Whale wars: Watch Eco-pussies attack japanese whalers, and fail hilariously

That was a relatively neutral article, but why do they still feel the need to add this?

Japan says it continues to hunt for scientific research, while not concealing the fact that much of the meat ends up on dinner plates, the BBC's Roland Buerk in Tokyo reports.
 
That was a relatively neutral article, but why do they still feel the need to add this?

Because it's a fact. Yes, it neatly undermines claims that the whaling is solely for scientific research, but the BBC is not about to pander to Japanese sensibilities.
 
The scientific research part is the only way to get past the international ban on whaling that they use a ruse.


You should see what they call a dolphin "hunt".


 
Last edited:
facepalm.jpg

The suggestion that it might be concealed implies there is something illegal or wrong happening when in fact they are complying with IWC regulations.

The suggestion that it might be concealed plays into the idea of "the deceitful Japs".

So the real purpose is the harvest meat for human consumption? The article itself says few Japanese people eat whale meat. The article, like anti-whalers, contradicts itself.
 
The suggestion that it might be concealed plays into the idea of "the deceitful Japs".

Ah but it doesn't suggest that it might be concealed, it explicitly states that it isn't concealed. Could have written:

Japan says it continues to hunt for scientific research, while not concealing the fact that none of the hunters rape small children

;)
 
Ah but it doesn't suggest that it might be concealed, it explicitly states that it isn't concealed. Could have written:

I think you misunderstood my point.

Utilizing byproduct from scientific research is a requirement under the IWC. Selling it for human consumption is not illegal, why would it be concealed? Explicitly stating that it is not concealed implies there is something illegal or untoward going on.

WillDAQ claims to be a man while not concealing the fact that he drives a Smart Roadster Coupe.

See what I mean?

And BTW, it in no way "undermines claims that the whaling is solely for scientific research".
 
And BTW, it in no way "undermines claims that the whaling is solely for scientific research".

Well that depends on the perception of the audience. In the UK at least most people would hold the perception that no animals used in research make it into the food chain. Therefore anything different is suspicious.
 
*Sigh*

Most people probably don't know the laws regarding whaling and assume that scientific research means going out, counting whales, placing radio trackers, etc. Saying that it's "lethal research" would mean to most people that a few whales get taken and thoroughly examined in a lab, not mass killings of entire pods, including juveniles, that are then eaten.

It's perfectly reasonable for the BBC to point out that the whales killed are for food.
 
I don't even know what to say anymore.

You both now claim that the BBC should colour the facts to pander to the general population's ignorance and skewed perceptions.

Well done, rock solid position you have.

not mass killings of entire pods, including juveniles, that are then eaten.

And I've asked you to stop lying. Why do you continue?
 
I think I see what hansvonaxion is saying. The statement in the article seems to suggest that there would be reason to hide the fact that the whales are used for food. It would have been more neutral to simply leave out the "not concealing" part. The wording of "end up on dinner plates" is also a bit condescending.
 
Last edited:
I don't even know what to say anymore.

You both now claim that the BBC should colour the facts to pander to the general population's ignorance and skewed perceptions.

Well done, rock solid position you have.

And I've asked you to stop lying. Why do you continue?

Are the whales not sold as food?
Do we not have the Japanese on camera harpooning juveniles, females with calves and multiple whales from the same pod?

So how is what I said a lie and how is the BBC "coloring the facts" or "pandering" when what they said is entirely true - the whales are sold as food and no one is trying to hide that fact. This is factually true.

The Japanese don't exactly have the best record when it comes to sustainable ocean harvesting, ever seen the documentary The Cove?
 
ever seen the documentary The Cove?

I am against Japanese whaling, but The Cove is a poorly argued piece of propaganda (hell they came inches from Godwin's law at the end).
 
The narrative aside, it's hard to argue when there's footage of the fishermen driving the dolphins into the beach and stabbing them until there's more blood than water.
 
Shit, I forgot my promise to keep politics out of this and just discuss the show, but I have to own up to my errors...

...mass killings of entire pods, including juveniles, that are then eaten.

I called you a liar but you are completely correct. It is entirely conceivable that there are "mass killings of entire pods".

Please feel free to use that exact phrase in any argument from now on, safe in the knowledge that it is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Knowing that only 1-2 whales are taken from a "pod" I found it difficult to believe that "mass killings of entire pods" were taking place. I should have known better than to take the anti-whaler's (or Blind's) claims at face value.

For those who care, Antarctic Minke whales travel in "pods" of 1-3 whales. A quote from the Australian Government...

Antarctic Minke Whales are not gregarious and tend to swim alone or in pairs

So yes, taking 1 whale from a pod of... 1 whale might be considered the "mass killing of an entire pod".

:rolleyes:


It's perfectly reasonable for the BBC to point out that the whales killed are for food.

Wrong.

The US claims its nuclear reactors are for energy production while not concealing the fact that depleted uranium is used in munitions.

It's perfectly reasonable to point out that nuclear reactors are built for weapons production.

...it's hard to argue when there's footage of the fishermen driving the dolphins into the beach and stabbing them until there's more blood than water.

Says the guy who defended "aboriginal" whalers because he thought they used traditional harpoons to stab the whales to death.

:rolleyes:
 
Minke whales travel in pairs or alone when in the subtropical waters for winter or during migration, but at the polar regions tend to gather into pods of 4-6 individuals.

Aboriginal whalers must take whales to live, they still use small boats, not massive fleets of ships. There are villages here in the US that have depended on taking a few whales in the fall to feed the village through the winter and their operations are not even close to what the Japanese are doing. I was saying that if the Japanese want to harvest whales on this scale, let's see them do it with their original tools. They claim a cultural heritage of whaling, but that just isn't the case, only a few isolated northern villages of Japan have a history of whaling. Some villages use the explosive harpoons, even in those cases the whales actually stand a pretty good chance of getting away before they are harpooned. Sometimes they can only get one whale for the season, sometimes they might have a good hunt and get three.

Oh, and nice job equating the herding of dolphins into a confined space for slaughter to hunting on the open sea. Yeah, those two are equivalent.

As for the nuclear reactor analogy, that's pretty spot-on. DU is used to make projectiles such as Sabot Anti-tank rounds and other AP projectiles. So to say that Reactors produce DU is true. The difference is that the primary purpose of a reactor is to generate power (assuming a civilian reactor), DU is a waste product that is then used to make weapons. The Japanese are harvesting whales primarily for food, not science. You can go on about their stated intentions all you want but they haven't contributed anything of consequence to the scientific understanding of whales through their research. A better analogy would be if the reactors were used primarily to produce weapons and were being operated as power generators to justify the weapons project.

What I don't understand is why you still take this claim of research at face value when it is apparent to pretty much the rest of the world that it's just a loophole to allow commercial whaling? I mean, part of the stated research goals is to kill whales to see what happens to the fish population - which isn't only bad science it's just idiotic logic. By that same reasoning I could justify going and shooting all the Giraffes to see what effect it would have on leaf growth. Whale populations have not recovered from previous whaling and fisheries around the world are being depleted faster than they can be replenished. The CRI haven't controlled for the other variables so any findings are totally worthless and even if they did get a result it wouldn't be worth the cost.

Other things such as measuring ear plugs and stomach contents may be interesting, but you hardly need to take 800+ whales a year to get a big enough sample size.
 
The narrative aside, it's hard to argue when there's footage of the fishermen driving the dolphins into the beach and stabbing them until there's more blood than water.

To play devils advocate, how is that different than slaughtering cows?
 
Cows aren't wild animals, they are domesticated as a food source. The dolphins in The Cove are allegedly rounded up to go to dolphin exhibits and the rest are slaughtered and sold as whale meat (which is illegal and dangerous since dolphin meat contains high amounts of heavy metals). The fishermen apparently also claim that the dolphins are pests that eat the local fish, so this is also an extermination.

Cows also aren't part of the ecosystem, as we discovered with wolves, depopulating predators has serious consequences.
 
Top