Jump to content

Recommended Posts

pommie Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> should ring wildlife aid or fox project rather

> than the RSPCA


Pommie, you'll see in my posts above that I did actually think of calling the fox project first but found that they can only help between 9am-9pm and that outside of these hours they advise to ring the RSPCA. As it was 1am, that's what I did!


I have to say, from what I'd heard on here about other people's experiences calling the RSPCA, I didn't really anticipate that they'd be willing to do anything and so was brilliantly surprised and found it so assuring that they answered the phone right away, took the situation very seriously, offered phone advice and said that they would come out right away, at any time of day or night.


Would you not recommend them? I didn't know about Wildlife Aid but I see that, like the RSPCA, they do have a phone line you can call 24 hours a day.

Or www.misanthropy.com




JimH Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Jeremy I agree with you 100%

>

> Seriously Blah Blah this is a post about an

> injured fox in Dulwich so you might want to put

> your point across in a different forum

>

> Try:

>

> http://vegtalk.org/animal-rights/

> http://www.animalconcerns.org/

JimH Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Jeremy I agree with you 100%

>

> Seriously Blah Blah this is a post about an

> injured fox in Dulwich so you might want to put

> your point across in a different forum

>

> Try:

>

> http://vegtalk.org/animal-rights/

> http://www.animalconcerns.org/


Yes, threads must always stay exactly on topic, at all times...


Blah Blah didn't start this particular discussion; she responded to a statement from MissMadMoo who, like many other members of the human race, feel justified in killing a creature because they don't like it. Cue boring statement about it being an over-sized/flying/fluffy rat. Whatever that means.


There is no measurement for importance of life but, if there were, we're not really making the best case for ourselves.


http://elitedaily.com/news/world/this-incredible-animation-perfectly-breaks-down-mans-relationship-with-nature-video/

Thanks EDLove. I'm a bloke by btw lol.


I'm learning fast that there are some voices on this forum that don't like being challenged. Being told to go on another forum just makes me want to yawn!


And Jeremey, it is not natural to value members of your own species at all, as many species do no such thing. And it's because people DO reccognise the importance of species to the eco system that we still have fish and the EU banned a chemical thought to be decimating the bee population. You can only spend your life not thinking about any of it because others do.


As EDLove has correctly summarised, it is right to challenge any view that an animal should die because someone doesn't like it. And my main point remains true. Urban Foxes do virtually no harm compared to us humans who seem to hate them so much.

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Thanks EDLove. I'm a bloke by btw lol.

>

> I'm learning fast that there are some voices on

> this forum that don't like being challenged. Being

> told to go on another forum just makes me want to

> yawn!

>

> And Jeremey, it is not natural to value members of

> your own species at all, as many species do no

> such thing. And it's because people DO reccognise

> the importance of species to the eco system that

> we still have fish and the EU banned a chemical

> thought to be decimating the bee population. You

> can only spend your life not thinking about any of

> it because others do.

>

> As EDLove has correctly summarised, it is right to

> challenge any view that an animal should die

> because someone doesn't like it. And my main point

> remains true. Urban Foxes do virtually no harm

> compared to us humans who seem to hate them so

> much.



I applaud you, bravo

Your comments regarding preservation of the ecosystem/environment are not really related to my point. It is possible to care about such things while also recognising the painfully obvious point that the life of a human and a fox cannot be considered equal.
But by what measure are they unequal? A life is a life. And the most basic instruction of all cellular DNA is replication. Just because we surround ourselves with things doesn't make us more worthy in terms of the basic science of life. All of our constructs are geared towards self preservation and replication. The same is true of the fox. You live, you reproduce, you die. That's all that life is for most people. And in several millions of years all trace of it will disappear as the sun expands and begins to swallow us up (our atmosphere having been burned away long before then of course).

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Blah Blah Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I don't get all the sentimental stuff over

> human

> > beings either MissMad. Especially the ones that

> > value their species over other species of

> animals.

>

> Anyone who doesn't understand why we value humans

> over animals has totally lost the plot.


Oh no Jeremy I have lost the plot then... and I usually agree with all your posts! poor old fox...


Even the wonderful Professor Steve Jones (FRS, geneticist) thinks that humans have reached their evolutionary peak. There is no geographical distance between us anymore, we simply cannot evolve. Humans schumans. The Singularity is upon us etc

Er... shouldn't this be in the Lounge now? ;-)

But it's just your view Jeremy and one I (and many others) disagree with, because I prefer cellular science over your definition of worth. Who says that relationships and empathy are the measure of worth? Some mammals are also capable of that btw (whilst some humans aren't). I find it equally absurd that you place so much importance on something that isn't essential for life at all. It really doesn't matter to the planet and life if humans exist. We really are that insignificant, whatever delusions we like to fill our minds with.

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'm not talking about intrinsic objective worth as

> a species, I'm talking about relationships and

> empathy with fellow members of your own species.

> Can barely believe this needs explaining...

> absurd..


Jeremy they're not mutually exclusive, you can still have empathy with humans. I guess.


spelling!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Why on earth is there so much interest, and negativity, after a 100 days of a Labour government when we had 1000s of days of dreadful government before this with hardly a chat on this Website?  What is it that is suddenly so much greater interest? Here's part of a list of what they have done in a 100 days - it's from a Labour MP so obviously there is some bias, and mainly new Bills so yet to deliver/put into law.  This reminds me of the US election where the popular view was that Biden had achieved nothing, rather than leading the recovery after Covid, a fairer tax system, housing, supporting workers, dealing with community unrest following high profile racist incidents,  So if we think Starmer is ineffective and Labour incompetent then we are all going to believe it? I do feel sick after seeing Clarkson on Newsnight, playing to the gallery.  Surely Trump must have a high profile role for him on the environment and climate change  
    • Hi looking for a shed for my allotment. Can pick up
    • But do you not understand how tough farming is, especially post-Brexit when some of the subsidies were lost and costs have increased massively yet the prices farmers can charge has not? On the BBC News tonight they said pig farming costs had gone up 54% since 2019, cow farming costs up 44% and cereal costs up 43%. The NFU said that the margins are on average 0.5% return on capital. Land and buildings are assets that don't make money until you sell them...it's what you do with them that makes money and farms are struggling to make money and so many farms are generational family businesses so never realise the assets (one farmers on the news said his farm had been in the family since 1822) but will have to to pay tax for continuing the family business. On another news item tonight there was a short piece saying the government has said that 50,000 more pensioners will be forced into relative poverty (60% of the average income) due to the Winter Fuel Allowance removal which will rise to 100,000 more by 2027. James Murray from the Treasury was rolled out on Newsnight to try and defend that and couldn't. You can't give doctors 20%+ and push more pensioners into poverty as a result.  The problem for Labour is the court of public opinion will judge them and right now the jury is out after a series of own-goals, really poor communication and ill-thought-out idealogical policies. And don't ever annoy the farmers.....;-)  
    • That % of “affected” doesn’t mean they are all in deep trouble.  It means this will touch on them in some small way mostly - apart from the biggest farms  it’s like high rate tax earners taking to the street when Osborne dragged child/benefit claimants into self assessment.  A mild pain  the more I read, the more obviously confected it is. Still - just as with farage and his banking “woes”, a social media campaign is no barrier to the gullible  what percentage of farms affected by Brexit and to what degree compared go IHT?  Or does that not matter? Thats different money is it? 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...