Cecil, famous Lion from Zimbabwe shot dead by Dentist from Minnesota for $55k
- Thread starter weltweit
- Start date
CNN dicks...
'who is also a lion' lol....
Apparently it's not true either (that he's dead, not if he's a lion)
It hasn't been CNN's best year has it, what with their ISIS flag at London Pride story and now this.
tim
EXPLODED TIM! (Help me!!!)
CNN dicks...
'who is also a lion' lol....
Apparently it's not true either (that he's dead, not if he's a lion)
Well, Jericho could be a liger or a liguar. They're fairly easy to breed in captivity and would be a neat USP for an entrepreneurial canned hunting business.
weltweit
Well-Known Member
All hunting around the Hwange National Park has been suspended and the authorities have named an American doctor they say was involved in another illegal lion hunt earlier in the year.
It has been reported that Zimbabwe have requested the extradition of Walter Palmer, the dentist who shot and killed Cecil the 13 year old lion although this has not been confirmed by established news outlets.
It has been reported that Zimbabwe have requested the extradition of Walter Palmer, the dentist who shot and killed Cecil the 13 year old lion although this has not been confirmed by established news outlets.
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
weltweit
Well-Known Member
Never let it be said that twitter is anything but wholly factual
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
I think that was Facebook, but your point still stands...Never let it be said that twitter is anything but wholly factual
Fingers
From Tuscany SE22
Zimbabwe are seeking a second American lion murderer
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-33752403
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-33752403
Yuwipi Woman
Whack-A-Mole Queen
I'm probably going to say something many people won't like. You can't be an environmentalist and a carnivore at the same time. Meat production is one of the biggest things that's causing deforestation, habitat loss, overuse of water, and greenhouse gas emissions.
Yuwipi Woman
Whack-A-Mole Queen
You're being absurd. You can have 7 billion people on the planet if they don't eat meat. If they eat meat the carrying capacity is going to be lower. At some point we're going to have to live within the means of the ecosphere to recover, or really bad things happen.
Last edited:
Yuwipi Woman
Whack-A-Mole Queen
Can't say I've run the numbers.
(Told ya'all that statement might piss a few people off.
)
Mrs Miggins
Eternal
Phew. What a good job Cecil spoke English and had such a way with words.
two sheds
Least noticed poster 2007
Can't say I've run the numbers.
(Told ya'all that statement might piss a few people off.
Yes, well it was a daft statement
.
andysays
Love and solidarity
Alternately, you can't be an environmentalist and a capitalist at the same time. The system of capitalist production is without a doubt the biggest thing that's causing deforestation, habitat loss, overuse of water, and greenhouse gas emissions. It's also, coincidently, what leads to a dentist from Minnesota paying $55,000 to slaughter a lion for a trophy.
The idea that the system can be changed or environmental damage can be significantly reduced by individuals choosing not to eat meat (which is the unstated and possibly unrecognised implication of your point), strikes me as naive at best and moralising ("I care more than you about the planet because I don't eat meat") at a little worse.
And there are probably many people here who won't like me saying that either...
Yuwipi Woman
Whack-A-Mole Queen
Yes, well it was a daft statement
To say that meat eating is unsustainable isn't daft at all:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-greenhouse-hamburger/
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2008/sep/07/food.foodanddrink
Last edited:
two sheds
Least noticed poster 2007
I didn't say it was daft to say that meat eating is unsustainable, I said that your statement that if you eat meat you can't be an environmentalist was daft.
Same argument goes for cars - you can have 7 billion people on the planet if they don't have cars. That's run the figures for you, so:
I eat meat but don't have a car - am I allowed to be an environmentalist?
You could say the same about anyone who has a tv/uses electricity, drinks water, ... as andysayssays it's just moralizing.
tim
EXPLODED TIM! (Help me!!!)
Probably, seeing as it's such a meaningless term. Just bear in mind that cattle, swine and poultry are suffering because of your dietary choices and refrain from wittering about the cruelty inflicted on animals by others.
Yuwipi Woman
Whack-A-Mole Queen
I'm not trying to moralize. I'm just trying to point out that there's larger issues here than one lion. It's all connected and we're failing to make the progress we need if we're to avoid the harsher impacts of climate change. I certainly see very little willingness on the part of politicians to do anything meaningful.
Yuwipi Woman
Whack-A-Mole Queen
I don't have a problem with you saying that.
andysays
Love and solidarity
Good - I don't have a problem with you saying what you said, but I think the way you phrase it is ultimately unhelpful.
Had you said "it is environmentally unsustainable for us as a species to continue to eat meat at the levels we in the west generally do" I would be in total agreement, but that statement doesn't reduce it to a notion of "meat eater bad; non-meat eater good" as your statement (possibly unintentionally) does.
And I had specific other people (not you) in mind when I suggested that there are probably many people here who won't like me saying that either
Bahnhof Strasse
Met up with Hannah Courtoy a week next Tuesday
Lion's eat meat, Dr Palmer was just doing the planet a favour. Good egg is that Dr Palmer.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
We have 7 billion people on the planet. Figures seem a bit hard to get, but around 90 per cent of us eat meat.
So you can have 7 billion people the planet with more than 6 billion of them eating meat. We can see that. It's what we have now.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
One of the biggest reasons for deforestation btw is the production of palm oil, not meat. two sheds' point is a very valid one - eating meat/not eating meat is but one of many indices of energy consumption, and it's not the most important.
Yuwipi Woman
Whack-A-Mole Queen
Good - I don't have a problem with you saying what you said, but I think the way you phrase it is ultimately unhelpful.
Had you said "it is environmentally unsustainable for us as a species to continue to eat meat at the levels we in the west generally do" I would be in total agreement, but that statement doesn't reduce it to a notion of "meat eater bad; non-meat eater good" as your statement (possibly unintentionally) does.
And I had specific other people (not you) in mind when I suggested that there are probably many people here who won't like me saying that either
Ok, I could have chosen a more constructive way of stating that. It's a mark of frustration. I heard the administration put out new regulations on power generation, only to hear a massive amount of whining and immediate lawsuits over fairly modest changes.
Similar threads
