IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Costa Rica incidents , environmental activists , paul watson , protest incidents

Reply
Old 19th May 2012, 06:50 AM   #401
NoahFence
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
Originally Posted by Travis View Post
The only thing I hate more than eco-terrorism is passive aggressive wimpy eco-terrorism. I'd have a lot more respect for Sea Shepherd if they'd man up and just start bombing boats.
Seriously, you think Sea Shepherd needs to "man up"?


NoahFence is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2012, 07:49 AM   #402
Furcifer
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 13,797
Originally Posted by Damien Evans View Post
http://robinbrown.co.uk/wp-content/u...-facepalm1.jpg

I forgot how low my expectations of you should be. I apologise, I won't make that mistake again.
Ad hom, I didn't expect anything less. Your argument is over there gasping it's last breath, you may want to address it.
Furcifer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2012, 08:01 AM   #403
Macgyver1968
Philosopher
 
Macgyver1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 5,164
Update on Watson's case.

Apparently, they decided yesterday he could be released on bail while awaiting the court's decision on whether they will extradite him or not. SS is using the weekend to come up with his €250,000 bail money. He will most likely be released on Monday. He has to stay in the country while on bail.

Quote:
Frankfurt's higher regional court announced on Friday that it had put him under preliminary arrest after deciding that an extradition would be permissible under German law. The authorities in Costa Rica now have three months to send the necessary extradition papers to Germany. However, the court said it was ultimately up to the federal justice ministry to decide whether or not to send him to Costa Rica.
__________________
"Fixin' crap that ain't broke."
Macgyver1968 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2012, 08:09 AM   #404
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 28,589
Originally Posted by Seismosaurus View Post
This is actually the commonest reaction I hear to their TV show. If you go to the show's page on IMDB the message board section is FULL of people laughing at them and cheering on the whalers, many of whom say that the show has made them into supporters of whaling.

I wonder if the board just attracts the sort of person who likes to be contrary, or if the overall impact of the show is to actually harm their own cause.
The show hasn't made me into a supporter of whaling, any more than Occupy Wall Street's failery will turn me into a Republican. It just makes me very anti-Sea-Shepherd. I want them to be unsuccessful not because I like whaling, but because I wish a lack of success on douchebags in general, and particularly on ones who wrap themselves in a "moral cause". I do not feel good that the guy's neat multimillion-dollar speedboat was destroyed for instance; but watching the taunts suddenly stop and the smug drain from their faces as it occurs to them that the whaler is not veering away is rather like a sip of hot cocoa on a bitter cold night.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2012, 02:11 PM   #405
Sam.I.Am
Illuminator
 
Sam.I.Am's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 4,627
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
The show hasn't made me into a supporter of whaling, any more than Occupy Wall Street's failery will turn me into a Republican. It just makes me very anti-Sea-Shepherd. I want them to be unsuccessful not because I like whaling, but because I wish a lack of success on douchebags in general, and particularly on ones who wrap themselves in a "moral cause". I do not feel good that the guy's neat multimillion-dollar speedboat was destroyed for instance; but watching the taunts suddenly stop and the smug drain from their faces as it occurs to them that the whaler is not veering away is rather like a sip of hot cocoa on a bitter cold night.
Exactly. As I said upthread, the SS tends to make people pro whalers (but not necessarily pro whaling). I think that it's akin to the Oakland Raiders (an American professional football team to you non-Americans reading this). They are the team that everyone likes to root against when they don't really have any other opinion about the particular game being played. Hell their team logo is even similar in some respects to the Sea Shepherds, probably because the root emblem for both is the classic Jolly Roger flag.

The Sea Shepherds make it so very easy to dislike them on so many different levels. Be it their flaunting of the law when it suits them while complaining that others are flaunting the law at the same time, their utter ineptitude as seamen, their stated position that it's ok to lie if it suits their cause and so on.

In my opinion the only people who support them (not their cause of stopping whaling, just the SS and their tactics) are doing so out of hatred and not rational thought. In that regard they are like the people who like the idea of Abortion Clinic bombings. There are plenty of people out there who abhor the idea of abortion and consider it murder but don't agree at all with the idea of blowing up a clinic to stop them just as there are plenty of people out there who don't like the idea of whaling (some even consider it murder) but don't agree with how the SS are going about trying to stop it.
__________________
"Swift, silent and deadly" was a part of my job description Upon hearing me say that my friend asked me "So you're a fart?"...

About my avatar.
Sam.I.Am is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2012, 02:32 PM   #406
DC
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 23,064
Originally Posted by Sam.I.Am View Post
Exactly. As I said upthread, the SS tends to make people pro whalers (but not necessarily pro whaling). I think that it's akin to the Oakland Raiders (an American professional football team to you non-Americans reading this). They are the team that everyone likes to root against when they don't really have any other opinion about the particular game being played. Hell their team logo is even similar in some respects to the Sea Shepherds, probably because the root emblem for both is the classic Jolly Roger flag.

The Sea Shepherds make it so very easy to dislike them on so many different levels. Be it their flaunting of the law when it suits them while complaining that others are flaunting the law at the same time, their utter ineptitude as seamen, their stated position that it's ok to lie if it suits their cause and so on.

In my opinion the only people who support them (not their cause of stopping whaling, just the SS and their tactics) are doing so out of hatred and not rational thought. In that regard they are like the people who like the idea of Abortion Clinic bombings. There are plenty of people out there who abhor the idea of abortion and consider it murder but don't agree at all with the idea of blowing up a clinic to stop them just as there are plenty of people out there who don't like the idea of whaling (some even consider it murder) but don't agree with how the SS are going about trying to stop it.
oh is that so? how do you know?
DC is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2012, 03:42 PM   #407
Cain
Straussian
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 15,419
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
Trying to remember the last time a Japanese whaler accidentally or intentionally explodey-harpooned some passerby's arm or something and it's just not coming to me (although to be honest I do not regularly keep track of such incidents so I just may not have heard of them).
Good point. As far as we know, they've never fired on humans. So where's the harm? I don't see any killing. Just a bunch of a dead whales.
__________________
Cain: Don't be a homo.
Diablo: What's that supposed to mean?
Cain: It's a heteronormative remark meant to be taken at face-value.
Cain is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2012, 05:08 PM   #408
Furcifer
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 13,797
Originally Posted by Wildy View Post
Because when I'm talking about Norway or Iceland I'm actually talking about Indonesia?



I'm guessing you're referring to Indonesia here, and you can see how they do it on the second link in this post.

Or you can just look at the table below.



Because asking someone who has been rather shifty in this discussion for clarification is a dodge.



Oh I see, so I'm to compare other ships to the Nisshin Maru and then somehow determine which ships are commercial and which aren't based on some set of standards that exist in your head.

But since I'm a little bored I'll play your stupid little game and present it in a nice table for you:

ShipPictureCountryUseTonnage (GT)Length (m)Propulsion (kw)Commercial Status according to Furcifer
Nisshin MaruICRJapanMain Research Vessel/Factory Ship7659129.585383Commercial
Yūshin Maru No. 2ShipspottingJapanResearch fleet harpoon ship105969.613900Non-commercial
Hvalur 9 RE99ShipspottingIcelandWhaling57351.151398Non-commercial
Hvalur 8ShipspottingIcelandWhaling48148n/aNon-commercial
SkarbakkShipspottingNorwayWhaling15621.523n/aNon-commercial
BrandsholmbøenShipspottingNorwayWhaling78.1720.13n/aNon-commercial
SofieShipspottingNorwayWhaling13421.2n/aNon-commercial
???Daily MailIndonesiaWhalingvery small~4However fast 16 men can row/whale dependentNon commercial
Bob BarkerWikipediaTogoDisrupting Japanese Whaling (Sea Shepherd)78852.22206.5Not current whaling vessel

Of course I will need you to tell me if the last column is correct, but I will admit that this method of defining "commercial" as "the largest ship involved in whaling" is pretty interesting. I could probably use that logic to "prove" that the only commercial cattle producer is Anna Creek station and that because of that the only commercial cattle company is S Kidman and Co Ltd.
Thanks for posting the image links. Unfortunately I'm having trouble opening them, but I was able to open the first one from Iceland. It certanly looks like a commercial fishing boat. I've seen the Indonesian whaling in the BBC special, it actually looks like the Daily Fail pic is from the video. I don't know how you could confuse that with a Japanese commercial whaling vessel? Or that the hunt is done for personal use and not for profit like the Japanese operation.
It seems to me you're just playing the same game of semantics that has allowed the countries claiming "traditional" hunting rights to ramp up production so that it's now so far removed from "tradition" it's unrecognizable.
Furcifer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2012, 07:21 PM   #409
alfaniner
Penultimate Amazing
 
alfaniner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Sorth Dakonsin
Posts: 29,368
Originally Posted by Seismosaurus View Post
This is actually the commonest reaction I hear to their TV show. If you go to the show's page on IMDB the message board section is FULL of people laughing at them and cheering on the whalers, many of whom say that the show has made them into supporters of whaling.

I wonder if the board just attracts the sort of person who likes to be contrary, or if the overall impact of the show is to actually harm their own cause.
I used to see the same on the Discovery Channel forum, when they still had it. I guess the moderation got to be too much, even though there were people from the SS actually posting there (and apparently not imposters.)
__________________
Science is self-correcting.
Woo is self-contradicting.
alfaniner is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2012, 08:38 PM   #410
portlandatheist
Illuminator
 
portlandatheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,725
Originally Posted by Sam.I.Am View Post
Exactly. As I said upthread, the SS tends to make people pro whalers (but not necessarily pro whaling). I think that it's akin to the Oakland Raiders (an American professional football team to you non-Americans reading this). They are the team that everyone likes to root against when they don't really have any other opinion about the particular game being played. Hell their team logo is even similar in some respects to the Sea Shepherds, probably because the root emblem for both is the classic Jolly Roger flag.

The Sea Shepherds make it so very easy to dislike them on so many different levels. Be it their flaunting of the law when it suits them while complaining that others are flaunting the law at the same time, their utter ineptitude as seamen, their stated position that it's ok to lie if it suits their cause and so on.

In my opinion the only people who support them (not their cause of stopping whaling, just the SS and their tactics) are doing so out of hatred and not rational thought. In that regard they are like the people who like the idea of Abortion Clinic bombings. There are plenty of people out there who abhor the idea of abortion and consider it murder but don't agree at all with the idea of blowing up a clinic to stop them just as there are plenty of people out there who don't like the idea of whaling (some even consider it murder) but don't agree with how the SS are going about trying to stop it.
Another amusing aspect of the show is how poorly they get along with each other overall and the extreme turnover of crew every time they reach a port. Its not just the audience that experiences its fair share of dislike.
portlandatheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2012, 11:07 PM   #411
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 28,589
Originally Posted by portlandatheist View Post
Another amusing aspect of the show is how poorly they get along with each other overall and the extreme turnover of crew every time they reach a port. Its not just the audience that experiences its fair share of dislike.
And that illustrates the point brilliantly. There's no shortage of people willing to support and even give their time and effort to help "save whales"...before they meet these people. And as repugnant as one may find them after being exposed to a few clips on a TV show, imagine being stuck with them on a boat in the southern ocean, unable to escape until whenever they decide to put into port.

Incidents like the Steve Irwin nosing into the aft quarter of that whaler at full speed must be horrifying. On deck the poor saps could at least watch their fate coming to meet them; imagine being belowdecks or in the engine room, feeling the collisions and listening to the screeching metal and wondering what on Earth is going on.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2012, 11:21 PM   #412
RandFan
Mormon Atheist
 
RandFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 60,135
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
And that illustrates the point brilliantly. There's no shortage of people willing to support and even give their time and effort to help "save whales"...before they meet these people. And as repugnant as one may find them after being exposed to a few clips on a TV show, imagine being stuck with them on a boat in the southern ocean, unable to escape until whenever they decide to put into port.

Incidents like the Steve Irwin nosing into the aft quarter of that whaler at full speed must be horrifying. On deck the poor saps could at least watch their fate coming to meet them; imagine being belowdecks or in the engine room, feeling the collisions and listening to the screeching metal and wondering what on Earth is going on.
I felt for the crew when they got stuck in the ice. They are obviously do not give a damn about the lives of those aboard.
__________________
Ego, ain't it a bitch?
RandFan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2012, 11:29 PM   #413
AlaskaBushPilot
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,314
My commercial fishing boat in the drift gillnet fishery of the lower Yukon (Y-1 district, Emmonak) was 20 ft. There were a lot of boats smaller than mine. I had twin 50 hp Mercs on the back of that. I used two mesh sizes, one for Chums and one for Kings.

Right now I got a 24 ft Wooldridge with a 225 hp Johnson and jet unit. It is not a commercial boat. The definition of "commercial" has nothing to do with size. It is strictly whether you catch for personal use or for trade.

And as a matter of fact we fished some days for personal use, always for kings that we smoked up with alders, and the boat was non-commercial on those days. That's how they separated the commercial from personal use - by which day you fished. We had to listen to the radio to listen for the openers of either one, which were anywhere from 12 hours to two days depending on the sonar count at the mouth.

So just go on with making up your own terms to suit your agenda. But it doesn't have much to do with the real world.
AlaskaBushPilot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2012, 12:40 AM   #414
Furcifer
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 13,797
Originally Posted by AlaskaBushPilot View Post
My commercial fishing boat in the drift gillnet fishery of the lower Yukon (Y-1 district, Emmonak) was 20 ft. There were a lot of boats smaller than mine. I had twin 50 hp Mercs on the back of that. I used two mesh sizes, one for Chums and one for Kings.

Right now I got a 24 ft Wooldridge with a 225 hp Johnson and jet unit. It is not a commercial boat. The definition of "commercial" has nothing to do with size. It is strictly whether you catch for personal use or for trade.

And as a matter of fact we fished some days for personal use, always for kings that we smoked up with alders, and the boat was non-commercial on those days. That's how they separated the commercial from personal use - by which day you fished. We had to listen to the radio to listen for the openers of either one, which were anywhere from 12 hours to two days depending on the sonar count at the mouth.

So just go on with making up your own terms to suit your agenda. But it doesn't have much to do with the real world.
Strawman. Nobody said the size of the boat was the only factor.
You're right of course, what the boat is used for plays a significant role in whether or not it's considered a commercial or recreational vessel. At least for smaller boats, for larger boats, like the ones in question, they can't even be registered as recreational vessels. I can't remember all of the laws offhand but these boats have to be captained and have a crew etc. based on their length.
The Japanese are operating a fleet of modern commercial whaling vessels, there's no question about that. And there's really no question it's nothing like the "traditional" hunts seen in various countries around the world.
Commercial hunting isn't sustainable, we really don't need any more "research" to prove that.
Furcifer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2012, 02:10 AM   #415
Wildy
Adelaidean
 
Wildy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 11,857
Originally Posted by Furcifer View Post
Thanks for posting the image links. Unfortunately I'm having trouble opening them, but I was able to open the first one from Iceland. It certanly looks like a commercial fishing boat.
But is it though? Remember, you were the one who said that the yardstick is the Nisshin Maru.

Quote:
I've seen the Indonesian whaling in the BBC special, it actually looks like the Daily Fail pic is from the video. I don't know how you could confuse that with a Japanese commercial whaling vessel?
I don't believe I did.

Quote:
Or that the hunt is done for personal use and not for profit like the Japanese operation.
So how do you know if a hunt is for personal use and not for profit?

Quote:
It seems to me you're just playing the same game of semantics that has allowed the countries claiming "traditional" hunting rights to ramp up production so that it's now so far removed from "tradition" it's unrecognizable.
Do you mean "traditional" as in "we've always eaten whales" or "traditional" as in "we have specific methods of catching and eating whales?

Originally Posted by Furcifer View Post
Strawman. Nobody said the size of the boat was the only factor.
Perhaps you could explain the other factors that make up your definition of "commercial" since so far we only have "size of the boat"?

Quote:
Commercial hunting isn't sustainable, we really don't need any more "research" to prove that.
You say that but you refuse to provide any actual evidence that this is the case. You have however tried to reverse the burden of proof by asking others to somehow show that Japan isn't affecting Kyrgyzstan's share of the whales though.
__________________
Wildy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2012, 06:19 AM   #416
Furcifer
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 13,797
Originally Posted by Wildy View Post
But is it though? Remember, you were the one who said that the yardstick is the Nisshin Maru.

I don't believe I did.

So how do you know if a hunt is for personal use and not for profit?

Do you mean "traditional" as in "we've always eaten whales" or "traditional" as in "we have specific methods of catching and eating whales?

Perhaps you could explain the other factors that make up your definition of "commercial" since so far we only have "size of the boat"?

You say that but you refuse to provide any actual evidence that this is the case. You have however tried to reverse the burden of proof by asking others to somehow show that Japan isn't affecting Kyrgyzstan's share of the whales though.
I'm not sure, it could be that the use of the bigger boat is a result of whales being as big as they are. Is it registered as a commercial boat?

The people killing the whale get a share of the kill. In Indonesia the kid delivering the killing blow gets a double share.

Both and more. Tradition is admittedly hard to define, but we've been able to do so here in Canada. Maybe we're just smarter than the Japanese?

You're lying. I've explained numerous other factors that go into making the Japanese whaling vessels commercial. I'm not going into capacity, range, international waters, organization, personal use, registration etc. again.

Perhaps you need to read more about whaling or read what I've already written for comprehension? The reason whales are protected is because commercial whaling was unsustainable. I suggest a history book.
Again, if you're saying the critical decline in the World's whale populations wasn't due to commercial hunting, and that what the Japanese are doing is sustainable then prove it. Just remember they're doing it in international waters so "It's sustainable if the Japanese are the only ones doing it" isn't a viable answer.
Furcifer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2012, 10:19 AM   #417
swright777
Muse
 
swright777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 897
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
...
Incidents like the Steve Irwin nosing into the aft quarter of that whaler at full speed must be horrifying. On deck the poor saps could at least watch their fate coming to meet them; imagine being belowdecks or in the engine room, feeling the collisions and listening to the screeching metal and wondering what on Earth is going on.
This is so true. One of the greenpeace ships did this to us back in 1989. Bolts and & metal fittings were snapped and the gunwale was damaged. We spent close to 3 months in the yards getting repaired.
swright777 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2012, 10:41 AM   #418
Wildy
Adelaidean
 
Wildy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 11,857
Originally Posted by Furcifer View Post
I'm not sure, it could be that the use of the bigger boat is a result of whales being as big as they are. Is it registered as a commercial boat?
The Icelandic boats that belong to the private company Hvalur hf? Them? I think they're registered as 1:87.1 models. It's either that or whaling ships, but then my Icelandic is pretty non-existent.

Quote:
The people killing the whale get a share of the kill. In Indonesia the kid delivering the killing blow gets a double share.
And?

Quote:
Both and more. Tradition is admittedly hard to define, but we've been able to do so here in Canada. Maybe we're just smarter than the Japanese?
So what is the Canadian definition then?

Quote:
You're lying. I've explained numerous other factors that go into making the Japanese whaling vessels commercial. I'm not going into capacity, range, international waters, organization, personal use, registration etc. again.
No, you've alluded to several factors. In fact "explaining" is one of the things that you've been sorely lacking on. Trying to get these factors out of you is like getting blood out of a stone.

Quote:
The reason whales are protected is because commercial whaling was unsustainable. I suggest a history book.
Perhaps you could actually provide some actual evidence to your claims instead of telling me to do your research for you.

Quote:
Again, if you're saying the critical decline in the World's whale populations wasn't due to commercial hunting, and that what the Japanese are doing is sustainable then prove it.
The bold is straw. The underlined is you attempting to shift the burden of proof.
__________________
Wildy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2012, 11:38 AM   #419
Sam.I.Am
Illuminator
 
Sam.I.Am's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 4,627
Originally Posted by DC View Post
oh is that so? how do you know?
Because I've read the Animal Planet Forums (along with others). There are a few pro SS people on there but nowhere as many as you would think. The vast majority of the posts were about how dumb the SS people were and that they were rooting for the Whalers to win the "War".

I also talk to people IRL (I live in the San Francisco Bay Area) and with one exception (it turns out that she used to be a crew member of the Steve Irwin for over a year (or so she claimed, she did have on a Sea Shepherd shirt on though). I called her an idiot to her face and told her why) the ones who have seen the show all prefaced with the fact that they don't like whaling then went on to say pretty much the same thing about rooting for the whalers due to the actions of the SS

Then look here on JREF. Not exactly a hotbed of neanderthals yet most of the posts are not exactly what I would call pro-SS.

Take your pick. The SS do it to themselves. Before I saw the show I was on their side. Now, not so much.
__________________
"Swift, silent and deadly" was a part of my job description Upon hearing me say that my friend asked me "So you're a fart?"...

About my avatar.
Sam.I.Am is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2012, 11:54 AM   #420
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 28,589
Originally Posted by swright777 View Post
This is so true. One of the greenpeace ships did this to us back in 1989. Bolts and & metal fittings were snapped and the gunwale was damaged. We spent close to 3 months in the yards getting repaired.
Wasn't Captain Shave-The-Whales here a member of Greenpeace back then? Might've been him; seems to fit his MO.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2012, 11:59 AM   #421
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 28,589
Originally Posted by Wildy View Post
Do you mean "traditional" as in "we've always eaten whales" or "traditional" as in "we have specific methods of catching and eating whales?
Being "a primitive" seems to have something to do with it; at least that's what I picked up.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002

Last edited by Checkmite; 20th May 2012 at 12:04 PM.
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2012, 01:11 PM   #422
Furcifer
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 13,797
Originally Posted by Wildy View Post
The Icelandic b
oats that belong to the private company Hvalur hf?

And?

So what is the Canadian definition then?

No, you've alluded to several factors. In fact "explaining" is one of the things that you've been sorely lacking on. Trying to get these factors out of you is like getting blood out of a stone.


Perhaps you could actually provide some actual evidence to your claims instead of telling me to do your research for you.


The bold is straw. The underlined is you attempting to shift the burden of proof.
So what? You think a private company can't be commercial???

And that's personal use. The fact that it's sold or traded by the hunters is really irrelevant unless you're splitting hairs trying to legitimize the commercial Japanese whaling hunt done under the guise of "research".

I can look it up when I get the chance. Suffice to say they aren't allowed to roam the sea in a floating processing plant and call it "research". I find it hard to believe you don't understand how the Japanese are gaming the system and not just doing things "on a bigger scale".

It's not black and white I've given you numerous examples of how a critical thinking person could look at the different hunts around the world and come to some logical conclusions as to what is or isn't commercial. Like I said, only a fool could be persuaded into thinking a bottle rocket and a bazooka are basically the same thing. The same principle is in play here.

If you don't know the history of whaling you don't have any business in this discussion. I know it's a common MO but playing the fool isn't "skepticism". Commercial whaling was stopped because their numbers were decimated to the point of extinction.

The burden of proof is on you to show why the majority of countries continue to enforce moratorium on commercial whaling while a select few ignore the research indicating the practise is unsustainable.

You continue to ignore the obvious problem which is what happens if every country decides they want to do "research" on whales. Or how about this, I "traditonally" enjoy tuna so how about we let the Newfies "research" the bluefin tuna all year round? We may as well open the season up in the US for "research" too. And why bother with tags and restricting catch to single hook lines, scale it up man, throw out the old Omni-Net. What's the difference?

I think the problem is people unfamiliar with fishing or hunting don't really understand these "lines" that have been drawn. In order for them to be sustainable we impose restrictions that are intended to maintain "sport". What difference does it make if you shoot a deer with a bullet or an arrow? What difference does it make if you hook a fish in the mouth or in the tail? What difference does it make if you use a fishing pole or a spear? The answer is "a lot", one is hunting and the other is poaching (at different times in different situations etc.). Most of the World has recognized the fact the our ability to collect far exceeds the natural world's ability to compensate. It's called "overkill" and in order to maintain some balance we have to impose restrictions based on the poential capacity of the methods used in the hunt. The Japanese are clearly the most egregious example of complete and utter disregard for this principle. The fact they have self imposed quotas doesn't really absolve them of anything. Snagging is illegal even if you promise to only take 1 fish. Using a shotgun during black powder season is illegal even if you promise to take only 1 deer.

Are you familiar with this idea of "sport"? Do you see how it relates to "capacity"? Do you understand how using a net is usually considered "commercial" but maybe at certain times could be considered "sport"? Do you understand that there are people who do "research" to determine when and if or how many deer can be taken with a bow, but not with a gun and why? Becuase I get the general gist of things and I'm pretty sure what the Japanese are doing is wrong.
Furcifer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2012, 01:46 PM   #423
Furcifer
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 13,797
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
Being "a primitive" seems to have something to do with it; at least that's what I picked up.
Perhaps a topic for another thread, but yah your "right" to do something becuase of "tradition" even when it flies in face of logic is "primitive". I really don't see anyone supporting whaling hunting as being different from those that support female circumcision under the guise of "tradition". It's primitive. So is forcing your wife to walk 10 feet behind you in public, or lighting her on fire becuase she disrepected you. They might be more extreme examples of "tradition" run amok but I'm not going to pull any punches, it's primitive.
Killing whales for food? Well if I think killing domesticated cows for food is primitive, can you imagine what I think about killing whales?
We may have come a long way from the Neaderthals but a lot of what we think as a society, much of which is based in tradition is primitive.
Furcifer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2012, 02:07 PM   #424
Furcifer
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 13,797
Originally Posted by Sam.I.Am View Post
Because I've read the Animal Planet Forums (along with others). There are a few pro SS people on there but nowhere as many as you would think. The vast majority of the posts were about how dumb the SS people were and that they were rooting for the Whalers to win the "War".

I also talk to people IRL (I live in the San Francisco Bay Area) and with one exception (it turns out that she used to be a crew member of the Steve Irwin for over a year (or so she claimed, she did have on a Sea Shepherd shirt on though). I called her an idiot to her face and told her why) the ones who have seen the show all prefaced with the fact that they don't like whaling then went on to say pretty much the same thing about rooting for the whalers due to the actions of the SS

Then look here on JREF. Not exactly a hotbed of neanderthals yet most of the posts are not exactly what I would call pro-SS.

Take your pick. The SS do it to themselves. Before I saw the show I was on their side. Now, not so much.
And according to YouTube posters black people are dumb thugs and women belong in the kitchen.

Call me skeptical but forums might not be the best place to gauge the collective human consciousness from. Just saying.

Mind you I wouldn't be totally surprised if most people actually felt this way. The fact is Watson is a fanatic, he falls on the wrong side of the law at times and he lends himself to the villification. Plus he has the personna of a dead whale. Still some of what he does is admirable and some is insane. You've got to take everything on a casee by case basis.
Furcifer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2012, 02:51 PM   #425
Wildy
Adelaidean
 
Wildy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 11,857
Originally Posted by Furcifer View Post
So what? You think a private company can't be commercial???
I don't believe I said anything of the sort. You on the other hand have been all over the place when it comes to the commercial nature of whaling.

Quote:
And that's personal use. The fact that it's sold or traded by the hunters is really irrelevant unless you're splitting hairs trying to legitimize the commercial Japanese whaling hunt done under the guise of "research".
Ok, this is a non-whale example but maybe asking about it this way might clear up a lot of this mess:

I went to school with someone whose parents owned a cattle station up north. It wasn't a big station, something like 400 head of cattle, but when they would send the animals to the abattoir they'd keep some of the meat for themselves and sell the rest. Would that mean that their entire operation is therefore "personal use" because they got a share of the resulting meat?

Quote:
I can look it up when I get the chance.
Please do.

Quote:
Suffice to say they aren't allowed to roam the sea in a floating processing plant and call it "research".
I'm guessing that might be because they are given a quota of whales by the IWC.

Quote:
I find it hard to believe you don't understand how the Japanese are gaming the system and not just doing things "on a bigger scale".
Perhaps you should try re-reading my posts again for comprehension (as you would put it) because I've admitted several times that the Japanese are exploiting a loophole in order to hunt whales.

Quote:
It's not black and white I've given you numerous examples of how a critical thinking person could look at the different hunts around the world and come to some logical conclusions as to what is or isn't commercial.
Perhaps in this thread in some alternate universe, but unfortunately this thread isn't in that universe. What we've got in this thread is you saying that certain hunts are commercial and others aren't based on some criteria that you steadfastly refuse to divulge.

Quote:
If you don't know the history of whaling you don't have any business in this discussion.
That's your assumption. And it's wrong. Unless all these countries that are undertaking whaling are doing so because they haven't discovered that Jojoba oil is a simpler, and apparently superior, solution to using whale oil and plastics and fibreglass is a good replacement for whalebone.

Quote:
The burden of proof is on you to show why the majority of countries continue to enforce moratorium on commercial whaling while a select few ignore the research indicating the practise is unsustainable.
Care to point out some of this research?

Quote:
You continue to ignore the obvious problem which is what happens if every country decides they want to do "research" on whales.
And is every country going to do this? I wonder how Lesotho will be able to do so?

Quote:
Or how about this, I "traditonally" enjoy tuna so how about we let the Newfies "research" the bluefin tuna all year round? We may as well open the season up in the US for "research" too. And why bother with tags and restricting catch to single hook lines, scale it up man, throw out the old Omni-Net. What's the difference?
Is this hyperbolic statement comparable to what we are actually talking about and if so, how?

Then again I would assume you would be perfectly fine with this if the people doing it were "primitive".

Quote:
I think the problem is people unfamiliar with fishing or hunting don't really understand these "lines" that have been drawn. In order for them to be sustainable we impose restrictions that are intended to maintain "sport".
I thought we were talking about whaling, which the last time I checked wasn't considered a "sport". But something tells me that after you read this statement you're going to start bitching about how I'm being pedantic which is normally what you do when you butcher the English language and people have to ask you questions to try and figure out what the hell you are going on about.

Quote:
What difference does it make if you shoot a deer with a bullet or an arrow?
I'd say that the bullet would probably kill the deer quicker than the arrow, but the arrow would be more "traditional" as you use the term.

Quote:
What difference does it make if you hook a fish in the mouth or in the tail?
Besides the obvious?

Quote:
What difference does it make if you use a fishing pole or a spear?
I'm guessing that using a rod would result in less blood than a spear.

Quote:
The Japanese are clearly the most egregious example of complete and utter disregard for this principle. The fact they have self imposed quotas doesn't really absolve them of anything.
Isn't that a bit contradictory there? We have to have limits but because the Japanese have limits they're wrong?

Quote:
Snagging is illegal even if you promise to only take 1 fish.
Is that true everywhere?

Quote:
Using a shotgun during black powder season is illegal even if you promise to take only 1 deer.
There's a black powder season?

Quote:
Are you familiar with this idea of "sport"?
No. Could you tell me which definition most matches what you're going on about?

Quote:
Do you see how it relates to "capacity"?
Since I have no idea what the hell you're going on about with "sport", I can't see how this relates to "capacity".

Quote:
Do you understand how using a net is usually considered "commercial" but maybe at certain times could be considered "sport"?
This seems to be a different definition of "sport" to the one you used in the ranty section above.

Quote:
Do you understand that there are people who do "research" to determine when and if or how many deer can be taken with a bow, but not with a gun and why? Becuase I get the general gist of things and I'm pretty sure what the Japanese are doing is wrong.
So care to tell me what the Japanese are researching?
__________________
Wildy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2012, 04:33 PM   #426
Furcifer
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 13,797
Originally Posted by Wildy View Post
I don't believe I said anything of the sort. You on the other hand have been all over the place when it comes to the commercial nature of whaling.



Ok, this is a non-whale example but maybe asking about it this way might clear up a lot of this mess:

I went to school with someone whose parents owned a cattle station up north. It wasn't a big station, something like 400 head of cattle, but when they would send the animals to the abattoir they'd keep some of the meat for themselves and sell the rest. Would that mean that their entire operation is therefore "personal use" because they got a share of the resulting meat?



Please do.



I'm guessing that might be because they are given a quota of whales by the IWC.



Perhaps you should try re-reading my posts again for comprehension (as you would put it) because I've admitted several times that the Japanese are exploiting a loophole in order to hunt whales.



Perhaps in this thread in some alternate universe, but unfortunately this thread isn't in that universe. What we've got in this thread is you saying that certain hunts are commercial and others aren't based on some criteria that you steadfastly refuse to divulge.



That's your assumption. And it's wrong. Unless all these countries that are undertaking whaling are doing so because they haven't discovered that Jojoba oil is a simpler, and apparently superior, solution to using whale oil and plastics and fibreglass is a good replacement for whalebone.



Care to point out some of this research?



And is every country going to do this? I wonder how Lesotho will be able to do so?



Is this hyperbolic statement comparable to what we are actually talking about and if so, how?

Then again I would assume you would be perfectly fine with this if the people doing it were "primitive".



I thought we were talking about whaling, which the last time I checked wasn't considered a "sport". But something tells me that after you read this statement you're going to start bitching about how I'm being pedantic which is normally what you do when you butcher the English language and people have to ask you questions to try and figure out what the hell you are going on about.



I'd say that the bullet would probably kill the deer quicker than the arrow, but the arrow would be more "traditional" as you use the term.



Besides the obvious?



I'm guessing that using a rod would result in less blood than a spear.



Isn't that a bit contradictory there? We have to have limits but because the Japanese have limits they're wrong?



Is that true everywhere?



There's a black powder season?



No. Could you tell me which definition most matches what you're going on about?



Since I have no idea what the hell you're going on about with "sport", I can't see how this relates to "capacity".



This seems to be a different definition of "sport" to the one you used in the ranty section above.



So care to tell me what the Japanese are researching?
I've never said the definition of "commercialism" is black and white. In fact I've mentioned it isn't several times. There's no mathematical formula, it's somewhat intuitive when you begin looking different operations around the world. My point is it isn't as grey as you keep trying to fake.

It could be. It depends on whether or not they were registered as a commercial operation or as butcher shop. What did their tax number indicate? What kind of tax breaks did they get? Did they get commercial subsidy? These things are defined and while they vary from country to country they are surprisingly uniform. In the US they might be a commercial operation, but in Mexico considered a "hobby farm", but usually it's a small differemce. I don't think anywhere in the world having 4000 head of cattle could be considered "recreational".

Yes, but you've also said it's just a matter of scale. You're not moving the goal posts but you're leaning on them at every opportunity.

The criteria is divulged and you understand them perfectly, you're just feigning ignorance to maintain this "Wah? I don't get it? Wah?" You're not fooling anyone, especially me.

I can't respond to a post like this on my phone. The formatting makes it extremely difficult. If you ever narrow it down to a single cogent point post I'll try to respond. In the mean time I've got to get a new computer.
Furcifer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2012, 06:05 PM   #427
Sam.I.Am
Illuminator
 
Sam.I.Am's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 4,627
Originally Posted by Furcifer View Post
And according to YouTube posters black people are dumb thugs and women belong in the kitchen.

Call me skeptical but forums might not be the best place to gauge the collective human consciousness from. Just saying.

Mind you I wouldn't be totally surprised if most people actually felt this way. The fact is Watson is a fanatic, he falls on the wrong side of the law at times and he lends himself to the villification. Plus he has the personna of a dead whale. Still some of what he does is admirable and some is insane. You've got to take everything on a casee by case basis.
Did you miss this part?

Quote:
I also talk to people IRL (I live in the San Francisco Bay Area) and with one exception (it turns out that she used to be a crew member of the Steve Irwin for over a year (or so she claimed, she did have on a Sea Shepherd shirt on though). I called her an idiot to her face and told her why) the ones who have seen the show all prefaced with the fact that they don't like whaling then went on to say pretty much the same thing about rooting for the whalers due to the actions of the SS
The AP anf JREF forums are just two more examples of the same. Hell they were even mocked on South Park for an entire episode just for being the idiots that I described. Sea Shepherds own actions make people dislike them enough to actually root for the people killing whales when SS is around.

Sometimes the ends don't justify the means and when they don't they can backfire big time.
__________________
"Swift, silent and deadly" was a part of my job description Upon hearing me say that my friend asked me "So you're a fart?"...

About my avatar.
Sam.I.Am is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2012, 07:57 PM   #428
Furcifer
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 13,797
Originally Posted by Sam.I.Am View Post
Did you miss this part?



The AP anf JREF forums are just two more examples of the same. Hell they were even mocked on South Park for an entire episode just for being the idiots that I described. Sea Shepherds own actions make people dislike them enough to actually root for the people killing whales when SS is around.

Sometimes the ends don't justify the means and when they don't they can backfire big time.
And still the Japanese whaling season has been shorter with less whales taken. As they say talk is cheap.
Furcifer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2012, 09:21 PM   #429
Sam.I.Am
Illuminator
 
Sam.I.Am's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 4,627
Originally Posted by Furcifer View Post
And still the Japanese whaling season has been shorter with less whales taken. As they say talk is cheap.
And there is no proof that it was solely because of the SS. Remember that the Sea Shepherds have quite openly stated that they will say anything to put themselves in a good light and that the truth is not a factor when they say it. A quota is the maximum allowed and not a guarantee that you will reach it. Ask anyone who has gone hunting or fishing. That still doesn't detract from what I said about how people felt about the SS or their rooting for the whalers during that show. People tend to dislike ******** and the SS has boatloads of them. Pun intended.
__________________
"Swift, silent and deadly" was a part of my job description Upon hearing me say that my friend asked me "So you're a fart?"...

About my avatar.
Sam.I.Am is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2012, 10:27 PM   #430
Korren
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 344
Originally Posted by Furcifer View Post
I'm not sure, it could be that the use of the bigger boat is a result of whales being as big as they are.
The reason why Japan is using larger boats than other whaling nations is because Japan is doing off-shore whaling. The other whaling nations are only doing on-shore whaling where smaller boats suffice.

It has nothing to do with commercial vs. non-commercial, the size of the whales or the strength of character of the whalers of differing nationalities.

Quote:
Perhaps you need to read more about whaling or read what I've already written for comprehension? The reason whales are protected is because commercial whaling was unsustainable.
That's oversimplified past the point of error. It is true that historically, the industrial hunt of whales for whale oil severely depleted many populations of whales and brought some species of whale to the point of extinction.

However, nobody is hunting for whale oil any more: modern whaling is all for whale meat, and that kind of whaling has a much lower impact -- in part because fewer whales are killed for meat than for whale oil, and in part because the hunt is more selective when it comes to which species are killed.

Quote:
Again, if you're saying the critical decline in the World's whale populations wasn't due to commercial hunting, and that what the Japanese are doing is sustainable then prove it. Just remember they're doing it in international waters so "It's sustainable if the Japanese are the only ones doing it" isn't a viable answer.
Which is why we require a working IWC to actually manage whaling. Sadly, IWC is logjammed by nations with a strict anti-whaling policy who ignores the IWC's charter and scientific committee and prevents any actual management from taking place. Ironically, it's the anti-whaling nations which pose the largest threat to the long-term protection of whales.
Korren is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2012, 10:27 PM   #431
Wildy
Adelaidean
 
Wildy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 11,857
Originally Posted by Furcifer View Post
I've never said the definition of "commercialism" is black and white. In fact I've mentioned it isn't several times.
1. Yes you have, several times. The problem is that your definition seems to be a special one that only you know.

Quote:
There's no mathematical formula, it's somewhat intuitive when you begin looking different operations around the world.
2. Except as you have shown in this thread it isn't. You've flip-flopped several times when it comes to the nature of Icelandic and Norwegian whaling.

Quote:
My point is it isn't as grey as you keep trying to fake.
3. No, it's as unintelligible as you have made it.

Quote:
It could be. It depends on whether or not they were registered as a commercial operation or as butcher shop. What did their tax number indicate? What kind of tax breaks did they get? Did they get commercial subsidy? These things are defined and while they vary from country to country they are surprisingly uniform. In the US they might be a commercial operation, but in Mexico considered a "hobby farm", but usually it's a small differemce. I don't think anywhere in the world having 4000 head of cattle could be considered "recreational".
(hundred not thousand)

4. I wouldn't know too much about their tax status because that wasn't something we spoke about, or subsidies.

Quote:
The criteria is divulged and you understand them perfectly, you're just feigning ignorance to maintain this "Wah? I don't get it? Wah?" You're not fooling anyone, especially me.
5. Again you must be talking about that alternative universe thread. If I'm wrong, perhaps someone with a better grasp of the English language can explain it to me.

Quote:
I can't respond to a post like this on my phone. The formatting makes it extremely difficult. If you ever narrow it down to a single cogent point post I'll try to respond. In the mean time I've got to get a new computer.
6. Then I hope the numbers help. You could have done that yourself, but I guess it's easier to complain that I'm not boiling down a complex discussion into a single point.
__________________

Last edited by Wildy; 20th May 2012 at 10:32 PM.
Wildy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2012, 10:29 PM   #432
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 28,589
Originally Posted by Furcifer View Post
Still some of what he does is admirable and some is insane.
Some of his goals are admirable; none of the steps he takes to achieve them is. Like a parent who wants to keep her child safe by never letting him outside the house, ever.

And his method of choice is completely insane. Ending whaling is something that's going to require massive popular interest and support to achieve; adopting an approach that so many are repulsed by indicates either a kind of naïve shortsightedness or a goal that isn't "ending whaling".
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2012, 10:52 PM   #433
Korren
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 344
Originally Posted by Furcifer View Post
And that's personal use. The fact that it's sold or traded by the hunters is really irrelevant unless you're splitting hairs trying to legitimize the commercial Japanese whaling hunt done under the guise of "research".

I can look it up when I get the chance. Suffice to say they aren't allowed to roam the sea in a floating processing plant and call it "research". I find it hard to believe you don't understand how the Japanese are gaming the system and not just doing things "on a bigger scale".
While it's true that Japan is exploiting a loophole and can be said to be "gaming the system", it should be pointed out that they're using said loophole to get around another loophole and that the system was already gamed by the other side.

In short: a temporary moratorium on all commercial whaling was enacted back in the eighties until the IWC's scientific committee could finish some revisions on the new management procedures. This work was finished about two decades ago, but -- in contradiction of IWC's charter -- anti-whaling nations have blocked the formal adoption of this work in order to extend the moratorium on this technicality.

It was only after this underhand tactic came into use that Norway opted to use its reservation, Iceland left the IWC (and later rejoined with a post-dated reservation) and Japan began exploiting the loophole of scientific whaling being (in essence) outside the remit of the IWC.

Be glad there was this loophole for Japan to take advantage of, because the realistic alternative is not Japan doing no whaling, but Japan leaving the IWC and doing whaling outside of any international body at all.

Quote:
If you don't know the history of whaling you don't have any business in this discussion. I know it's a common MO but playing the fool isn't "skepticism". Commercial whaling was stopped because their numbers were decimated to the point of extinction.
Not true. Some species and some populations of whales were brought to the brink of extinction (but the actual moratorium came about years and decades after this had actually happened), other species and populations were reduced to the point where they were threatened, but some species and populations were never in any danger at all.

Quote:
The burden of proof is on you to show why the majority of countries continue to enforce moratorium on commercial whaling while a select few ignore the research indicating the practise is unsustainable.
There exists a large body of research -- accepted and conducted by the IWC's scientific council, in particular the body of work related to the Revised Management Procedure -- which shows the exact opposite.
Korren is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2012, 10:59 PM   #434
DC
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 23,064
Originally Posted by Sam.I.Am View Post
Because I've read the Animal Planet Forums (along with others). There are a few pro SS people on there but nowhere as many as you would think. The vast majority of the posts were about how dumb the SS people were and that they were rooting for the Whalers to win the "War".

I also talk to people IRL (I live in the San Francisco Bay Area) and with one exception (it turns out that she used to be a crew member of the Steve Irwin for over a year (or so she claimed, she did have on a Sea Shepherd shirt on though). I called her an idiot to her face and told her why) the ones who have seen the show all prefaced with the fact that they don't like whaling then went on to say pretty much the same thing about rooting for the whalers due to the actions of the SS

Then look here on JREF. Not exactly a hotbed of neanderthals yet most of the posts are not exactly what I would call pro-SS.

Take your pick. The SS do it to themselves. Before I saw the show I was on their side. Now, not so much.
aah i see, you dont know it thanks for clarification.
DC is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2012, 11:08 PM   #435
Andrew Wiggin
Master Poster
 
Andrew Wiggin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,915
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
Wasn't Captain Shave-The-Whales here a member of Greenpeace back then? Might've been him; seems to fit his MO.
If by 'member of' you mean 'founder of' then yes.
__________________
"Everyone takes the limits of his own vision for the limits of the
world." - Arthur Schopenhauer

"New and stirring things are belittled because if they are not belittled,
the humiliating question arises, 'Why then are you not taking part in
them?' " - H. G. Wells
Andrew Wiggin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2012, 02:13 AM   #436
Eligbak
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 100
Some interesting statistics about 'Whale Wars' from imdb.



Girls < 18 love it, women >= 45 rate it the lowest. That's assuming a majority was truthful about their age/sex.
Eligbak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2012, 07:30 AM   #437
alfaniner
Penultimate Amazing
 
alfaniner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Sorth Dakonsin
Posts: 29,368
Originally Posted by Andrew Wiggin View Post
If by 'member of' you mean 'founder of' then yes.
I understand he was then banned for being too extreme in his methods.
__________________
Science is self-correcting.
Woo is self-contradicting.
alfaniner is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2012, 10:03 AM   #438
Wildy
Adelaidean
 
Wildy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 11,857
In news relevant to this thread it seems that Sea Shepherd did get the money together as Watson was released on bail, or if you would like a headline that is simply bad journalism "Anti-whaling activist walks free".

But it seems that I was wrong about him leaving the country since it seems he'll hang around to protest at the arrival of the Costa Rican President. Although I wonder if being sent to Costa Rica really is a "death sentence" as he put it.
__________________
Wildy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2012, 10:23 AM   #439
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 28,589
Originally Posted by Andrew Wiggin View Post
If by 'member of' you mean 'founder of' then yes.
Curious; he seems to be the only one who recalls him being a founder.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2012, 10:38 AM   #440
Macgyver1968
Philosopher
 
Macgyver1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 5,164
Originally Posted by Wildy View Post
In news relevant to this thread it seems that Sea Shepherd did get the money together as Watson was released on bail, or if you would like a headline that is simply bad journalism "Anti-whaling activist walks free".

But it seems that I was wrong about him leaving the country since it seems he'll hang around to protest at the arrival of the Costa Rican President. Although I wonder if being sent to Costa Rica really is a "death sentence" as he put it.
From what I understand, one of the terms of his bail release was he stay in the country. If he were to slip out of Germany, I'm sure the Germans would just issue a warrant for his arrest for jumping bail.
__________________
"Fixin' crap that ain't broke."
Macgyver1968 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:09 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.