From: traub@rtf.bt.co.uk (Michael Traub)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
Subject: Re: New Subscriber and a look on hunting
Date: 16 Apr 92 09:21:11 GMT
Organization: BT Customer Systems, Brighton, UK

In article <1992Apr15.121236.5075@ac.dal.ca> robinson@ac.dal.ca writes:
>In article <1992Apr13.075448.19268@rtf.bt.co.uk>, traub@rtf.bt.co.uk (Michael Traub) writes:
>> In article <1992Apr10.100844.4932@ac.dal.ca> robinson@ac.dal.ca writes:
>>>In article <1992Apr7.113123.9177@rtf.bt.co.uk>, traub@rtf.bt.co.uk (Michael Traub) writes:
>>>> You  call  a  few  of  your friends disapearing due to an invasion of large
>>>> creatures one month in twelve a temporary disturbance???????
>>>
>>>Yup.  It's temporary alright.  It is predictable only because *we* can 
>>>measure time.
>>>
>> Are you now saying that other animals cannot?
>
>Well, I've not seen nor heard of animals wearing watches which they created 
>themselves, nor have I heard of them or seen them using calendars, from 
>which I can only surmise that they do not measure time in a quantitative 
>way.  Opening day of the hunting season is ample proof that they are not 
>planning ahead.
>
So let me get this right, you initially came up with the anthropomorhism
about friends disappearing to show that the disturbance is only temporary,
but now you wish to drop it because it doesn't apply to humans after all?

>>>> Are  you  so  stupid  or  callous that you wouldn't alter your lifestyle to
>>>> try and prevent the creatures taking you or your friends in that one month?
>>>
>
>Pompeii was an ancient city in southern Italy on the Bay of Naples which 
>was destroyed by the eruption of mount Vesuvius in 79 AD.  Despite this 
>eruption and the total anhiliation of this city, as well as others in the 
>area, people continued to live on the slopes of Vesuvius, thereby 
>demonstrating the above (i.e. that people often ignore a clear and present 
>danger).
>
Would you?

>>>> Would you wait until the month came around or would you plan ahead?
>>>
>>>Being human I would plan ahead.
>> 
>> Thank you for agreeing that the disruption would not be temporary.
>
>What I would do is not indicitive of what the population as a whole would 
>do.  It is quite likely that a large segment of the population would 
>pretend that it wasn't really going to happen again and ignore the 
>possibility.  Thus, at least initially, the disruption *would* be 
>temporary.
>
Why do you think this would be the case?

>>>It doesn't appear that deer do plan 
>>>ahead, from which one can deduce that they do not measure time the same way 
>>>we do (which should be obvious).   Nonetheless they recognize the invasion 
>>>when it happens.
>>>
>> What would you suggest the dear do, start a petition?
>
>Well, if they were able to quantitatively measure time and were able to 
>plan ahead, I would expect them to vanish from their usual haunts a couple 
>days before the season opened.  They don't.
>
Ah, so the anthropomorphism is being dropped now is it?

>>>> Temporary  disruption,  what  crap.  Maybe  you would like to withdraw your
>>>> analogy, this anthropomorphism is not helping you much.
>>>
>>>On the contrary.
>>>
>> On the contrary what? You still haven;t shown that your example would not
>> cause permanent disruption.
>
>Actually, I think I've substantiated it just fine.  You're welcome to 
>disagree.
>
Well I'm confused as to why you are contradicting yourself twice in the
above article.

>> The signature of a madman.
>
>The voice of a slave unaccustomed to the heady fumes of freedom.
>
>John Robinson                  Only criminals, tyrants, and cowards have
>robinson@ac.dal.ca                 reason to fear the armed, honest citizen.

If a bunch of Americans running around on the loose with guns shooting
each other is freedom, I'll take captivity thank you very much.




-- 
Michael Traub
BT Customer Systems, Brighton Systems Centre. traub@rtf.bt.co.uk
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals