 | | Re: Responsible Hunting (was Re: We are what we eat. Or is that "whom we eat?") —Dave Schuler
|
| | | (...) I think you're referring to my earlier comment about "being prey to bacteria," by which I was being (in retrospect) unclearly rhetorical. I would say that prey can be defined as an animal consumed by a predator, while a predator is an animal (...) (24 years ago, 31-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Responsible Hunting (was Re: We are what we eat. Or is that "whom we eat?") —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | (...) they (...) So humans (at least Bangladeshis) are prey too? Because they are hunted sometimes by predators. How's this: In addition to being prey, deer are a great many other things, and I don't think that their happenstance role as prey in the (...) (24 years ago, 31-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Responsible Hunting (was Re: We are what we eat. Or is that "whom we eat?") —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | (...) Absolutely! Just as I would be prey if I slept unprotected on the veldt, and just as the poor guy a few weeks ago (in Canada? I can't remember) who was eaten by a bear. (...) Being prey doesn't preclude being other things, too. Many predators (...) (24 years ago, 31-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Responsible Hunting (was Re: We are what we eat. Or is that "whom we eat?") —Tom Stangl
|
| | | | (...) Handled below... (...) That's assuming deer HAVE that complex of a longterm memory (as opposed to spacial memory maps of the best places to eat, and instinct for a certain breeding grounds they've never been to before). (...) Nope - that can (...) (24 years ago, 5-Aug-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Responsible Hunting (was Re: We are what we eat. Or is that "whom we eat?") —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | (...) doesn't (...) season. (...) Absolutely. And I could be wrong. But in many ways it seems safer to assume similarity than difference. (...) ivy? (...) Agreed, but I'm not sure it's that simple. (...) Right. You're not going to change, and I'm (...) (24 years ago, 5-Aug-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Responsible Hunting (was Re: We are what we eat. Or is that "whom we eat?") —Tom Stangl
|
| | | | (...) OK, I should have stated "giving SOME animals". I agree with the above, obviously some animals are quite intelligent. But I certainly don't put deer, fowl, or beef cattle in their ranks. (...) Bull. All rules can be broken (except some (...) (24 years ago, 5-Aug-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Responsible Hunting (was Re: We are what we eat. Or is that "whom we eat?") —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | (...) obviously (...) beef (...) OK, my bad. I had been using the deer (even prior to your entry into the discussion) as an icon for the other animals in general. that was sloppy of me. I am willing to disucuss any given animal's capabilities (...) (24 years ago, 6-Aug-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Responsible Hunting —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | (...) Out of curiosity, how is this determined, other than by casual observation? And how broad a range of behaviors do the chickens exhibit? This would seem central to a useful discussion of chicken intelligence. By the way, is your use of (...) (24 years ago, 7-Aug-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Responsible Hunting —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | (...) clearly (...) that (...) Hi, I'm out of town and this is likely to be my last access to the net until Monday or Tuesday, so I'm a bit behind. In backward order: It was not a subtle propoganda on my part, but now that it's pointed out, I think (...) (24 years ago, 9-Aug-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
