login info join!
This thread was locked on 2013-06-07 07:01:31. Reason: Soapbox is closed. Please don't use other forums as a replacement.
Forums > Off-Topic Discussion > Massive shark caught - rant Search   Reply
12last
Photographer
Lumatic
Posts: 13,591
Chicago, Illinois, US


"An 11-foot-long mako shark, weighing in at 1,323.5 pounds, is no tall tale. The shark, caught off the southern California coast, was reeled in by Jason Johnston of Mesquite, Texas, and its size might be a world record."

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/ma … .html?vp=1

I hate shit like this.

New world record, epic battle, dude could have died if something went wrong, blah blah blah.  FUCK THAT.  Now this magnificent beast is a trophy, and its death was entirely unnecessary, opportunity for study notwithstanding. 

This guy had no business out there but to find something to kill.  It wasn't like he needed to defend himself, or that he's going to eat it or anything.  This is nothing but pure, wanton, cowardly destruction.  Evil, to put it bluntly.  Oh but look, it's a new world record, ISN'T THAT GREAT?

Goddamn people and their egos.  Anyone who thinks killing an animal for sport is something to celebrate just because it was a "challenge" has no understanding of life at all, much less any respect for it.

Now ask me how I really feel.

/rant
Jun 04 13 10:14 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
T-D-L
Posts: 9,981
Los Angeles, California, US


Just curious, but if he ate it would you feel better?
Jun 04 13 10:15 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Lumatic
Posts: 13,591
Chicago, Illinois, US


T-D-L wrote:
Just curious, but if he ate it would you feel better?

This isn't a question of "if."  He wasn't out there to find food.

Jun 04 13 10:20 pm  Link  Quote 
Makeup Artist
Angie_ Hair_ and Makeup
Posts: 39
Saint Cloud, Florida, US


Lumatic wrote:

This isn't a question of "if."  He wasn't out there to find food.

can't answer the question?

Jun 04 13 10:27 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
T-D-L
Posts: 9,981
Los Angeles, California, US


Lumatic wrote:
This isn't a question of "if."  He wasn't out there to find food.

*shrug*

It was donated to research. 

Mako's aren't endangered. 

While I think you should eat what you kill, I'm not going to lose any sleep over a common fish.

Jun 04 13 10:27 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Lumatic
Posts: 13,591
Chicago, Illinois, US


Angie_ Hair_ and Makeup wrote:

can't answer the question?

No.  I'm not bullshitting over hypotheticals, I'm talking about reality.

Lumatic wrote:
Anyone who thinks killing an animal for sport is something to celebrate just because it was a "challenge" has no understanding of life at all, much less any respect for it.

That's what happened, period.

Jun 04 13 10:29 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Lumatic
Posts: 13,591
Chicago, Illinois, US


T-D-L wrote:
*shrug*

It was donated to research. 

Mako's aren't endangered. 

While I think you should eat what you kill, I'm not going to lose any sleep over a common fish.

Sure, fine.

That has nothing to do with my rant, though.  I'm talking about people, not just one mako shark.

It wouldn't have been donated to research if it wasn't dead.

There are plenty of living things that aren't endangered.  Does that mean they should all be hunted and killed for sport?

Respect for life is respect for life.  Respect for some life is something else entirely, and that's evidently the popular approach.

Jun 04 13 10:31 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Tony Lawrence
Posts: 18,891
Chicago, Illinois, US


http://www.ehow.com/info_8161388_endang … shark.html

I'm with the OP.   Why kill anything for sport.   We hunted the poor Dodo bird into extinction.   Isn't it enough that we poison our seas?   I guess not.
Jun 04 13 10:52 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Lumatic
Posts: 13,591
Chicago, Illinois, US


Tony Lawrence wrote:
http://www.ehow.com/info_8161388_endang … shark.html

I'm with the OP.   Why kill anything for sport.   We hunted the poor Dodo bird into extinction.   Isn't it enough that we poison our seas?   I guess not.

Thank you, Tony.

As I said, no understanding.  We can do so much, yet so often, it doesn't even occur to consider the ramifications of what we do.  We behave as if there were none, and act because we can without considering whether or not we should.

I constantly marvel at how we're capable of such creative good and destructive evil simultaneously.  And I maintain that, as a species, we have survived up to this point in spite of our shortcomings rather than because of our advantages.

I also see that as a finite condition, which is why I take seemingly larger issues like... oh, I don't know... life... personally.  To me, this isn't an isolated incident involving one big shark.  I am protective of animals because I see the anthropocentric view of the world as a big problem.

Jun 04 13 11:23 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
John Jebbia
Posts: 27,560
Phoenix, Arizona, US


T-D-L wrote:
*shrug*

It was donated to research. 

Mako's aren't endangered. 

While I think you should eat what you kill, I'm not going to lose any sleep over a common fish.

I agree with the OP. I like fishing as much as the next guy. But I eat what I kill. People aren't endangered either..

Jun 04 13 11:55 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
John Jebbia
Posts: 27,560
Phoenix, Arizona, US


Lumatic wrote:
Thank you, Tony.

As I said, no understanding.  We can do so much, yet so often, it doesn't even occur to consider the ramifications of what we do.  We behave as if there were none, and act because we can without considering whether or not we should.

I constantly marvel at how we're capable of such creative good and destructive evil simultaneously.  And I maintain that, as a species, we have survived up to this point in spite of our shortcomings rather than because of our advantages.

I also see that as a finite condition, which is why I take seemingly larger issues like... oh, I don't know... life... personally.  To me, this isn't an isolated incident involving one big shark.  I am protective of animals because I see the anthropocentric view of the world as a big problem.

I remember a few years ago I read a story about the oldest known living creature was caught. I forget what it was. A lobster or something. When they found it, they killed it.

250 yrs or something like that and along came us.

Jun 04 13 11:57 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
John Jebbia
Posts: 27,560
Phoenix, Arizona, US


Found it.. it was a clam. 450yrs..

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,306076,00.html
Jun 04 13 11:59 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
T-D-L
Posts: 9,981
Los Angeles, California, US


John Jebbia wrote:
I agree with the OP. I like fishing as much as the next guy. But I eat what I kill. People aren't endangered either..

Like I said earlier, I too think you should hunt to eat...but I'm not understanding the need to rant considering it's.....wait for it....a fish.  One of probably hundreds of thousands, that is in no danger of becoming extinct.  It's a big fish....I get it.  But where was the rant about the gator hunters in the southeast?  They kill some rather large creatures.  Or the rant about the leather belt/shoe industry?  To kill for vanity is just as bad as to kill for a trophy right?  Shit...I'm willing to bet the OP owns a couple leather items of clothing lol.  If the situation were different and we were down to a couple hundred or so Makos?  Then sure, rant away.  Join the WWF or something....but it's not.  I don't see the need to rant and get your blood pressure up is all I'm saying.

Jun 04 13 11:59 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Lumatic
Posts: 13,591
Chicago, Illinois, US


John Jebbia wrote:

I remember a few years ago I read a story about the oldest known living creature was caught. I forget what it was. A lobster or something. When they found it, they killed it.

250 yrs or something like that and along came us.

Exactly.  Quite an accomplishment, wouldn't you say?  Go us.

The issue here isn't just animals, it's that we don't understand life and all that it entails.  So we treat the Earth from that limited perspective.  It's the same whether it's a 250 year-old lobster, a centuries-old tree or a mountain that's sat there for an age until it got in the way of "progress."

D.T. Suzuki once compared a haiku by Basho with a poem by Lord Alfred Tennyson because they were essentially two poems about a flower that reflected two very different approaches to nature.  Basho simply celebrated the flower as he noticed it there.  Tennyson killed his flower by pulling it out by its roots, holding it in his hand so he could try to understand "what God and man is" through his intellectual contemplation of it.

And there you have it, the perfect representation of this conversation.  We view the world as something to serve our needs at any cost to our environment.

No. understanding. whatsoever.

Jun 05 13 12:25 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Lumatic
Posts: 13,591
Chicago, Illinois, US


T-D-L wrote:
Like I said earlier, I too think you should hunt to eat...but I'm not understanding the need to rant considering it's.....wait for it....a fish.  One of probably hundreds of thousands, that is in no danger of becoming extinct.  It's a big fish....I get it.  But where was the rant about the gator hunters in the southeast?  They kill some rather large creatures.  Or the rant about the leather belt/shoe industry?  To kill for vanity is just as bad as to kill for a trophy right?  Shit...I'm willing to bet the OP owns a couple leather items of clothing lol.  If the situation were different and we were down to a couple hundred or so Makos?  Then sure, rant away.  Join the WWF or something....but it's not.  I don't see the need to rant and get your blood pressure up is all I'm saying.

You want me to post every time an animal is killed needlessly, or wait until it's on some endangered list, in order for the point to be valid, is that it?

This isn't a new thing.  The fact that I have leather shoes or that I eat meat isn't the issue, which... again... is not about the big fish.  It isn't about killing one thing or another. 

What set me off about the story was that this is being touted as some great accomplishment, and that it's indicative of the larger issue that we completely suck in our attitude towards the only home we've got, which includes everything in it.

Once more, for emphasis:

Lumatic wrote:
Anyone who thinks killing an animal for sport is something to celebrate just because it was a "challenge" has no understanding of life at all, much less any respect for it.

I guess I don't really know how to make that any clearer.  *shrug*

Jun 05 13 12:44 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Amul La La
Posts: 708
Plymouth, England, United Kingdom


Never made it right, people, animals, things are killed everyday, I'm sure sadly most people have become accustomed to hearing about such atrocities on a near daily basis, again doesn't make it right, but who's ever in the right to kill someone or something, 
I'll hedge my bets and say not many.
Jun 05 13 01:22 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Lumatic
Posts: 13,591
Chicago, Illinois, US


Amul La La wrote:
Never made it right, people, animals, things are killed everyday, I'm sure sadly most people have become accustomed to hearing about such atrocities on a near daily basis, again doesn't make it right, but who's ever in the right to kill someone or something, 
I'll hedge my bets and say not many.

I think that's fair to say.  I should mention that I don't harbor some childish fantasy that nothing should die.  That's not any more natural than hunting for sport is.

Among many cultures that depend on the land, it's common for their hunters to say a little prayer when they kill.  Something along the lines of, "Thank you for giving your life so that I may eat, brother."

That's respect for life and the connection of things, even when it involves a kill.

"Civilization" calls those people things like "savage" and "unintelligent."

Jun 05 13 01:42 am  Link  Quote 
guide forum
Photographer
Robb Mann
Posts: 9,515
Baltimore, Maryland, US


Normally these sport fishermen pay fees for permits/licenses to go and catch non-endangered species of fish. These fees go towards protecting endangered species.
Jun 05 13 02:40 am  Link  Quote 
Model
Rachel-Elise
Posts: 1,650
Grand Rapids, Michigan, US


Lumatic wrote:

Exactly.  Quite an accomplishment, wouldn't you say?  Go us.

The issue here isn't just animals, it's that we don't understand life and all that it entails.  So we treat the Earth from that limited perspective.  It's the same whether it's a 250 year-old lobster, a centuries-old tree or a mountain that's sat there for an age until it got in the way of "progress."

D.T. Suzuki once compared a haiku by Basho with a poem by Lord Alfred Tennyson because they were essentially two poems about a flower that reflected two very different approaches to nature.  Basho simply celebrated the flower as he noticed it there.  Tennyson killed his flower by pulling it out by its roots, holding it in his hand so he could try to understand "what God and man is" through his intellectual contemplation of it.

And there you have it, the perfect representation of this conversation.  We view the world as something to serve our needs at any cost to our environment.

No. understanding. whatsoever.

Exactly. I agree with this and the OP.

Also... I love Dr. Suzuki. He really knows what's going on! I got to meet and spend a decent amount of time with him once, about a zillion years ago, and it's one of the days of my life that I remember the most clearly. Amazing.

Jun 05 13 03:00 am  Link  Quote 
Model
Rachel-Elise
Posts: 1,650
Grand Rapids, Michigan, US


Lumatic wrote:

I think that's fair to say.  I should mention that I don't harbor some childish fantasy that nothing should die.  That's not any more natural than hunting for sport is.

Among many cultures that depend on the land, it's common for their hunters to say a little prayer when they kill.  Something along the lines of, "Thank you for giving your life so that I may eat, brother."

That's respect for life and the connection of things, even when it involves a kill.

"Civilization" calls those people things like "savage" and "unintelligent."

Also this. Heck, my family in MI hunts for food, and I'm pretty sure they all do daily and nightly prayer together, all relating to the hunt, giving thanks, etc. (I never personally joined the hunt, but being in a hunting family, you come to know what goes on at the camp.)

Jun 05 13 03:03 am  Link  Quote 
Model
Kelli
Posts: 23,967
Toronto, Ontario, Canada


One time a guy was bragging to me that he tortured a squirrel to death. I got pissed off about it and another guy tried to make me feel better by saying, " Toronto is over-populated with squirrels anyways. " I told him " Toronto is also over-populated with assholes, what should we do about that? "
Jun 05 13 03:05 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Prolens Photography
Posts: 470
Fullerton, California, US


Kelli wrote:
One time a guy was bragging to me that he tortured a squirrel to death. I got pissed off about it and another guy tried to make me feel better by saying, " Toronto is over-populated with squirrels anyways. " I told him " Toronto is also over-populated with assholes, what should we do about that? "

I like this person, just for her above words!

Jun 05 13 03:10 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Allen Carbon
Posts: 763
Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand


Robb Mann wrote:
Normally these sport fishermen pay fees for permits/licenses to go and catch non-endangered species of fish. These fees go towards protecting endangered species.

+1 From experience, people like them have so much respect for sea life that they are usually the forerunners of  wildlife protection. It's not as black and white as some people may claim it to be.

Lumatic wrote:
That has nothing to do with my rant, though.  I'm talking about people, not just one mako shark.

It wouldn't have been donated to research if it wasn't dead.

There are plenty of living things that aren't endangered.  Does that mean they should all be hunted and killed for sport?

You can't just dismiss your initial thought when you are too stumped to come up with an answer and just say that it had nothing to do with your initial argument.


and are you so close minded to underestimate the power of research? seriously?

Jun 05 13 03:26 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Lumatic
Posts: 13,591
Chicago, Illinois, US


Allen Carbon wrote:
You can't just dismiss your initial thought when you are too stumped to come up with an answer and just say that it had nothing to do with your initial argument.


and are you so close minded to underestimate the power of research? seriously?

Are you serious?

There are oceanographers, biologists and research vessels all over the world that exist for that purpose.  I know one of them personally.  This had nothing to do with any of that, it was a sports fisherman out to make a kill who is now celebrated for his luck. 

I said "opportunity for study notwithstanding."  I guess you don't know what that means, so I'll explain.  The fact that the shark will be submitted for research, after the fact, has nothing to do with my argument, initial or otherwise.  Therefore, your misinterpretation of my initial argument does not equal a dismissal of my initial argument.  Read it again if you missed it, because I'm getting tired of repeating it.

My refusal to answer a hypothetical question - which also had nothing to do with research, which is what you're on about - is no indication of any kind that I'm stumped.  I'm crystal clear about what I'm saying, while you evidently would prefer to fixate on straw man arguments. 

I would appreciate it if you'd employ a little reading comprehension before taking such a condescending tone.

Jun 05 13 03:48 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Lumatic
Posts: 13,591
Chicago, Illinois, US


Kelli wrote:
One time a guy was bragging to me that he tortured a squirrel to death. I got pissed off about it and another guy tried to make me feel better by saying, " Toronto is over-populated with squirrels anyways. " I told him " Toronto is also over-populated with assholes, what should we do about that? "

lol

Jun 05 13 03:48 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Lumatic
Posts: 13,591
Chicago, Illinois, US


Rachel-Elise  wrote:
Also... I love Dr. Suzuki. He really knows what's going on! I got to meet and spend a decent amount of time with him once, about a zillion years ago, and it's one of the days of my life that I remember the most clearly. Amazing.

I'll bet it was!  Very cool.

Jun 05 13 03:49 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Allen Carbon
Posts: 763
Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand


Lumatic wrote:
Are you serious?

There are oceanographers, biologists and research vessels all over the world that exist for that purpose.  I know one of them personally.  This had nothing to do with any of that, it was a sports fisherman out to make a kill who is now celebrated for his luck. 

I said "opportunity for study notwithstanding."  I guess you don't know what that means, so I'll explain.  The fact that the shark will be submitted for research, after the fact, has nothing to do with my argument, initial or otherwise.  Therefore, your misinterpretation of my initial argument does not equal a dismissal of my initial argument.  Read it again if you missed it, because I'm getting tired of repeating it.

My refusal to answer a hypothetical question - which also had nothing to do with research, which is what you're on about - is no indication of any kind that I'm stumped.  I'm crystal clear about what I'm saying, while you evidently would prefer to fixate on straw man arguments.

I would appreciate it if you'd employ a little reading comprehension before taking such a condescending tone.

ha. What a terrible rebuttal. Anyone who just resorts to attacking and defending ones syntax and grammar - "employ comprehension" - is just plain childish. Honestly, your rhetoric sounds great. It really does. But it holds no weight.

The Fish was put to good use. Fishermen like them pay permits and are usually on the front end of fish and sealife preservation. Donation of Fish like that is such a crucial and important part of study.
You can't just spout names like oceanographers and just say that they are enough.
You know one of them personally? Great. So do I. Many of them. and they are all avid fishermen.
People who exist to merely criticise what fishermen do usually have never actually been on a boat let alone touch a live fish before.

And by the way, get it right.
The sport isn't the kill. The sport is the catch
A popular and practised procedure is to catch and release.
Noone just kills for the sake of killing and dumps the body down the sea.
The only reason any fisherman would kill is 1, for the meat and 2 for the research.

So maybe go into a boat, do some of your own research, before you put your judgement on a group of people.

Jun 05 13 04:39 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Lumatic
Posts: 13,591
Chicago, Illinois, US


Allen Carbon wrote:

ha. What a terrible rebuttal. Anyone who just resorts to attacking and defending ones syntax and grammar - "employ comprehension" - is just plain childish. Honestly, your rhetoric sounds great. It really does. But it holds no weight.

Give me a break, dude.  You just focused on the smallest possible point in the whole post, just as you are in the thread. 

Come up with some substance and maybe I can actually make a rebuttal.  So far, all you've suggested is "but research is good!!"

"It was donated to research" is a straw man argument, and nothing I've said dismisses the power of research.  I'm talking about respect for life and you want to sit there and bullshit about nothing.

Jun 05 13 04:49 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Allen Carbon
Posts: 763
Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand


Lumatic wrote:

Give me a break, dude.  You just focused on the smallest possible point in the whole post, just as you are in the thread. 

Come up with some substance and maybe I can actually make a rebuttal.  So far, all you've suggested is "but research is good!!"

"It was donated to research" is a straw man argument, and nothing I've said dismisses the power of research.  I'm talking about respect for life and you want to sit there and bullshit about nothing.

meh. yeah if you are going to quote someone. maybe do it properly? So you just ignore the second half of my post? great job.

and by the way. it wasn't the smallest possible point of the post. It was 3 paragraphs of your OP.

Jun 05 13 04:51 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Michael Kerrek
Posts: 1,350
Orlando, Florida, US


They are, by far, not an endangered species. The body was donated to science. They pay fees and fishing licenses, which go to conservation efforts for those fish that actually need protecting.

And... cowardly destruction? Please. It's a 1300 pound, 11 foot long killing machine. Taking that thing on was ballsy as hell. The fact that it was done without any fatalities is slightly amazing.

I bet you think PETA saves animals.
Jun 05 13 05:23 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Allen Carbon
Posts: 763
Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand


Michael Kerrek wrote:
I bet you think PETA saves animals.

Honestly. I would call double standards if he supports PETA.

Jun 05 13 05:28 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Tony Lawrence
Posts: 18,891
Chicago, Illinois, US


Allen Carbon wrote:

ha. What a terrible rebuttal. Anyone who just resorts to attacking and defending ones syntax and grammar - "employ comprehension" - is just plain childish. Honestly, your rhetoric sounds great. It really does. But it holds no weight.

The Fish was put to good use. Fishermen like them pay permits and are usually on the front end of fish and sealife preservation. Donation of Fish like that is such a crucial and important part of study.
You can't just spout names like oceanographers and just say that they are enough.
You know one of them personally? Great. So do I. Many of them. and they are all avid fishermen.
People who exist to merely criticise what fishermen do usually have never actually been on a boat let alone touch a live fish before.

And by the way, get it right.
The sport isn't the kill. The sport is the catch
A popular and practised procedure is to catch and release.
Noone just kills for the sake of killing and dumps the body down the sea.
The only reason any fisherman would kill is 1, for the meat and 2 for the research.

So maybe go into a boat, do some of your own research, before you put your judgement on a group of people.

I don't think most people would see this the same way if it were a seal or dolphin.   Sharks, fuc% 'em.   That's just not the right attitude in my view and no I don't have to be a fisherman to understand that.   Your view was one used by people who used to hunt down and kill elephants and rhinos and lions for example.   Since you don't know everyone who fishes how can you speak to everyone's motivations?   This isn't SB but there were people in years past in this country who would pose with the people they killed.   In fact some of our soldiers did so  recently.   Its disgusting.   Yep, I'm judging them.

Jun 05 13 05:32 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Allen Carbon
Posts: 763
Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand


Tony Lawrence wrote:
I don't think most people would see this the same way if it were a seal or dolphin.   Sharks, fuc% 'em.   That's just not the right attitude in my view and no I don't have to be a fisherman to understand that.   Your view was one used by people who used to hunt down and kill elephants and rhinos and lions for example.   Since you don't know everyone who fishes how can you speak to everyone's motivations?   This isn't SB but there were people in years past in this country who would pose with the people they killed.   In fact some of our soldiers did so  recently.   Its disgusting.   Yep, I'm judging them.

1. Fishing and killing seals and dolphins are not the same. They aren't fish. You can't fish something that's not a fish. It's like bringing killing tigers into the equation. In fact it is, they are mammals.
2. No, my view was not at all the view of the people who killed elephants and rhinos.
Give me one shred of evidence that even remotely supports that. Otherwise it is just shallow accusations.

Jun 05 13 05:36 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Jirrupin
Posts: 1,742
Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia


anyone that's too upset on this should go check out pangeaseed.org, they do some worthwhile stuff.. (and also have really cool merchandise)
Jun 05 13 05:37 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Lumatic
Posts: 13,591
Chicago, Illinois, US


Allen Carbon wrote:
meh. yeah if you are going to quote someone. maybe do it properly? So you just ignore the second half of my post? great job.

and by the way. it wasn't the smallest possible point of the post. It was 3 paragraphs of your OP.

Oh, so now you're the expert on syntax, huh?  Good job.  It's called paraphrasing.  Once again, reading comprehension.

Calling me out on not answering the second half of your post, which wasn't there until you edited in?  Nice, you got me again.

Each of the three paragraphs of my OP are there for one purpose - to support the concluding one.  Maybe you don't know, but making a point involves a beginning, a middle and an end.  One more time, all together now... READING COMPREHENSION.

So let's talk about your edit, and about your accusations.  I spent half my childhood on boats.  There were trophies on the walls, dinners on the table and stories about catch-and-releases so you'd think Jonah himself was telling the tale.  So take your own advice.

First of all, how many stuffed marlins are there available for research? 

Second of all, I don't give a shit what you say the sport is, I've seen sports fishing with the goal of acquiring a trophy, so don't hand out some high and mighty crap that killing is only for meat or research.  You're wrong, period.  And yeah, I can say that.  Who am I going to believe - you throwing a tantrum about it, or my own eyes?

Third, tell you what - YOU have a gaff shoved through your jaw and see how you like it.

Now that that's out of the way... SO WHAT?  My point...for the last time... is that this animal died at the hands of this guy - this sweet little innocent sports fisherguy that I'm so cruelly persecuting, according to you - and the problem I have with it is....

....ready?

....the shark would not be dead (and on its way to be researched, what a stroke of luck eh?) if it wasn't for the sport, and its death is cause for celebration because of its size.....

ERGO: NO UNDERSTANDING OR RESPECT FOR LIFE.

That is not the same as saying that there are no benefits to research.  But research was not EVER the point of that fishing trip.  It's a byproduct of the sport, and to rationalize the deaths of animals resulting from the sport like some sort of goodwill ambassador is utter bullshit.

But I suppose I shouldn't expect any more from you, because your attitude towards life is precisely what this thread is about, evidently.

Jun 05 13 05:44 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Lumatic
Posts: 13,591
Chicago, Illinois, US


Michael Kerrek wrote:
And... cowardly destruction? Please. It's a 1300 pound, 11 foot long killing machine. Taking that thing on was ballsy as hell. The fact that it was done without any fatalities is slightly amazing.

I bet you think PETA saves animals.

Great.  Get in the water with it then next time.

You lose the bet.  What do you owe me?  tongue

Jun 05 13 05:45 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Lumatic
Posts: 13,591
Chicago, Illinois, US


Allen Carbon wrote:
1. Fishing and killing seals and dolphins are not the same. They aren't fish. You can't fish something that's not a fish. It's like bringing killing tigers into the equation. In fact it is, they are mammals.
2. No, my view was not at all the view of the people who killed elephants and rhinos.
Give me one shred of evidence that even remotely supports that. Otherwise it is just shallow accusations.

Minutia, immaterial.  You love semantics, don't you?

This is my point, exactly:

Lumatic wrote:
Respect for life is respect for life.  Respect for some life is something else entirely, and that's evidently the popular approach.

Jun 05 13 05:57 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Allen Carbon
Posts: 763
Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand


Lumatic wrote:
Oh, so now you're the expert on syntax, huh?  Good job.  It's called paraphrasing.  Once again, reading comprehension.

Calling me out on not answering the second half of your post, which wasn't there until you edited in?  Nice, you got me again.

Each of the three paragraphs of my OP are there for one purpose - to support the concluding one.  Maybe you don't know, but making a point involves a beginning, a middle and an end.  One more time, all together now... READING COMPREHENSION.

So let's talk about your edit, and about your accusations.  I spent half my childhood on boats.  There were trophies on the walls, dinners on the table and stories about catch-and-releases so you'd think Jonah himself was telling the tale.  So take your own advice.

First of all, how many stuffed marlins are there available for research? 

Second of all, I don't give a shit what you say the sport is, I've seen sports fishing with the goal of acquiring a trophy, so don't hand out some high and mighty crap that killing is only for meat or research.  You're wrong, period.  And yeah, I can say that.  Who am I going to believe - you throwing a tantrum about it, or my own eyes?

Third, tell you what - YOU have a gaff shoved through your jaw and see how you like it.

Now that that's out of the way... SO WHAT?  My point...for the last time... is that this animal died at the hands of this guy - this sweet little innocent sports fisherguy that I'm so cruelly persecuting, according to you - and the problem I have with it is....

....ready?

....the shark would not be dead (and on its way to be researched, what a stroke of luck eh?) if it wasn't for the sport, and its death is cause for celebration because of its size.....

ERGO: NO UNDERSTANDING OR RESPECT FOR LIFE.

That is not the same as saying that there are no benefits to research.  But research was not EVER the point of that fishing trip.  It's a byproduct of the sport, and to rationalize the deaths of animals resulting from the sport like some sort of goodwill ambassador is utter bullshit.

But I suppose I shouldn't expect any more from you, because your attitude towards life is precisely what this thread is about, evidently.

1. It's not paraphrasing when your using quotations. So yeah. Syntax isn't my issue. It's yours. You're the one that brought it up. Maybe practise what you preach?

So you admit that the part i highlighted wasn't a small part? that was the whole point of me bring up that.

I mean really how many times will you push this thing that I can't comprehend when all i've been doing is answering your points? lol

But I am right. You have never been on a boat let alone touch a fish before.
Evidently?
Ha!
once again.

Your entire argument is inherently flawed.

Your argument was that you are angry that this man killed a Fish for sport.
My argument points out that he didn't kill the fish for sport. That the fish died for research.
You try and bring up that the killing of said fish was never the point. You then proceed to attack my comprehension. That it was always about the significance of life.
I merely pointed out that your initial point was about the fish.
You said that it was a little bit of it
I said that it was 3 paragraphs
You said I needed to check my comprehension again? and when you realize that I was right about the fish not needing to die but they killed it for research not for sport you went on about how I would feel having things in my mouth.

Now that is paraphrasing.

Honestly though. How angry of a person are you? I have nothing against you. And you can think low of me, I don't actually care. I just really hope that you have more to do with your life than go on a modeling website and criticise the way some people live their lives and get so actively angry when people don't see it the way you do.
maybe check your moral compass bro.
Come back at me when you aren't arguing like a highschool boy and actually have something more than comprehension to throw at my face.

Jun 05 13 06:02 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
RennsportPhotography
Posts: 17,925
Cherry Hill, New Jersey, US


Some people like to fish and hunt, some do not.

Why does the OP feel his POV is superior to those with a different view? Rather intolerant and judgmental IMO. I put this in the same category as the NYC Mayor's war on 16 oz drinks, much ado about nothing.

Shark, bear, deer or skunk species does not make much of a difference.

I am having a hard time feeling outraged by people doing what they have for ages and having a good time and keeping people employed.
Jun 05 13 06:19 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Lumatic
Posts: 13,591
Chicago, Illinois, US


Allen Carbon wrote:
1. It's not paraphrasing when your using quotations. So yeah. Syntax isn't my issue. It's yours. You're the one that brought it up. Maybe practise what you preach?

Well, you're right that paraphrasing doesn't require quotation marks.  You're wrong about syntax, since your paraphrasing below still misses the point, even though I placed much emphasis on it in my previous post.  So I guess we both miss on that point.

Allen Carbon wrote:
So you admit that the part i highlighted wasn't a small part? that was the whole point of me bring up that.

I mean really how many times will you push this thing that I can't comprehend when all i've been doing is answering your points? lol

What part, about the research?  Well, I'm not going to revisit it anymore, because it looks like you don't get that research isn't what I'm getting at.  Or, maybe don't want to, I don't know.  Either way, you're trying to articulate what you think I'm saying below and still missing, so what else can I assume about your comprehension?  Either you can't or won't grasp it, or you're just not paying attention because you're fixed on this research thing, which isn't the issue of this thread.

Allen Carbon wrote:
But I am right. You have never been on a boat let alone touch a fish before.
Evidently?
Ha!
once again.

facepalm

Allen Carbon wrote:
Your entire argument is inherently flawed.

Your argument was that you are angry that this man killed a Fish for sport.
My argument points out that he didn't kill the fish for sport. That the fish died for research.
You try and bring up that the killing of said fish was never the point. You then proceed to attack my comprehension. That it was always about the significance of life.
I merely pointed out that your initial point was about the fish.
You said that it was a little bit of it
I said that it was 3 paragraphs
You said I needed to check my comprehension again? and when you realize that I was right about the fish not needing to die but they killed it for research not for sport you went on about how I would feel having things in my mouth.

Now that is paraphrasing.

Yes, it is.  Inaccurately, though I suppose that was on purpose.  Obviously, further discussion between us on this topic is pointless, as mentioned.

Allen Carbon wrote:
Honestly though. How angry of a person are you? I have nothing against you. And you can think low of me, I don't actually care. I just really hope that you have more to do with your life than go on a modeling website and criticise the way some people live their lives and get so actively angry when people don't see it the way you do.
maybe check your moral compass bro.
Come back at me when you aren't arguing like a highschool boy and actually have something more than comprehension to throw at my face.

Assuming that's an actual question, the answer is that this story made me angry, but I'm not at all an angry person.  Further, the only angry post in this thread was the OP - everything else, while pointed and emphatic, was not.  I don't even think I've ever posted an angry rant thread, or if I have it was too long ago for me to remember.

I have nothing against you either, I don't know you from Adam.  I do, however, find your continual leaps to false conclusions and condescending attitude - further evidenced by this quote above - entirely off-putting in the context of this thread.

Jun 05 13 06:54 am  Link  Quote 
12last   Search   Reply



main | browse | casting/travel | forums | shout box | help | advertising | contests | share | join the mayhem

more modelmayhem on: | | | edu

©2006-2014 ModelMayhem.com. All Rights Reserved.
MODEL MAYHEM is a registered trademark.
Toggle Worksafe Mode: Off | On
Terms | Privacy | Careers