see any evidence supporting these claims, although I think you are misinterpreting the situation. The majority of Australians are only anti-whaling to the extent that people can whine about it at the pub/shops as a point of conversation and for the media to the extent that they can sensationalise a story out of it. As a nation we have not made significant efforts to stop illegal whaling in our waters.

Besides this the underlying problem is the doublespeak which makes this all seem legitimate as long as it sounds nice: "sustainable harvesting of whales" translates to "stopping the slaughter of species' of living creature before the point of extinction" and this does not sit well with me at all.

[foolsbreath]

Yeah sorry mate, I might have misunderstood you in haste there, but the only countries really interested in whaling now are japan and norway. I guess the majority of the populous would find it inhuman due to the very fact that we have been swayed by our governments and NGO's.

However, it is debatable weather the Minki's would have ever reached their current population size without the modification of their environment through human interaction, ie. the removal of other krill feeders, and that brings to point the dabate wether it is indeed our responsibilty to now manage that population?

As for whaling for scientific research, Scientists lately trauled through the masses of literature put togethor under that banner (enough to fill a small house), and found that only 200 odd papers where actually writrten in anything considered a scientific report with any findings at all. Furthermore only a handful of those were considered relevant to the scientific community, I think 6 papers from memory! There is indeed some need for control and regulation on the whaling front and some clearing up of the misconceptions held in the public view.

[occidentalis]

The majority of Australians are only anti-whaling to the extent that people can whine about it at the pub/shops as a point of conversation and for the media to the extent that they can sensationalise a story out of it. As a nation we have not made significant efforts to stop illegal whaling in our waters.

I wasn't referring to the opinion of the average Australian, or to preventing illegal whaling in our waters. I was talking about the annual IWC meetings and the political and diplomatic relationships between the relevant countries.

Besides this the underlying problem is the doublespeak which makes this all seem legitimate as long as it sounds nice: "sustainable harvesting of whales" translates to "stopping the slaughter of species' of living creature before the point of extinction" and this does not sit well with me at all.

Yeah, I agree that it there are many dangers here and there is the potential for doublespeak

However the fact is that whale populations are largely managed populations - and they have been managed badly. The question, which foolsbreath also touched on, is "do we continue managing these populations, although in a different way, or do we 'conserve' them by ignoring them completely?" I don't know the answer, and I haven't reviewed the primary literature in any detail (all 6 papers of it ), but my feeling is that allowing japan and other nations to hunt under the commercial clauses of the IWC constitution, with appropriate monitoring and controls, is the best way forward for the future existance of whales.

Note that I am not considering the relevant but separate issues of animal rights - I am only talking about conservation.

[devance]

http://www.livescience.com/animalworld/061001_ap_koalas.html

CANBERRA, Australia (AP) _ Scientists hope to test a contraceptive dart next year as a new weapon to curb a koala population explosion that has destroyed thousands of trees on an Australian island, a researcher said Sunday.

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

Bad koalas breeding to much.

[Green Osiris]

If a species cannot sustain itself without causing signifigant inpact to its environment, and ultimately creates an irreversible ecological imbalance, it needs to be removed for the sake of the majority other species.

Effectively we as humans should all be killing ourselves voluntarily if we're so concerned about the global issues of flora & fauna destruction.