Philosophy Now Forum

They're not hurting anyone.

Feds propose changes to allow more bald eagle deaths

http://www.9news.com/news/feds-propose- ... /262456433

Walker wrote:They're not hurting anyone.

Feds propose changes to allow more bald eagle deaths

http://www.9news.com/news/feds-propose- ... /262456433

I favor the change. The article says:

"But, U-S Fish and Wildlife Director Dan Ashe has said the change will spur development of pollution-free energy and reduce the nation's dependency on fossil fuels."

Not only does this help humankind, I believe it helps all kinds of life (including eagles).

PhilX

By the reasoning you quoted, wishful thinking justifies killing eagles.

The practicality of windmills is wishful thinking. This is why the industrial revolution replaced wind power.

What if wishful thinking determines that a certain number of human deaths are acceptable for a rosy future.

Oh, wait a minute …

Wishful thinking for the future is sometimes the determinate of irrevocable death in the present, but always for another individual eagle than the rule-writer.

Hummm.

People can find other ways to turn on their little machines without erecting irresponsible totem poles across the landscape, worshiping the goodness of the weather and themselves.

Walker wrote:By the reasoning you quoted, wishful thinking justifies killing eagles.

The practicality of windmills is wishful thinking. This is why the industrial revolution replaced wind power.

What if wishful thinking determines that a certain number of human deaths are acceptable for a rosy future.

Oh, wait a minute …

Wishful thinking for the future is sometimes the determinate of irrevocable death in the present, but always for another individual eagle than the rule-writer.

Hummm.

People can find other ways to turn on their little machines without erecting irresponsible totem poles across the landscape, worshiping the goodness of the weather and themselves.

Wishful thinking you say. You seem to have a pessimistic view of government. Let me know when you come up with hard evidence as to how many more eagles would die under the proposed changes. And btw, I don't equate animal life with human life as humans do care - can you say the same about animals?

PhilX

You gents had to import eagles from Canada, because you killed most of them. Same as buffalo. We had to take in your retired cavalry horses because you were going to slaughter them as useless.

Dalek Prime wrote:You gents had to import eagles from Canada, because you killed most of them. Same as buffalo. We had to take in your retired cavalry horses because you were going to slaughter them as useless.

Every case should be judged on its merits. I often find in these discussions that important points are overlooked due to prejudice and other reasons.

PhilX

Walker wrote:They're not hurting anyone.

Feds propose changes to allow more bald eagle deaths

http://www.9news.com/news/feds-propose- ... /262456433

Thanks for the "4thJuly Sale Day advertisement' and the grotty Channel9 website jam-packed with phishing sites and advertisements for morons.
It occurs to me that the very existence of the society that insists on this crass and overbearing consumerism can't at the same time afford to preserve the environment which sustains the American Bald Eagle.

The USA needs to at least try to join up the fucking dots.

Dalek Prime wrote:You gents had to import eagles from Canada, because you killed most of them. Same as buffalo. We had to take in your retired cavalry horses because you were going to slaughter them as useless.

Canada needs to build a wall against the USA. All those who can't afford health insurance, bringing their diseases into Canada - you might need to build it high to stop the poisonous air too.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Walker wrote:They're not hurting anyone.

Feds propose changes to allow more bald eagle deaths

http://www.9news.com/news/feds-propose- ... /262456433

Thanks for the "4thJuly Sale Day advertisement' and the grotty Channel9 website jam-packed with phishing sites and advertisements for morons.
It occurs to me that the very existence of the society that insists on this crass and overbearing consumerism can't at the same time afford to preserve the environment which sustains the American Bald Eagle.

The USA needs to at least try to join up the fucking dots.

Sorry about that. My machine has built up an immunity to that stuff over the years, or else there might be an advertisement blocker in there somewhere.

Dalek Prime wrote:You gents had to import eagles from Canada, because you killed most of them. Same as buffalo. We had to take in your retired cavalry horses because you were going to slaughter them as useless.

Buffaloes are in Asia.

Bison are in North America.

Buffalo sounds cooler though. Bison Bill lacks panache.

Philosophy Explorer wrote:

Walker wrote:By the reasoning you quoted, wishful thinking justifies killing eagles.

The practicality of windmills is wishful thinking. This is why the industrial revolution replaced wind power.

What if wishful thinking determines that a certain number of human deaths are acceptable for a rosy future.

Oh, wait a minute …

Wishful thinking for the future is sometimes the determinate of irrevocable death in the present, but always for another individual eagle than the rule-writer.

Hummm.

People can find other ways to turn on their little machines without erecting irresponsible totem poles across the landscape, worshiping the goodness of the weather and themselves.

Wishful thinking you say. You seem to have a pessimistic view of government. Let me know when you come up with hard evidence as to how many more eagles would die under the proposed changes. And btw, I don't equate animal life with human life as humans do care - can you say the same about animals?

PhilX

Let me know when you have a better rebuttal.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Walker wrote:They're not hurting anyone.

Feds propose changes to allow more bald eagle deaths

http://www.9news.com/news/feds-propose- ... /262456433

Thanks for the "4thJuly Sale Day advertisement' and the grotty Channel9 website jam-packed with phishing sites and advertisements for morons.
It occurs to me that the very existence of the society that insists on this crass and overbearing consumerism can't at the same time afford to preserve the environment which sustains the American Bald Eagle.

The USA needs to at least try to join up the fucking dots.

Walker wrote:

Philosophy Explorer wrote:

Walker wrote:By the reasoning you quoted, wishful thinking justifies killing eagles.

The practicality of windmills is wishful thinking. This is why the industrial revolution replaced wind power.

What if wishful thinking determines that a certain number of human deaths are acceptable for a rosy future.

Oh, wait a minute …

Wishful thinking for the future is sometimes the determinate of irrevocable death in the present, but always for another individual eagle than the rule-writer.

Hummm.

People can find other ways to turn on their little machines without erecting irresponsible totem poles across the landscape, worshiping the goodness of the weather and themselves.

Wishful thinking you say. You seem to have a pessimistic view of government. Let me know when you come up with evidence as to how many more eagles would die under the proposed changes. And btw, I don't equate animal life with human life as humans do care - can you say the same about animals?

PhilX

Let me know when you have a better rebuttal.

Rebutt what? You haven't said anything to rebutt in this post.

PhilX

'Bison Bill' sounds quite good actually. Anyway, the murdering prik doesn't deserve a pet name.

Walker wrote:

Dalek Prime wrote:You gents had to import eagles from Canada, because you killed most of them. Same as buffalo. We had to take in your retired cavalry horses because you were going to slaughter them as useless.

Buffaloes are in Asia.

Bison are in North America.

Buffalo sounds cooler though. Bison Bill lacks panache.

Sadly Americans don't know the difference.

Like where the fuck did Buffalo Bill live? Singapore?