Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
Still Waters

Bunnies implicated in Neanderthals demise

39 posts in this topic

So a neandethal couldn't throw a rock?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i don't believe that.hunting animals in my opinion is wrong and this goes to to hunters who enjoy this as a sport.put yourself in their situation.how would you like people hunting you as a sport?i bet and most likely would say and think i don't like that especially for their entertainment and ours.all life is precious and valueble.let nature decide that and handle that nature knows what she is doing!!!humans can help and its not by killing animals for our entainment or consumptions i know for a fact.that's just really disgusting and if you people had a heart and conscious you would know that.i seen one time when they kill pigs in mexico to eat and by stabbing the animal in the heart and the pig is sqealing and running around in pain and agonizing not a pretty sight or sound and i feel bad for that pig.also blood coming out

Well i hunt and enjoy it.I always eat what i kill,as has already been said it is much healthier to eat deer meat than almost any other store bought meat.As far as letting nature take care of it,you just said "let nature decide that and handle that nature knows what she is doing!Humans can help and its not by killing animals for our entertainment or consumptions i know this for a fact" what the hell does that mean?I do not believe in killing just for entertainment,but hunting for food hell yes i do.If we didnt cull overpopulated species we would be over run with sick diseased animals.Well i cant speak for how people in mexico take their next meal,but when i hunt it is 1 shot 1 kill.Man has been eating animals since the begining of our time,i consider being a vegetarian unnatural and goofy,just because i think it doesnt make it true lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think maybe the point is that the Neanderthals, while they may have looked pretty much like homo sapiens, were not homo sapiens. If you look at the standard Neanderthal "toolbox" of tools they made that you find associated with their remains, it stayed very much the same for several hundred thousand years. This is conservative. If reflects a species inability to change hardly at all, so it might be that creature they did not recognize as being food just simply were never so recognized.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any killing of anything, for food or otherwise, is wrong. It is just that starving yourself is also wrong. There are big wrongs and small wrongs and in-between wrongs, and we all have to make our decisions.

I am not a vegetarian. I eat fish and poultry and a few other more bizarre things, but most of my diet is vegetarian. Do I think it is wrong for others to eat meat? Well, yes, but cutting off a bit of asparagus is also killing, and therefore wrong, but, as things go, not a very bad wrong. It is even better if the animal as a result lives better than if it weren't our prey -- either because of domestication and humane treatment or because culling has become a necessity to prevent serious wild suffering.

Westerners have this stupid idea of sin -- if something is wrong it is as sin and all sin is condemned. This is an absurd notion. Wrongs come in a scale of wrongness -- lying is wrong but so is telling the truth if it hurts someone.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any killing of anything, for food or otherwise, is wrong. It is just that starving yourself is also wrong. There are big wrongs and small wrongs and in-between wrongs, and we all have to make our decisions.

I am not a vegetarian. I eat fish and poultry and a few other more bizarre things, but most of my diet is vegetarian. Do I think it is wrong for others to eat meat? Well, yes, but cutting off a bit of asparagus is also killing, and therefore wrong, but, as things go, not a very bad wrong. It is even better if the animal as a result lives better than if it weren't our prey -- either because of domestication and humane treatment or because culling has become a necessity to prevent serious wild suffering.

Westerners have this stupid idea of sin -- if something is wrong it is as sin and all sin is condemned. This is an absurd notion. Wrongs come in a scale of wrongness -- lying is wrong but so is telling the truth if it hurts someone.

Well said frank

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are big wrongs and small wrongs and in-between wrongs, and we all have to make our decisions.

Westerners have this stupid idea of sin -- if something is wrong it is as sin and all sin is condemned. This is an absurd notion. Wrongs come in a scale of wrongness -- lying is wrong but so is telling the truth if it hurts someone.

I would guess you are a Westerner then. ;)

In reality there are no rights, wrongs or sins just life and death...

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would guess you are a Westerner then. ;)

In reality there are no rights, wrongs or sins just life and death...

Even better said chubb hahaha

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would guess you are a Westerner then. ;)

In reality there are no rights, wrongs or sins just life and death...

Not quite, although I suspect close to it. I think there are rights and wrongs. This is a notion that no doubt I was taught very young with a switch but I have both religious and philosophical reasons for retaining the idea. I just don't buy "sin." That is an offense against God, and since I'm an atheist I don't believe in that kind of divine legislation.

Something is wrong basically if it harms. Now many things both harm and do good, which is why there are degrees of harm. The Buddha (sorry but I can't help bring him into this since that is where I am coming from) teaches that doing harm, lacking compassion, is part of the reason we are trapped in the cycle of suffering, of birth and death. What we do, both good and bad, changes what we are, and therefore allows us to either progress or causes us to fall back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i just had 3 eggs,and venison tenderloin for breakfast.I just sinned like crazy,felt and tasted good though so i guess it was worth it :lol:

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

This is a notion that no doubt I was taught very young

This is where your perception of right or wrong comes from, we all have different (though often similar) perceptions of right and wrong though in reality there is no such thing, there is just survival and what has to be done to survive. Luckily we live in a world where we can justify what is 'right' or what is 'wrong'.

I just don't buy "sin." That is an offense against God, and since I'm an atheist I don't believe in that kind of divine legislation.

I see where you are coming from with this, but again it is all point of view, for me saying 'sin' is just a posh way of saying 'wrong', linked to religion maybe, but not dependant on it.

Edited by Junior Chubb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have a perception of right and wrong that we were indoctrinated as children, and we all automatically assume this is the proper basis for behavior. It is called our conscience.

It is a reasonably good guide, but we have to remember that it is a cultural artifact, not a rational one. So we really need a rational guide to help us assess what our conscience tells us. In the West some complicated combination of utilitarianism and Kant seems to work. For me the concept of compassion is the best guide.

Whether or not good and bad are absolutes in the frame of things is problematic, but we can always ask ourselves, does this do good or harm, and how much, and try to decide how to proceed from that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but we can always ask ourselves, does this do good or harm, and how much, and try to decide how to proceed from that.

That's always a good way to proceed (and how I like to think I appoach situations), but again yields varyingly wild results depending on the individual.

For me the way to proceed from here would be to wish you a good day... ;)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any killing of anything, for food or otherwise, is wrong. It is just that starving yourself is also wrong. There are big wrongs and small wrongs and in-between wrongs, and we all have to make our decisions.

I am not a vegetarian. I eat fish and poultry and a few other more bizarre things, but most of my diet is vegetarian. Do I think it is wrong for others to eat meat? Well, yes, but cutting off a bit of asparagus is also killing, and therefore wrong, but, as things go, not a very bad wrong. It is even better if the animal as a result lives better than if it weren't our prey -- either because of domestication and humane treatment or because culling has become a necessity to prevent serious wild suffering.

Westerners have this stupid idea of sin -- if something is wrong it is as sin and all sin is condemned. This is an absurd notion. Wrongs come in a scale of wrongness -- lying is wrong but so is telling the truth if it hurts someone.

Absolute gibberish, a very confused person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.