Eating Whales

D

DRZion

Theoretical Experimentalist
Valued Senior Member
I have a quick challenge here for environmentalists -

Seeing how we can make 100,000 burgers out of a single whale and only 1,000 burgers out of a cow, isn't it more humane to kill one whale as opposed to one hundred cows? It seems like killing one whale is a lot less drastic than killing one hundred cows.. wouldn't it be right to kill the whales instead if protecting animals from pain was the objective?

edit : dear mods, could this be moved to http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=2494140#post2494140 ? I didn't notice this thread already exists in another sub forum.
 
Last edited:
Yeah good. Except that 100 bovines get smoked instantaneously with a bolt to the brain and collectively feel zero pain (pre smoking stress aside) and one whale which gets ruthlessly murdered by means of several poorly aimed and grossly inefficient harpoons to the torso feels the pain of...well, insert your own description of an ugly and excruciating death here. The Japanese have some traits to be admired. Their stubborn, ugly and completely unempathetic slaughter of the most impressive species on Earth is not one of them.
 
finally the Australian gov is standing up for Australian interests. unfortuantly not enough, it should be in court now
 
Asguard, the Aus. government is actually standing up for the whales.
I'm sure there is a better way to get a resolve than to tell the Japanese they are way out of line.
Anyone who can mediate this cross cultural issue with a positive outcome will sign off on their own Nobel prize.
 
the feder court told the fed gov to send armed naval vessals down there to enforce the econmic zone. so why has it taken 2 years and it still hasnt happened
 
And Dr. Zion, The cows (and I live in a completely rural environment and have lots of respect for the intelligence and sentience of bovines despite the fact that it's at a seemingly low level) are bred for the market and are not endangered or even wild and free.
Does that matter, yes it bloody well does!
 
Spud Emperor said:
Asguard, the Aus. government is actually standing up for the whales.
I'm sure there is a better way to get a resolve than to tell the Japanese they are way out of line.
Anyone who can mediate this cross cultural issue with a positive outcome will sign off on their own Nobel prize.
Click to expand...

Why not sell them bovines that Australia raises to their specs. Sell them at the same expense that the shipping companies charge for whale meat. Then have the Japanese come to Australia and pick up the beef whenever they want it. That way Australia makes money as well as Japan gets its meat it needs. I do not think Japan would kill whales if they could get another meat from elsewhere for the same cost. IMHO
 
Spud Emperor said:
Yeah good. Except that 100 bovines get smoked instantaneously with a bolt to the brain and collectively feel zero pain (pre smoking stress aside) and one whale which gets ruthlessly murdered by means of several poorly aimed and grossly inefficient harpoons to the torso feels the pain of...well, insert your own description of an ugly and excruciating death here. The Japanese have some traits to be admired. Their stubborn, ugly and completely unempathetic slaughter of the most impressive species on Earth is not one of them.
Click to expand...

This is a good point. I have seen the video of a whale being harpooned, it takes a while and it bleeds like a fountain :(

It is worth noting that whaling is one of the oldest professions in the world. Banning whaling is in some sense going against tradition. And a whale's death in the wild would probably be just as painful as it is from harpoons. What I don't understand is why whales haven't figured out to run away from whaling ships! Maybe if people have to hunt whales in scuba gear and submarines it will become a noble profession once again. It seems like a slow death is more appropriate for a real live whale then something quick. More honorable maybe.

Spud Emperor said:
And Dr. Zion, The cows (and I live in a completely rural environment and have lots of respect for the intelligence and sentience of bovines despite the fact that it's at a seemingly low level) are bred for the market and are not endangered or even wild and free.
Does that matter, yes it bloody well does!
Click to expand...

Well, this raises some other moral questions - are 'plastic people' worth less then normal people? Its usually the other way around - 'normal' people (aborigines, natives) are displaced by technologically advanced industrial peoples.

In some sense however, it is more acceptable to 'kill' industrial people, if by killing we are destroying their environment. If we relocate 10,000 natives its going to be on the news, if we destroy 10,000 jobs it won't be nearly as loud, and certainly not in the same newspapers. Do we only have the right to impose our will on humanity and not the environment? In the past it was man vs nature. Now its man vs ideologies and regulations. When did this change?
 
Lions eat Zebras

Bears eat Salmon

Humans eat everything

We shouldn't apologize for being the best hunters on the planet.
 
With the recent trend in freakishly large families like the octomom and the Duggers and the immanent threat of overpopulation... wait nevermind, still too early :mufc:
 
stateofmind said:
With the recent trend in freakishly large families like the octomom and the Duggers and the immanent threat of overpopulation... wait nevermind, still too early :mufc:
Click to expand...

You're not suggesting something like Soylent Green patties.;) There's fresh meat & lots of burgers in just one earthquake alone. It would save a lot of critters and free up some land space at the same time.
 
I've actually eaten whale. Imagine taking a perfectly nice peace of beef and marinating it in a warm oceanic cesspool stew for a couple of months - such that it turns a putrid green color and smells like seagull vomit mixed with cow shit.

THAT is what whale tastes like!!

Even the dog refused to get near the stuff. One sniff and she wasn't having a bar of it.
 
DRZion said:
I have a quick challenge here for environmentalists -

Seeing how we can make 100,000 burgers out of a single whale and only 1,000 burgers out of a cow, isn't it more humane to kill one whale as opposed to one hundred cows? It seems like killing one whale is a lot less drastic than killing one hundred cows.. wouldn't it be right to kill the whales instead if protecting animals from pain was the objective?
Click to expand...

We can control the population of cows, we have no control over the population of whales apart from lowering it. From an ethical standpoint, it's better to slaughter 100 cows than a whale.
 
Cosmic, brilliant take on a difficult subject.
Why not offer an everybody wins resolution.
Here...Japan, take our best marbled beef at this low price but leave the whales alone.
Is that too much to ask? The idea that hunting whales is cultural, well that might just work for the Inuit but we're not exactly talking about the ancient Japanese subsistence techniques which required the killing of half a dozen whales for survival are we?
Cosmic, bring this one home, Nobel prize awaits.

Australia and the rest of the world would surely subsidise an agreement which was in the whales best interests and resulted in the promotion of the free market.
 
Spud Emperor said:
Cosmic, brilliant take on a difficult subject.
Why not offer an everybody wins resolution.
Here...Japan, take our best marbled beef at this low price but leave the whales alone.
Is that too much to ask? The idea that hunting whales is cultural, well that might just work for the Inuit but we're not exactly talking about the ancient Japanese subsistence techniques which required the killing of half a dozen whales for survival are we?
Cosmic, bring this one home, Nobel prize awaits.

Australia and the rest of the world would surely subsidise an agreement which was in the whales best interests and resulted in the promotion of the free market.
Click to expand...



Not giving the beef away but selling it at what the whale would cost them or more depending upon certain factors. If all Australia needs do is raise the beef then shipping the beef would be Japans responsibility which reduces costs quite a bit I would think. If this type of cooperation could be worked out then, as you say, everyone will win.
 
DRZion said:
I have a quick challenge here for environmentalists -

Seeing how we can make 100,000 burgers out of a single whale and only 1,000 burgers out of a cow, isn't it more humane to kill one whale as opposed to one hundred cows? It seems like killing one whale is a lot less drastic than killing one hundred cows.. wouldn't it be right to kill the whales instead if protecting animals from pain was the objective?

edit : dear mods, could this be moved to http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=2494140#post2494140 ? I didn't notice this thread already exists in another sub forum.
Click to expand...


not even close we can raise cattle it takes just a few years to get to full size.. we cant raise whales if we could it would take decades to get to full size
 
Although my skin is white, I am Lakota.
Among the various traditions also is included several adopted traditions.

Within my own, personal, hunting code are the following rules. Although some might disagree with them, they are formulated to suit my own perspective of life.
- The intent of the hunter is always to ensure his prey feels the least amount of pain possible, given that the other standards of hunting are followed.
- Life must be valued and respected. Thank your prey.
- Prey always has the right to defend itself. Prey that is unable to defend itself is NOT prey. A predator does not eat the defenseless. That is what scavengers do.
- The balance of life and death must be maintained. Do not kill without need or waste a kill.
- The hunter must feel empathy for his prey but not mercy.

These are a few of the basics.

In this topic, it's an interesting perspective. I see whales as natural prey as much one would see a cow as one. As long as that prey is respected. Pain is to be expected in hunting and I find the manner in which Modern Man slaughters cattle to be dishonorable and to deprive the cow of respect. He gives a painless death, yet does so by depriving that animals natural self defenses and depriving that animal of really LIVING before it's led to slaughter.

These animals are not free. You can taste the memory of life, as an animal experiences and lives, hormones course in its tissues... Modern meat, wrapped in packages, wastefully distributed to those that are thankless to where it came from-- It tastes of slavery. It tastes of empty livelihood. It's bitter.

Most people do not know what it's like to stalk your prey, to choose that particular animal from weeks of observation.
Choose that one that has had a full life and the experiences that go with it.
To cut the meat directly from the bone- THAT is how meat should taste.
Not the tainted and fouled styrene wrapped chunks vomited out by out industrialized slaughter practices.

In the end, people do not hunt. There are so many people, some method of feeding them all must be devised, since they do not hunt.
But it seems odd to me all the same.

Hunt whales?
A lot of the trouble would be solved by individuals providing for themselves in a balanced manner, rather than the wasteful methods currently used.
But then- that cannot be regulated.
 
Nice post.

Funnily enough, I knew someone who wouldn't hunt, because perfectly good meat was at the store - so why kill a free animal. Which is odd, but, the choice most of us make. For me I really never did much hunting. Oh, I've killed animals, deer and fish, and of course cleaned them, but, I never really enjoyed hunting. If I had to hunt, I'd probably mainly fish.
 
Michael said:
Nice post.

Funnily enough, I knew someone who wouldn't hunt, because perfectly good meat was at the store - so why kill a free animal. Which is odd, but, the choice most of us make. For me I really never did much hunting. Oh, I've killed animals, deer and fish, and of course cleaned them, but, I never really enjoyed hunting. If I had to hunt, I'd probably mainly fish.
Click to expand...

I understand. I've enjoyed stalking prey and enjoyed observing prey.
But never enjoyed killing.

It is the hardest part and requires a deep respect for the animal in order to do so properly. Any bumbling buffoon can take a life- but few can really hunt (My opinion.)

In our modern society, I can tell a person who does not wish to kill to hand me his weapon; I'll hunt for him.
But that's a limited scope- one does for a neighbor, as one would for his elders or children.

In a more rugged and threatened society the prospect is simple. Let the fat burn for a while. After the first week, he will realize that those grumbly tummy rumbles he mistook for hunger were actually symptoms of habit.
By the second week, he will know what real hunger is.
Shouldn't be long after that that he will be ready to Hunt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top