tvashtarkatena

Regarding the orca and seagull, the answer may well be 'none of the above'. And given our propensity for misunderstanding, despite language, science, and all the rest, I'd wager we'll increasingly find that our behavior is more pre-programmed than many of us would like to think.

Kruger National Park sells elephant jerky in the gift shop. I asked a ranger about it. He told me that, while all large animal populations in the park are controlled to prevent environmental degradation, elephants must be culled by family group, rather than individual. This is part mercy, part safety, he explained. Elephants really don't forget, and after a period of mourning, they become angry and very dangerous. I went on a four day guided walk in Umfolozi - another SA NP. Before heading out, we were instructed on what to do if we were charged by an animal - rhino (slowly move towards a large visual object like a tree - don't move as they (hopefully) run past you), cape buffalo (climb a tree, even if its an acacia with 3 inch thorns), lion (stand your ground), hippos (don't camp on riverbanks and, for gods sake, swim elsewhere), etc. "You didn't mention elephant" I commented. "Don't piss an elephant off" he replied. Apparently, there is no escape from an elephant if it wants a piece of you and you don't happen to have 2 well trained guys with .458s handy to even the playing field.

The fun will really begin when we make contact with another advanced apex predator.

1000+ extra solar planets and rising is kinda cool, too. We'll find extraterrestrial life within 3 or 4 years, but it won't be on Mars, or anywhere else in our solar system. It'll take a bit longer for that.

The objects depicted certain look like something one could philate if so inclined. Preferably not during a re-entry burn.

Touche LOL

The animal rights debate will become stickier in the future. That might be good practice for the inevitable sentient machine rights debate.

You were, indeed, exposed here. Humans see animal intelligence and emotional range through a very narrow lens. We don't see most of what they do in the wild, our experiments are simplistic, and we've only crudely deciphered a tiny fraction of their languages. Adaption, nature's analog for distributed artificial intelligence, can seem like cognitive prowess - during his recent visit my biologist nephew told me of a spider that preys on other spiders than can mimic over 50 different kinds of prey when pretending to be stuck in its prey's web. Even a polar bear, the most imaginative predator in the world, hasn't been observed to have as many tricks up its sleeve (although it comes close). Adaption sans higher intellect falls pretty short, however, when you observe, as I did in Vancouver several years back, 3 orcas after a marine show delicately balancing their last fish on their lower lip so they can tease the seagulls - presenting the fish, fading back - before gifting those fish to the seagulls in the end. It was the last part that really got me - lots of species play, but these animals have a strong sense of fairness that extends across the boundary of species - even a prey species no less. That's amazing. Or, perhaps, those orcas were practicing some less than amazing seagull catch and release because they weren't hungry and had some time to kill. Maybe they were inviting those seagulls to become lunch next time. It would be great to be able to ask them. We will eventually figure out how to communicate with orcas and the like. It will be interesting to hear their thoughts on their captivity and circus stardom.

Fuck all this tired bullshit, my niece just got engaged to a really great guy!

and opinions are like assholes

Labeling requirements constitute compelled commercial speech, and have been at the center of several free speech cases. Here's a piece about the FDA's new requirement to add graphio anti smoking warnings on ciggies: linky From Citizens United to this, folks often don't consider the idea that the government must provide some proof of harm when attempt to either restrict or compel speech. Regardless of how you feel about corporate campaign spending or smoking, you really want to think carefully before wishing for a world where the government can so limit speech without having to provide a compelling reason, with supporting data, for that action. Think about that world for a bit.

There's a seat in Congress waiting for him.

This is not true, and there have been no libel challenges to GMO Free labeling to date. Such a challenge would be unlikely - given that 'peanut free' and a host of other 'xxxx free' labels are commonplace, and that such labels make no direct critic or health claims against producers or their products. Currently, a minority of the states have food disparagement laws. That's not to say such laws should not be a concern. Any law which limits free speech should be considered very carefully. Our food industy's impact on the environment is as big a disaster as our current state of health - largely caused by same, so I would expect that industry to use every means to defend itself against this emerging realization. Suing for a GMO Free label probably won't be one of these action, IMO.

THere's a storm a-comin... Take Shelter! And to think this poor guy just thought he was sprucing up an anchor rather than inciting the Hate State of Ah Rea'y Gone to secede from the Climbing Union. The usual tempest in an herbal tea cup. Ah, life in a pampered country!

Not lighting them on fire just before dropping them was a missed opportunity.

Is this, like, 7th grade? Later, my brother.

I enjoy it. But hey, this is no time for drama, cuz There's a storm a-comin! You cannot make this shit up. The general public doesn't give two shits about what climbers do. Whatever storm you're going on about is hawt climber on climber action. That's some new school shit right there, man.

I'm not judging you, but you do act like a tool on occasion - like now, for example. I don't really give a shit if you Oregon boys shut every one of your climbing areas down for good, frankly. Cockblock each other at will. That seems to be more important than climbing to you southerners. Knock yourselves out. The granite's all up here anyway.

Yes, long after the Smiffholes have cockblocked the place for other climbers, Dtown will still be WA STYLE GOOD TIMES.

WTF is in the water down there, anyway? Jaysus.

storms can blow both ways.

There was this kid named Rudy Campodonica in High School who had a substantial learning disability. Poor kid got caught by some jocks in the locker room shower chocking it, and from then on he was known as Rudy Campobeatica. Now, every time I hear the name Rudy....

Actually, a farmer that purchases patented seeds that CAN be reproduced cannot subsequently plant those seeds to create a self sustaining supply without a specific contract allowing him to do so. Recent, interesting case in the midwest: The farmer purchased seed for feed, some of which he knew from experience contained patented Roundup Ready seeds. Rather than use them for feed, he planted, then Roundupped the shit out them. Only the Roundup Ready plants survived to produce more seeds. No contract with Monsanto, however. He was therefore shutdown in court.

Most likely all the same arguments we see in this campaign were used abroad. There is a dearth of scientific support for the assertion that GMOs are unhealthy. If you buy whole foods anyway, it's not much of an issue. If you buy lots of processed foods, um *cough*, GMOs should be the least of your concern. The effect of GMOs on the environment is the real issue - one that is, unfortunately, fantastically complicated and unsettled - and therefore not cut and dry. I'm for moving away from factory monoculture to more sustainable food production for about 100 reasons. This seems like a poorly crafted hippy sideshow to me, however, and one that brings little advantage to a voluntary labeling approach to providing consumers choice and information. Why would a GMO Free company NOT put that on their label to gain a competitive advantage?

I522's requirement not to simply append existing FDA labeling, but instead require what is essentially a warning label on the product front very much implies that GMOs are bad. Classic overreach, and one that will kill the entire project should it pass. This is about punishment, not 'providing information'. Talk to its supporters - its an insult a minute once you start asking salient questions. It all boils down to punishing agribusiness, not 'providing choice'. If it was, voluntary GMO FREE labels would be the direction for offering that choice.