EnviroLink Forum
http://www.envirolink.org/forum/

Help Save the Animals
http://www.envirolink.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=24596
Page 2 of 3

Author:  animal-friendly [ Mon May 05, 2014 1:34 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Help Save the Animals

animal-friendly wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
animal-friendly wrote:
"the treatment of animals and the environment is better than it ever has been"

Wayne, the treatment of the environment, of which we are all a part, is abysmal. Animals are included, as we are all. How to respond to such a statement?

"..... but the cumulative effect of abuse of the environment over the history of mankind is still a threat?"

Yes, of course it is. it was and continues to be as long as our consciousness does not shift. Do you not feel the danger?


Not as much danger as there was in the past though. what was done to protect the Passenger Pigeon compared to more modern endagered species? How about the emissions of harmful compounds?
There are restrictions and controls now which were not in place when I was young.


So you cite the incidence of the Passenger Pigeon as some kind of justification or rationalization for the present day violence? We never had restrictions before because the need was never there.

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Mon May 05, 2014 5:59 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Help Save the Animals

animal-friendly wrote:
So you cite the incidence of the Passenger Pigeon as some kind of justification or rationalization for the present day violence? We never had restrictions before because the need was never there.


The reference was to refute your incorrect claim that animals had never been treated like this before. Animals, on average, have been treated much worse in the history of humanity, and the treatment now is much better on average. The need for restrictions has always been there, the impact of not having them was just better concealed in the past. That is why the creation of animal protection laws was so popular in the Victorian era, but the first known laws that resemble protection date back to Hammurabi.

Author:  Johhny Electriglide [ Mon May 05, 2014 2:45 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Help Save the Animals

That is all very interesting, but I am talking about humans causing the extinction of millions of species from single cell to ourselves.
This is short and to the point;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILahdcT7Usw

Sure, eat less meat or go vegan, but if you emit more than 10% of what you did back in 1990, the trail ends.
I did it by one child and going all solar, changing my diet, and sacrificing at times, but it already looks very bad for Arctic temps and going past that tipping point very soon. We may have run out of time, and the end result may be much worse than the Permian ELE. There is definitely enough sequestered carbon to cause a runaway greenhouse if all released by increasing heat, and the oceans boiled away........

Author:  animal-friendly [ Sun May 18, 2014 7:28 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Help Save the Animals

Wayne Stollings wrote:
animal-friendly wrote:
So you cite the incidence of the Passenger Pigeon as some kind of justification or rationalization for the present day violence? We never had restrictions before because the need was never there.


The reference was to refute your incorrect claim that animals had never been treated like this before. Animals, on average, have been treated much worse in the history of humanity, and the treatment now is much better on average. The need for restrictions has always been there, the impact of not having them was just better concealed in the past. That is why the creation of animal protection laws was so popular in the Victorian era, but the first known laws that resemble protection date back to Hammurabi.


Both "refute' and "incorrect" are words you shouldn't have begun with. Although they show a fighting spirit, they point to nothing at all.

It is impossible that animals have been treated much worse in human history than they are now. The breadth and depth of animals in industry is much greater now than it has ever been for obvious reasons. They are much more tide up with the entire economic process than they ever were .... ever, in human history. They are now inextricably linked up in industries never even dreamed of a few hundred years ago. And the need for "restriction" as you put it, has always been there, but never, ever had we had so may restrictions as we do now and that is only because the industry has grown so large. Yet, we do not have enough restrictions and that is partly due to consumer taste which has been influenced by advertisement and propaganda.

To put it quite simply, the vast majority of the meat producing industry is unnecessary. It really is that simple. You will debate it of course, but there is no rationalization which could possible justify this industry in real terms. It's an industry that is as fabricated as any .....

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Sun May 18, 2014 8:03 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Help Save the Animals

animal-friendly wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
animal-friendly wrote:
So you cite the incidence of the Passenger Pigeon as some kind of justification or rationalization for the present day violence? We never had restrictions before because the need was never there.


The reference was to refute your incorrect claim that animals had never been treated like this before. Animals, on average, have been treated much worse in the history of humanity, and the treatment now is much better on average. The need for restrictions has always been there, the impact of not having them was just better concealed in the past. That is why the creation of animal protection laws was so popular in the Victorian era, but the first known laws that resemble protection date back to Hammurabi.


Both "refute' and "incorrect" are words you shouldn't have begun with. Although they show a fighting spirit, they point to nothing at all.


The nothing they point to is the basis for your claim, which is why they were used.

Quote:
It is impossible that animals have been treated much worse in human history than they are now.


And you have some evidence for this claim? No, you do not because it does not exist other than your assumption.

Quote:
The breadth and depth of animals in industry is much greater now than it has ever been for obvious reasons.


You mean the breadth and depth is greater now than when the majority of the population were farmers which relied upon animals for labor and food without ANY oversight of the treatment of those animals? You are saying animals were treated better BEFORE any animal protection laws were enacted than after? That position makes no sense when approached logically.

Quote:
They are much more tide up with the entire economic process than they ever were .... ever, in human history.


You mean when they were the major source of labor for transport and work in addition to the food source owned by the majority of the population, they were LESS tide up in the econominc process? How is that possible?

Quote:
They are now inextricably linked up in industries never even dreamed of a few hundred years ago.


And delinked to other industries even some of those with which they were linked in the interim.

Quote:
And the need for "restriction" as you put it, has always been there, but never, ever had we had so may restrictions as we do now and that is only because the industry has grown so large.


So the restrictions have done nothing positive? That is the only way the basis can be claimed. If the restrictions were always necessary but not in place the only way the situation could be worse now is for the restrictions to cause the problems you are claiming and thus are a reason to remove the restrictions.

Quote:
Yet, we do not have enough restrictions and that is partly due to consumer taste which has been influenced by advertisement and propaganda.


You claim it was worse for animals priot to the restrictions but then claim more restrictions are needed. This refutes your basic claim that animals were treated worse prior to said restrictions.

Quote:
To put it quite simply, the vast majority of the meat producing industry is unnecessary.


That is an opinion and one not shared by the majority of the population.

Quote:
It really is that simple. You will debate it of course, but there is no rationalization which could possible justify this industry in real terms. It's an industry that is as fabricated as any .....


So the industry has always been irrational or did it become irrational at some point in time in your opinion?

Author:  Johhny Electriglide [ Sun Jun 15, 2014 12:57 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Help Save the Animals

Johhny Electriglide wrote:
That is all very interesting, but I am talking about humans causing the extinction of millions of species from single cell to ourselves.
This is short and to the point;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILahdcT7Usw

Sure, eat less meat or go vegan, but if you emit more than 10% of what you did back in 1998, the trail ends.
I did it by one child and going all solar, changing my diet, and sacrificing at times, but it already looks very bad for Arctic temps and going past that tipping point very soon. We may have run out of time, and the end result may be much worse than the Permian ELE. There is definitely enough sequestered carbon to cause a runaway greenhouse if all released by increasing heat, and the oceans boiled away........

Save the humans from bad animals, too;
Animal Rights
Little Girl With Scars From Attack Reportedly Asked To Leave KFC Restaurant
article image
By Michael Allen, Fri, June 13, 2014

"Victoria Wilcher, 3, was reportedly told to leave a Kentucky Fried Chicken restaurant in Jackson, Miss., because her facial scars supposedly scared customers.

Wilcher's face was mauled by three dogs.

"The right side of her face is paralyzed. She's got a lot of surgeries to go through and she won't even look in the mirror anymore," Wilcher's grandmother Kelly Mullins told 16 WAPT News."
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/ ... restaurant

Author:  Johhny Electriglide [ Thu Mar 19, 2015 12:06 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Help Save the Animals

All the feel good avoidance of the big picture is sickening. The big picture is humans causing most species to die from a thermal max extinction event, or series of events. Started by the use of black evil crud like coal and crude oil, the stimulated mammal population was even more stimulated by religious over-compassion, technologies, and killing off or controlling most predators, including bacteria, viruses, and other humans.
So the only logical help for any and all species is to go to lifestyle changes to no emissions and low impact, and try to get everyone to stop over-breeding and reduce emissions 95% within 8 years or less.
We will lose some species, but most could eventually make it.
Do not concentrate on a single species or revolting practice. The most revolting practice is burning fossil fuels and the gross overpopulation of our own species. :mrgreen:

Author:  animal-friendly [ Fri Apr 17, 2015 1:27 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Help Save the Animals

Johhny Electriglide wrote:
and other life forms, too, like plant species.
Years of Living Dangerously airs on Showtime starting April 13 at 10pm ET/PT.
"Nothing is more important to human society than preserving its natural capital. Nature does not need people, people need nature." Harrison Ford
:mrgreen:
http://yearsoflivingdangerously.com/


People ARE nature. If we destroy part of it, we destroy ALL of it. We can not partition some of it. If we are to be concerned about people, we must be concerned about animals. We cannot torture animals in this way and expect to treat each other better.

Author:  Donnie Mac Leod [ Fri Apr 17, 2015 8:13 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Help Save the Animals

Wayne Stollings wrote:
animal-friendly wrote:
So you cite the incidence of the Passenger Pigeon as some kind of justification or rationalization for the present day violence? We never had restrictions before because the need was never there.


The reference was to refute your incorrect claim that animals had never been treated like this before. Animals, on average, have been treated much worse in the history of humanity, and the treatment now is much better on average. The need for restrictions has always been there, the impact of not having them was just better concealed in the past. That is why the creation of animal protection laws was so popular in the Victorian era, but the first known laws that resemble protection date back to Hammurabi.


You are correct Wayne. The 1900 to 2015 time frame has been all about preventing extinction through conservation methodology. One of the few groups seeking eradication of specific animals is those seeking the end of pet & zoo animals. For example Pit Bulldogs,Dobermans, elephants,Tigers or snow leopards, even though they might be trying to use this method to make sure there are living gene pools that they can draw upon in order to save the species at some time in the future.

Author:  Donnie Mac Leod [ Fri Apr 17, 2015 8:16 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Help Save the Animals

animal-friendly wrote:
Johhny Electriglide wrote:
and other life forms, too, like plant species.
Years of Living Dangerously airs on Showtime starting April 13 at 10pm ET/PT.
"Nothing is more important to human society than preserving its natural capital. Nature does not need people, people need nature." Harrison Ford
:mrgreen:
http://yearsoflivingdangerously.com/


People ARE nature. If we destroy part of it, we destroy ALL of it. We can not partition some of it. If we are to be concerned about people, we must be concerned about animals. We cannot torture animals in this way and expect to treat each other better.


In fact nature has a specific use for Man. We are the only animal that can understand & adjust to the pressures of nature in a humane way & with scientific weight in keeping nature in balance.

Author:  Johhny Electriglide [ Sat Apr 25, 2015 6:46 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Help Save the Animals

Donnie Mac Leod wrote:
animal-friendly wrote:
Johhny Electriglide wrote:
and other life forms, too, like plant species.
Years of Living Dangerously airs on Showtime starting April 13 at 10pm ET/PT.
"Nothing is more important to human society than preserving its natural capital. Nature does not need people, people need nature." Harrison Ford
:mrgreen:
http://yearsoflivingdangerously.com/


People ARE nature. If we destroy part of it, we destroy ALL of it. We can not partition some of it. If we are to be concerned about people, we must be concerned about animals. We cannot torture animals in this way and expect to treat each other better.


In fact nature has a specific use for Man. We are the only animal that can understand & adjust to the pressures of nature in a humane way & with scientific weight in keeping nature in balance.

Too bad most people don't have that ability to understand and adjust.

Author:  Johhny Electriglide [ Fri May 01, 2015 1:02 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Help Save the Animals

in my mail----
"Dear Friend,

On April 17, CNN ran a headline story about "the last known male northern white rhino left in the entire world."

42 years old, the elderly rhino (named Sudan) will live out his remaining days at the Ol Pejeta Conservancy in central Kenya. He remains in the constant company of several armed guards, who are his 24-hour protection against the violent poachers who seek his tusks - which are highly valuable on the Asian black market.

According to Ol Pejeta's website, human beings are the sole threat to white rhinos. They have few predators in the wild. In 2014, over 1,000 rhinos were killed in Africa for their horns for illegal export to the far east. There are only 5 northern white rhinos left on Earth - and all of them live in captivity.

There are NO northern white rhinos left in the wild.

However, the threat isn't just to African rhinos - human population growth is threatening animal species all over the world. The Discovery Channel website recently published an article titled "Animals That Could Become Extinct in Your Lifetime." A recent study found 15 species - ranging from birds to amphibians to small mammals - which are facing extinction very soon.

What did the study find as a primary reason these animals face extinction? You guessed it: "High probability of its habitat becoming urbanized." Dalia Conde of the University of Southern Denmark, the study's lead author, notes: "Conservation opportunity evaluations like ours show the urgency of implementing management actions before it is too late."

Our world is changing. Global biodiversity is disappearing.

Human population growth is the primary reason.

All of NPG's publications are designed to highlight the link between population growth and its inevitable impact on our environment -including our precious animal species. These valuable resources remain FREE OF CHARGE, thanks to the generous support of members like you. "
http://www.npg.org

Author:  Purebreed [ Tue Mar 08, 2016 3:57 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Help Save the Animals

Yes! I agree to a campaign in saving the animals as part of our environment. They are also like human and they deserve to be respected. Animal brutality must be prevented and a punishment must be given to those who will harm them.

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Tue Mar 08, 2016 12:46 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Help Save the Animals

animal-friendly wrote:
So, the treatment of animals and the environment is better than it ever has been, but the cumulative effect of abuse of the environment over the history of mankind is still a threat?


Yes, just like we have the best prevention for measles in the history of mankind, but there is still a threat to children from the disease.

Quote:
I'm still trying to figure this one out. I emphatically stated my observation and I think my observation is quite accurate ... that we have NEVER, in human history, treated animals the way we do now.


You may think your observation is correct, but the facts speak differently, just as there are those who think there are aliens visiting in their UFOs and taking Elvis home with them, but .......

Quote:
And your response is that we have never treated animals and our environment better than ever? Really?


Yes. How many animal protection laws are there on the books now compared to any period prior? How many environmental protection laws are there on the books now compared to any prior period?

Author:  Johhny Electriglide [ Thu Jun 09, 2016 5:11 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Help Save the Animals

I have a rabbit that loves me and I love him. Such a remarkable happy boy, so full of love.
>>>>I was not fully informed several years ago. We don't have any time left and necessary changes in human behavior are way past implementing and stopping. All we can do is watch, and pray for a really big miracle. I had hopium, I guess. I would give my life to save little Fozzy, and his species. [-o<

Page 2 of 3 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/