Enmos
Valued Senior Member
And how is that relevant? You think you can include all marine life because we are discussing a marine animal?
Shamu Kills Trainer
- Thread starter sandy
- Start date
And how is that relevant? You think you can include all marine life because we are discussing a marine animal?
Are you reading these posts and links?
THIS whale (the one in question) was born and raised in an aquarium.
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
So fucking what!?
So you are supposed to read the posts.
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
You are supposed to answer my questions.
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Take a hike, John. I've read your posts.
SeaWorld's Shamu show offers tribute for slain trainer:
Dawn Brancheau is honored at the first killer whale performance at the Orlando park since she was fatally attacked. The orca involved in the attack does not perform.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-na-seaworld-death28-2010feb28,0,2200745.story
Dawn Brancheau is honored at the first killer whale performance at the Orlando park since she was fatally attacked. The orca involved in the attack does not perform.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-na-seaworld-death28-2010feb28,0,2200745.story
Bells
Staff member
Because the whole thing is a negative.
I'm sorry, but your sole claim to your being an expert in marine biology is that you had a salt water fish tank. In your apparent expert opinion, you even went so far as to refer to whales as fish and compared them to fish:
the thing about fish, i know whales are not tecjnically fish, is they need a lot of room and also the parameters must be met for theri requirements.
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2488450&postcount=52
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2488450&postcount=52
So you will excuse me if I think your expert opinion is a load of bollocks.
In the wild, whale sharks can live to over 70 years. In captivity, the longest they have survived has been 10 years. So tell me, how exactly are they learning about their requirements for survival?
In the wild, whale sharks cover a hell of a lot of open ocean. In captivity, they are held in tanks where they get to swim around and around in circles.
A killer whale is not a fish. A fish in a fish tank, and I think even that is cruel, if released into the ocean would not survive, simply because they have never had to deal with predators before. Their behaviour changes.
So keeping them in tanks and shortening their lifespans is supposed to provide an answer?
And that is your justification for this practice?
Life in the real world is also very dangerous for humans. If you think that being held in captivity somehow protects them, even though it dramatically shortens their lifespan, I would suggest you lock yourself in a prison cell and be fed and then, for the entertainment of others, you be taught tricks so you can perform. We'll see how you fare after 5 or so years.
Last edited:
So what? Animals are animals. They can be killed for food, sport, science, or pleasure. There's nothing immoral about it, unless it is done in an unusually cruel way.
I never made such a demand. My point is that an animal known to have killed humans in the past shouldn't be used for shows. It should either be set free or killed.
Because the whole thing is a negative.
It isnt negative to do research on animals that are\may become threatened by extinction.
I'm sorry, but your sole claim to your being an expert in marine biology is that you had a salt water fish tank. In your apparent expert opinion, you even went so far as to refer to whales as fish and compared them to fish:
So you will excuse me if I think your expert opinion is a load of bollocks.
That post doesnt show me claiming to be an expert. Certainly i am not an expert on whales. If you are referring to 'trust, me im a profesional', that is a quotre from the cable guy movie. Right before it i also made another quote from the movie.
In the wild, whale sharks can live to over 70 years. In captivity, the longest they have survived has been 10 years. So tell me, how exactly are they learning about their requirements for survival?
In the wild, whale sharks cover a hell of a lot of open ocean. In captivity, they are held in tanks where they get to swim around and around in circles.
A killer whale is not a fish. A fish in a fish tank, and I think even that is cruel, if released into the ocean would not survive, simply because they have never had to deal with predators before. Their behaviour changes.
So keeping them in tanks and shortening their lifespans is supposed to provide an answer?
And that is your justification for this practice?
A few whales are taken from the wild to provide research into how they live and what they need to survive is overall a good for animal populations in the wild. There are many natural reasons why animals go extinct.
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/episodes/the-loneliest-animals/captive-breeding-success-stories/4920/
It isnt negative to do research on animals that are\may become threatened by extinction.
I'm sorry, but your sole claim to your being an expert in marine biology is that you had a salt water fish tank. In your apparent expert opinion, you even went so far as to refer to whales as fish and compared them to fish:
the thing about fish, i know whales are not tecjnically fish, is they need a lot of room and also the parameters must be met for theri requirements.
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2488450&postcount=52
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2488450&postcount=52
So you will excuse me if I think your expert opinion is a load of bollocks.
That post doesnt show me claiming to be an expert. Certainly i am not an expert on whales. If you are referring to 'trust, me im a profesional', that is a quotre from the cable guy movie. Right before it i also made another quote from the movie.
In the wild, whale sharks can live to over 70 years. In captivity, the longest they have survived has been 10 years. So tell me, how exactly are they learning about their requirements for survival?
In the wild, whale sharks cover a hell of a lot of open ocean. In captivity, they are held in tanks where they get to swim around and around in circles.
A killer whale is not a fish. A fish in a fish tank, and I think even that is cruel, if released into the ocean would not survive, simply because they have never had to deal with predators before. Their behaviour changes.
So keeping them in tanks and shortening their lifespans is supposed to provide an answer?
And that is your justification for this practice?
A few whales are taken from the wild to provide research into how they live and what they need to survive is overall a good for animal populations in the wild. There are many natural reasons why animals go extinct.
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/episodes/the-loneliest-animals/captive-breeding-success-stories/4920/
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
And that is where we disagree.
Food: as long as it's done respectfully. I have no real problem with this, the problem is our numbers.
Science: Depends. I don't like the idea much, but if it directly helps the species in question or if it's done for the greater good (not humanity) it can be acceptable.
Sport and Pleasure: No way!
Bells
Staff member
Okay.. Again for the one who does not get it..
When you breed captive killer whales, they can never be released into the wild. Secondly, you cannot study them in their natural habitat, nor can you study whale behaviour in captivity, simply because their behaviour has been so altered by forced human interraction. They don't know how to hunt for their food, they do not recognise predators and they basically become overgrown domesticated pets, taught to do tricks for our amusement.
In captivity, you are unable to study their migratory pattern, because guess what, going from one tank to another does not amount to migration. You cannot study their behaviour or their groups, because guess what, whales in captivity are unable to interract with each other as they normally would in the wild. You cannot study their feeding patterns, because again, guess what, they do not hunt since they are fed by their handlers.
Whales bred in captivity are bred for the purpose of entertainment. It is a highly profitable business for aquariums and waterparks.
It would seem we also have reading comprehension issues.
The post I linked was you claiming that they are somehow comparable to fish.
/Gobsmacked!
How in the hell can you study "how they live" and "what they need to survive", when you put them inside a frigging tank? How can you study what they need to survive when they are captive and bred in captivity and given everything..?
Animals go extinct because of man's intervention you numbskull. We either hunt them to extinction or we destroy their habitat.
superstring01
Moderator
Well, to be fair, 99.999% of all animals (and more) have gone extinct for other reasons that had nothing to do with humans, though, I totally agree with the rest of your post.
~String
Are you jus espressin you'r personal moral standards... or do you see those standards as corect for everone.???
So you can see it as moral when a human kills animals meerly for the pleasure of enjoyin ther taste.!!!
How is it moral for humans to exploit animals for the taste of ther flesh but not in other ways.???
Last edited:
How I would react has nothing to do with it - I'm not a killer whale.
The truth is it's probably a lot better to leave killer whales in their natural environment. Nevertheless, to suggest that the whales are being tortured is absurd. It's not as though pain is inflicted upon them. Plus they have a ready supply of food, physical exercise and social activity. They could do considerably worse.
Oh, and:
- interact
- willfully
Results 1 - 10 of about 29,500 for interract
Results 1 - 10 of about 48,200,000 for interact
And the spelling 'willfully' (with a double L) is an American variant :blbl:
(First, my apologies to Enmos - I read the thread from the end back, and at first I thought CellarDoor's comments were yours. Then, I'm like - what? That's not Enmos! I reread it, got my act together, and stopped shivering...
)@CellarDoor:
Now, back to topic, I think you should perhaps reconsider your definition of "torture". Most civilized nations consider a psychological aspect to the term. Meaning, humans, a killer whale, "Flipper", or any other intelligent being confined in a small space with limited / no contact with others of their kind is considered torture, or at least "cruel and unusual punishment". Would you not agree?
So this leaves us with only one question - are Orcas intelligent?Are they self-aware? I don't know, but if they are, they are being "tortured" by being kept in captivity. If you allow this premise for a moment, would you agree that this creature is being tortured, notwithstanding the regular feedings and appropriate P.H. of the water they are kept in? Just ask yourself how you would feel, in similar conditions...
Furthermore, don't start the bleeding heart, liberal crap on me - I am (or was, circumstances permitting) an avid hunter, have killed many a meal for my family and see no moral contradiction in doing so. However, I would pick non-sentient creatures to eat, given a choice...
I believe morality really only applies to interactions between humans. I will admit that if I saw someone abusing an animal, I'd try to stop them. I'd do this not because of any rights the animal possesses, but because a person who goes out of his way to be cruel to an animal will soon move on to humans. Such behavior should be squashed as soon as it appears.