+OverSword Posted March 12, 2019 #26 Share Posted March 12, 2019 25 minutes ago, Orphalesion said: On natural predators: The African Elephant has no natural predators during its adulthood, yet the Savannah's aren't overrun with hordes of Elephants trampling over each other. Part of it is the slow reproductive cycle, part is that calves and newborn are preyed upon, and for those (if it is even necessary) there's still wolves and bears in Siberia. And part of it is ivory poachers. 100k in three years due to poaching. 1 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piney Posted March 12, 2019 #27 Share Posted March 12, 2019 14 minutes ago, Jon the frog said: Yeah they are planting home but abroad, Chinese companies are cutting forest in Africa in an alarming rate... Can I see a link to that Jon? You could be right. They are pretty sneaky. The type of woods they demand are in ample supply in Southeast Asia and I didn't see any mention of it on NHK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+OverSword Posted March 12, 2019 #28 Share Posted March 12, 2019 26 minutes ago, danydandan said: I honestly think the only way to actually do that is World War Three. Do you believe that regardless of the population explosion after WWII? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danydandan Posted March 12, 2019 #29 Share Posted March 12, 2019 2 minutes ago, OverSword said: Do you believe that regardless of the population explosion after WWII? Yeap, unfortunately I do. As I think WW3 will involve nukes. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piney Posted March 12, 2019 #30 Share Posted March 12, 2019 5 minutes ago, danydandan said: Yeap, unfortunately I do. As I think WW3 will involve nukes. And right now we have 3 religious groups aiming for a self fulfilling "prophecy". 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danydandan Posted March 12, 2019 #31 Share Posted March 12, 2019 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Piney said: And right now we have 3 religious groups aiming for a self fulfilling "prophecy". And an American president looking to sell tactical nukes to a very very extremist country. Edited March 12, 2019 by danydandan 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orphalesion Posted March 12, 2019 #32 Share Posted March 12, 2019 35 minutes ago, OverSword said: And part of it is ivory poachers. 100k in three years due to poaching. Yeah, I'm fairly sure that might turn out to be a problem with Mammoths as well... 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+OverSword Posted March 12, 2019 #33 Share Posted March 12, 2019 1 minute ago, Orphalesion said: Yeah, I'm fairly sure that might turn out to be a problem with Mammoths as well... Maybe they will genetically engineer them to not grow tusks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danydandan Posted March 12, 2019 #34 Share Posted March 12, 2019 3 minutes ago, OverSword said: Maybe they will genetically engineer them to not grow tusks. I find myself wondering if it's possible to grow ivory in a lab? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piney Posted March 12, 2019 #35 Share Posted March 12, 2019 23 minutes ago, danydandan said: And an American president looking to sell tactical nukes to a very very extremist country. The Evangelicals do adore him! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piney Posted March 12, 2019 #36 Share Posted March 12, 2019 @OverSword @danydandan Good mammoth ivory story. Russia was a top exporter during the 19th and early 20th Centuries. Russian trappers were finding it everywhere in the permafrost. So Colt opted to buy mammoth ivory instead of elephant ivory and use that. My grandfather's 1920's SSA which is now owned by my aunt-stepmother has grips on it that are 10,000 years old. The best part about this was when they made all ivory illegal here it does not include mammoth so anyone with a classic Colt with ivory inlay or grips is allowed to have it. 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MyOtherAccount Posted March 12, 2019 #37 Share Posted March 12, 2019 If you've ever been served elephant stew from those huge native stew pots and been amazed by their size, just wait until you get to see the size of the mammoth stew pots! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHaYap Posted March 12, 2019 #38 Share Posted March 12, 2019 Mammoth tusks ... end of story ~ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon the frog Posted March 12, 2019 #39 Share Posted March 12, 2019 (edited) 3 hours ago, Piney said: Can I see a link to that Jon? You could be right. They are pretty sneaky. The type of woods they demand are in ample supply in Southeast Asia and I didn't see any mention of it on NHK. some: http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/furniture-from-china-contributes-to-deforestation-in-central-africa https://qz.com/africa/613965/five-ways-chinas-overseas-investments-are-impacting-african-forests/ https://wwf.panda.org/our_work/forests/deforestation_fronts/deforestation_in_the_congo_basin/ The world is now so interconnected than green growing on one side can hide a desert on the other....but if they can put the policy they are doing home on their industry and demand abroad, it would be awesome. Beside India got the first agroforestry policy in agronomy, bringing back tree on farmer land with more ease. http://worldagroforestry.org/news/india-leads-way-agroforestry-policy Edited March 12, 2019 by Jon the frog 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHaYap Posted March 12, 2019 #40 Share Posted March 12, 2019 Just now, Jon the frog said: The world is now so interconnected than green growing on one side can hide a desert on the other.... Clearly, the questions that begs the logic here remains what makes a tree cut down for the sake of investments from China in some foreign land is much more, or as much of an impact on the climate than any other old tree chopped down for any other purpose ~ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon the frog Posted March 12, 2019 #41 Share Posted March 12, 2019 (edited) 14 minutes ago, third_eye said: Clearly, the questions that begs the logic here remains what makes a tree cut down for the sake of investments from China in some foreign land is much more, or as much of an impact on the climate than any other old tree chopped down for any other purpose ~ Well is more about the policy of no deforestation in China land, when China foreign investments abroad cause deforestation... it's just a paradox. China doing abroad is not worse or better than other countries deforestation but it's a little hypocrite to have pretty policy home and not doing it abroad... the same thing happen elsewhere, we have horrible abroad mining history in Canada but the government try to look clean at home with habitat restoration and protection policy. It's hard to give laurel to a country when they don't respect their own law abroad... But China policy need to be look upon and applied everywhere and not only by China. Edited March 12, 2019 by Jon the frog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHaYap Posted March 12, 2019 #42 Share Posted March 12, 2019 Just now, Jon the frog said: Well is more about the policy of no deforestation in China land, when China foreign investments abroad cause deforestation... it's just a paradox. China doing abroad is not worse or better than other countries deforestation but it's a little hypocrite to have pretty policy home and not doing it abroad... the same thing happen elsewhere, we have horrible abroad mining history in Canada but the government try to look clean at home with habitat restoration and protection policy. It's hard to give laurel to a country when they don't respect their own law abroad... But china policy need to be look upon and applied everywhere. The thing is, is China responsible for those policies ? If some country needs investments, needs to kick start the Economy, needs to build infrastructures, needs to crawl out of Third World status, needs to create jobs, needs to compete in the Modern Industrial Globalized Markets, needs to have ambitions to achieve Surpluses to pay for INternational Aids that comes in forms of modern weaponry and arms that the populations cannot consume, well .... you tell me ... is China the only country cutting down forests and jungles , never mind trees , as we speak ? ~ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+susieice Posted March 12, 2019 #43 Share Posted March 12, 2019 6 hours ago, MasterHex said: right...this still seems like a bad bad idea. its gone,leave it be. I mean what next Raptors?! well I mean we have chickens etc but you know what I mean. cant wait to hear what others think. Cheers. That's already in the works. A lot of links in google. https://www.livescience.com/50886-scientific-progress-dino-chicken.html https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/chicken-embryos-get-dino-snouts-thanks-biological-tinkering-180955250/ They've grown chickens with dinosaur legs. https://www.sciencealert.com/scientists-have-grown-dinosaur-legs-on-a-chicken-for-the-first-time One scientist is working on mutating birds back through evolution. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/dinosaurs/8847499/The-Jurassic-Park-scientist-who-plans-to-turn-a-chicken-into-T-Rex.html 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orphalesion Posted March 12, 2019 #44 Share Posted March 12, 2019 3 hours ago, OverSword said: Maybe they will genetically engineer them to not grow tusks. But at the same time the ivory from their tusk could become a valuable export if obtained through controlled hunting. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHaYap Posted March 12, 2019 #45 Share Posted March 12, 2019 WHat makes a dead tusk less mammoth much more palatable than a dead tusk less elephant is what I am wondering ~ 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon the frog Posted March 12, 2019 #46 Share Posted March 12, 2019 (edited) 28 minutes ago, third_eye said: The thing is, is China responsible for those policies ? If some country needs investments, needs to kick start the Economy, needs to build infrastructures, needs to crawl out of Third World status, needs to create jobs, needs to compete in the Modern Industrial Globalized Markets, needs to have ambitions to achieve Surpluses to pay for INternational Aids that comes in forms of modern weaponry and arms that the populations cannot consume, well .... you tell me ... is China the only country cutting down forests and jungles , never mind trees , as we speak ? ~ Just saying that local policies must be applied abroad if you wanna look credible. Never pointed finger on China saying they are worse than others.... but if you put no deforestation policy at home to preserve forest cover and you don't give the industry alternative at home... the deforestation will just migrate (and china own most of his industry...). The UN put redd financing to cut deforestation but at some place they are just taking the money and deforest elsewhere... Still we are sailing far away from the mammoth subject, lol Edited March 12, 2019 by Jon the frog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon the frog Posted March 12, 2019 #47 Share Posted March 12, 2019 (edited) 16 minutes ago, third_eye said: WHat makes a dead tusk less mammoth much more palatable than a dead tusk less elephant is what I am wondering ~ Well for some it will be a patented GMO thing ? but looking broader, it's like why a cow is more palatable than a dog ? Perception is strange thing. Edited March 12, 2019 by Jon the frog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHaYap Posted March 12, 2019 #48 Share Posted March 12, 2019 Just now, Jon the frog said: Just saying that local policies must be applied abroad if you wanna look credible. Never pointed finger on China saying it's worse than others.... but if you put no deforestation policy at home to preserve forest cover and you don't give the industry alternative at home... the deforestation will just migrate (and china own most of his industry...). The UN put redd financing to cut deforestation but at some place they are just taking the money and deforest elsewhere... That is rather a simplistic tune to grind an axe to. No country today is so stupid as to put their environment conditions to detrimental stresses that would be put them at risk of desertification. Not every country is as stupid as to risk their future well being just because of a fast buck. Managing is just what everybody has options to and managing it as best anybody can is what everybody is trying to do. Granted that the future being as sustainable as perfect a balance seems bleak in the final equation according to some, China has shown that it is possible given time and sound policies. It is just harder when those that doesn't help but also sees it noble to actively sabotage the efforts without offering probable solutions just because it does not profit them. When China's environment was being compromised for the sake of generating the Global Economic recovery nobody batted an eye about a shrub much less forests, now when China has the means to protect and recover from the damages suddenly they are hypocrites ? Like I mentioned, China doesn't demand policies made or unmade for them, they have been practical for millenniums and that has never changed, more and more countries are becoming more receptive to dealing with them in recent years because their track record speaks for them and itself. All you are saying is nothing more than the psycho babble hangover from the Cold War propaganda still hanging in the air is what I am saying. ~ 14 minutes ago, Jon the frog said: Well for some it will be a patented GMO thing ? but looking broader, it's like why a cow is more palatable than a dog ? I honestly have no idea where to start with this, I guess it speaks more for you than for it self ~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon the frog Posted March 13, 2019 #49 Share Posted March 13, 2019 3 minutes ago, third_eye said: ~ I honestly have no idea where to start with this, I guess it speaks more for you than for it self ~ It's just that human perception can be broad and diverse... the way we blind look at cow and chicken as feeder stock and the way people react about dog getting eaten is kinda strange here in Canada. I don't see the value difference between a cow and a dog and why people over reaction about dog eating. It will probably be the same thing about mammoth vs Elephant, one raised for production, the other seen has a nature greatness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHaYap Posted March 13, 2019 #50 Share Posted March 13, 2019 Just now, Jon the frog said: It's just that human perception can be broad and diverse... the way we blind look at cow and chicken as feeder stock and the way people react about dog getting eaten is kinda strange here in Canada. I don't see the value difference between a cow and a dog and why people over reaction about dog eating. It will probably be the same thing about mammoth vs Elephant, one raised for production, the other seen has a nature greatness. I get all that and I fully understand that part of it, its that GMO reference that I find all too disconcerting. Anyhow, this is fast going off track and with all due respect, my breakfast is taking longer than usual and I am getting grumpier by the minute Best I take my leave before I get cranky ~ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now