Support NeoGAF

[Angelus Errare]

Jesus Christ. Defending yourself against wild life is NOT THE SAME as paying $50,000 to go hunting for sport. Are you being dense intentionally?

That's not what I'm saying at all. Yea the dentist is a twat for hunting a protected lion and honestly should face a judge in either US or Zimbabwe for luring out a protected lion since one would hope there are laws about such (apparently not). But that's as far as my outrage/emotional response goes.

Punish the guy, make him do community service, charge him $50,000-$100,000 or whatever needs to be done. But this whole outrage, "let's destroy his life, he needs to suffer for this" mentality is so trippy and honestly...dumb.

I often wondered if people in Zimbabwe were as angry and outraged as people in the US were then I found out...no, not really. Then read the article and it put things in perspective for me. I mean back in August a guide was killed by a lion in Hwange national park, I'm willing to bet 95% of people who are outraged don't even know where/what Hwange National Park is or what it has to do with anything.

 

[Xdrive05]

I like Steven Rinella's initial reactions to the whole thing:

http://themeateater.com/2015/thoughts-on-african-lions-big-game-trophies-and-hunting-in-america/

The outrage and the emotions involved on both sides are keeping the more important questions from being addressed. That also includes hunters who take part in these things, and what their actions are also doing to hunting rights moving forward.

 

[Mascot]

That's not what I'm saying at all. Yea the dentist is a twat for hunting a protected lion and honestly should face a judge in either US or Zimbabwe for luring out a protected lion since one would hope there are laws about such (apparently not). But that's as far as my outrage/emotional response goes.

Punish the guy, make him do community service, charge him $50,000-$100,000 or whatever needs to be done. But this whole outrage, "let's destroy his life, he needs to suffer for this" mentality is so trippy and honestly...dumb.

I often wondered if people in Zimbabwe were as angry and outraged as people in the US were then I found out...no, not really. Then read the article and it put things in perspective for me. I mean back in August a guide was killed by a lion in Hwange national park, I'm willing to bet 95% of people who are outraged don't even know where/what Hwange National Park is or what it has to do with anything.

To be honest, if I saw an adult kicking a domestic cat I'd want that person's life destroyed.

 

[HMD]

I'd go to him, his prices must be way down.

 

[| Praxis |]

I don't know, I can't really see a problem with any trophy hunters life being turned to shit.

 

[Joni]

The outrage is important because ecologically, the loss of one lion is a lot more damaging than the loss of one human. It seems quite arrogant of us as a species to assume the reverse, that a human life is worth more than a lion life. There are less than 20.000 Africans lions compared to 6.000.000.000 humans, with the killed Southwest African lion being an even rarer subspecies. 150.000 humans die each day, which has an emotional impact on those around them, but it has no effect at all on the species. We need less than half a day to replenish that without any damage to the genetics. About 2.000 lions die each year. They are not replaced.

 

[cpp_is_king]

The outrage is important because ecologically, the loss of one lion is a lot more damaging than the loss of one human. It seems quite arrogant of us as a species to assume the reverse, that a human life is worth more than a lion life. There are less than 20.000 Africans lions compared to 6.000.000.000 humans, with the killed Southwest African lion being an even rarer subspecies. 150.000 humans die each day, which has an emotional impact on those around them, but it has no effect at all on the species. We need less than half a day to replenish that without any damage to the genetics. About 2.000 lions die each year. They are not replaced.

If they're not replaced, and there's that few, then a lion-less future seems inevitable to me. I don't mean to sound insensitive, but it sounds like natural selection is working as intended.

 

[Mascot]

If they're not replaced, and there's that few, then a lion-less future seems inevitable to me. I don't mean to sound insensitive, but it sounds like natural selection is working as intended.

Yeah, it's amazing how the crossbow evolved from a common twig.

 

[Simmins]

I don't mean to sound insensitive, but it sounds like natural selection is working as intended.

Not really natural selection. Really it's more or less artificial selection, with the exception that we are selecting all the lions to be killed instead of a group of individuals that share a common trait we desire.

 

[anaron]

why is there any sympathy towards someone who killed an animal for no other reason than for a trophy?

he did it illegally, he killed a member of an endangered species, and has now taken away money that Cecil funded as a tourist attraction and for research.

but hey, I mean, don't ruin his life and all, it's not like he made any sort of decision in all of this.

 

[Slavik81]

I mean back in August a guide was killed by a lion in Hwange national park, I'm willing to bet 95% of people who are outraged don't even know where/what Hwange National Park is or what it has to do with anything.

What does it have to do with anything? It's not really clear what you're getting at.

 

[ramparter]

"I wouldn't do it if I knew there would be consequences."

 

[Hellwarden]

why is there any sympathy towards someone who killed an animal for no other reason than for a trophy?

he did it illegally, he killed a member of an endangered species, and has now taken away money that Cecil funded as a tourist attraction and for research.

but hey, I mean, don't ruin his life and all, it's not like he made any sort of decision in all of this.

It's one thing to say that the man should face punishment for his actions in a legal manner. I think he should have to face some sort of punishment absolutely.

It's another to say that he and his family deserves to be threatened to the point where he has to be escorted to work.

 

[anaron]

It's one thing to say that the man should face punishment for his actions in a legal manner. I think he should have to face some sort of punishment absolutely.

It's another to say that he and his family deserves to be threatened to the point where he has to be escorted to work.

oh his family should definitely be exempt from the treatment. I agree.

 

[shadowsdarknes]

If they're not replaced, and there's that few, then a lion-less future seems inevitable to me. I don't mean to sound insensitive, but it sounds like natural selection is working as intended.

I don't think you understand natural selection.

When humans are poisoning bodies of water and killing biodiversity, that's not natural selection if they can't survive.

No, lions dying out is not a result of natural selection.

 

[Triggerhappytel]

So he would have lured a different lion off of protected ground and killed it, had he only known?

It's still hard to believe he didn't know with all the elaborate things they did.

Yep, that's the reason why all of his excuses seem so hollow - they deliberately went to the effort of luring the animal out of protected land before killing it. If he's flying half way around the world to do this shit, he has to know that what they were doing was not legal.

 

[Stinkles]

Yep, that's the reason why all of his excuses seem so hollow - they deliberately went to the effort of luring the animal out of protected land before killing it. If he's flying half way around the world to do this shit, he has to know that what they were doing was not legal.

He bribed people in the U.S. To illegally hunt bears. Dude is full of shit and unless you believe he was caught 100% of the time he committed crimes to get at unobtainable animals then it's pretty reasonable to think he's irredeemable scum.

 

[Shadax the wizard]

"The Dentist Who Killed Cecil the Lion Says He's Heading Back to Work"

Seriously, will he receive any kind of fine or punishment for killing Cecil? Haven't been following this lately.

 

[Eidan]

Yeah, the guy's garbage. His entire argument hinges on wanting us to believe he's a complete moron as opposed to an amoral prick. Fuck em.

 

[Siegcram]

Thanks for letting us know. It's amazing that everyone wailing against the "mob justice" can completely disregard that this fool brought it entirely on himself.

 

[Foffy]

"The Dentist Who Killed Cecil the Lion Says He's Heading Back to Work"

Seriously, will he receive any kind of fine or punishment for killing Cecil? Haven't been following this lately.

He didn't kill a person, so probably not. That's usually where punishment only occurs, because people matter more than other life or something egoic like that.

 

[Joni]

If they're not replaced, and there's that few, then a lion-less future seems inevitable to me. I don't mean to sound insensitive, but it sounds like natural selection is working as intended.

If tomorrow an alien culture comes around, kills all humans and goes away. Is that a failure of human life on natural selection?

 

[More Fun To Compute]

I don't think you understand natural selection.

When humans are poisoning bodies of water and killing biodiversity, that's not natural selection if they can't survive.

No, lions dying out is not a result of natural selection.

Mass extinctions are part of natural seleciton. Maybe when huminity is extinct due to our own self destructive behaviour there will be another more intelligent species that comes along and points out that humans were just dumb mammals who failed to evolve in a way that enabled their survival.

 

[Shadax the wizard]

He didn't kill a person, so probably not. That's usually where punishment only occurs, because people matter more than other life or something egoic like that.

Yeah, I guess. I think they should pull his hunting license, ban him from returning to Africa and hit him with a fine.

 

[Bananajama]

Its not just the one lion he killed

By targeting this lion; he risked the lives of seven of its cubs for a protected species.

This hunt was irresponsible.

And I have no sympathy for the troubles he faces because of this

 

[markofhavoc]

This is random, but I live in San Diego, and I drove out for breakfast with my fiancee to Carlsbad, and in the town there is a huge painting of a lion, but I only noticed when looking closer, that it was a rip Cecil memorial if you will. Anyhow I found it interesting, I'll find the picture

 

[cpp_is_king]

Not really natural selection. Really it's more or less artificial selection, with the exception that we are selecting all the lions to be killed instead of a group of individuals that share a common trait we desire.

What is it then, when a species can't adapt to the circumstances it's faced with and goes extinct as a result? It's survival of the fittest right? Isn't survival of the fittest the mechanism by which natural selection takes place?

 

[Shadax the wizard]

What is it then, when a species can't adapt to the circumstances it's faced with and goes extinct as a result? It's survival of the fittest right? Isn't survival of the fittest the mechanism by which natural selection takes place?

I'd say humans are far from natural in this day and age.

 

[cpp_is_king]

I'd say humans are far from natural in this day and age.

I'd say that everything that exists in the universe is, by definition, natural.

 

[Joni]

What is it then, when a species can't adapt to the circumstances it's faced with and goes extinct as a result? It's survival of the fittest right? Isn't survival of the fittest the mechanism by which natural selection takes place?

What natural mechanism is killing these lions then? They're being hunted by humans as trophies, they're being killed by the lack of room for cities, ... They're not adapting to a natural predator, they're not being outfoxed by their prey, ...

I'd say that everything that exists in the universe is, by definition, natural.

And that is not true, humankind as a whole is rejecting natural selection with our medicine. We're by definition trying our best to make sure even the weakest of our species survive. Baby's born at 5 months for instance.

 

[Fuzzery]

Ok? Don't know why people cared that much about this guy in the first place

 

[Shadax the wizard]

I'd say that everything that exists in the universe is, by definition, natural.

About as natural as your avatars boobs

 

[Pyramid head]

What is it then, when a species can't adapt to the circumstances it's faced with and goes extinct as a result? It's survival of the fittest right? Isn't survival of the fittest the mechanism by which natural selection takes place?

Natural selection describes the process of creatures with certain advantages or traits, like 'having a longer neck' or 'being a darker colour' surviving better under situations like changes in environment. Humans developing tools with which to systematically wipe out entire species doesn't really fall under this. Unless you think there might be a subset of bulletproof lions thriving out there?

 

[cpp_is_king]

What natural mechanism is killing these lions then? They're being hunted by humans as trophies, they're being killed by the lack of room for cities, ... They're not adapting to a natural predator, they're not being outfoxed by their prey, ...

What makes humans an unnatural predator? The fact that we're using guns? I don't buy it, our intelligence and power of thought gave us the ability to create those guns.

Anyway, I looked it up and it looks like I was wrong about one thing (and I should have known better, as I've made this mistake before, but it still trips me up). Namely that natural selection refers to differential reproduction.

 

[direct_quote]

I'd say that everything that exists in the universe is, by definition, natural.

I think preserving biodiversity is a good enough reason, because in some cases losing biodiversity can have a negative effect on ecological systems..

 

[Link]

why is there any sympathy towards someone who killed an animal for no other reason than for a trophy?

he did it illegally, he killed a member of an endangered species, and has now taken away money that Cecil funded as a tourist attraction and for research.

but hey, I mean, don't ruin his life and all, it's not like he made any sort of decision in all of this.

I hear that Cecil was no angel.

 

[cpp_is_king]

And that is not true, humankind as a whole is rejecting natural selection with our medicine. We're by definition trying our best to make sure even the weakest of our species survive. Baby's born at 5 months for instance.

If it abides by the laws of physics and the laws of the universe, it's natural. That's what it means. The opposite of natural in this context is not artificial, it's supernatural.

 

[entremet]

That's not what I'm saying at all. Yea the dentist is a twat for hunting a protected lion and honestly should face a judge in either US or Zimbabwe for luring out a protected lion since one would hope there are laws about such (apparently not). But that's as far as my outrage/emotional response goes.

Punish the guy, make him do community service, charge him $50,000-$100,000 or whatever needs to be done. But this whole outrage, "let's destroy his life, he needs to suffer for this" mentality is so trippy and honestly...dumb.

I often wondered if people in Zimbabwe were as angry and outraged as people in the US were then I found out...no, not really. Then read the article and it put things in perspective for me. I mean back in August a guide was killed by a lion in Hwange national park, I'm willing to bet 95% of people who are outraged don't even know where/what Hwange National Park is or what it has to do with anything.

Yep.

 

[Jakten]

I'd say that everything that exists in the universe is, by definition, natural.

It may have an origin in nature but natural is a term humans created to differentiate what humans had a hand in versus what occurs outside of human interaction. The word natural means not made by humankind.

Rocks are naturally occurring but a house is not. Metal is naturally occurring but a bullet is not. Problem is, human beings often kill the fittest or healthiest animals. That's the opposite of what survival of the fittest means. Survival of the fittest means the weak of the species die off and the strong procreate. Humans have a different process of selection from nature.

A gun has no bearing on the how strong or healthy you are. I could be the most disease ridden, stupid, scrawny human and kill the strongest, healthiest lion. It's unnatural selection.

 

[OriginofHysteria]

I hear that Cecil was no angel.

I heard Cecil was an anti-semetic from his brother.

Btw, I'm just going to echo some sentiments that have been mentioned here already but I don't think his private practice and his life should be ruined. This is a matter for the courts to decide, not an internet mob.

 

[GaimeGuy]

Mass extinctions are part of natural seleciton. Maybe when huminity is extinct due to our own self destructive behaviour there will be another more intelligent species that comes along and points out that humans were just dumb mammals who failed to evolve in a way that enabled their survival.

Natural selection does not mean "Shit happens"

 

[Joni]

If it abides by the laws of physics and the laws of the universe, it's natural. That's what it means. The opposite of natural in this context is not artificial, it's supernatural.

That is not what natural means in that context. The counter is artificial. Otherwise you are arguing that dogbreeding, GMO and the likes are also natural selection.

 

[cpp_is_king]

That is not what natural means in that context. The counter is artificial. Otherwise you are arguing that dogbreeding, GMO and the likes are also natural selection.

Natural selection is a process that takes place on the cellular level when reproduction occurs. And yes, I know that's contrary to what I said earlier, but I already admitted I was wrong earlier. You could breed humans and dogs to together, and if you could somehow make offspring come out of that, I would argue that natural selection still takes place because it has nothing to do with how or why two things are reproducing, and only to do with the cellular aspects of the reproductive process.

 

[Jakten]

First of all, natural selection is a process that takes place on the cellular level when reproduction occurs. And yes, I know that's contrary to what I said earlier, but I already admitted I was wrong earlier. You could breed humans and dogs to together, and if you could somehow make offspring come out of that, I would argue that natural selection still takes place because it has nothing to do with how or why two things are reproducing, and only to do with the cellular aspects of the reproductive process.

I don't think you know what you are talking about, those processes would have to be artificially manipulated by a human for them to work. This is why if you have sex with your dog it won't have hybrid babies. The individual elements that comprise the process are natural but nothing would happen without the artificial manipulation. People forced it to happen so nature didn't "select" it. I'm also not sure what hybrid-species babies has to do with killing an animal now.

 

[Siegcram]

You could breed humans and dogs to together, and if you could somehow make offspring come out of that, I would argue that natural selection still takes place because it has nothing to do with how or why two things are reproducing, and only to do with the cellular aspects of the reproductive process.

That's nonsense.

 

[cpp_is_king]

I don't think you know what you are talking about, those processes would have to be artificially manipulated by a human for them to work. This is why if you have sex with your dog it won't have hybrid babies. The individual elements that comprise the process are natural but nothing would happen without the artificial manipulation. People forced it to happen so nature didn't "select" it. I'm also not sure what hybrid-species babies has to do with killing an animal now.

I said *if* you could somehow make offspring come out of that. Obviously you can't. The point is that GMO, dog breeding, any other kind of "artificial" breeding scenarios you can come up with are irrelevant. Natural selection still occurs. Dog breeding you literally just take two dogs, stick them in a room, and let them have sex. Natural selection does not refer to the process of dogs finding their own mates, it refers to what happens when the sperm meets the egg, and the traits of the offspring are selected in the process.

Edit: Apparently some literature on the internet agrees with you, but I still think it's stupid. For example, there's this:

Also called selective breeding, artificial selection is perhaps best understood as a contrast to natural selection, where the random forces of nature determine which individuals survive and reproduce. In both cases, the outcome is the same: a population changes over time, so that certain traits become more common.

Which is complete nonsense. The actions of humans are a random force of nature! How do you think humans got here? How do you think our brains evolved into what they are? The distinction between human intervention and non-human intervention is completely arbitrary. Some species kill off their own young if they're too small because they want their lineage to remain strong. Is this still natural selection, because it's caused by the intentional actions of a non-human instead of the intentional actions of a human? Even if you want to draw a distinction between humans and non-humans, the distinction is meaningless in my opinion.

 

[Triggerhappytel]

I'd say that everything that exists in the universe is, by definition, natural.

Sure, but if there's an oil spill in the Pacific and as a result a species of sea lions go extinct, that's not natural selection.

 

[Jakten]

I said *if* you could somehow make offspring come out of that. Obviously you can't. The point is that GMO, dog breeding, any other kind of "artificial" breeding scenarios you can come up with are irrelevant. Natural selection still occurs. Dog breeding you literally just take two dogs, stick them in a room, and let them have sex. Natural selection does not refer to the process of dogs finding their own mates, it refers to what happens when the sperm meets the egg, and the traits of the offspring are selected in the process.

The act of dogs having sex is a natural function yes but they didn't naturally select each other. A human did based off of traits they prefer, usually for reasons beneficial to the animal.

Natural selection absolutely refers to animals choosing their own mates. It also refers to the quality of the mates they choose and how that determines the survival of their genes and species. Not what we choose for them.

 

[DoktorEvil]

The Internet Mob will destroy whomever it feels morally bankrupt, in spite of what laws currently exist designed to punish offenders.

He seems really tone deaf in regards to whole ordeal. "If I had known it had a name..." Just shut the fuck up guy it's not about that. Stop hunting these amazing animals for sport. It's barbaric and you are a piece of shit for participating. Yes, I am mad. Knowing my children will not see some of the most beatiful creatures on Earth because of a man made extinction disgusts me.

*beautiful

I wasn't aware that this guy was hunting lions located within zoos. I should let the Bronx Zoo know just in case.

 

[Darksol]

I really hate the ambiguity of language sometimes. You didn't "take" the animal, you fuckhead, you murdered it.