EnviroLink Forum

Community • Ecology • Connection
It is currently Mon Dec 18, 2017 7:02 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 140 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 10  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Jan 12, 2016 2:52 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 21222
Location: Southeastern US
animal-friendly wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
Now for the reality check. What happens if one of these "compassionate" people giving water to random farm animals outside of the slaughterhouse ...


The fact that they are thirsty is indication that these animals are in need. They often have long journeys. They are probably hungry too.

If one wanted to poison the food chain, it would be easier to go to go to a grocery store .....

This is not terrorism; It is compassion.



It cannot be known to be anything without the investigation and evidence. It could be either or both as some might look at it, but the fact is that no outside observer can say it is or is not terrorism. It very well could be and probably should be treated as such until evidence shows otherwise for the safety of the consumer.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 24, 2016 5:35 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 12:42 am
Posts: 1473
Wayne Stollings wrote:
animal-friendly wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
Now for the reality check. What happens if one of these "compassionate" people giving water to random farm animals outside of the slaughterhouse ...


The fact that they are thirsty is indication that these animals are in need. They often have long journeys. They are probably hungry too.

If one wanted to poison the food chain, it would be easier to go to go to a grocery store .....


But it would have a greater impact at the slaughterhouse since only the inventory of one specific store would be impacted by "going to a grocery store", but the inventory of ANY product at ANY grocery store could be impacted by one pig being contaminated prior to entry.
Every product which could contain anything which came into contact with the contaminated pig would be suspect, which covers many stores and even restaurants and other food products.


Good point. Yet, if the pigs were not thirsty in the first place, would they accept water of any kind? Seems they are eager for it, and are gobbling it up. We really have no need of "pork product" to begin with, aside from the fact that bacon is ever so popular. But if people insist on eating it, should the animals who are bound for slaughter not be treated humanely on their way there?

Hopefully this comment only posts once. (fingers crossed).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 24, 2016 8:52 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 21222
Location: Southeastern US
animal-friendly wrote:

Good point. Yet, if the pigs were not thirsty in the first place, would they accept water of any kind? Seems they are eager for it, and are gobbling it up.


I cannot say from personal experience because there was no such thing as bottled water when we raised hogs nor do I suspect we would have had any opportunity to have tried to give them water from a bottle had that even been an option. From my memory of that time it seems they would take anything a person had in their hand, much like a dog who will eat anything a person will. From that experience I would have to say the hogs probably would take water in that situation.

Quote:
We really have no need of "pork product" to begin with, aside from the fact that bacon is ever so popular.


We really do not need anything other than air, basic shelter, basic food, and minimal water if you want to go that route.

Quote:
But if people insist on eating it, should the animals who are bound for slaughter not be treated humanely on their way there?


The problem is the definition of what is and is not "humane" varies from person to person and to one extreme "humane" means no human contact.

Quote:
Hopefully this comment only posts once. (fingers crossed).


Worked. Congratulations on the effective finger crossing.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 24, 2016 11:12 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 12:42 am
Posts: 1473
Good point. Yet, if the pigs were not thirsty in the first place, would they accept water of any kind? Seems they are eager for it, and are gobbling it up.

"I cannot say from personal experience because there was no such thing as bottled water when we raised hogs nor do I suspect we would
have had any opportunity to have tried to give them water from a bottle had that even been an option."

Whether the pig needed the water. is my question It's not important if the pig took it from bottled water or some other vessel.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 24, 2016 12:32 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 21222
Location: Southeastern US
animal-friendly wrote:
Good point. Yet, if the pigs were not thirsty in the first place, would they accept water of any kind? Seems they are eager for it, and are gobbling it up.

"I cannot say from personal experience because there was no such thing as bottled water when we raised hogs nor do I suspect we would
have had any opportunity to have tried to give them water from a bottle had that even been an option."

Whether the pig needed the water. is my question It's not important if the pig took it from bottled water or some other vessel.


The pigs would have to know what the container held in order to want or not want the contents. In my experience they would check it regardless because it is being given my a person and people are associated with food.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 27, 2016 4:27 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 12:42 am
Posts: 1473
Wayne Stollings wrote:
animal-friendly wrote:
Good point. Yet, if the pigs were not thirsty in the first place, would they accept water of any kind? Seems they are eager for it, and are gobbling it up.

"I cannot say from personal experience because there was no such thing as bottled water when we raised hogs nor do I suspect we would
have had any opportunity to have tried to give them water from a bottle had that even been an option."

Whether the pig needed the water. is my question It's not important if the pig took it from bottled water or some other vessel.


The pigs would have to know what the container held in order to want or not want the contents. In my experience they would check it regardless because it is being given my a person and people are associated with food.


Are you saying that a pig eats when it is not hungry and drinks when it is not thirsty?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 27, 2016 8:19 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 21222
Location: Southeastern US
animal-friendly wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
The pigs would have to know what the container held in order to want or not want the contents. In my experience they would check it regardless because it is being given my a person and people are associated with food.


Are you saying that a pig eats when it is not hungry and drinks when it is not thirsty?


Yes, they would just like a dog would if they thought it was something special. For example, have you ever offered a dog a treat just after it has eaten? Did the dog refuse it or was it taken immediately?

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 29, 2016 12:03 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 12:42 am
Posts: 1473
Wayne Stollings wrote:
animal-friendly wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
The pigs would have to know what the container held in order to want or not want the contents. In my experience they would check it regardless because it is being given my a person and people are associated with food.


Are you saying that a pig eats when it is not hungry and drinks when it is not thirsty?


Yes, they would just like a dog would if they thought it was something special. For example, have you ever offered a dog a treat just after it has eaten? Did the dog refuse it or was it taken immediately?


Ye, but water is a different thing. A dog does not drink water if it is not thirsty.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 29, 2016 3:34 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 21222
Location: Southeastern US
Wayne Stollings wrote:
animal-friendly wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
The pigs would have to know what the container held in order to want or not want the contents. In my experience they would check it regardless because it is being given my a person and people are associated with food.


Are you saying that a pig eats when it is not hungry and drinks when it is not thirsty?


Yes, they would just like a dog would if they thought it was something special. For example, have you ever offered a dog a treat just after it has eaten? Did the dog refuse it or was it taken immediately?


animal-friendly wrote:
Ye, but water is a different thing. A dog does not drink water if it is not thirsty.


How many times have you tried to give a dog water out of a bottle instead of pouring it into a container? The problem is the curiosity involving the bottle and what is in it, which is an unknown to the pigs.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 31, 2016 2:23 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 12:42 am
Posts: 1473
Quote:
How many times have you tried to give a dog water out of a bottle instead of pouring it into a container? The problem is the curiosity involving the bottle and what is in it, which is an unknown to the pigs.


If the pig is not thirsty, it will not drink out of ANY container once it knows what is in the container. Does that look like what is happening here?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VRZ08sblVw


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 31, 2016 5:19 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 21222
Location: Southeastern US
animal-friendly wrote:
Quote:
How many times have you tried to give a dog water out of a bottle instead of pouring it into a container? The problem is the curiosity involving the bottle and what is in it, which is an unknown to the pigs.


If the pig is not thirsty, it will not drink out of ANY container once it knows what is in the container. Does that look like what is happening here?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VRZ08sblVw


I just happened to be able to do a little experiment this weekend while dog sitting. Every time I put water into the bowl the dog I was watching took a drink to see what was being put into the bowl.

I noticed more pigs in the video smelling the bottles and trying to bite them than drinking even with the edited video presented.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 01, 2016 1:20 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 12:42 am
Posts: 1473
Wayne Stollings wrote:
animal-friendly wrote:
Quote:
How many times have you tried to give a dog water out of a bottle instead of pouring it into a container? The problem is the curiosity involving the bottle and what is in it, which is an unknown to the pigs.


If the pig is not thirsty, it will not drink out of ANY container once it knows what is in the container. Does that look like what is happening here?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VRZ08sblVw


I just happened to be able to do a little experiment this weekend while dog sitting. Every time I put water into the bowl the dog I was watching took a drink to see what was being put into the bowl.

I noticed more pigs in the video smelling the bottles and trying to bite them than drinking even with the edited video presented.


And if the dog was actually thirsty, s/he would have drank the entire bowl instead of looking around for kibbles. I just did the experiment with my own dog. She sniffed the water and didn't take one lick of it because she was not thirsty. The pigs in the video tell a much different story.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 01, 2016 8:00 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 21222
Location: Southeastern US
animal-friendly wrote:

And if the dog was actually thirsty, s/he would have drank the entire bowl instead of looking around for kibbles. I just did the experiment with my own dog. She sniffed the water and didn't take one lick of it because she was not thirsty. The pigs in the video tell a much different story.


Not really since the video would be edited to cast the best light on the project and even then there were many pigs who were not drinking but were curious about what the people were doing. You want to believe and thus you will. I look at the evidence and do not see enough to support their claim.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 08, 2016 11:35 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 12:42 am
Posts: 1473
Wayne Stollings wrote:
animal-friendly wrote:

And if the dog was actually thirsty, s/he would have drank the entire bowl instead of looking around for kibbles. I just did the experiment with my own dog. She sniffed the water and didn't take one lick of it because she was not thirsty. The pigs in the video tell a much different story.


Not really since the video would be edited to cast the best light on the project and even then there were many pigs who were not drinking but were curious about what the people were doing. You want to believe and thus you will. I look at the evidence and do not see enough to support their claim.


Yes of course, the video must have been edited to show only those pigs who were actually thirsty (I think the video showed two thirsty pigs?). The other pigs were probably not thirsty at all which is why "Toronto Pig Save" edited them out. Despite the fact that July 2013 was a heat wave in Toronto with temperatures soaring between 90 and 100 degrees, I'm pretty sure the group had to do some fancy editing to show ONLY those two pigs were were voraciously thirsty. :crazy:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 08, 2016 12:58 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 21222
Location: Southeastern US
animal-friendly wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
animal-friendly wrote:

And if the dog was actually thirsty, s/he would have drank the entire bowl instead of looking around for kibbles. I just did the experiment with my own dog. She sniffed the water and didn't take one lick of it because she was not thirsty. The pigs in the video tell a much different story.


Not really since the video would be edited to cast the best light on the project and even then there were many pigs who were not drinking but were curious about what the people were doing. You want to believe and thus you will. I look at the evidence and do not see enough to support their claim.


Yes of course, the video must have been edited to show only those pigs who were actually thirsty (I think the video showed two thirsty pigs?). The other pigs were probably not thirsty at all which is why "Toronto Pig Save" edited them out. Despite the fact that July 2013 was a heat wave in Toronto with temperatures soaring between 90 and 100 degrees, I'm pretty sure the group had to do some fancy editing to show ONLY those two pigs were were voraciously thirsty. :crazy:


Now that we agree on this I suppose we can move on now.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 140 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 10  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group