Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Rhino species extinct


Commander CMG

Recommended Posts

Why not?

Because I have no evidence not to.

You have no problem assuming anything else with no evidence. Heck, you have no problem assuming things when evidence directly contradicting you is presented

Like?

Are you...no, never mind, of course you aren't kidding, you just assumed you knew and didn't bother checking before talking.

Checking the OP article would be the hint necessary to observe I'm not assuming. Extinction would be the greatest evidence that enforcement of the law is inadequate.

Tanzania recently (a few years ago) repealed their "shoot on sight" standing orders

Conferring with what I'm saying.

the law was still in the books, but not enforced.

Conferring with what I'm saying.

Kenya remains the worst in terms of directly addressing the poaching issue

Conferring with what I'm saying. There's great room for improvement in anti-poaching law enforcement.

I keep producing citation after citation of my claims. Remember the whole Dictionary fiasco? Where you kept insisting that we look in the dictionary for a definition that you insisted was correct? And how I kept telling you to actually look in the dictionary, which you utterly refused to do, in the same way you refuse to educate yourself above there, and you kept insisting your definition was correct until I finally had to post three seperate dictionary definitions showing how your definition was not correct?

Where I cited the dictionary definition of violence before you did, yes I remember. According to you, you can commit "violence" against inanimate objects when I already used the word "destroy" which was adequate enough already. Violence is defined well enough. I've never heard of "injuring" objects, but if you prefer "commit violence against equipment" instead of "destroy equipment" then it still provided no reason to change my mind using weaker words that nobody else uses to try to make a point.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/violence

Violence is the intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or actual, against a person, or against a group or community, that either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, death, psychological harm, maldevelopment or deprivation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence

By these definitions, Sea Shepherd is non-violent.

This is the exact same thing. Exactly the same. The only difference is that I now have to decide whether you are truly incapable of recognizing when you are wrong about something, or whether you are being intentionally dishonest. Either way, I'm done providing citations for you. You never acknowledge them, and on occassion, completely ignore them.

I have no idea what citations you're talking about. The only citations posted show me that you're the one assigning your own errors in meaning to me.

It helps that more than a few rangers have been killed by poachers (life is cheap in some of these places.

No, it hurts that life is cheap in some of these places, that's why extinction is a real possibility.

Rhino horns are all made of the same material.

No,

Unlike the horns of most animals, which have a bony core covered by a relatively thin layer of keratin, rhino horns are keratin all the way through — although the precise chemical composition of the keratin will vary depending on a rhino’s diet and geographic location. This fact has allowed ecologist Raj Amin of the Zoological Society of London and his colleagues to take “fingerprints” of horn samples and determine the animal populations they came from, which has helped law enforcement officials target and crack down on poaching.

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/episodes/rhinoceros/rhino-horn-use-fact-vs-fiction/1178/

Dear Lord, please stop talking...

You're not entitled to interfere with free speech on a discussion forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

And that's the end of the ball game.

On the bright side, I don't consider you to be willfully ignorant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And that's the end of the ball game.

On the bright side, I don't consider you to be willfully ignorant.

I willfully ignore your opinion of me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fine with me. Just like everything else you ignore, it doesn't go away, nor is it shown to be incorrect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

and agree with Red, stop buying Chinese and all Asian products! You can find Made in the USA now, just look on Etsy and in stores. :)

Yes and that's just a racist comment because what have Japan done with regards to this issue? Ziltch!

Also it's so easy to criticise developing countries for the destruction of their natural habitat when it's the very 'globalization' that the West has imposed and promotes that is the main perpetrator, besides the fact that here in the UK for instance we had already obliterated the native wolves, boars (which had to be reintroduced from Eastern Europe), bears and others. Instead of complaining we should be doing something about it as we are part of the problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes and that's just a racist comment because what have Japan done with regards to this issue? Ziltch!

My comments are not to be construed as racist. My take on this is problem is one of superstition. Yup, Europeans and Americans are superstitious too, just witness the prevalence of astrology and other pseudo-sciences. They even exploit animals for it, I'm sure "lucky" rabbit feet key chains are still a popular commercial item. But these Westerners are not causing the extinction of species because of superstition, that's my point.

Also it's so easy to criticise developing countries for the destruction of their natural habitat when it's the very 'globalization' that the West has imposed and promotes that is the main perpetrator, besides the fact that here in the UK for instance we had already obliterated the native wolves, boars (which had to be reintroduced from Eastern Europe), bears and others.

I don't think globalization has been imposed so much as embraced, greed cuts across all ethnicities.

Instead of complaining we should be doing something about it as we are part of the problem.

What do you propose?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think human should start finding some other options to cure certain ailments, surely there would be lot of botanical compositions they could use to replace substance coming from poor animals. As I know Medicine is not always the best option to cure the ailments. There should be much heavier penalty for using and distributing the items. Beside who ever could afford that price, certainly are not poor people, above them there is always on higher position to collect large profitable income with much less tax to pay in their operation. The greed behind all of this that gets me the most. IF I see from the poachers point of view, there is always a matter of financial aspect that lacking to feed their family, and they got to do what they got to do, even though if there are greedy poachers, they wouldn't get as much as profit as in the higher place. The people in the higher place could get away with it because they can afford it and they have power over them. They should be sentenced for life and seize all their possession in exchange to feed the hungers and money should also go back to conservation operation, hopefully they will use the money in order to create tougher system and regulations.

Edited by Mindscanner
Link to comment
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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.