Animal testing

[Aculaud 0]

Espectro, You are living, blissfully blind, deaf, and generally unaware, in a sad, sad world called denial.

As far as not saving anything, thats up for grabs. Maybe youre right. But at least i'm trying. You dont do shit. You support the industry like the good, typical person you are, and ridicule those who dont. You fit right in with the species of animal that couldnt get any lower on the food chain: the masses.

[Col. Kurtz 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Espectro @ Aug. 21 2002,09:58)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">So do plants, will they take over the world as well?<span id='postcolor'>

Thats right! Soon all the plants of the word shall jump out of the ground, and TRAMPLE you to death! Be afraid!

Aculand, do not try and convence them of any thing, thye have their morals set, so have you. They shall believe what thye want to believe, and will not listen to what you say, thyey have ignorance, leave them and let them SUFFER for their SINS when they get judged by the panel of Animals!

[Oligo 1]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Albert Schweizer @ Aug. 21 2002,10:35)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">This is pure assumption. You assume that animals (in contrast to humans) prefer the "golden cage" in contrast to their natural life-environment.

That cloning has many useful purposes is absolutely right. But I think we are crossing one of the last moral bridges here. Cloning in my eyes is going too far. And while people are still preparing weapons of massdestruction and over 50% of our planet live below the povertyline I think we are not prepared nor moraly capable yet to do this step. Cloning means playing with life, you are actually experimenting with tools of life. I think that is pervert!

The problem is that again some very capitalistic countries pressure forward (cause they got little moral values only good customers do count) and force all others to follow in order not to fall behind in a very lucrative and prgressive business idea. You know like me that the official kidney cloning is not the last step. I dont even want to know what is happening behind closed doors of some of the worlds national labs. Just accept that 70% of the people on this planet have no moral barrier and are willing to ignore all and everything to reach certain goals. The atomic bomb is a good example. How the hell can a scientist develop a weapon of mass-destruction without remources (please dont give me that "it ended the war". Whether yes or no, this no scientists could have forseen)<span id='postcolor'>

From the behaviour of the mice I can pretty safely say that it surely seems like they don't mind being safe from predators and having all the food and drink they want plus a nice hiding place. I doubt they even understand they're in a cage. However, I as a human of course feel bad about locking them in the cage, because I have the basic human skill of empathy. Therefore I would never do this if I didn't believe it is absolutely necessary.

We humans have been tampering life as you call it almost for the entire existence period of our species. Look at dogs. How much do they resemble wolves anymore? We have been experimenting with the tools of life like DNA for decades now. It's just that the public does not have a clue about what we do, so it is easy for the media to demonize news they do not understand. I wonder how Galileo felt, when the press called him a heretic for claiming the Earth orbits the sun? The same thing happens even today.

Cloning as such does not form a moral bridge, since it is just a small step from what we have done previously, especially if we do not use it for reproduction purposes (the old way works like a dream for this and it's more fun). So cloning of stem cells or organs poses no moral dilemma whatsoever.

Experimenting for biological and chemical warfare is a bad thing and I condemn it. I don't know anybody who would voluntarily work to achieve such sick goals. You have to remember that 99.9% of science is benign. And the 0.1% done in secret government supported labs (National Security you know) do not care what laws are in effect, so they cannot be regulated in any way. All you're doing is lashing out at the benign, well regulated, supervised and quite transparent science.

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

Aculaud. I know that in Germany those Labelled are having a serious meaning. The stuff I buy is around 30-40% more expensive than ordinary products. The major problem only is chicken. Cause countries like Holland, Russia and the US dont realy care about what their farmers are doing (or feeding) with their animals. There are hundreds of factories worldwide where millions of chicken sit in ugly batteries and eat and shit and eat and shit.... Problem N°2 is the so called "chicken living outside" label. Well yes, it makes sense to us that chicken living outside are happier, but in fact they are not. Chicken have a very strict authoritative system. Now imagine 80 chicken having to fight for rank every day and every time a new chicken enters. that is pure stress for the animals and often they will die because of that. The best solution is inside and not too much space cause then they cant recognise each other and dont fight. So if you dont have chicken the best solution is dont buy them, dont eat them or get them from your local farmer. Or eat meat or whatever.

But concerning cows...I am pretty much sure german cows are happy. But the problem is cheap imports from elsewhere.

[Espectro (DayZ) 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Aculaud @ Aug. 21 2002,11:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Espectro, You are living, blissfully blind, deaf, and generally unaware, in a sad, sad world called denial.

As far as not saving anything, thats up for grabs. Maybe youre right. But at least i'm trying. You dont do shit. You support the industry like the good, typical person you are, and ridicule those who dont. You fit right in with the species of animal that couldnt get any lower on the food chain: the masses.<span id='postcolor'>

Lol, okay. Have you ever been told that you lack social abilities?

[Oligo 1]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Albert Schweizer @ Aug. 21 2002,11:32)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Aculaud. I know that in Germany those Labelled are having a serious meaning. The stuff I buy is around 30-40% more expensive than ordinary products.<span id='postcolor'>

"Not tested on animals" means the finished product. The raw materials have been tested on animals, I'm sorry to say. It's required by law, especially in E.U. where the product safety laws are very strict.

In U.S. cosmetics do not have to be tested on animals, but then they have to be labelled: "Warning! Not tested for safety!"

The 30-40% price increase is there, because people pay more for a good conscience.

[Aculaud 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Espectro @ Aug. 21 2002,02:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Aculaud @ Aug. 21 2002,11:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Espectro, You are living, blissfully blind, deaf, and generally unaware, in a sad, sad world called denial.

As far as not saving anything, thats up for grabs. Maybe youre right. But at least i'm trying. You dont do shit. You support the industry like the good, typical person you are, and ridicule those who dont. You fit right in with the species of animal that couldnt get any lower on the food chain: the masses.<span id='postcolor'>

Lol, okay. Have you ever been told that you lack social abilities?<span id='postcolor'>

Iv never had to be told i lacked social ability, i knew anyway.

Alright, this is bullshit. I'm not going to sytmatically alienate everyone i know here over a stupid fight about something that no one will never solve anyway, since no one here has the knowledge and experience to do so. Not to mention the fact that none of us will EVER change. I hereby commend us for being the most stubborn bastards iv ever known!

I'm bowing out. Just know that i still stand by everything iv said here, and i wont change for anyone. Do what you will with the thread, i'm tired of this. Happy posting

[DarkLight 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Major Fubar @ Aug. 20 2002,11:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Aculaud @ Aug. 21 2002,00:34)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">They have everything it takes to be alive. They are no more dead than we are. They are no less alive than we are. Many of them are less evolved than us, few are more evolved than us. According to science, a human invention, we are no more worthy of respect than they are. I hope someday you'll get this.<span id='postcolor'>

So let me get this straight...if a friend or relative of yours was dying, and some mad scientist had found a way to funnel life essence from animals to humans...and they asked you for permission to drain the life of a cow to save the life of your friend/relative, you would say "no, you can't do that, both of their lives are equal"?

If your answer is yes, you might want to take a good look at yourself...and I don't mean that as an insult.<span id='postcolor'>

'Course you would say: Kill the cow and save my friend.

But that's just because you knew your friend and because he was your friend. If some stranger would ask you if he could kill a cow that is a friend to you, to save himself then you'd probable say: Fuck off, go find your own cow!

But their lifes are equal, a life is a life.

No matter what, it is still wrong to kill animals for tests, especially tests like these Al Qaeda ones...

Tests for saving ourselves aren't good too, i've said this before, catch some serial killers, al qaeda soldiers, etc and try the tests on them, you don't even have to give them any food so it's cheap too!

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

ouch! That is not fair to say that cloning is just a step away from crossing dogs. Then you could also argue that cloning is nothing else than the increase in speed of natural mutation. Anyway if you look at the amount of races of dogs I could actually say "look what happens if you experiemnt too much" cause there is a huge amount of overcrossed animals. And the more pure the better the dog is.

The problem here is that we get too much free space for doing research at once. Now we not only can cross equal races but we can exchange e.g. genes between animal kinds and plants Horses with elephants, rhinos with sunflowers Humans with sharks! Before we were able to cross what had the natural potential to be crossed (race of dog A & race of dog B). So we werent actually doing something unnatural with dogs. Now we are trying cloning, and this is indeed a great step away from simply crossing races.

[Oligo 1]

Ehh, like I said, the public is very misinformed on these matters.

Cloning is a method to create an identical genetic copy of an animal or human specimen. If small mutations occur during cloning, it is an error rather than a goal (you have to remember that mutations also occur during normal reproduction). The genetic copy (a clone) must be reared in a womb, given birth to and so on just like any other child. The only difference is that the genome of the child is identical to an existing individual. Nature does cloning too, because most species reproduce by it (cell division reproduction of bacteria and single-celled eucaryotes). Identical twins are clones of each other and they don't turn our to be twisted in any way.

With organ cloning you could create for example a liver, which is genetically identical to your old liver. That would make an ideal transplant.

Crossing different species with each other (like horses with elephants) has actually been possible for 40 or so years and it has nothing to do with cloning. Nobody in normal science does it though, because it is considered unethical and unnecessary.

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

Cloning is just the begining of genetical engineering. It is the first step we can undertake without knowing all variations of the genetical code. Mutations are normal indeed. but they occur rather seldom and usually are destroyed by selection of the "survival of the fittest" rule (charles darwin). That is a rather weak comparison. The idea of genetical engineering is e.g. to construct plants that are immune against certain pesticides. Now where nature is taking little steps towards such developement we want to take it at once. Where nature has the chance to take 1000 thousands little steps (mutations) over a few thousand of year to solve such a problem it always had the capability to easily delete an evolution that went into the wrong direction. Humans try it at once. One example of human failure to oversee the consequences was the great "natural enemy" idea of the 80ies. During that time every scientists had the idea to import certain animals from other countries to get rid of parasites or certain insects. The consequences were devastating. This is also one of the reasons why we have so many animal epidemics at the moment. Just imagine you would create a plant with great immune-system! Can any scientists seriously claim to be able to oversee the consequences. In case yes this scientist must be megalomaniac just like Hitler!

(BTW: mutations dont occur during reproduction but due to radiation of natural sunlight! Reproduction is only a occasion where this mutation might become visible (or not))

[Espectro (DayZ) 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Aculaud @ Aug. 21 2002,11:41)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Espectro @ Aug. 21 2002,02:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Aculaud @ Aug. 21 2002,11:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Espectro, You are living, blissfully blind, deaf, and generally unaware, in a sad, sad world called denial.

As far as not saving anything, thats up for grabs. Maybe youre right. But at least i'm trying. You dont do shit. You support the industry like the good, typical person you are, and ridicule those who dont. You fit right in with the species of animal that couldnt get any lower on the food chain: the masses.<span id='postcolor'>

Lol, okay. Have you ever been told that you lack social abilities?<span id='postcolor'>

Iv never had to be told i lacked social ability, i knew anyway.

Alright, this is bullshit. I'm not going to sytmatically alienate everyone i know here over a stupid fight about something that no one will never solve anyway, since no one here has the knowledge and experience to do so. Not to mention the fact that none of us will EVER change. I hereby commend us for being the most stubborn bastards iv ever known!

I'm bowing out. Just know that i still stand by everything iv said here, and i wont change for anyone. Do what you will with the thread, i'm tired of this. Happy posting <span id='postcolor'>

You know... i was gonna post the same exact thing.... But okay, now I dont have to...

[Major Fubar 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (DarkLight @ Aug. 21 2002,11:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Major Fubar @ Aug. 20 2002,11:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Aculaud @ Aug. 21 2002,00:34)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">They have everything it takes to be alive. They are no more dead than we are. They are no less alive than we are. Many of them are less evolved than us, few are more evolved than us. According to science, a human invention, we are no more worthy of respect than they are. I hope someday you'll get this.<span id='postcolor'>

So let me get this straight...if a friend or relative of yours was dying, and some mad scientist had found a way to funnel life essence from animals to humans...and they asked you for permission to drain the life of a cow to save the life of your friend/relative, you would say "no, you can't do that, both of their lives are equal"?

If your answer is yes, you might want to take a good look at yourself...and I don't mean that as an insult.<span id='postcolor'>

'Course you would say: Kill the cow and save my friend.

But that's just because you knew your friend and because he was your friend.  If some stranger would ask you if he could kill a cow that is a friend to you, to save himself then you'd probable say: Fuck off, go find your own cow!

But their lifes are equal, a life is a life.

No matter what, it is still wrong to kill animals for tests, especially tests like these Al Qaeda ones...

Tests for saving ourselves aren't good too, i've said this before, catch some serial killers, al qaeda soldiers, etc and try the tests on them, you don't even have to give them any food so it's cheap too!<span id='postcolor'>

OK, put it this way:

If you had the chance to save the lives of 1000 starving Somalian children at the cost of slaughtering 1000 sheep, would you?

(Assuming you don't know the children or the cows)....

[ran 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Major Fubar @ Aug. 21 2002,14:18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (DarkLight @ Aug. 21 2002,11:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Major Fubar @ Aug. 20 2002,11:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Aculaud @ Aug. 21 2002,00:34)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">They have everything it takes to be alive. They are no more dead than we are. They are no less alive than we are. Many of them are less evolved than us, few are more evolved than us. According to science, a human invention, we are no more worthy of respect than they are. I hope someday you'll get this.<span id='postcolor'>

So let me get this straight...if a friend or relative of yours was dying, and some mad scientist had found a way to funnel life essence from animals to humans...and they asked you for permission to drain the life of a cow to save the life of your friend/relative, you would say "no, you can't do that, both of their lives are equal"?

If your answer is yes, you might want to take a good look at yourself...and I don't mean that as an insult.<span id='postcolor'>

'Course you would say: Kill the cow and save my friend.

But that's just because you knew your friend and because he was your friend.  If some stranger would ask you if he could kill a cow that is a friend to you, to save himself then you'd probable say: Fuck off, go find your own cow!

But their lifes are equal, a life is a life.

No matter what, it is still wrong to kill animals for tests, especially tests like these Al Qaeda ones...

Tests for saving ourselves aren't good too, i've said this before, catch some serial killers, al qaeda soldiers, etc and try the tests on them, you don't even have to give them any food so it's cheap too!<span id='postcolor'>

OK, put it this way:

If you had the chance to save the lives of 1000 starving Somalian children at the cost of slaughtering 1000 sheep, would you?

(Assuming you don't know the children or the cows)....<span id='postcolor'>

i would , but you'd have to give me the time to kill all these sheeps

[ran 0]

and i forgot : you'd have to give me the right tools

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

like what? Lethal natural gas gained from Roquefort?

[DarkLight 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Major Fubar @ Aug. 20 2002,15:18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (DarkLight @ Aug. 21 2002,11:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Major Fubar @ Aug. 20 2002,11:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Aculaud @ Aug. 21 2002,00:34)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">They have everything it takes to be alive. They are no more dead than we are. They are no less alive than we are. Many of them are less evolved than us, few are more evolved than us. According to science, a human invention, we are no more worthy of respect than they are. I hope someday you'll get this.<span id='postcolor'>

So let me get this straight...if a friend or relative of yours was dying, and some mad scientist had found a way to funnel life essence from animals to humans...and they asked you for permission to drain the life of a cow to save the life of your friend/relative, you would say "no, you can't do that, both of their lives are equal"?

If your answer is yes, you might want to take a good look at yourself...and I don't mean that as an insult.<span id='postcolor'>

'Course you would say: Kill the cow and save my friend.

But that's just because you knew your friend and because he was your friend.  If some stranger would ask you if he could kill a cow that is a friend to you, to save himself then you'd probable say: Fuck off, go find your own cow!

But their lifes are equal, a life is a life.

No matter what, it is still wrong to kill animals for tests, especially tests like these Al Qaeda ones...

Tests for saving ourselves aren't good too, i've said this before, catch some serial killers, al qaeda soldiers, etc and try the tests on them, you don't even have to give them any food so it's cheap too!<span id='postcolor'>

OK, put it this way:

If you had the chance to save the lives of 1000 starving Somalian children at the cost of slaughtering 1000 sheep, would you?

(Assuming you don't know the children or the cows)....<span id='postcolor'>

Hmmm, this is rather hard to answer actually... I'll give it my best shot but don't blame me if my english sucks

Thinking as someone that doesn't know tthosez kids and the sheep, they are the same to me, when someone dies that i never knew, well that's sad but after one day i'm sick of talking about it.

I had the same feeling about the WTC, first, i was shocked but after a couple days i got sick of everybody talking about.

I hope all of you understand why, i live far away from NY, so obviously it doesn't touch me as much as the American ppl.  If something bad in Europe happens, the ppl that live far away from Europe pro'ly are sick of hearing about it after a week or 2.  Same story

So if i hear that 1000 Somalian kids die for nothing, that's sad, but if 1000 sheep or nothing, that's sad too and i'll also forget it in the next days.  So basically they don't mean that much to me.  This might sound cruel but it's not, i believe it's normal because i don't know any of them.  Please don't tell me that i'm a lunatic.  All people think like that, but perhaps it's harder for you because you never had to think like that...

I guess it's obvious that i'd choose the kids, the sheep would get killed and the kids would be saved.

I think i'd choose this because we are a lot closer to human beings than we are to sheep, this is pretty obvious of course, as far as i know, we are all human...

if the sheep would have to kill us to feed themselves, they'd do the same.  They'd save their own ppl first.

And after all, we used the sheep on a positive way, the way nature wants it, we kill them to provide food to our brothers and sisters.  This is totally natural...

This is something different than animal testing, the actual subject of this topic...

But i would still feel very sorry about it...  I might've saved the lives of 1000 children but i also killed 1000 innocent animals...

And both mean a lot to me...

ps: Please tell me when something stupid is written in here before someone starts nagging about it, it probable is just my horrible english so don't start flaming

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

terrible english he is using there, isnt it?

[DarkLight 0]

Shut up!

At least i try!!!

Hmmm post # 700, not baaaad...

[Ex-RoNiN 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Albert Schweizer @ Aug. 21 2002,17:08)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">terrible english he is using there, isnt it?  <span id='postcolor'>

hmmmmm

[DarkLight 0]

What do you mean by that?

Is that "hmmm, you're right..." or is that "hmmm, you're not right..." or is that "Hmmm, this place smells like cheese..."?

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

Oh, dont bother, he has got this since he was born. it is kind of a genetical problem I guess. He cant control his saliva and constantly has to do his hmmm. Dont embarass him and play as if you havent noticed.

[DarkLight 0]

Noticed what?

[Ex-RoNiN 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Albert Schweizer @ Aug. 21 2002,19:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Oh, dont bother, he has got this since he was born. it is kind of a genetical problem I guess. He cant control his saliva and constantly has to do his hmmm. Dont embarass him and play as if you havent noticed.  <span id='postcolor'>

Bye bye posting rights

You are banned for making fun of a moderator

[Aculaud 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Ex-RoNiN @ Aug. 21 2002,13:13)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Bye bye posting rights

You are banned for making fun of a moderator

<span id='postcolor'>

Oh, now that was just fakakta!