Dead tiger bigger victim than dead man?

[MindOverMatter]

additionally, even if you think the animal was completely the villain, it's sad to have lost yet another of a species of whom there are very few left. (as for the guys involved...the world still has an abundance of morons...)

That’s just beautiful. Oh you gotta love it. So, because there are more humans in the world than tigers, the loss of the tiger should elicit more emotional response than the loss of the human. That is just beautiful.

So, in other words, since the world is full of humans, we shouldn’t care more about the loss of one of our own. Maybe we should let the animals take over and wait until humans are almost extinct? Maybe humans should switch places with the tigers, mammoths, and dodos of the world?

 

[koban]

Anger is simply self-defense (or in the case of parenting it is discipline). Attacks out of boredom and play are manifestations of the instinctual drive behind either self-defense or hunger. It is obvious when an animal is being playful out of boredom. There are specific aggressive signs that are not displayed.

Animals with a simpler nervous system like fish and reptiles very rarely if ever attack out of play. That is a behavior that is distinct to mammals and perhaps some birds. Although there is also some newer research that points to cephalopods (octopus, squid...) exhibiting similar behavior.

Also you should be careful not to anthromorphisize animal behavior too much. These latest cartoon movies that give animals the same array of emotions that humans have is misleading.

I'm basing it on my experiences with animals over the years - whether as pets or wildlife rehabs. Not Disney.

 

[koban]

Perhaps, none of which should be 'morally' applied to an animal however.....

Has anybody attributed "morality" to the tiger in this case?

Morality doesn't exist for animals.

 

[red77]

Ahh.... evil zoos! :doh:

One way or another the humans are at fault. :chuckle:

Liberals hate humans and love animals.

In a moral sense it can only be the humans who are at fault

You can't blame a marrauding tiger for it's behaviour no matter what....

But who erect zoos for their own entertainment? Humans.....:shocked: this has got nothing to do with your perceived branch of "liberalism" as you well know and is totally irrelevant....

 

[koban]

That’s just beautiful. Oh you gotta love it. So, because there are more humans in the world than tigers, the loss of the tiger should elicit more emotional response than the loss of the human. That is just beautiful.

So, in other words, since the world is full of humans, we shouldn’t care more about the loss of one of our own. Maybe we should let the animals take over and wait until humans are almost extinct? Maybe humans should switch places with the tigers, mammoths, and dodos of the world?

You're an idiot.

 

[Town Heretic]

I don't know...I'm still getting over those evil fires vicious attack on innocent people around the San Diego area recently. I can't process any additional natural/moral implications just yet.

I wonder if we'll find out at some point that people were taunting the dry grass? :think:

 

[MindOverMatter]

I think they don't like the fact that he is a behavioral biologist. Once I told Bob B that behavioral biology was one of my life long interests/passions. His response was "Oh, you are a quack!". I guess trying to understand animal behavior really offends some people.

Actually, what offends people are those who try to understand lower animal behavior more than human behavior. Putting the lower animal before the human tends to tee off some people. For crying out loud, we have people running around spending more time, money, and energy trying to understand lower animals when we don’t even fully understand human behavior. Don’t you think that there is something wrong with that picture?

 

[Nathon Detroit]

I don't know...I'm still getting over those evil fires vicious attack on innocent people around the San Diego area recently. I can't process any additional natural/moral implications just yet.

I wonder if we'll find out at some point that people were taunting the dry grass? :think:

:rotfl:

 

[MindOverMatter]

Has anyone notified PETA about this? I think they could make good use of this story. "Three human morons vs one defensive tiger" Who should we cry over?

Well we already know who PETA will be crying over. And guess what… it won’t be the guys who are walking upright.

On another note if the guy who was killed was gay, then no harm done. I think it is far better to be mauled by a tiger, than stoned to death by an angry mob of religious zealots.

Why is that? Why is it better to be mauled by a tiger than stoned by an angry mob of religious zealots?

 

[Town Heretic]

Why is that? Why is it better to be mauled by a tiger than stoned by an angry mob of religious zealots?

Well, there goes one old saying: sticks and stones may break my bones, but tigers will never maul me.

Maybe humans should switch places with the... dodos of the world?

So, in other words, since the world is full of humans, we shouldn’t care more about the loss of one of our own. Maybe we should let the animals take over and wait until humans are almost extinct? Maybe humans should switch places with the tigers, mammoths, and dodos of the world?

This is only a guess, but I'm thinking it might be time to change your "crazy" filter. I don't think you're getting enough intake at this point to operate efficiently.

 

[heir]

Salmoni, obviously shaken by the taking of one of his own, would have rather had a huge predator cat running loose taking out as many humans as possible than have it downed immediately to protect the lives of other possible human victims.

Here kitty, kitty, kitty, kitty....

 

[MindOverMatter]

Wow! Everyone seems so quick to believe the ultra-liberal left-wing media that these kids deserved what they got. :nono:

Well, at some point in time everyone is deserving of death. So it’s just a matter of when and how that death comes.

Secondly, generally, very few people who are punished for a Law that they are against, are of the belief that they deserve the reward which they have received. On the other hand, those who are for that particular Law or for the LAW in general, will usually believe that the individuals who received that reward are deserving of it.

In other words, in this case and for the most part, those who are more for humans will be of the mind that the individuals who were killed by the tiger, were deserving of that death. And for the most part, those who are more for animals or for the LAW, will usually conclude that those individuals deserved what they received. Just a matter of preference.

 

[MindOverMatter]

If they provoked the attack, do you have sympathy for them? Certainly have it for their families, but those who got what they deserved?

Hold on one minute…. Even if they did, shouldn’t the victims be free to break the rules and taunt the tigers? Why should they abide by an unjust Law that prevents them from taunting and enraging tigers?

Once again Koban, gotta love the consistency of your arguments. You gotta love your intellectual dishonesty. :rotfl: Now you have switched positions and the victim in this instance should have no sympathy, plus they should be held responsible for their actions? You gotta love it! You guys are just beautiful. Now there should be no sympathy for the victim? What changed? Was it the animal? Is it different now because one of your beloved lower animals is involved? Shouldn’t we be free to taunt and enrage the lower animals? Who put that unjust Law into place? Who was the idiot that decided to restrict our freedom to taunt and enrage animals? Shouldn’t we have sympathy for those who are hurt while they are breaking the rules and Laws?

 

[koban]

Seriously, find another board to annoy.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Seriously, find another board to annoy.

Please place MOM on ignore.

 

[Ktoyou]

Well, at some point in time everyone is deserving of death. So it’s just a matter of when and how that death comes.

Secondly, generally, very few people who are punished for a Law that they are against, are of the belief that they deserve the reward which they have received. On the other hand, those who are for that particular Law or for the LAW in general, will usually believe that the individuals who received that reward are deserving of it.

In other words, in this case and for the most part, those who are more for humans will be of the mind that the individuals who were killed by the tiger, were deserving of that death. And for the most part, those who are more for animals or for the LAW, will usually conclude that those individuals deserved what they received. Just a matter of preference.

There is either something deeply disturbed in your thought process, or you like being as weird and obscure as you can possibly be. I hope you know that some of us can see through you and may be slightly amused, yet may be annoyed!:idea:

 

[BillyBob]

Slightly edited:

Please, everyone place MOM on ignore.

Now that would be funny! :darwinsm:

 

[Ktoyou]

Turbo makes a good point. He is showing us an example of ‘animalism’ perhaps one of the most heinous sins, which has recently come again to plague us. Animal worship is anytime we place animals before humans. We must learn to love each other first and not allow animals to be a substitute for human love properly directed.

 

[koban]

Slightly edited:



Now that would be funny! :darwinsm:

I think most people already do have her on ignore. I'm one of the very few who responds to her.

 

[BillyBob]

I think most people already do have her on ignore. I'm one of the very few who responds to her.

I'm somewhere in between.

I don't have her/him/it on 'Ignore', but I rarely read anything worth responding to.

Although, my post asking her/him/it if he/she/it has a local zoo nearby and a slingshot seemed worth posting.

:devil:


:chuckle: