News Germany - singing animals soon to be outlawed

[rynnor]

Given that the definition of the word "species" basically means a group of creatures that can inter-breed, I find that a strange discussion.

The definition of species has changed a lot in modern times - it's actually very difficult to pin down. When you look at a population there are always outriders who differ from the main population - many of these are thought to be from hybridisation.

Things like corals that broadcast spawn produce masses of hybrids.

 

[Scouse]

When you look at a population there are always outriders who differ from the main population

In more than just genetics - just like people who shag animals...

 

[rynnor]

The problem with the study of the concept of species is that it runs into issues when you apply it to humans.

If we saw the differences that exist in humans in different regions in another animal we would have called them different species but nobody in the scientific community wants to state this as its tainted by hitlers master race nonsense.

Thus we are stuck with a definition that says if they can interbreed they are one species while simultaneously knowing that this isnt true.

 

[Jeros]

If they want to outlaw perversion they are barking up the wrong tree.

 

[opticle]

TLDR.

I think the issue is that animals are viewed to be vulnerable, and so at risk of being taken advantage of, just like children. It's no absolute - even the children thing is a cultural one to a degree.

Does just seem wrong though. And it'd be difficult to find those animals new owners after their current ones..

 

[Wazzerphuk]

I like the way Scouse thinks that because people have shagged animals in the past that we're meant to.

Of course it couldn't possibly be the simple fact that deviants have existed throughout humanity, oh no! We're all supposed to enjoy a little goat-play.

 

[Scouse]

I like the way Scouse thinks that because people have shagged animals in the past that we're meant to.

Back in the thread but still not answered my question I see Waz.

I quite obviously never said "we're meant to" - I'm saying "why should we criminalise those who do stuff we don't like" and "humans have done this for ages".

Deviants? Sounds like an emotional reaction Waz. You feeling guilt because you used to rub your willy against your rabbit when you were a kid because it "felt nice", or something?

 

[Ctuchik]

The problem with the study of the concept of species is that it runs into issues when you apply it to humans.

If we saw the differences that exist in humans in different regions in another animal we would have called them different species but nobody in the scientific community wants to state this as its tainted by hitlers master race nonsense.

Thus we are stuck with a definition that says if they can interbreed they are one species while simultaneously knowing that this isnt true.

Sorry but no you're wrong.

Peel the skin of a Japanese, an African and a German and you most likely can't tell the difference between them.

Do the same with a horse, a cow and a pig and you'd know exactly which species they belonged to.

The difference between human "species" is quite literally skin deep and nothing else. There's nothing what so ever that differs say a Russians anatomy from an Americans that would suggest that they are different species.

And that's where most people get it wrong, COLOR does not determine species, nor does their regional whereabouts, anatomy does.

A Japanese and a swede might be different races (though as you say it's a tainted word when it comes to humans), but we're all still the same species, which is human.

Much the same an Irish Wolfhound is the same species as a German Shepherd (DOG) but different breed/race/whatever...

 

[old.Tohtori]

I quite obviously never said "we're meant to" - I'm saying "why should we criminalise those who do stuff we don't like" and "humans have done this for ages".

Deviants? Sounds like an emotional reaction Waz. You feeling guilt because you used to rub your willy against your rabbit when you were a kid because it "felt nice", or something?

Well....

But still. Humans are obviously omni-sexual.

And speaking of deviants, you're one step away from admitting you watch kiddie porn since you already watched almost every bestiality video out there. Deviant isn't a finger you should be waving.


But to keep it in your ballpark; if there's no harm, then why outlaw it....right?

 

[Wazzerphuk]

Oh dear god that's the most desperate retort I've ever read on these boards.

Yes, I'm a serial rabbit botherer! You're fucking batshit

 

[rynnor]

Sorry but no you're wrong.

Peel the skin of a Japanese, an African and a German and you most likely can't tell the difference between them.

If you peel the skin off a zebra and a pony your not going to see a lot of difference either - are they now one species?

A large number of bird species are only seperate species due to region and colouration - I'm sorry that it seems to cause offence but we do really have seperate species.

Because its a scientific taboo people have had to work around it in areas where it causes issues like health because the reality is that medicines behave differently in the different populations and these populations have different health problems due to genetics.

It would probably save lives if we actually did declare seperate human species because then drugs would need to be tested on each to see how effective they would be on each population.

 

[noblok]

I'm not sure why we're discussing whether or not it's natural for humans to shag animals or not. That seems irrelevant to me when the question is whether it's wrong or not. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature)

On the topic of "animals, just like children, are vulnerable and at a risk of being taken advantage of." You could say that, but there are plenty of differences between animals and children as well. We don't generally use/breed children for our own enjoyment like we do with dogs, horses and other domesticated animals. So we already 'take advantage' of animals in plenty of ways, which are obviously even less consensual, yet people seemingly don't have a problem with those (meat consumption being the clearest).

 

[Killswitch]

If you peel the skin off a zebra and a pony your not going to see a lot of difference either - are they now one species?

A large number of bird species are only seperate species due to region and colouration - I'm sorry that it seems to cause offence but we do really have seperate species.

Because its a scientific taboo people have had to work around it in areas where it causes issues like health because the reality is that medicines behave differently in the different populations and these populations have different health problems due to genetics.

It would probably save lives if we actually did declare seperate human species because then drugs would need to be tested on each to see how effective they would be on each population.

Actually, from a Biology point of view, I'm pretty sure you're wrong here. Zebras, ponies, horses (and probably some other ****) ARE the same species and in fact you can cross-breed ponies and zebras, I believe. Same as Jack Russells, Pitbull Terriers and Wolves are the same species.

That said, it looks like the real answer is incredibly complicated and has repeatedly defeated the best minds in the field. As such, we're unlikely to come to a conclusion based on good science here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Species_problem

 

[old.Tohtori]

You moan to the mods like the whiny little bitch you are if someone bandies around a bit of CTFADOA, but you repeatedly tar someone with a paedo brush.

Which is worse, toht?

FOAD is against the rules, has been always, though ignored in your case.

I didn't say you were a paedo, though according to your Wazz logic this must've hit a nerve and you -do- like brushing little kids against your crotch. Right?

 

[rynnor]

Actually, from a Biology point of view, I'm pretty sure you're wrong here. Zebras, ponies, horses (and probably some other ****) ARE the same species and in fact you can cross-breed ponies and zebras, I believe.

Sorry but you are completely wrong - even Zebras are composed of several species and so are Giraffe. The fact that you can interbreed them yet they are seperate species is proof that interbreeding per se is not useful in determining species.

Are Lions and Tigers one species since they can interbreed? I dont think so and neither does the scientific community.

 

[DaGaffer]

Actually, from a Biology point of view, I'm pretty sure you're wrong here. Zebras, ponies, horses (and probably some other ****) ARE the same species and in fact you can cross-breed ponies and zebras, I believe. Same as Jack Russells, Pitbull Terriers and Wolves are the same species.

That said, it looks like the real answer is incredibly complicated and has repeatedly defeated the best minds in the field. As such, we're unlikely to come to a conclusion based on good science here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Species_problem

And yet weirdly, its almost impossible to domesticate a zebra. Been tried loads of times, always failed.

 

[rynnor]

And yet weirdly, its almost impossible to domesticate a zebra. Been tried loads of times, always failed.

Really? I heard they were used as coach horses in England in the past by particularly showy lords?

Edit: http://shopkins-fossick.blogspot.co.uk/2011/03/taming-of-zebra.html

 

[Scouse]

Actually, from a Biology point of view, I'm pretty sure you're wrong here. Zebras, ponies, horses ARE the same species

They're not m8.

They're the same family and genus, but different species.

 

[DaGaffer]

Really? I heard they were used as coach horses in England in the past by particularly showy lords?

Yeah, I read about it in Guns, Germs & Steel. Jared Diamond flags it as one of the reasons why sub-Saharan African civilisation was at a disadvantage compared to Eurasia; everyone thinks there should be loads of potential domestication candidates in Africa because there are simply so many more species than anywhere else, but only cattle got domesticated (and they were an import from North Africa), and zebras failed (fuckers'll bite your arm off soon as look at you apparently). Obviously there have been some subsequent successes like Ostriches, but you still don't see anyone riding zebras.

 

[Killswitch]

Sorry but you are completely wrong - even Zebras are composed of several species and so are Giraffe. The fact that you can interbreed them yet they are seperate species is proof that interbreeding per se is not useful in determining species.

Are Lions and Tigers one species since they can interbreed? I dont think so and neither does the scientific community.

Are they the same species? By some definitions yes they are, absolutely. The problem here is that the word "species" is ill-defined. They are the same family (Felidae) and the same sub-family (Pantherinae) but different genus (Panthera leo vs Panthera tigris). I don't even know what you could possibly mean by "even Zebras are composed of several species". Zebra is a name given to different species that look similar *but do not interbreed* which is (as said before) the simplest definition of species.

"Even this thing which is defined as a loose grouping of similar species is comprised of different species" is basically what you said there, which is something of a tautology.

Until we tie down a definition of "species" here, this conversation isn't going to go anywhere. One fairly widely-used (but somewhat deprecated) definition is "types of animals which can interbreed and produce viable, fertile offspring". This is difficult as, apparently, all three "species" of zebra can, with very low probability, produce a viable hybrid with each other and with other equine types such as horses and ponies. However the chances of this happening naturally in the wild is so remote that they are considered different species by some people.

The same cannot be said of humans who, universally, can interbreed with any other human of the opposite sex and produce viable offspring. I don't see anyone, anywhere, referring to different levels of skin pigmentation as "speciation" and given the massive number of types of dogs (who can all interbreed from Jack Russells through to Pitbull Terriers through to Wolves) which are categorically all a single species, I don't see a good reason for claiming humans are multiple species.

 

[Olgaline]

Actually, from a Biology point of view, I'm pretty sure you're wrong here. Zebras, ponies, horses

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Species_problem

Zebras are closer related to da donkey rather than horses

 

[Scouse]

Obviously there have been some subsequent successes like Ostriches

 

[Killswitch]

They're not m8.

They're the same family and genus, but different species.

I think you're probably right actually, but it's degrees again, I think. They are, with low probability, able to produce viable, fertile offspring. This, by the most basic definition, would make them the same species. This is as opposed to, for example, my attempts to impregnate a zebra which have zero probability of producing a viable embryo. Stay Safe: Fuck a Zebra.

 

[rynnor]

Are they the same species? By some definitions yes they are, absolutely.

There is no definition where Tigers and Lions are the same species that has been accepted by the scientific community. Feel free to write that up but I think you might face difficulty getting it accepted into a reputable journal.

Zebra in common parlance refers to a stripey horse but species is a scientific term and it has a specific meaning.

I dont agree that all dogs are the same species - I think the best definition of species is of posessing certain common characteristics which clearly a Great Dane and a chihuahua are not. Outside of a laboratory those two could not even physically mate which is a great indicator of seperate species.

 

[Killswitch]

There is no definition where Tigers and Lions are the same species that has been accepted by the scientific community. Feel free to write that up but I think you might face difficulty getting it accepted into a reputable journal.

Zebra in common parlance refers to a stripey horse but species is a scientific term and it has a specific meaning.

I dont agree that all dogs are the same species - I think the best definition of species is of posessing certain common characteristics which clearly a Great Dane and a chihuahua are not. Outside of a laboratory those two could not even physically mate which is a great indicator of seperate species.

Biology . the major subdivision of a genus or subgenus, regarded as the basic category of biological classification, composed of related individuals that resemble one another, are able to breed among themselves, but are not able to breed with members of another species.

Definition of LIGER

: a hybrid between a male lion and a female tiger

So there's at least one. They are in the same genus AND subgenus, resemble one another and are able to breed. Then again, that definition defines a "species" as something unable to breed with another "species" which is pretty fucking useless, now I read it again. If only there was someone in this thread who knew what they were talking about who could settle this argument! It's certainly not me and I have a sneaking suspicion it's not you either, rynnor!

 

[rynnor]

So there's at least one. They are in the same genus AND subgenus, resemble one another and are able to breed. Then again, that definition defines a "species" as something unable to breed with another "species" which is pretty fucking useless, now I read it again. If only there was someone in this thread who knew what they were talking about who could settle this argument! It's certainly not me and I have a sneaking suspicion it's not you either, rynnor!

I dont think we are having an arguement tbh - you think Lions and Tigers are the same species.

On this you are on one side and the scientific community is on the other.

It doesnt really make for an arguement.

 

[Killswitch]

I dont think we are having an arguement tbh - you think Lions and Tigers are the same species.

On this you are on one side and the scientific community is on the other.

It doesnt really make for an arguement.

Ah...Appeal to Authority and without providing any evidence. Whereas I produce both evidence of a commonly-accepted usage of the word "species" and evidence that Lions and Tigers can interbreed and produce viable offspring, which means they meet that definition. So it seems like you are throwing Logical Fallacy bombs and I am doing some research. So you're right, we're not arguing.

EDIT: And didn't this start because you claimed that humans with different-coloured skin are different species, which I think NO-ONE is arguing for except you and a few fringe US special interest groups with a love of white cloaks and silly hats?

 

[rynnor]

And didn't this start because you claimed that humans with different-coloured skin are different species, which I think NO-ONE is arguing for except you and a few fringe US special interest groups with a love of white cloaks and silly hats?

I said that the ability to interbreed does not preclude multiple species.

Your rather odd counter was that anything that looked similar was all actually the same species.

I still haven't seen anything you raised that actually shows that the ability to interbreed is a good definition of a species so from that standpoint your not even arguing the point.

 

[Killswitch]

Actually...I'm wrong.

Lions and Tigers are different species and their offspring are generally sterile. This would be a "hybrid". I believe the same is probably true about horses and zebras. The ability to produce an offspring is not, in and of itself, enough to prove that two animals are from the same species, although it's a strong indicator.

Dogs and wolves however (all dogs and all wolves) are the same species and so are all humans.

I shall get off your lawn now.

 

[rynnor]

EDIT: And didn't this start because you claimed that humans with different-coloured skin are different species, which I think NO-ONE is arguing for except you and a few fringe US special interest groups with a love of white cloaks and silly hats?

I cant say I'm really suprised to see your ad hominem attack since you are clearly out of your depth tbh.