Japanese whaling

recently there has been some interesting occurences in he southern seas, Japanese whaling ships shooting whales with explosive tipped harpoons before dragging the whales aboard and then disecting them with medievil style weapons - all while the creatures are still alive and bleeding

apparently it is for the benefits of scientific research

coincidentally enough whale meat is sold throughout Asia

?

surely this is 'tresspassing' on an intentional scale? what can research into the effects of explosives on whales and the nutritional value and taste of their meat possibly have to offer science?

if i was the prime minister i would have S.A.S troops jumping out of helicopters onto the whaling ships and 'nuetralising' the crew, this is not from a territorial, geographic boundaries perspective but simply for the horridness of the actions of certain Japanese whaleships in the waters south of Australia

are there any other thoughts or viewpoints upon this subject? do the Japanese have a right to shoot whales with explosive tipped harpoons? do the Australian Navy and Air Force have a right to shoot high explosive missiles at the Japanese whaling ships? do the Whales have the right to combine their own forces and attack the Japanese whaling ships 'Moby Dick' style?

???

The Japanese are not whaling, they are sampling the species :/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bishop

The Japanese are not whaling, they are sampling the species :/

---

I think Japanese fishing is a problem for many species, but then when you look at Japan's situation, I don't think they have many alternatives:

1) They are overpopulated

2) They are on a small island and are putting an emphasis on industry

3) The above emphasis on industry is taking a lot of land away from agriculture

Actually, i was referring to this - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institu...acean_Research

Emphasis on industry = more export = better trade balance = more gc's to import bushels of food.
The Japanese need to stop making excuses. They don't need the whales. Period.
Sea Shepherd FTW.

Sea Shepherd did more damage to the cause than good. Paul Watson is an absolute idiot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bishop

Sea Shepherd did more damage to the cause than good. Paul Watson is an absolute idiot.

---

Worse than that, he's a REALLY bad liar...and a liar that doesn't even make sure his cohorts are in it together with him.

"Another whopper of a lie has recently come to light as we've learned that the Ady Gil did not sink as a result of the collision with the Shona Maru #2. As it turns out, Peter Bethune, the builder and captain of the Ady Gil, has admitted that although damaged, that after the collision, the Gil was sound and afloat, saying, "The boat was definitely salvageable. It was still rock solid...It would have stayed afloat for sure." Bethune reveals he was ordered to scuttle it 'in order to gain public sympathy'."

Old news, but still more than a little amusing. Not to mention the dolt has been on Interpol's Wanted list for how long now? xD

My degree is in biology so I appreciate how destructive the japanese whaling is on the population dynamics of a collection of species that is greatly depleted. They simply should not be allowed to whale for at least a decade or two and allow the population to recover. I could say the same for all fishing the world over, but that would cause a lot of people to starve. I am not some bleeding heart who loves how pretty the whales are, I say this from a purely selfish point of view about maintaining a sustainable food supply for the human species.

THAT SAID.....I enjoyed watching whale wars so much, I hope the Japanese head back down there to whale soon. I love watching how stupid the sea shepherd crew and leaders are. In my perfect world, they would bring back that Peter Brown guy, and one of the ships would hit an iceberg and a couple dozen of them would die for my amusement. OK, not really, I don't want anyone to die, but I did greatly enjoy how stupid they could all be.

The taiwanese shark fin industry is worse

i think the worst part of it is that they claim it is in the name of science, i think there are many alternatives for food sources - McDonalds is one of them.

greenpeace are acting for the right reasons, their only fault is that they are human and prone to occasional bouts of idiocy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by scorpio86

i think the worst part of it is that they claim it is in the name of science, i think there are many alternatives for food sources - McDonalds is one of them.

greenpeace are acting for the right reasons, their only fault is that they are human and prone to occasional bouts of idiocy.

---

You act as if McDonald's and places similar, pull food out of thin air, without animals meeting their end in similar (if not worse) fashions. Oh wait...they're cows and pigs...who cares about cows and pigs?...must...save...whales...

"The minke whale, currently the most commonly hunted whale, is not considered "endangered" or even "threatened" according the IUCN, the recognized authority in classifying endangered species."

But whales are mammals like us, and they are cute! It must be wrong to eat something cute, right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bishop

But whales are mammals like us, and they are cute! It must be wrong to eat something cute, right?

---

But...but...piggy...
http://blog.lib.umn.edu/whitn007/whi...sing%20Pig.bmp

Find me a picture like THAT of a whale that isn't Photoshopped garbage. :D

mate i have worked at abatours, i know where meat comes from - that is why i don't eat meat pies or sausages any more

im not fussed whether or not minke whales are endangered or where McDonald's gets their food supplies from, i am saying i think it is wrong that Japanese whaling ships are cruising around in the water's south of Australia shooting whales with explosive tipped harpoons and chopping them up while they are still alive.

and yes i am a hippy

there are other ways of getting food supplies than using explosives on whales

You'll have to forgive my ignorance when it comes to marine law, but to whom do these waters belong? If it is in fact Australia, then yeah, they should boot them out if they don't want them there. If the answer is no one, then...well, no one has a right to tell them a damned thing, except for maybe the whales and sharks, who should get together and...coerce them to leave. They certainly possess the physical strength to do so.

Oh...wait...they don't possess the cognitive abilities to do so. Hmm, can't decide if my desire to see stupid people eradicated should extend to animals as well.

sharks are not stupid!

the Japanese whaling fleet is (at times) inside Australia's territorial waters while performing their 'scientific research' - i think that the Australian Defence Force simply hasn't reacted because to do so might then begin a war (we should just send them a Ruby Dragon :-)

as far as killing things based upon intelligence - that is rather foolish as it would be a lonely world with everything dead

my adversion to what they are doing is simply the act itself, not based upon imaginary borders between countries

sharks are not stupid, i agree, they are brilliant creatures i say

The eradication thing was a joke. I don't support killing anything for any reason, other than natural needs. Honestly, I'd support the whalers more if they were just killing them as a food source, rather than trying to mask it with 'in the name of science'. I have the same issue with laboratory rats, honestly. Something born and bred, just to be injected with all kinds of various substances seems...dubious at best.

If they want to get an idea of what kind of effects this crap (everything ranging from animal venom to biological agents) has at different dosages on humans, they should be testing it on humans...preferably those who volunteer. I'm sure they could find all kinds of voluntary candidates by screening suicide hotlines.

probably not suicide hotlines

better to test it on convicted rapists and evil doer's, people on death row

Why not? It's perfect. There's no chance of killing someone who was wrongly convicted, and there's no prisoner's right group to have to listen to cry about it. You could even use inspiration themed commercials if you fail to get enough sign ups from hotlines.

"Do you feel completely worthless? Feel like your life isn't going anywhere? Constantly depressed and thinking about suicide? Well, suicide is not the answer. If you have just completely given up on finding any joy in life, there's still hope. Sign up today for research that will benefit all of mankind. In your final acts upon this Earth, you could prove to be the hero that saves millions of lives by helping scientists learn exactly how various biological weapons and toxins affect the human body. Be a hero in your final hours. Call today."

I wish people would put as much effort into protesting the Japanese overfishing of tuna (and others)...which is on a far larger scale than whaling.

Take a visit to Tsukiji Fish Market and you can see where the real problem lies.

i shall decline that invitation inventio, i understand what you are saying however

Shark finning is the worst problem........... THEY ARE THE OLDEST SEA FISH

I wouldn't say that any of them are a major problem. It's been a while since any species was hunted into extinction. The fact is that as the human population grows, natural resources will be further tapped to keep up with demand. That's just how it works. The only real solution to any of this is birthing laws, and I don't know too many people who would be keen on such.

i am pretty sure Mother Nature has her own solution to human overpopulation

i see them as major problems simply for what they are, horrid

there is no need to use explosives on whales, unless the whales are attacking you

Many species sharks are facing extinction gallowmere http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8117378.stm

I was very specific when I said 'hunted to extinction'. I have no doubt that there are many that are Threatened or even Endangered.

Plus the way the fins are cut off and the live shark thrown back into the sea to die is inhumane. Long line fishing also leads to the death of thousands of other sea creatures like turtles

thats nothing compared to the waste with quotas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by scorpio86

i think the worst part of it is that they claim it is in the name of science, i think there are many alternatives for food sources - McDonalds is one of them.

greenpeace are acting for the right reasons, their only fault is that they are human and prone to occasional bouts of idiocy.

---

speaking of which those burgers are one big reason for the destruction of rainforests

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by scorpio86

i am pretty sure Mother Nature has her own solution to human overpopulation

i see them as major problems simply for what they are, horrid

there is no need to use explosives on whales, unless the whales are attacking you

---

the world is not overpopulated, it's been estimated she can take more than triple the amount of people that we currently have and demographers estimate population growth will cease anyway when we reach about 12 billion. It's just that we're acting some damn wasteful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by freemehul

the world is not overpopulated, it's been estimated she can take more than triple the amount of people that we currently have and demographers estimate population growth will cease anyway when we reach about 12 billion. It's just that we're acting some damn wasteful.

---

I agree, and disagree, but that's largely because your statement is rather vague. For example, where does one draw the line for 'wasteful'? Is it somewhere between the United States and Mexico, or say, between Algeria and Cypress?

I mean, of course, if we were to all only consume 200 calories per day, had absolutely bare minimal use of precious metals (bye cell phones and computers and various pieces of machinery), only burned about 1/8th of a gallon of raw petroleum per person, per day... yeah, I am sure at that point, the world could very easily support triple, quadruple, or even fifty times it's current population.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gallowmere

I agree, and disagree, but that's largely because your statement is rather vague. For example, where does one draw the line for 'wasteful'? Is it somewhere between the United States and Mexico, or say, between Algeria and Cypress?

I mean, of course, if we were to all only consume 200 calories per day, had absolutely bare minimal use of precious metals (bye cell phones and computers and various pieces of machinery), only burned about 1/8th of a gallon of raw petroleum per person, per day... yeah, I am sure at that point, the world could very easily support triple, quadruple, or even fifty times it's current population.

---

i was being deliberately vague, because there's no easy answer to that

oh by the way precious metals has nothing to do with how you feed a population, you can still expend energy on mining just fine

electricity isn't much of problem, it's cars and gasoline that's the biggest problem

in any event i would have to say the food consumption of mexico and the united states is extremely wasteful, both these countries take way too much calories then is good for them

the earth has resources enough to hold a population of 45 billion people, even in the worst case, which is the U.S. you're still talking twice the normal expenditure, so that would mean you keep about 22 billion U.S. citizens alive. Now demographers estimate the population will never reach that level, but will stay at about 12 billion. It could be 11 billion depending on how quick the underdeveloped countries go through the demographic transition.

So claiming that the world is overpopulated or will get overpopulated is bull****.

This Malthusian population bomb theory, of their being overpopulation has already been proven false. People really should stop using it, because it is such sheer and utter nonsense.

You will get no argument from me on the food consumption. I'd say one quick look at obesity statistics (even those that use better scales than the joke that is BMI) will show you which countries are eating too much.

However, your assumption that overpopulation has no bearing on metals for example, is flat wrong. More people require more housing, etc. Every finite resource has to be taken into account when you are factoring in population growths.

Also, your assumption that people can expend identical quantities of energy on variable food supplies is also incorrect. Try sticking someone running on 800 calories per day next to someone of roughly equal physical ability consuming 2000, and see which one has higher production. Of course you would need to normalize things by making the food that each is consuming be of equal nutritional value. Of course, if the guy getting 800 was running on steak and potatoes, which the guy eating 2000 was getting it from candy and fried chicken, the former may just come out ahead.

it isn't flat wrong, there are easy ways of using water and electricity to solve many of those problems, hell the ancient romans knew how to use water

you don't have to take every mineral into account, only those of which the risk exist that you may not have enough (the ones most used and most quantitive needed)

I was not incorrect, people who use less calories are more energy efficient in the use of those calories than the ones who take too much (obese people have an inefficient liver). You're reasoning in this is based on the fact that you take obese people i.e. 2000 calories as normal people. Western research isn't normal. You should really read some books about epigenetics and harvests.

Now as for 800 calories, yeah that's too low, especially for 17 year old men or pregnant women, but many young men will run just fine on 1200.

I just may do so.

Also, keep in mind, I never said anything about overpopulation becoming a problem. What I said was that a growing population will require more resources to be taken from the Earth, in whatever form they may be.

The basic point of what I was getting at is that Western tree huggers should either shut up, or get used to doing without a lot of the niceties that they have gotten used to. Good luck getting either to happen.

I think the real problem lies in the need for status building. If we weren't so prestige driven in collecting objects for which we don't have a need, a lot of problems would disappear over night. Nobody is telling me that you have a need to smoke cuban sigars, collect 1000+ figurine elephants in your living room, or 100+ pair of shoes in your closet. But alas that may just be my wishful thinking.

You are now talking about something that is now so ingrained in various societies, that it will likely never go away. Hell, at this point in the conversation, we could completely throw religion under the bus as well. How many places have you been where the two most elaborate buildings on any given block are a church, and a bank? I see it quite a lot. Not to mention all of the weird idolatry related stuff.

Back to the original point though, you're right. Excess is the keystone for waste. The solution to that problem is one that will likely never be seen in our lifetime though. It would probably take a complete world catastrophe for people to scale that aspect back.

Back to the original point, i think the Australian S.A.S should be sent in to nuetralise the Japanese whaling fleet. There are many other ways to find food without killing whales, growing potatoes is one idea, also fish farming rather than shooting whales with explosive tipped harpoons and cutting them up while they are still alive.

we whale in canada too. Just saying, natives get to kill one every couple years. Who cares though meat is meat, i bet whale is delicious