Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

History of animals
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 23456 7>
Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Knights View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar
suspended

Joined: 23-Oct-2006
Location: AUSTRALIA
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3224 		  Quote Knights Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: History of animals
    Posted: 29-Nov-2006 at 03:00
hahaha Styrbiorn...gotta love those drunken raves.

In response to Omshanti;
Thankyou and thanks to Hellios too - I've had a great conversation with you and others too, and hope that it continues. Hehe..beat you to those snow leopards! As you may have gathered, I work at Taronga zoo in sydney, I'm a youth volunteer (I;m only 16) but I absolutely love it there. I work on the carnviores section and the snow leopards are amazing, as are all the others (lions, tigers, bears, dholes, meerkats, red panda.etc.). On the subject of 'two snow leopard cubs' you may be aware that last october the zoo had the first snow leopard cubs in about twenty five years in Australisia! They are adorable - Sabu and Kamala - and mum and dad are good parents. Onto planet earth, how exhilirating is the snow leopard chase down the mountainside, they are the supreme predators of the Himalayas and they have mad skills! Pity though what's been happening with hunting and killing by farmers in Afghanistan though . Good on you for even considering sponsoring them. I'm doing just the same actually, through the snow leopard trust, who I have got some valuable information and field data from.

Well, keep up the good work everyone, even though the topic has sort of morphed into 'Animals in general' rather than the history - anything is fine

- Knights -
Back to Top
omshanti View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 02-Nov-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 429 		  Quote omshanti Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Nov-2006 at 05:13
Originally posted by Hellios

An animalon its way to becoming 'history' in Canada is the polar bear.
According torecent studies,they'll begone within a few decades.
In order to get from one food source to another, polar bears must cross large bodies of water using floating ice patches as resting points; with global warming these floating ice patches (resting points) are disappearing so bears are drowning due to exhaustion. They can swim really long distance without stopping, but they still need thoseice patches to stop & rest.


I was just wondering . Is it not possible to make some fake ice patches for the polar bears? it is just so sad to think about those bears drowning completely alone in the sea.
    
    

Edited by omshanti - 30-Nov-2006 at 05:18
Back to Top
Knights View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar
suspended

Joined: 23-Oct-2006
Location: AUSTRALIA
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3224 		  Quote Knights Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Nov-2006 at 21:41
Well, I suppose it *could* be done...however it would be very challenging. Some sound strategies would be open range conservation parks (100's of Hectares big) in Greenland or Northern Russia.etc. where the Polar bears do not rely on pack ice, but can live in relative ease in the tundra. Also, after studies of polar bear movement patterns and home ranges, small marine reserves could be established with fake ice and a monitered environment for a/family of polar bear/s. The latter would be very cost ineffective and challenging, however can be done. Relocation is another viable option, though again, is time-consuming, and is a cure not a prevention - as most of these strategies are. If anyone has better/other ideas please contribute...or for any other animals who's plight is not looking good.

- Knights -
Back to Top
Hellios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1933 		  Quote Hellios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Dec-2006 at 02:10
"Never get out of the boat.  Absolutely god damn right.  Unless you're going all the way.  Kurtz got off the boat.  He split from the whole program." - Capt. Willard, Apocalypse Now.
 


Edited by Hellios - 06-Dec-2006 at 02:12
Back to Top
Hellios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1933 		  Quote Hellios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Dec-2006 at 02:26
Originally posted by omshanti

I was just wondering. Is it not possible to make some fake ice patches for the polar bears? it is just so sad to think about those bears drowning completely alone in the sea.
 
Not a bad idea if made of eco-friendly materials, but how would we know where to place them?  I'm not sure of the bears always follow the same routes.  How would we keep them from floating away?  Would they have to be anchored to the ocean floor?  Would they break loose during violent arctic storms or when hit by other icebergs?
 
Edit:  Did some more checking; the drownings are not the main problem.  The main problem is the species is dependent on coastal ice also, so it's not just the disappearing ice patches in the open water, it's the disappearing coastal ice also (their hunting environments).  Consequently, the species is dying of "nutritional stress" meaning the mothers aren't getting enough nutrients to produce good enough quality milk for the cubs, and the survival rates of the cubs are dropping dramatically as the mortality rates continue to increase, in direct unison with the warming temperature and melting hunting environment.
 
"History in the making."
 
I suppose what we can do is push our local politicians to push our upper politicians to do more about the global warming issue. 


Edited by Hellios - 06-Dec-2006 at 02:45
Back to Top
JanusRook View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar
Ad Maiorem Dei Gloriam

Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2419 		  Quote JanusRook Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Dec-2006 at 23:26

I suppose what we can do is push our local politicians to push our upper politicians to do more about the global warming issue.


That's presupposing global warming's man-made, and we can do something to stop it.

I don't see a problem really with the polar bears going extinct, billions of species have done so in the history of the earth and there's always something to take it's place.

If the problem with the polar bears is that they aren't getting enough nutrients, just set up "bird feeders" in reserves that contain the proper blend of nutrition. Space a few hundred of these out across the arctic coast, you'll certainly have volunteers for it and the polar bears will go to them. Way more cost effective then the above-mentioned solutions.
Economic Communist, Political Progressive, Social Conservative.

Unless otherwise noted source is wiki.
Back to Top
Hellios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1933 		  Quote Hellios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Dec-2006 at 02:57
Knights, check out the claw of a male wild Kodiak.
 
 
Back to Top
Hellios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1933 		  Quote Hellios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Dec-2006 at 03:10
This criminal shows us how big polar bears are.
 
omshanti, notice the claws partially webbed (for water) and the nails shorter than grizzlies.
 


Edited by Hellios - 08-Dec-2006 at 03:11
Back to Top
Knights View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar
suspended

Joined: 23-Oct-2006
Location: AUSTRALIA
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3224 		  Quote Knights Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Dec-2006 at 03:13
Wow....that is one heck of a big [cuddly!] bear hehe..and yeh the kodiaks have enormous claws, not just for fighting, but for digging up yummy roots/shoots too Smile
Back to Top
Goban View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar

Joined: 09-Mar-2006
Location: Subterranea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 581 		  Quote Goban Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Dec-2006 at 05:05

Here is a big bear that went extinct 12,000 years ago in North America. Tremarctinae arctodus, aka The Short-Faced Bear.

Here one is compared with a grizzly (front) and a polar bear (middle).  Yep, he was a big one. Smile


Edited by Goban - 08-Dec-2006 at 05:06
The sharpest spoon in the drawer.
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor

Suspended

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792 		  Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Dec-2006 at 06:50
There were wild lions and tigers in iran until the last ones were killed int he 20th century.  There are still about 50 or 60 cheetahs, leopards and brown bears.
 
The lions were akin to the Indian lion with the large pom pom on their tails.
Back to Top
JanusRook View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar
Ad Maiorem Dei Gloriam

Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2419 		  Quote JanusRook Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Dec-2006 at 17:11
This criminal shows us how big polar bears are.


Whose to say he's a criminal, it seems like what he's doing is perfectly legal.....



Canada allows natives to hunt polar bears under a quota system that divides permits among native communities. However, Canada is the only nation that allows sport or trophy hunting by non-natives and non-citizens. This enables native hunters to sell their permits to sport hunters for large sums, a windfall for communities that have no other source of income.

Source: http://www.polarbearsinternational.org/bear-facts/hunting/
Economic Communist, Political Progressive, Social Conservative.

Unless otherwise noted source is wiki.
Back to Top
omshanti View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 02-Nov-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 429 		  Quote omshanti Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Dec-2006 at 18:46
JanusRook , I don't think Hellios used the word''criminal'' in a legal sense. Legality of an action alone, does not make it morally right. What do you think of this law in Canada which allows sport or trophy hunting of polar bears (who are a species on the verge of extinction) by non-natives? Do yo think this law is morally right?
I don't think so, because I don't think it is right to kill any living creature just for pleasure or sport.

Originally posted by JanusRook

That's presupposing global warming's man-made, and we can do something to stop it.I don't see a problem really with the polar bears going extinct, billions of species have done so in the history of the earth and there's always something to take it's place.

Global warming is man-made.One of the biggest reasons for global warming is the unnatural amount of CO2 gas which is caused by the pollution we human-beings create. I am sure so many other members here are able to prove that global warming is man-made. Polar bears will not be the first nor the last victims of global warming. One of the first victims of global warming was the golden toad in Costa Rica which became extinct in 1987. Please read           THIS LINK     about the golden toad. Until now other animals have paid for the mess humans make , but I am sure that if we do not take global warming seriously and don't take action , some time in the near future it would be humanity itself that will be the victim of the mess it is making.

I also don't agree with your reasoning that if there have been billions of species who have gone extinct in the past, there is no problem with one more speicies ( in this case polar bears) going extinct. It is not about which species becomes extinct and which doesn't. It is about each individual animal's life.

    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

Edited by omshanti - 09-Dec-2006 at 00:02
Back to Top
JanusRook View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar
Ad Maiorem Dei Gloriam

Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2419 		  Quote JanusRook Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Dec-2006 at 23:07

Do yo think this law is morally right?


Morality though is subjective and legality objective. Are you claiming you have a superior moral code to the man in the photo. I'm assuming he doesn't see his activities as killing a species on the brink of extinction for no reason. I've spoken to many sport hunters and they are some of the world's greatest conservationists (since if they weren't there'd be nothing to hunt.) His moral code sees it as a struggle to conquer a beast that has quite a good chance of conquering him. He is trying to prove his strength is comparable to the majestic creature. He doesn't see himself as destroying the species since, according to his logic, if he didn't kill the creature the native who sold him the pass would have.

The real question is do you believe it's morally right for natives to hunt polar bears? And if so, why do they get acceptance when the non-native doesn't?

------------------------------------------


One of the biggest reasons for global warming is the unnatural amount of CO2 gas which is caused by the pollution we human-beings create.


Actually no........


CO2 in our atmosphere has been increasing steadily for the last 18,000 years-- long before humans invented smokestacks. Unless you count campfires and intestinal gas, man played no role in the pre-industrial increases.

As illustrated in this chart of Ice Core data from the Soviet Station Vostok in Antarctica, CO2 concentrations in earth's atmosphere move with temperature. Both temperatures and CO2 have been steadily increasing for 18,000 years. Ignoring these 18,000 years of data "global warming activists" contend recent increases in atmospheric CO2 are unnatural and are the result of only 200 years or so of human pollution causing a runaway greenhouse effect.

Incidentally, earth's temperature and CO2 levels today have reached levels similar to a previous interglacial cycle of 120,000 - 140,000 years ago. From beginning to end this cycle lasted about 20,000 years. This is known as the Eemian Interglacial Period and the earth returned to a full-fledged ice age immediately afterward.

Total human contributions to greenhouse gases account for only about 0.28% of the "greenhouse effect". Anthropogenic (man-made) carbon dioxide (CO2) comprises about 0.117% of this total, and man-made sources of other gases ( methane, nitrous oxide (NOX), other misc. gases) contributes another 0.163% .

Approximately 99.72% of the "greenhouse effect" is due to natural causes -- mostly water vapor and traces of other gases, which we can do nothing at all about. Eliminating human activity altogether would have little impact on climate change.

If global warming is caused by CO2 in the atmosphere then does CO2 also cause increased sun activity too?

........ rising Earth temperatures and increasing CO2 may be "effects" and our own sun the "cause".


FUN FACTS about CARBON DIOXIDE

Of the 186 billion tons of CO2 that enter earth's atmosphere each year from all sources, only 6 billion tons are from human activity. Approximately 90 billion tons come from biologic activity in earth's oceans and another 90 billion tons from such sources as volcanoes and decaying land plants.

At 368 parts per million CO2 is a minor constituent of earth's atmosphere-- less than 4/100ths of 1% of all gases present. Compared to former geologic times, earth's current atmosphere is CO2- impoverished.

CO2 is odorless, colorless, and tasteless. Plants absorb CO2 and emit oxygen as a waste product. Humans and animals breathe oxygen and emit CO2 as a waste product. Carbon dioxide is a nutrient, not a pollutant, and all life-- plants and animals alike-- benefit from more of it. All life on earth is carbon-based and CO2 is an essential ingredient. When plant-growers want to stimulate plant growth, they introduce more carbon dioxide.

CO2 that goes into the atmosphere does not stay there but is continually recycled by terrestrial plant life and earth's oceans-- the great retirement home for most terrestrial carbon dioxide.

Source: http://www.clearlight.com/~mhieb/WVFossils/ice_ages.html


----------------------------------

It is not about which species becomes extinct and which doesn't. It is about each individual animal's life.

So each individual animal is more important than the entire biosphere? Species become extinct for various reasons and these open up niches to other organism. Whose to say that when the Polar Bear becomes extinct, say a Narwhale evolves to take it's place, or a Giant Albatross or something? What if it takes the extinction of the polar bear to allow the survival of say harp seals.

Your belief places humans outside of the natural order. Making them the obstruction in nature. I contend that humans have never left the natural order, we are still vulnerable to disease, and put into the right circumstances predators, such as the polar bear. Human beings are just doing what any other species would do, and that is survive and breed. Why should we be faulted at being good at it?

Besides animals that don't have large populations are always at risk to extinction. Humans were almost wiped out when a volcano exploded millions of years ago. Scientists believe less than a hundred individuals would have survived, meaning that we are the largest endangered species success story.
Economic Communist, Political Progressive, Social Conservative.

Unless otherwise noted source is wiki.
Back to Top
Hellios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1933 		  Quote Hellios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Dec-2006 at 03:18
I'd be more than happy to replace the word "criminal" with "idiot" or "moron".  The polar bear is an endangered animal.  Let him hunt non-endangered ones. 
 
 
 
 


Edited by Hellios - 09-Dec-2006 at 03:57
Back to Top
Hellios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1933 		  Quote Hellios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Dec-2006 at 03:49
Janus,
 
That debate is a thing of the past for most people these days.  It's already proven that mankind is aggravating global warming.  The debates these days are about how to change our impacts on it.  We all know that global warming has also occurred naturally in the past but this doesn't excuse us for aggravating it. Wink
 
 
Originally posted by JanusRook

His moral code sees it as a struggle to conquer a beast that has quite a good chance of conquering him. He is trying to prove his strength is comparable to the majestic creature. He doesn't see himself as destroying the species since, according to his logic, if he didn't kill the creature the native who sold him the pass would have.
 
Above is a fine argument when talking about non-endangered animals, but when it comes to a highly endangered ones (such as the polar bear) it's pure nonsense (sorry to say) because there are plenty of non-endangered animals that can suit his moral code. Tongue
 
 
Your point about the natives is very interesting.  I agree with you that they shouldn't get special treatment in this regard.  Good point Janus.
 
Rgds, Bill 


Edited by Hellios - 09-Dec-2006 at 09:14
Back to Top
Hellios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1933 		  Quote Hellios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Dec-2006 at 08:23
Originally posted by JanusRook

His moral code sees it as a struggle to conquer a beast that has quite a good chance of conquering him.
 
What exactly is the "struggle" in lining up such a big target in the crosshairs of a spy-scope (like his) on a long range high caliber rifle like that? and how does this give the polar bear "quite a good chance of conquering him"?
 
That guy doesn't apply to what you say; he probably has a family, big salary, mistress, etc, back home, which he isn't interested in losing; so he's just looking to have a photo of him with a dead polar bear trophy.
 
 
Originally posted by JanusRook

He is trying to prove his strength is comparable to the majestic creature.
 
Why does it have to be with an endangered one?  There are plenty of non-endangered ones for him to "prove his strength". Smile
 
 
Originally posted by JanusRook

He doesn't see himself as destroying the species since, according to his logic, if he didn't kill the creature the native who sold him the pass would have.
 
Hardly a reason to choose an endangered target instead of a non-endangered one. Wink 


Edited by Hellios - 09-Dec-2006 at 09:18
Back to Top
JanusRook View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar
Ad Maiorem Dei Gloriam

Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2419 		  Quote JanusRook Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Dec-2006 at 15:36

but this doesn't excuse us for aggravating it.


Of the 186 billion tons of CO2 that enter earth's atmosphere each year from all sources, only 6 billion tons are from human activity.

Total human contributions to greenhouse gases account for only about 0.28% of the "greenhouse effect"

Needless to say I don't see how that can effect the earth in such a profound way.


but when it comes to a highly endangered ones


There are 20,000 polar bears in the world, which means they aren't in extreme danger of going extinct. In fact the IUCN Red List, lists them as only vulnerable which is defined as:

A vulnerable species is one whose chances of extinction characterize it as threatened but not quite as endangered.


Which makes them just about as likely to go extinct as the Great White Shark.


so he's just looking to have a photo of him with a dead polar bear trophy.


Then he just has to prove to himself he's a man, slightly different moral code, kind of a sad outlook on life. But it's still a separate moral code, and he does have the right to follow that code.


Why does it have to be with an endangered one?


Get it before it's gone mentality, perhaps?


Hardly a reason to choose an endangered target instead of a non-endangered one.


Again see above for reasons, I personally don't think they're good ones, which is why I don't hunt.  But I don't think people should be judged on killing animals because it's "too easy". Since nature has endowed us with the capacity to hunt that way. Also I don't think people should be judged on killing merely for trophies, since another animal, cats also do that. Anyone that's ever owned cats knows that sometimes in the morning you'll find a dead mouse or bird on your front door, that proves how much of a "man" your cat is.
Economic Communist, Political Progressive, Social Conservative.

Unless otherwise noted source is wiki.
Back to Top
Ponce de Leon View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar
Lonce De Peon

Joined: 11-Jan-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2967 		  Quote Ponce de Leon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Dec-2006 at 16:01
just a question for all animal and non-animal lovers. Would anybody have a problem if the mosquito became extinct?
    

Edited by Ponce de Leon - 09-Dec-2006 at 16:03
Back to Top
Hellios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1933 		  Quote Hellios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Dec-2006 at 16:31
Originally posted by JanusRook

Needless to say I don't see how that can effect the earth in such a profound way.
 
We can spend all day throwing contradicting numbers at each other. Smile LOL
What I see is a growing number of high-level debates & actions on an issue you don't consider a real concern.
 
 
Originally posted by JanusRook

they aren't in extreme danger of going extinct.
 
Yes, they are. Tongue
 
 
Originally posted by JanusRook

Get it before it's gone mentality, perhaps?
 
LOL
 
 
Originally posted by JanusRook

Again see above for reasons, I personally don't think they're good ones, which is why I don't hunt.  But I don't think people should be judged on killing animals because it's "too easy". Since nature has endowed us with the capacity to hunt that way. Also I don't think people should be judged on killing merely for trophies, since another animal, cats also do that. Anyone that's ever owned cats knows that sometimes in the morning you'll find a dead mouse or bird on your front door, that proves how much of a "man" your cat is.
 
I respect your refusal to judge people who's reasoning you don't agree with. Smile


Edited by Hellios - 09-Dec-2006 at 16:32
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 23456 7>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.