Why the hate?

[Silverscale derg]

The main problem (and this is going to sound simple and idiotic... and that's because it is) is that "the squeaky wheel gets the oil."

Animals can't advocate for themselves... so who are the "authorities" listening to when they open hunting seasons or respond to the "threat" of wolves in an area with a culling? They are listening to the only creatures able to complain - humans.

There's not really much way around it... we "humans" are the worst species on the planet for many, many reasons. Our claim to "superiority" rests on our knowledge-base and intelligence, which, in-turn, rests on the shoulders of our forebears. There is not much "intrinsic" within we humans, as individuals, that automatically places us above nearly any living creature on Earth without the fact that we have such a knowledge-base as we do to draw on. Opposable-thumbs... that's about it.

Take guns, for example. Can you think of any more cowardly and presumptuous way to kill another being? A hunting human starts out alright... merely trying not to allow the prey to detect his/her presence... but then loses all honor and credibility the moment they pull that trigger and enact the kill without even having to put themselves at risk. Before anyone even raises a single word in protest, think on this: Why do you think we abhor the idea of someone sniping on the public at large from a bell-tower? Becomes very easy to answer at that point... doesn't it?

Animals can not speak human but that doesn't mean the self proclaimed "intelligent" species called humans shouldn't try to study their language. It's hard to learn something as a species if leaders keep getting killed. "culling" is immoral. No animal needs to be culled. You should only kill to eat. Nature can balance itself. Humans twist tests on smart to their own version of it when just as a quote said about not judging a fish to climb a tree, you should not judge a lizard on math because math is confusing to them and so is trying to use noise. Guns are cowardly

 

[Silverscale derg]

Your claim, not mine.

If indeed you are with the others, you also know that your pest control only will go so far. You yourself have little time left. Your long life of billions of years will now come to an end. Your final solution will be the final solution with yourself included. So much higher than humans, yet fallen so low, lower than animals who show love and fellow feeling.

I wonder what promises got so many of you to follow your god.

My life of thousands of years has come to an end yet I and all the rest of the dragons are immortal. Killing us only pisses us off especially because it was for sport. We don't follow "god" we follow the gods, the first dragons to make the world through careful cultivation

 

[Silverscale derg]

Only some of them. (actually most of them)

There you go

 

[Silverscale derg]

Yes they are, or were, but you, and other's still have the decency to care about life.

Edit, and may a say you English is very good for a dragon

All dragons care about life because we long ago made life. To take life away is painful yet the creature lives a new life in the spirit world up above and some like that, some which are families want to be eaten together. Humans are the ones who don't care about life, not even of the same species. They do nothing but destroy. Thank you. I'm over 2000 years old so I had some time to learn

 

[suncowiam]

"humans are on the top of the food chain" boy listen to yourself...humans aren't a part of the food chain. No creature kills another creature that killed their kind out of revenge as is the case with humans who kill bears who ate humans in the wild...Humans are on the "top" of the "food chain" just like an alien species would be if they came to earth with more than the capabilities of humans. Humans are unique in the fact that they have thumbs that they can use well but they are bashful towards species with different types of intellect. Lizards aren't stupid for standing still because they can hide and their body especially on the underside is quite delicate. My argument is that if humans are going to complain about "womens" rights or "black lives" because humans complain of creatures not of their area like happens for "canadian" wolves because that's a human made boundary. Another case is the brown anole stuff. So green anoles are seen as native, brown anoles, the same exact lizard save for it's scale color which green anoles can mimic anyways is seen as invasive and pests. I don't mean to be offensive but saying that is like saying in human terms that people of color shouldn't be allowed here and that they're invasive to the white ones because they were native. You'd be called a nazi for saying such stuff to humans. If humans preach equality within themselves they need to help with equality all over. I have no problem with eating other creatures but what I do have is needless slaughter of those in the name of "pest" or "population control" such as what happens to coyotes a lot.

Maybe you were banned because of your use of grammar? Or lack of.

I'm sorry, I can't read this easily so I'm going to pass.

 

[ChristineM]

All dragons care about life because we long ago made life. To take life away is painful yet the creature lives a new life in the spirit world up above and some like that, some which are families want to be eaten together. Humans are the ones who don't care about life, not even of the same species. They do nothing but destroy. Thank you. I'm over 2000 years old so I had some time to learn

Tell that to the komodo dragon.

Lease don't classify all humans as the same

Perhaps senility creaps in after 1999 years.

 

[Father]

May I ask where you learned that these were laws of nature? Are you using "law" colloquially and not to mean an actual law in the scientific sense? Neither of these statements are in keeping with what is known in the discipline of biology, so I'm a bit confused. Is this more like your personal philosophy?


Law as in how nature abides. it is commonly known the first law of nature is survival of the fittest. I simply put forward if there was the second law it would be that

 

[Father]

This simple answer is grounded in outdated information about organismal interactions. Kids used to be taught (and are probably still taught) that food chains are a thing, but it's been known for quite some time that organismal interactions are more complex than that. Contemporary ecologists talk about food webs, not food chains - meaning there is no "top" of these interactions. There are also countless other dependencies all organisms have on abiotic aspects of their environments, reinforcing the lack of a "top" to anything.

however, we can bend and shape nature to our will. while it is a food web we are the most powerful and therefore top. nothing comes close. we might as well be at the pinacol of the web

 

[Father]

I don't think an argument needs to be made at all - to anyone who is marginally knowledgable in the discipline of ecology, it's readily apparent that humans are entirely dependent on the planet's biotic and abiotic systems to exist. Unfortunately, ecology is one of the sciences the general public is poorly appraised of.

we are bound to food and such yet how does this coincide to our killing of animals for game? we also genetically modify plants and grow them. again we are the most powerful animals on this planet. and power is everything

 

[ChristineM]

we are bound to food and such yet how does this coincide to our killing of animals for game? we also genetically modify plants and grow them. again we are the most powerful animals on this planet. and power is everything

The most intelligent (arguably) but hardly the moist powerful

 

[Father]

The most intelligent (arguably) but hardly the moist powerful

power takes many forms. intelligence is the strongest of power as it can raise other forms. a human is physically weaker than a bear. yet we can make a gun and kill a bear with relative ease

 

[ChristineM]

power takes many forms. intelligence is the strongest of power as it can raise other forms. a human is physically weaker than a bear. yet we can make a gun and kill a bear with relative ease

The word powerful is well defined

Powerful: having great power or strength.
"a fast, powerful car"
synonyms: strong, muscular, muscly, sturdy, strapping, robust, mighty, hefty, brawny, burly, husky, athletic, manly, wellbuilt, Herculean, tough, solid, substantial, lusty;

Nothing's about intelligence.

And bear (most species of bear anyway) outmatches us

 

[Ingledsva]

You hunt for defense?

"I'm a hunter, - for food and defense only."

I hunt for food, and I carry concealed for defense, - and will definitely go into cat and mouse hunt mode to keep myself and others alive.

DEFENSE - from The Free Dictionary.

1. The act of defending against attack, danger, or injury.
2. A means or method of defending or protecting.
6. The science or art of defending oneself; self-defense.
8. a. the tactics of defending oneself or one's goal against attack.

*

 

[Milton Platt]

How would that get you banned? There's at least a few of us here (myself in here) who would bash the brains in of a human long and way before they would harm another animal, and some of us who view trophy hunters as scum of the earth. I fully get and understand hunting for food - it's how nature works. But ****ers thing they're big and bad with their cowardice ways of using a gun to take down a lion, I say we give the lion a fair chance and have the trophy hunter ***** go against that lion using only what nature provides for them.
I've stated numerous times one of my favorite videos to watch is that deer kicking the hunters ***, and I've laughed many times, even on this site, at the picture of the bull who gored the matador up his ***.

I'm a long way from vegetarian, but I basically agree with you. Feeding deer corn all year and hiding in a blind when they show up for the next meal is asinine. That isn't hunting at all.

 

[Ingledsva]

More gay people.

There is actually the idea out there, that we have an evolutionary - steady percentage of gay people, to help in times of great stress (war, famine, etc.) while not acerbating the situation by producing more offspring in need.

I agree that at the current state some select creatures need to be controlled because the natural predators have been wiped out which would allow them to control it. Humans don't need to hunt. Nature knows how to balance.

Humans all over the world still need to hunt to survive.

Nature has whiped out many species.

I have no issue with hunting as long as it's done ethically and respectfully of the creature being taken. If you take a life I expect it to be done out of need for food regardless of species. If you kill a wolf you don't do it for the fur, you do it because either you were attacked and defending yourself which is really rare, or you do it because you need the meat. Sure the fur can be a side bonus but it's more respectful to kill for meat. So many hunters shoot either coyote or wolves claiming they are saving "their" deer. Big emphasis on their.

People all over the world kill animals for clothing to survive the elements. For instance our Eskimo, and other indigenous tribes.

I've made deer hide moccasins, with fur trim, and beading.

We've turned antler into art, jewelry, pipes, etc. I made an Alaskan antler Yule wreath.

Also, here, - the hides of hunted deer, moose, elk, etc. - are collected and sold, - with the money going to charity.

*

 

[Father]

The word powerful is well defined

Powerful: having great power or strength.
"a fast, powerful car"
synonyms: strong, muscular, muscly, sturdy, strapping, robust, mighty, hefty, brawny, burly, husky, athletic, manly, wellbuilt, Herculean, tough, solid, substantial, lusty;

Nothing's about intelligence.

And bear (most species of bear anyway) outmatches us

that's a base definition. no power is control. anything that can control is power.
a bear outmatches us in brute force. however not in intelligence

the second definition of power is

pow·er
ˈpou(ə)r/
noun
noun: power; plural noun: powers

1. the ability to do something or act in a particular way, especially as a faculty or quality.
   "the power of speech"
   synonyms: ability, capacity, capability, potential, faculty, competence
   "the power of speech"
   antonyms: inability
2. 
   the capacity or ability to direct or influence the behavior of others or the course of events.
   "the idea that men should have power over women"
   • political or social authority or control, especially that exercised by a government.
     "the party had been in power for eight years"
     synonyms: control, authority, influence, dominance, mastery, domination, dominion, sway, weight, leverage; More

so next time maybe quote the entire definition

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I hunt for food, and I carry concealed for defense, ...

Which is a far more coherent statement as compared to: "I'm a hunter, - for food and defense only."

DEFENSE - from The Free Dictionary.

1. The act of defending against attack, danger, or injury.
2. A means or method of defending or protecting.
6. The science or art of defending oneself; self-defense.
8. a. the tactics of defending oneself or one's goal against attack.

Pointless pedantry is, first and foremost, pointless, but thanks for sharing.

 

[Quintessence]

Law as in how nature abides. it is commonly known the first law of nature is survival of the fittest.

There is no such law of nature, though. A common misconception about biological evolution is the erroneous oversimplification of "survival of the fittest." In actuality, the theory articulates something more along the lines of "survival of the fit enough in some specific environmental context."

At any rate, it's rather clear you hold to the sadly common myth of human supremacy, which is not really supported by the sciences. I will grant one thing, though - humans are certainly the pinnacle of arrogance and self-importance on this planet.

 

[Father]

There is no such law of nature, though. A common misconception about biological evolution is the erroneous oversimplification of "survival of the fittest." In actuality, the theory articulates something more along the lines of "survival of the fit enough in some specific environmental context."

At any rate, it's rather clear you hold to the sadly common myth of human supremacy, which is not really supported by the sciences. I will grant one thing, though - humans are certainly the pinnacle of arrogance and self-importance on this planet.

can any other animal destroy the planet 1000x times over? shape the environment? build entire islands and ecosystems? bend the will of planets and animals to suit our needs? harness fire and energy? what about adapt to a great multitude of climates within a matter of moments than years? no, they can not.

 

[Quintessence]

can any other animal destroy the planet 1000x times over? shape the environment? build entire islands and ecosystems? bend the will of planets and animals to suit our needs? harness fire and energy? what about adapt to a great multitude of climates within a matter of moments than years? no, they can not.

If you say so. You're not going to get to me to convert to your human worshiping religion when I'm too aware of the faults in your theology.