wouldn't want to be any of your pets, they are there for your use, whatever that might be? that's what it sounds like to me
*****For example, I think looking at them in the wild and admiring them even from afar falls under making use of them. There are many ethical ways to use what nature shows us and gives us. Surely, there is no good thing that can't be spoiled.
you still missed the point about pulling fish out of the wild. research is one thing, that's not what i am talking about and you know that's not it. how many fish are needed to find out which species they are, 2?
*****I think you jumped into too many arguments that are too wide too early. It seems we lost track of context that this is all about hybrid syno versus genuine syno in the ornamental fish trade and hobby. That's all.
so just decimating wild populations is ok?
*****It is not ok.
so that no one will have to make due with fish that are bred specifically for the aquarium trade?
*****Genuine species bred naturally in captivity are ok by me.
i would guess the only reason more wild populations are not decimated is that man figures out a way to force them to reproduce.
*****IDK how many are decimated by harvesting for ornamental trade. I think most or all, that are decimated, are decimated by commercial fishing industry, industrial and agricultural runoff and pollution, and climate change.
maybe just selling the ones that are abundant in the wild / populations that can easily bounce back night be a but more ethical. but that's would be with man's hand in again, it so none of that, let them go extinct, right?
*****See below. About the man's hand. You are taking words and sentences out of context and making unneeded and uncalled for dire statements based on that.
it's about man's whim to have pretty fish in the living room or in the yard, screw what it does to the environment. how many people that the time to actually research what they have? and before you jump all over that i'm not talking about most of the people here but, you know, how many people here point out their species wild location ona map?
*****Some may have this whim and if it not illegal, no one can take their freedom to do so yet. We as a responsible fish keeping community I think are called to change that, so that people keep fish humanely and responsibly. Again, this is all very far from the context. We can't discuss all these things at the same time and remain sensible.
and the point one more time, if you can stop preaching for a minute is that Frankenstein was never alive how can you keep saying you don't get it? might be standard in academia which you have to be in, there's no one else who can split hairs quite the same way and use semantics as a defense, but it doesn't make any sense since Frankenstein was never alive and the fish are, that's my issue.
*****Ok. I'll make an effort to use "man made or unnatural" every urge I get to say F.
"To me, the line is clear. If it is made by nature / God, without interference of man, it is valid and worth keeping and studying, even naturally occurring hybrids." how noble that you can say this but people still exploit living creatures. a zoo is a zoo and there are plenty of wet ones.
*****IMHO there is nothing inherently wrong with zoos and aquariums. But again, this is too far from the topic, I think.
fish, Without interference of man? man is involved in the fish trade every which way from the beginning, how do you think most of them are bred?. how do they get here?
captive breeding programs maybe? you ensure all your purchased fish are "all natural" before you purchase? wouldn't want one that wasn't 100% natural even if it had a longer life, was more resistant to disease, could live in a wider range of ph.
*****My statement was made in the context of hybrid syno versus genuine syno. I am not talking about the whole world and all that lives in it and how it lives and how it must live.
so, this part makes no sense whatsoever.
*****I understand why. If there is my fault that I was too curt, I apologize. But mainly I am supposing this is because you appear to think of ten things at a time and freely leave the context somewhere down there in the dust behind an iron curtain of a myriad of words.
if they were in a tank and you were told they were naturally occurring you would buy them. but if not, you wouldn't? and what if it happened you were mistaken? or just weren't told? put them down? must be nice to be on that high a horse!
*****I think this needs no addressing now given the above going. Let's get back to earth from the clouds. I will not buy a hybrid syno. I would buy a genuine syno, especially if I knew that they were bred humanely and naturally. Mostly this is not knowable though. So we can safely skip this part, I think.
so V is saying what about people / animals conceived with the help of man? no good ? man is involved in the reproduction of countless organisms including himself, so none of them are any good? man pulls them out of their natural settings but that's ok?. that's what the quotes seem to say. i say the statement is flawed.. and really arrogant
*****Out of context. And in the clouds again. IMHO.
a lot of people use captive animals to make a living, a lot of people besides me would have a problem. just because it happens to be your stock in trades, without a doubt makes it what, the word of god? don't think so. more like man's arrogance, the same arrogance that in an admittedly different form that is going to bring this planes to it's knees and it some of what i read is true. has a better than fair chance of ending the human race
it's that ego, you know, that " all this is mine to do with as i please" way of thinking, everything was put here for me (you), right)?
*****IDK about you and Lycosid, but I was speaking of the humankind because we climbed so high so quick in our discussion, nothing less would do. Yes, I believe everything in the Universe was made for man, with man in mind, for man to use and lord over. Man named everything because he saw it for what it was. But then man sinned and things got bad from there. The primary purpose of the creation remains though because it is true aka reality. For me. Again, my belief.
also, you can't "be" a peta, it's an organization not a person. you can be a member but i'm not. I dont' agree with all of PETA's methods but i think their ambitions are noble.
*****Insert "person" after "PETA" if you wish. What you speak of are extremist views by my book. But then again, this is way up high in the clouds...
if you are going to insult me at least get it right
*****Far be it from me to want to insult you. Yet, I am but a man of modest means, including brain.
the both of you seem to feel that any / all creatures on the planet where put there for your use / exploitation, could you be any more arrogant?
*****See above. I think if we clarified what we mean by use and exploitation, there'd be no opposition here. Yet, again, clouds...
and once more, this whole thing started because i had an issue with living creatures being compared with a creature from a horror novel (not a good one by the way, but you probably disagree with that too,
*****For the safety of my aesthetic tastes, I must state I am not a fan of the horror genre at all. If all you are hung up is semantics, I should have restated the same thing but used the word "unnatural" or man-made" and you would be fine then. I think.
kvnbyl wrote: ↑
Wed Jan 09, 2019 11:03 pm
i'm going for more spine surgery but when (more like if at this point)i am able to function again, we can keep this up? this is fun!
Perhaps for you. Not for me. I am not a sadomasochist. Yet, being verbally slapped on the left and right cheek is good for my overinflated ego. I am dubious there is anything left to say, except good luck with the surgery. I'll pray for you.