Prad on Towards Freedom

Scuro

Sun, 01 Dec 2024 16:00:36 -0800

A long winding adventure that tells the tale of how a 2024 Fiat 500e became the Kyron’s first car.

This is a complex story so we have organized it into headings.

(All photos unless otherwise indicated are by Kyron.)

Initializations

It all began with rats.

Rats! They fought the dogs and killed the cats.
(Prad Piper)

Well not really. Rats are not the horrid varmints that some people make them out to be. They’re actually resourceful and imaginative creatures who make the most with the cards they have been dealt. Few appreciate what a hard life it can be for a rat.

My son, Kyron, who has been rescuing animals ever since he was born, has helped many a rat in our mini sanctuary. Each has its own unique personality and interests, such as this one who liked staying on his shoulder fascinated by the sound while I played the organ.

Aficionado of organ music (Photo by Prad)

Before telling you about the role of rats, I will provide some background, as I do throughout the story here, so that you can better understand things in context. I will even provide you with links if you are inclined to research things to the utmost!

The Rils

In 2018, my wife of countless decades, Ranjana, made one of her astonishingly astute acclamations, deciding we should only drive electric vehicles. After some research, we bought 2 Nissan Leafs from a fine salesman at Campus Nissan named Frank Pecorelli. He worked very hard to get us the best deal possible and arrange for us to maximize the government grants that were available at that time.

One car was silver, a 2013 leaf, and the other was a dark blue, a 2018 leaf. They glowed like gemstones! So, inspired by Tolkien’s silmarils, we named them Silveril and Sapphiril.

The Two Rils (Photo by Prad)

Silveril must have had magical properties because its range seemed to increase as we drove it. Once due to a miscalculation, it showed we had run out of range, but I still managed to make it home! After six years, I changed its parking location under a tree. Unfortunately, sap from the tree dripped onto it, but more seriously, a group of rats decided to make their home under the hood! We did not realize what had happened till one day when we tried to pop open the charging compartment and it wouldn’t work. The rats had chewed through some of the wiring and had also utilized a part of the hood as their lavatory. In fact, we were told by our trusted Shawnigan Lake Garage that before anyone could work on the wiring, the car would have to go in for a major cleaning.

Fortunately, ICBC covered rodent damage. When I asked the assessor, Robert Lise, for a recommended merchant, he said I could take it wherever I want, but ICBC approved dealerships made the job easier because they did the paperwork for us. So I started calling around and though the first two places tried to be helpful they did not know how to proceed. The third phone call led me to Duncan Dodge, and a very nice lady named Crystal, who knew exactly what to do! She was remarkably efficient and to my surprise, she told me to bring the car in that same day! One of their service agents, Sean looked after the repair work liaising with Robert. The entire job including courtesy rides and paperwork was done in less than two days!

Our Next Car

I was so impressed, I had Crystal hook me up with one of their salespeople, Richard, because I planned to buy our next car from this fine dealership! I told Richard that we likely wouldn’t buy for awhile and that I didn’t want to waste his time, but he said I wasn’t wasting his time at all and he’d be happy to do research and send me items whenever they met the requirements I had set. Those requirements eventually lead to 2 possibilities, the Bolt and the Fiat 500e.

On Saturday, November 9th Richard told us he had a couple of Fiats available for us to look at and was willing to talk to his manager to bring in some Bolts, but we went to the Island GM dealer up the road to look at those after test driving one of the Fiats at Duncan Dodge. When we got to the GM dealership, Kyron realized he had accidentally swiped the key for the Fiat we had just driven. That made me think that this Fiat was indeed the car we were going to get, but I took the key back right away to Richard telling him that now he wouldn’t have to check up on his inventory because of the enthusiasm my son had shown.

By the time I got back to the GM dealership, Kyron had already looked at one of the Bolts and we were waiting for the salesguy who didn’t want to talk to Kyron till I returned for some reason. He seemed to be busy with some other clients even though we had set an appointment to meet with him. I asked Kyron what he thought of the Bolt and it wasn’t much. Rather than waiting around for this salesguy, I said “Let’s just go”. As we were driving out, the aforementioned salesguy came rushing out to find out why we weren’t waiting around for him. I told him simply that we didn’t like the Bolt and we were going to get the Fiat. He warned us that having sold both types of cars, he would never get a Fiat, and I felt like telling him that he wasn’t the one getting the car so he really had nothing to worry about, but I repressed this retort, since my son was in the car, and I felt I should set a good example for him.

That very Saturday evening, Richard made arrangements for us through his sales manager Jeremy, to take the Fiat on their dealership insurance and license plate until we could buy it a few days later trading in Silveril at our convenience! Though I didn’t have the funds to pay for the car for a few weeks, Richard had emailed me indicating I could get it financed at no interest/down if I wanted to move on this sooner. He also added that he was on our side, and if we wanted to arm-wrestle about the price, he’d go to bat for us. I thought this sort of thing to be a rather purile way to make a deal, and told Richard that we don’t do business that way. They can give us their best offer and we’d either accept it or move on. As it turned out, the offer they made us, was quite suitable, so we accepted!

Another fine fellow name Danny arranged for the background information to deal with the finances. Danny took an interest in Kyron’s music career too, since he was a folk singer himself. It was agreed that we would get the car Wednesday, November 13th. They were very accommodating folks indeed!

Driving Kyron

Before continuing with this story we need to flashback to how Kyron got around to driving - because he never wanted to! (Actually, neither he not I particularly liked to drive, even though we as a project resuscitated a 1981 Eagle named Kiyreagle, thus enjoying the car without driving it.)

At the end of Grade 1, Kyron asked if he could homeschool till he was 20. As a homeschooler, he was able to explore and acquire expertise in numerous areas such as music, science, photography, and computer science, unburdened by the education system’s mandatory curriculum. His skills in the latter field grew to the extent that a professor at Caltech was interested in having him study there.

When he was 17, I reminded him that 20 wasn’t that far off and asked what was it he was planning to do when he reached that age. With a big smile he said “Home university!” - which he did! So since most of his activities were centred around the home, he rarely required transportation elsewhere that he couldn’t manage on a bicycle. Driving was the furthest thing from his mind.

However, when he turned 24, he enrolled in the Victoria Conservatory of Music vocal course. To get to class, we would drive him from Shawnigan Lake to Langford. From there, he would take the bus and we would pick him up in Langford when he was finished. Often, due to his schedule, we’d have to take him all the way to downtown Victoria and pick him up from there.

Additionally, Ranjana would drive him to all his concerts and performances, because she enjoyed being part of his audience. Two years later, he was accepted into the University of Victoria music program where he earned his Bachelors degree. After that, he moved to Victoria for a couple of years to do his Masters, but then returned home again when COVID hit in 2020. He started teaching at both institutions as well as performing as a high demand baritone in Victoria. Additionally, he had established a reputation of being a talented photographer and his skills were regularly sought after.

Needless to say, he had to be driven to all things or had to take public transportation after being driven to the Victoria area.

So why had he not learned to drive yet?

One reason lay with his aversion to the activity in the first place. He tended to fall asleep in a car. Also he wasn’t that keen on rubbing shoulders with some of the crazy drivers out there that he had certainly witnessed as a passenger.

The other was his mother.

Radical Ranjana

Apparently, sometime after COVID when he had started working as a vocal teacher at both his former schools VCM and UVic, he had asked his mother if it was alright that he be driven for another year just so he could get organized. Ranjana however decided this was an opportunity to start an exclusive business with the very long title, The Prad and Ranjana Chauffeur Service for Kyron! My name came first because I did most of the driving - in fact, for a while (as between 2014-2024), all of the driving. Ranjana, no doubt, was doing some sort of essential administrative work for this exclusive business. Every trip to Victoria resulted in three more, one to get back, one to go down to pick him up, and one to come back. I could see there was a point to this when he was going to school because it was a big change for him, but after he started work he needed to acquire some independence.

When I brought up the point about her son doing his own driving to Ranjana, I was met with the stauchly steadfast statement, “I see nothing wrong with us driving him everywhere!”

A bit of background on Ranjana may help to alleviate your understanding of what she just said. (So will these links: Ranjana in Ottawa, Wedaches, A Far Far Better Thing, if you have the courage to follow them.)

To most, Ranjana appears to be a perfectly normal and highly intelligent person. I can certainly see why people would think that way, given that not only does she have her Bachelors, Masters, and Doctorate degrees, but she also had the brilliance to marry me. However, things are not always as they appear, for trepidation doth not reveal itself to most, willingly!

For instance, practically no one knows that Ranjana could easily have been a world champion race car driver! After we had attended an Aikido seminar in Montreal, she decided we had to get back to Toronto quickly. She drove the entire way and completed the trip in under 3 hours. I will not go through the computations to determine how fast she was traveling, but let it suffice to say that this trip would have been terrifying to not one but two provincial Departments of Transportation!

After that dashing display, I realized that an ordinary car would not stand much chance with her, and bought her a sports car, a brand new 1984 black Chrysler laser, turbocharged with the works!

Armed with this vehicle, Ranjana had opportunities to demonstrate her scintillatingly, superior skillset!

For instance, she is the only person I know, who can drive a car that actually talks to you telling that it is low on fuel, but chooses to heroically rebel against the inevitable, managing to repeatedly run out of gas.

Furthermore, she is the only person I know that police take a special interest in. When they set out a check point, they stop her while she’s going one way, and then they stop her again when she’s coming back. Perhaps they know something that even I don’t?

Admittedly, these are minor crises, so you may be wondering, how does she handle something really serious?

Once we were driving to Stratford, Ontario to Shakespeare ourselves, and were confronted with an impatient (I could use alternate terminology, but I don’t want to set a bad example), illegally crossing the double lines to pass another car coming the other way. It would have been a certain head-on high speed crash! Without hesitation, Ranjana accelerated her powerful sports car onto the soft shoulder, preventing the accident, and leaving behind the now stunned driver of the other car, fearfully stopped, trembling in the middle of the road!

Talking Kyron into driving

So, given the circumstances and his immediate plans, Kyron was in no hurry to learn to drive. What he was hoping to do, may have been to delay things till FSD (full self-driving) cars became available.

However, I wasn’t so optimistic even though I certainly thought FSD was the way to do things. It was just too far in the future and there would likely be several complications. Kyron needed his independence and I needed to get alternate employment.

So I talked to him directly in an appropriately logical fashion. I told him that while his mother was quite happy to drive him everywhere till the end of time, his ability to do things would be greatly restricted by relying on others for transportation. He was willing to drive in order to help out at home, of course, but I told him that that wasn’t the point I was conveying.

He thought about moving back to Victoria, but calculated it would be much more expensive than commuting even the way we were now with 4 trips. There would also be issues with renting a decently located place with sufficient wifi bandwidth (a problem he’d encountered while doing his Masters degree).

Then we looked into the possibility of electric bikes. Ranjana opposed obstructively objecting with “It’s too dangerous”, revelling with relish in her role as the excessively protective mother. Kyron and I however, saw some merit in the idea despite the problems the rainy season would offer. However, considering that the cost of a decent electric bike was more than what Silveril would bring on resale, the idea was abandoned.

After considering flexibility of movement, capability of carrying equipment, accountability of expenses, it became evident that the best option was to learn to drive.

So I contacted our excellent agent Paula at Westland Insurance and told her Kyron was going to learn to drive. She was delighted and said how exciting that would be, to which I replied, “Yes. Poor baby is only 34 years old!” With typical efficiency she set Kyron up to drive Sapphiril.

Kyron took the written driving test and went out with me several times. Though hesitant at first, he quickly gained confidence and was driving like a pro within a week! It was actually quite amusing being in the car with him, because he’d make snide but accurate comments about the improper drivers he encountered, such as tailgaters, speeders, and lane ignorers. He noticed practically everything and had something to say about it. He even commented on his mother’s present speeding tendencies which, while no longer like the Montreal-Toronto debacle, were under excruciating scrutiny! Ranjana came to me one day complaining that Kyron had been hassling her for driving 5 km/hr over the speed limit.

With his Learner license, Kyron could now share half the trip, so I had no issues letting Ranjana do most of the driving allowing me to moonlight into a different profession.

Kyron developed into a fine driver not showing any indication of having inherited his mother’s Autoban genes. After getting his New Driver license, Kyron was happily soloing with Sapphiril to all those activities we used to have to drive him to.

“I don’t want a car”

While Richard had been sending me possibilities for our next car, Kyron had been telling me he saw no point in getting his own car. So I told Richard, that Kyron categorically said “No!” to getting his own car. Now, you must understand that this refusal was not because Kyron was trying to make Sapphiril his car at all. His refusal was a pattern of ’not wanting’ that had been prevalent from his childhood. It was actually quite a mature attitude of non-indulgence that you can read about in The Old Man, a title given to him by his nursery school teacher.

It is true that we didn’t really need another car at this point, but what Kyron hadn’t taken into account was the original rationale for getting Sapphiril. This car was equipped with major safety features and conveniences that weren’t available in Silveril. We had originally bought this car to facilitate Ranjana’s driving because she has severe arthritis.

Ranjana, always supporting her son, claimed with increasingly indignant insistence that she could drive Silveril just fine, but Kyron knew it wasn’t as good for her as Sapphiril. So he changed his mind immediately agreeing to get his own car.

I emailed Richard and told him we wanted to see the Fiat bringing us to that Saturday of November 9th when Kyron found his Fiat!

However, it was not to be!

You can’t buy this car!

Kyron and I went up to Duncan Dodge on Wednesday, November 13 in the Fiat Dodge Duncan had kindly let us drive since Saturday. When we arrived, we learned that Richard wasn’t going to be there, but Jeremy would look after us and we just needed to wait for Jen to implement the financial details. I took the opportunity to thank both Sean and Crystal, pointing out that their service was what had convinced me to get the car from here.

Then the surprises began.

When we met with Jen, she indicated the interest payments we would have to make for the car. I told her that Richard had said, we could get the car for no interest till February when we’d have the full amount. She said that wasn’t correct, and that dealerships don’t do financing that way. I found this turn of events to be peculiar, but Jen went and checked with Jeremy who apparently confirmed this. She said that Richard may have misunderstood the situation.

I told Jen that I wasn’t thrilled by this alteration, but if that is the only way for us to get the car, then, we’d pay the full amount in a couple of days after I acquired the money. Jen seemed fine to go ahead with things, but Jeremy suddenly appeared looking very unhappy.

He began apologizing profusely then dropped a bombshell - we couldn’t buy this car despite our agreement, despite the fact the trade-in for Silveril was already done, because, believe it or not, Duncan Dodge couldn’t sell it! The car was something they were showing for their sister store in Nanaimo.

He said the only way we could buy a Fiat, would be to go to Nanaimo and buy a similar Fiat through that store! He again apologized and said that he was never informed of the situation. He would completely understand if we cancelled the entire deal and took back Silveril.

I thought cancellation would be best at this point.

We had another problem in that I had terminated Sapphiril’s insurance for Kyron, so now he had no car to drive! Jeremy said he could extend the insurance for this Fiat for a day, but no more.

That would not be sufficient given Kyron’s busy schedule, so we simply cancelled everything, took back Silveril, and left Duncan Dodge on good terms. They had treated us well, but had some internal communication errors, so we didn’t think ill of them at all despite the surprises. Besides, we had to figure out what Kyron was going to drive within a couple of hours!

So as we drove home, I told Ranjana what had happened. She immediately called Paula to see if Kyron could be reinstated on Sapphiril right away. Well, you can always count on Paula - we have for years! By the time we got home, Paula had prepared all the necessary paperwork through Docusign and I was able to do almost everything online. I just had to go in to see her, and Kyron would be all set up again!

When we arrived at Westland Insurance, Kyron received a phone call from Nanaimo Dodge. They had learned what had taken place and were willing to bring the same trim Fiat to our doorstep! We thought this was indeed very decent of them, but I told Kyron to just hold off so we can think out things a bit. Since he could drive Sapphiril again, there was no longer an urgency.

As you’ll see, waiting proved to be the ultimate salvationary choice in the story!!

How dark the cloud behind the silver lining!

After Kyron left for Victoria in Sapphiril, I started to think of possibilities. I wanted to know for instance, why there seemed to be 3 ways to buy a Fiat: through the Fiat website, through a dealership, and through the Fiat dealer in Victoria.

So I phoned the latter and was greeted by someone (Heather) identifying the dealership as Alfa Romeo Victoria. Thinking I had the wrong number, I asked if they knew how I could contact the Fiat dealership and was surprised to learn that they were the Fiat dealership. I was transferred to one of their salespeople, Sebastian (aka Seba).

I asked him several questions and each answer impressed me with its precision and detail. Never did I sense any attempt to do a ‘sales pitch’, for here was someone who had such confidence in his product and service, that such gymnastics were unnecessary and undesirable! I told him how it came about that I had called his dealership, providing a brief history. I emphasized that I had nothing bad to say about Duncan Dodge and that we really had been treated very well by those nice people despite the eventual outcome.

Seba then obliquely gave me some very sound wisdom. He said they may be nice, but they need to know their product. That really struck home, because I realized at that moment that not only did Duncan Dodge not know they couldn’t sell us the car, but on more than one occasion, Kyron told them something they didn’t know about their own Fiat!

It was much worse than that though.

Seba was about to walk me through EV101, but I told him we’d been driving EVs for six years. He was quite pleased and said I must know about the government grants then. I said we did, and that we’d get a $5000 federal grant, and that, we were told Kyron could apply for the $4000 provincial grant after we’d bought the Fiat.

Seba was a bit shocked and told me, “No! You must apply first and then after the application comes through, then you buy the car!”

I was more than a bit shocked!

Had the sale completed at Duncan Dodge or had we followed through on Nanaimo Dodge’s offer, we would have lost the $4000 grant!!

It became clear that some Fiat Angel had been looking out for us all this time! The silver lining was that the failed deal led us to Alfa Romeo, but the cloud behind it was far more morbid than we had realized!

I assured Seba that we weren’t going to buy anything till we had a chance to meet with him!

Step into a New World!

Seba, Kyron, and I exchanged some emails that evening and in one of them Kyron outlined the entire deal Duncan Dodge was offering for the Fiat and the Silveril trade-in. We arranged to go to the dealership the very next day.

When we arrived on Thursday morning, November 14th, in Sapphiril (Silveril needed charging), we learned that Seba couldn’t be there due to a doctor’s appointment and were greeted by the salesmanager, Pietro.

After the first few minutes with him, it became clear to us that we were at a high-end dealership. They were high-end, not because they sold expensive exotic cars (the Fiat is actually the least expensive EV on the market!), but because their level of service rose right to the top! They weren’t trying to sell us a car, they were doing their best to make sure we got the car that was right for us and in the right way!

This is how business really should be done by both sides. No haggling, no nickel and dime thumb twisting, where you may gain a few dollars, but at the loss of integrity of both parties. With them, we work together to achieve a mutually desirable state.

Kyron told Pietro that we would get the car from them and that the Silveril trade-in had no bearing on the sale. If we got a decent price on the trade-in, we’d accept. Otherwise, we’d give Silveril to charity. Pietro said he appreciated Kyron’s transparency, but thought he could give us a better deal than Duncan Dodge. Furthermore, he encouraged us to take advantage of their $0 interest over 3 years financing (completely contradicting what we had been told by Duncan Dodge)! He’d have to see Silveril first of course. We drove back to Shawnigan Lake so I could bring the car down that afternoon.

Pietro checked it out, test drove it, sat down to scribble numbers on a piece of paper, then showed me the results. I asked how he had come up with the very interesting $3173 trade-in value. What he had done was taken the Duncan Dodge offer and added the finance charge to it, so we’d be covered even for that! True to his word, he did $600 better in total than what we’d been offered before.

For the financing, he introduced me to Alex, who would do the honors including the Silveril transfer on Saturday, November 16th when everything would be ready. Finally, Pietro said, “Welcome to the family!”

Pietro was willing to send me home in a cab, but I felt that kindness would be too much since a trip from Victoria to Shawnigan Lake was over $100. So he charged up Silveril for me so I would have no concerns getting home.

While we waited we had a long chat about various topics.

I told him that Kyron had named the car Scuro, and he was surprised that an Italian name had been chosen. I explained that my son was a vocal and diction instructor at the University of Victoria and the Victoria Conservatory of Music, so he was familiar with various languages. In fact, he thought Pietro had a very fine singing voice! Pietro was pleased by the assessment, but thought his Italian accent was too heavy. I said singers often try to develop the correct inflections when singing in other languages, and that he therefore had a headstart!

I learned that he had done work at the University of Calabria in hospitality and told him it showed!

He had somehow surmised that I was a teacher and we talked about my background. We also covered areas such as diet, health, and awareness. It was really quite a delightful conversation and indeed, I felt welcomed to this Alfa Romeo family!

When the charging was done for Silveril, Pietro jokingly said, “Be careful with the car, because it’s my car now.” I said he had nothing to worry about because I really was a very conscientious driver. He seemed reassured, till I mentioned that Ranjana was less inclined to be so, relating the Montreal-Toronto cataclysm. Then I removed my hood and after he recovered from the reflective radiance emanating from my head, I said, “Did you know that before I met my wife, I had a full head of hair?”

Noting the look of deep consternation that had suddenly come over his face, I allayed his fears, telling him that Ranjana rarely drove Silveril, causing Pietro to burst into the uncontrollable laughter of relief, still squinting from the glare.

Finally Home

On Saturday, November 16, Kyron and I drove down in Sapphiril to pick up Scuro, and were greeted by Seba, accompanied by his assistant in training, Matthew.

Then the surprises began.

But different ones this time!

Seba told us that since we had an unfortunate experience earlier, they had prepared something special. We followed him to a showroom and found Scuro meticulously gift-wrapped for us.

Scuro Gift Wrapped Backview

Scuro Gift Wrapped Frontview

Then Matthew and Seba unwrapped Scuro!

(See the Alfa Romeo Victoria page in our businesses section for kudos to this superb dealership.)

We have never encountered a gesture such as this!

Kyron went through the first-delivery as Seba explained various points to him. Their second-delivery would take place at a later date after Kyron had a chance to drive the car for a while. Seba also assured us that anytime we had any questions about Scuro, they would be there for us. They certainly do honor to the family concept!

Then Alex showed up to handle all the finance paperwork which included various protective packages we could add on, all covered within the 3 year, no interest loan! He went over all the details, answering our questions with careful thoroughness. I was quite amazed by his smooth handling of a massive number of forms! When we did the insurance with an outside agent (Emily), he was there to make sure there was no unnecessary duplication of benefits!

Alex showed the same level of thoughtfulness and consideration that Seba and Pietro had earlier! It was quite evident that we had acquired much more than a car!

Finally, everything was done and there was nothing left but for Kyron to drive away in Scuro. Pietro appeared at that moment and with a mischievous smile told us, “This time you get to keep the car!”

And so we did!

Catzenjammer of the Vegan Kind

Wed, 05 Jun 2024 01:15:24 -0700

(Image generated by Microsoft Designer.)

This article deals with confusion and distress that can materialize for humans who put cats on vegan diets.

Catwalk addresses the issue from the cat’s personal situation, while Catacomb is oriented towards predicaments the cat’s guardian often faces. Rational for being aware of the mechanisms at play is provided in Catharsis.

Catwalk

The question on display here is:

If you are a vegan, should you be feeding your cats vegan?

Feeding your cats a vegan diet has nothing to do with whether you are a vegan or not.

Vegan diets for cats are well-established for more than three decades. These diets are clinically approved and offered by various companies. (See Vecado for example.)

The notion that cats are carnivores and therefore have to eat meat, is a fictitious one that does not apply the carnivore taxonomy appropriately. A carnivore is a classification based on certain physiological traits such as canine teeth, and short intestinal tracts. These traits enable carnivores to process animal products more easily than say herbivores. There is no necessity for meat consumption though (as one of many such examples, see Jed Gillen’s book Obligate Carnivore). Cats require specific nutrients, not specific delivery systems (see Vegan Cats 101 article).

Those that cattack vegan diets for cats usually do a catwalk along this yellow brick road.

Embark with cats cannot survive on a vegan diet.
When the above is shown to be false empirically, the goal posts are moved to, cats may survive on a vegan diet, but they can’t thrive.
After again being foiled by empirical evidence showing thriving vegan cats, the last flail insists it’s not natural for cats to be on a vegan diet.

The problem with this ‘Appeal to Nature’ is that it is a logical fallacy (see definition or a more extensive article Natural = Good?). Note the effort falls apart when confronted with the fact that it is also not natural for cats to be eating kibbles or tinned food much of which actually has vegetable ingredients in it, by the way, as well as synthetic taurine. Cats are healthier and live longer (see Study Shows Cats Are Living Longer… ) than they did 40 years ago due to people doing unnatural things to cat food.

Catacomb

Filled with dead ideas that keep crawling out like zombies, the proselytizing centers around:

If you are a vegan but don’t feed your cats vegan, should you be allowed to insist that people coming to your house eat vegan?

Well it is your house right? Do you not make decisions on your own turf?

You really don’t have to justify your actions using the common ‘we have a choice to be vegan but cats don’t due to limited vegan options’. The argument is a moderately good one, but is not ubiquitously meaningful since cats really don’t have a choice other than the one you make for them.

If your friends, neighbors, family members, random visitors, or the carnivorous vegan police, don’t like your decisions, you should welcome them with open arms not to come to your house.

Cattacks here can follow these primary paths (responses are suggested in italics):

You are bringing non-vegan food into your house for your cat, therefore, I should be able to do the same!
Okay, I completely agree, that you should be able to bring my cat non-vegan cat food. Here are the brands that my cat likes …
You let your cat eat non-vegan, therefore I should be able to as well!
Here is a reality check: you are not a cat. Despite your wishfoolness, you really aren’t a cat. Even if you employ technology to promote such an idea as in the video below, you are still not a cat! Okay? So get over it! However, if it means that much to you, I will order some extra tins of cat food and you can share the same dinner with my cat.
- You are a hypocrite because you do non-vegan things yet claim you’re a vegan!
  Well this one is actually an attempted Kobayashi Maru gotcha to catapult a capitulation: If you are a vegan, and you feed your cat vegan, you are imposing your will upon your cat. However, if you are a vegan, and you feed your cat non-vegan, you are being a hypocrite. Notice the common element here has nothing to do with the cat or the cat’s diet. It has to do with your being a vegan!

Imposing your will is something that guardians do anyway as part of the job of bringing up cats, dogs, children, parents, or even a spouse. Doing so is part of being responsible and so long as your will benefits the subject, there is nothing wrong in such imposition.

The hypocrisy accusation though is more interesting.

First, one should understand that there is no logical fallacy of hypocrisy. So behaving as a hypocrite, does not make your argument incorrect. While your personal credibility may diminish with some, hypocrisy does not bear any consequence upon the argument itself.

For instance, even an animal abuser is correct when speaking out against animal abuse. The activities the individual engages in, have no bearing on the correctness of what is being spoken (ie that animals should not be subjected to abuse).

Activists often fall prey to the hypocrisy accusation, because they are under the misguided illusion that they must behave perfectly or what they say has no merit. On such matters, if you engage in earnest self-flagellation, you might as well stop breathing because you are killing microbes every time you inhale! In fact, such reasoning is gleefully catcalled thus: You aren’t vegan because you kill microbes, therefore I can eat corpse.

However, the above pout is merely an illustration of the Tu Quoque (you too) fallacy, explained in this Nobody Is Vegan example.

So, despite many being conditioned into believing that “Do as I say and not as I do” is a bad attitude, it needs to be understood that one’s personal actions do not alter the morality/validity of a statement.

Second, do realize that the ‘holier than thou’ attitude you are being accused of, is a result of the ‘holier than thou’ attitude that is already present in your accuser. In other words, I am so holy, that you are not entitled to accuse me of not being so holy, just because you’re a vegan! It is irrelevant whether you actually made any such accusation, because your being vegan becomes the accusation itself!

This of course leads to the reality that your accuser already knows that he or she is not very holy. Usually, to buffer such self-awareness, the accuser resorts to reciting numerous acts of Heavy Holiness such as:

I have a foster child in Africa
I gently take out spiders in my house
I only eat corpse parts once a week

Or in case of serious desperation, some conjure up a direct connection to the supreme being of their choice, announcing that “God gave us dominion over animals” which of course is just a precursor to not just speciesism, but its subsequent applications justifying racism, sexism, ableism, etc. Admittedly, having some god on your side can be of considerable convenience as Joan Baez’ beautiful singing illustrates:

We have often seen holiness play out with serious consequences. As one example, a Jehovah’s witness couple who used to visit us, went vegan advised by the wife’s doctor to restore her constitution. They complained to us that their usual circle attacked them mercilessly for such dietary blasphemy, to their total astonishment! They hadn’t even gone vegan for ethical reasons, but it seems some people really covet their neighbors’ greater holiness.

Catharsis

Knowing the terms of engagement in any encounter is important. However recognizing when these terms are being violated through fallacious argumentation, improper imposition, and frantic self-image validation is even more important.

Too often some allow bullies, intellectual or otherwise, to ram their views through while accusing you of doing the same. The saying “With friends like these, who needs enemies” becomes increasingly apparent in such situations.

Fortunately, recognition of the way the game is being played can be helpful and healthful, not only for your own peace of mind, but also if one hopes to instill some understanding in others.

Sidney Island Deer

Mon, 21 Aug 2023 22:36:50 -0700

In 2023 Parks Canada decided to slaughter all deer on Sidney Island British Columbia. This page provides information, resources, and updates on what is an unethical process on many levels. Sign the petition to Save the Sidney Island deer. The page is still in construction.

Letter to Stephanie Coulson, Parks Canada (request for public input)

Hi Stephanie!

Good stuff on the “Role of education, curiosity, and exploration in conservation” article for Raincoast. I read it with some interest having been an educator myself and helped to start Students Towards Environment Protection (some decades ago in our school). I found your ‘culture of conservation’ a rather intriguing concept!

My compliments on the thoroughness of the SIERP DIA - both scope and detail. Coastal Conservation has certainly created a detailed paper. It is good to see such a strong emphasis on mitigation and I’m sure that element will make many people feel good.

However, the credibility of the enterprise raises eyebrows considering that Coastal Conservation’s Head, Gregg Howald, is also the chair of SIERP. Why would Park’s Canada de-legitimize its own credibility by cahooting such an arrangement, especially since it was internally advised of this blatant conflict of interest:

“If CC gains financially or otherwise in some way from an approved eradication going forward, then [the Chair] should not be running the show – it’s a conflict of interest.” (FOI p306). I’m sure you are aware of the notorious FOI.

Beyond this guffaw, emerges the following issues:

1. Exactly how is shooting deer by the methods detailed in SIERP considered humane?

It isn’t humane and here’s why:

Helicopters and hunting dogs cause potential victims severe stress and fear!
Trained marksmen miss! In fact, often attempts at being humane require backtracking to shoot fallen/wounded deer multiple times.)
Outright violation of animal welfare! Specifically #10 of Wildlife and Rodent Control Standards “Lethal Methods are only be used when an animal’s presence is an ongoing threat to human health and safety” (FOI p389)
You wouldn’t do this to your dog or cat! Euthanasia may be humane, but this sort of slaughter just isn’t.

2. Was sterilization even considered seriously as an alternative?

It seems as though due diligence has not been done in this area. The readily accessible information shows that:

It is humane! We keep dog and cat populations under control this way.
It is cost effective in the longer term! Even if full eradication takes place, there is no guarantee of remaining deer-free and “Over time, the cumulative costs of sharpshooting outweigh the costs of surgical sterilization …” (Deer Population Control Methods – Cost & Effectiveness Comparison, Trapp)
It has been successful! There is evidence of effectiveness such as this article about White Buffalo Inc DeNicola’s activities which points out “Sterilization was controversial in San Jose because it worked … Some residents freaked out, worrying they’d lost too many deer”, as does (DeNicola’s) more academic, Sterilization as an alternative deer control technique: a review “In an increasing number of communities, however, lethal management strategies are rejected … Surgical sterilization is scale-limited based on the ability to capture and sterilize 80% or more of the female deer …”

3. What about GonaZonaSpayva?

Fertility control drugs have been used successfully for many years, so there is historical evidence demonstrating effectiveness:

Gonacon, Zonastat-D, Spayvac pZP do work (despite the naysayers’ chanting)
Fertility control can be, however, the most expensive route as per Cost & Effectiveness link above
The usual whine about these being 70% or so effective is flawed:
- it isn’t correct, since some studies demonstrated 100% (eg Fraker et al and more recently Botstiber)
- it doesn’t matter, because you don’t need 100% efficacy to get the restoration job done (everyone knows this including the Chair of SIERP “the numbers of deer on the Island have been reduced dramatically and the impacts of fallow deer are not really obvious …” FOI p219 item h)
- that the number of deer is indeed low is also confirmed by the Gulf Islands National Park Reserve Superintendent, Kate Humble: “… said while the number of fallow deer is currently relatively low” (AlaskaHighway News).

4. Are Fallow deer really an invasive species?

Not anymore. They were brought to James Island in 1902 and got to Sidney Island by 1960, so they’ve been here a while. They no more an invasive species than Europeans or Asians are now to Canada. We should take into account that:

the ecosystem has adapted to accommodate them on Sidney Island for 60+ yrs. As a Parks Canada ecological specialist writes (Ethics section of Freedom of Information Request): “… we could consider them naturalized and work to maintain the species …”
suddenly removing them, may not go well, despite all those the mitigation measures that appear so voluminously in SIERP
killing them all off in one place also doesn’t mean that they won’t come back from another. Even though SIERP claims that accounts of fallow deer swimming between Southern Gulf Islands in the 1930s is unsubstantiated … did they take the ferry then? … but this 2013 Times Colonist article by Judith Lavoie certainly indicate that they are fine swimmers.

5. Why can the deer population not be reduced through non-lethal means over a period of time?

Well it can, but certain factions for yet-to-be determined reasons don’t want to do it that way. Some of these objections are:

the current population continues to have a negative impact on the ecosystem EXCEPT it’s unclear how that can be when the population is so low as per above indications by Howald and Humble
relocation would transfer the problem elsewhere EXCEPT it is unclear whether the ’elsewhere’ would necessarily see these deer as a problem
contraceptives wouldn’t achieve Parks Canada’s goal in a timely way EXCEPT one has no idea what that is actually supposed to mean or why it should be so
considered sterilization and contraceptives, but these techniques do not allow for the removal of the population, which is the objective EXCEPT we have been led to believe that the objective was, in Humble’s own words there, “focus of this work is the restoration of a healthy ecosystem”

6. Guffaws Galore!

The above 5 points illustrate what seems to be a considerable disregard for science and ethics, but the behaviors highlighted by the FOI and various comments by ‘interested’ parties, make matters worse:

PC’s Emily Gonzales, Ecological Scientist asks about evidence for the SIERP claim that the deer population is “4 times greater than a healthy ecosystem can support” and goes on to say “I realize it would be nice to be able to make statements like this and you will be pressured by your managers … That doing so is something you’ll regret because they aren’t defensible values and don’t even make ecological sense …” (FOI p537). Later she adds about another statement, “I provide advice/feedback and some key problematic issues (IMO) keep showing up … my head and the wall are hurting."(FOI p538). [A painful head is quite understandable at this point.]
PC’s Michael Janssen, Forest Ecosystem Restoration Manager, on consideration of alternatives was met with this curious response (FOI p445) from Howald “If the purpose and need of the project is to eradication fallow deer to facilitate natural restoration … then you can narrow your alternatives dramatically … This way people see you considered them, but dismissed them because they don’t meet the P/N.” [So why is this starting to feel like a Machiavellian con-job?]
Continuing on from the ‘impacts of fallow deer are not really obvious’ we have from Howald’s notes (FOI p219): “it is unlikely that the BENEFIT of the eradication efforts will be clear on implementation. We need to consider how to bring out the BENEFIT side … One way we could do that is a mix of citizen science, or very targetted restoration potential … May be it is using peoples vegetable gardens or flower beds …” [A lemon car sales pitch?]
And we gotta keep it going forever and ever (see Biosecurity section in Freedom of Information Request): The CC Proposal advises: “It is important the biosecurity plan be maintained as needed in perpetuity because the long-term benefit of fallow deer removal to the biodiversity of Sidney Island will depend on continued project support from Parks Canada, Sallas, and the public to maintain a deer free island”. (page 139) [It’ll never end because bio-insecurity can be made eternal.]
Speaking of cars, let’s look at insurance “The key to this is that we are not taking on the liability, we are transferring liability to those who have insurance.” … “private landowners must rely on the insurance of the hunters rather than Coastal Conservation or any indemnity from Canada. This would be described in an “access agreement” with owners.”. [So this sounds like a way to force all landowners to comply? You’re with us or outaluck!]
What about the number of deer? From Parks Canada we get the extraordinarily bizarre “Parks Canada says the current fallow deer population is unknown but estimates between 300 and 900.” [Is this for real? Unknown or 300-900?! Did Parks Canada do the computations for Russia’s Luna-25?]
What about the landowners? 50 yea, 46 nay, 3 abstained, 11 absent which means 46+3+11=60 (54.5%) DID NOT say yea. That’s not even close to the 75% approval required by law. [So if the residents’ rights are upheld, there can be no slaughter, right? … Unless an exception is suddenly made to push through whatever agenda.]
To confuse the waters, we have Sidney Island resident, Michael Parfit (of Saving Luna fame), supporting the slaughter with sweeping statements like “Sidney Island can become an example of healthy ecosystems that can exist in British Columbia but have almost all vanished. It could show us what our province once was and could be again.” which seems to pre-suppose that slaughter is the only route and that everything is the deers’ fault. He belittles the obvious conflict of interest issue with the peculiar argument that we need “best talent for both planning and execution” which seems to miss the point of conflict of interest and its ramifications. He notes the irony that “though a majority of owners voted for the cull [they did??!!] , the most intense hunters are allying themselves in opposition with activists who care about keeping animals alive. Ironic? Yeah.” [Well yeah, Michael! When you have 2 diametrically opposing groups allying against you, we can be assured you are doing something really wrong! After all, it took something really wrong in Ukraine to bring together the Republicans and Democrats!]
And what about this seeking public input? According to Kate Humble: “the goal of asking for public feedback is not to determine whether the cull goes ahead but to get input on reducing negative impacts.” [Gee thx a lot Kate! The public can input, but who cares!]

Conclusions

So based on my research above, I come to these conclusions about this initiative:

it is hugely expensive and a burden on taxpayers
it is unquestionably inhumane
it is backed by insufficient/incorrect attempts at biological/ecological science
it stinks of deception, arrogance, and high-handedness (similar to the toxic soil fiasco in Shenanigan Lake some years ago)
it has the inappropriate goal of eradication rather than restoration (despite pretenses)
it should spend the 6 million on a good PR company instead of eradicators

Oh then there’s those conflict of interest fumes which pervade who knows where. Possibly we should rename Parks Canada to Perks Canada!

Anyway, thank you Stephanie for receiving my input on the matter and best wishes on your endeavors.

In friendship,
Prad Basu

Resource summaries and sites

Below listed in alphabetical order are links and summaries of webpages and sites relating to various aspects of the deer and general conservation issues. The resources are encompass areas such as animal welfare, conservation, management, and restoration. Many of the items have been referenced in the letter to Parks Canada.

(The summaries were mostly done by harpa.ai though one item Eradication and Restoration Options On Sidney Island has summaries produced by harpa, bing, and perplexity.)

Animal Alliance of Canada Opposed to Parks Canada Sidney Island Deer Eradication Plan

### Key Takeaway The Animal Alliance of Canada opposes Parks Canada’s plan to eradicate fallow deer on Sidney Island using aerial gunning and dog harassment, considering it unjustified, inhumane, and expensive.

### Summary

Parks Canada plans to eradicate fallow deer on Sidney Island through aerial gunning and dog harassment.
Sidney Island is part of Gulf Islands National Park and has around 100 lots overseen by a strata corporation.
Fallow deer were introduced to the island in 1908 for hunting, leading to a population growth to 3000 deer by the early 2000s.
About 2000 deer were killed in the 2000s, and current estimates suggest the population is around 300.
A UBC report from five years ago indicated a 30% improvement to the ecosystem since the peak population.
AAC West Coast Campaign Director Jordan Reichert questions Parks Canada’s claim that the ecosystem isn’t regenerating and the current deer population isn’t sustainable.
Parks Canada aims to spend $5.9 million on the eradication program, similar to a past $6 million effort in Haida Gwaii.
Jordan Reichert criticizes the program as unethical, unjustified, and excessively expensive.
The Sidney Island Deer Management Society opposes the eradication program and questions its justification and contract award process.
The Animal Alliance of Canada aims to hold Parks Canada and other stakeholders accountable for their actions.

Animal welfare outcomes of helicopter-based shooting of deer in Australia

### Key Takeaway The study evaluates the animal welfare outcomes of helicopter-based deer shooting in Australia, highlighting the importance of using multiple shots in the head or thorax for better welfare results.

### Summary

Helicopter-based shooting is commonly used for deer control in Australasia.
The study assesses the animal welfare outcomes of this method in Australia.
It examines the fates of observed deer, procedure durations, and bullet wound details.
Shots were fired at 69-76% of observed deer, with variable chase times (73-145 seconds) and time to insensibility (17-37 seconds).
On average, deer had 1.43-2.57 bullet wounds per animal.
Animal welfare outcomes were better for fallow deer operations compared to chital deer operations.
Shooting procedures with multiple shots into the head or thorax yielded improved animal welfare outcomes.
The study suggests the need for a national-level standard operating procedure to enhance animal welfare in helicopter-based deer shooting operations in Australia.

Anthropomorphism Favors Coexistence, Not Deadly Domination

### Key Takeaway The research indicates that anthropomorphism, attributing human traits and emotions to nonhuman entities, challenges traditional wildlife management approaches and promotes coexistence over domination in human-animal relationships. [Mark Bekoff in Psychology Today]

### Summary

Anthropomorphism involves attributing human traits, emotions, or intentions to nonhuman entities.
Traditional wildlife management is rooted in a domination ideology, but anthropomorphism challenges this perspective.
Anthropomorphism helps understand the behavior, emotions, and cognitive lives of nonhuman animals from their perspective.
Growing research supports accurate interpretations of nonhuman thoughts and feelings, debunking the notion of animals merely acting “as if.”
The use of human languages in discussing animal cognition and emotions, when done critically and biocentrically, respects animals’ viewpoints.
Anthropomorphism’s acceptance varies geographically, with people in Hawaii being more anthropomorphic than those in South Dakota.
Anthropomorphism is linked to favoring mutualism and coexistence rather than domination in human-wildlife interactions.
A shift in people’s values regarding nature and wildlife management has occurred due to increasing acceptance of anthropomorphism.
Anthropomorphism stimulates value shifts and challenges traditional wildlife management approaches, emphasizing individual animal consideration.
Compassionate conservation emphasizes that each individual’s life matters, regardless of their utility to humans.
Anthropomorphism has the potential to aid conservation efforts by promoting empathy and considerate practices.
Anthropomorphism, when properly applied, can support the conservation of a broad array of nonhuman species.
The field of cognitive ethology, studying animal minds, has much research potential, revealing animals’ rich and deep emotions.
Understanding and appreciating animals as individuals can aid conservation efforts for the benefit of current and future generations.
Inappropriate anthropomorphism can be mitigated through detailed studies of animal minds and emotions.
Anthropomorphism reflects an accurate way of knowing animal emotions and is supported by scientific research.
The Anthropocene necessitates recognizing animals’ emotions and using knowledge for ethical decisions.
Animals’ emotions are gifts shared with humans, and recognizing this aids ethical decisions for their well-being.
Anthropomorphism promotes empathy, coexistence, and understanding in human-animal relationships.

(Note: The above summary is based on the content provided and aims to capture the key points and ideas presented in the web page.)

Assessment of humaneness using gunshot targeting the brain and cervical spine for cervid depopulation under field conditions

### Key Takeaway The study assessed the humaneness of using gunshot targeting the brain and cervical spine for cervid (deer) depopulation under field conditions. The results demonstrate that targeting the brain or upper cervical spine effectively achieves euthanasia standards, while lower cervical spine shot placement is not as humane.

### Summary The study aimed to evaluate the accuracy and humaneness of gunshot placement on Philippine deer during depopulation activities for meeting AVMA standards of euthanasia under field conditions. Here are the key findings and aspects of the study:

Objective: The study aimed to assess the humaneness of gunshot placements for cervid depopulation under field conditions.
Method: Firearms, specifically a suppressed .223 caliber rifle, were used for euthanizing deer from distances of 10–125 m. Shot placements were targeted at the brain and upper cervical spine (C1—C3) for immediate incapacitation.
Results:
- Deer shot in the brain or upper cervical spine (C1—C3) died instantly due to the destruction of brain or spinal tissue.
- Shot placements were accurate, with deviations within 1.9 cm from the point of aim (POA).
- Targeting of the lower cervical vertebrae (C4—C7) was accurate but did not result in immediate insensibility, indicating that it’s not a humane option.
Physiological Responses:
- Deer shot in the brain or upper cervical spine showed immediate cessation of heart rate, respiration, ocular reflexes, and post-mortem spasms.
Secondary Objective:
- The study aimed to determine if upper cervical spine shot placement could result in euthanasia.
- Upper cervical spine shot placement (C1—C3) showed accuracy and immediate insensibility, making it an alternative target site when brain targeting is not optimal.
- Lower cervical spine shot placement (C4—C7) was accurate but did not result in immediate insensibility, suggesting it’s not a humane choice.
Significance:
- The study provides evidence-based research on acceptable euthanasia methods using firearms for wildlife management.
- It highlights the importance of achieving humane death even when practical limitations exist.
- The findings emphasize the importance of targeting the brain or upper cervical vertebrae for deer depopulation under field conditions.

The research contributes to improving wildlife professionals’ firearm practices and supports the interests of animal welfare, wildlife professionals, and the public in achieving humane depopulation while accomplishing management objectives.

At $10K per deer, critics question cost of Sidney Island eradication plan

### Key Takeaway The cost of the Sidney Island eradication plan for European fallow deer, priced at $10,000 per deer, has raised concerns and criticism.

### Summary

Eradication Plan Overview
- Parks Canada is executing a plan to eliminate the European fallow deer population on Sidney Island.
- The eradication plan is conducted in phases.
Phase Completion
- The first phase of the eradication plan has been concluded this month.
Criticism on Cost
- Critics express concern over the high cost associated with the plan.
- The price tag for eliminating each deer is $10,000.
Public Opinion
- The article doesn’t provide a clear perspective on public opinion.
- It would be valuable to understand how the local community feels about the eradication plan and its costs.
Parks Canada’s Perspective
- The report doesn’t elaborate on Parks Canada’s justification for the high cost.
- Including this perspective could provide a more balanced view of the situation.
Environmental Impact
- The article doesn’t discuss the potential environmental impact of the deer population and its eradication.
- Understanding the ecological rationale behind the plan would enhance the report.
Future Phases
- Details about the subsequent phases of the eradication plan are not provided.
- A comprehensive summary should include information about the entire plan for context.
Conclusion
- The article highlights concerns about the cost of the Sidney Island deer eradication plan.
- A more thorough analysis, including different perspectives and potential ecological benefits, is needed for a comprehensive understanding.

A systematic review of ground-based shooting to control overabundant mammal populations

### Key Takeaway Ground-based shooting can be an effective tool for managing overabundant wildlife populations, but careful planning, clear objectives, and adequate resources are essential for success.

### Summary

Context: The web page discusses the use of ground-based shooting as a method to manage invasive or overabundant wildlife populations. It highlights that while this method is widely used, its effectiveness varies, and a systematic examination of its efficiency is lacking.
Aims:
- The review aimed to assess the efficacy of ground-based shooting as a population management tool.
- It sought to identify commonalities among studies to help managers determine situations where ground-shooting is most likely to be effective.
Key Results:
- Most studies lacked clear quantifiable objectives for their shooting operations.
- 60% of the 64 case studies resulted in a detectable reduction inpopulation density or damage.
- The most common type of operation used unpaid or commercial harvest-oriented shooters to reduce herbivore density or damage.
- Only 30% of operations that used volunteer shooters or recreational hunters achieved their objectives.
- Target taxa, geographic area, or integration of shooting with other population-control methods had no significant effect on the effectiveness of shooting operations.
- Common factors hindering effectiveness included immigration of target species from adjacent areas, decreasing effort from shooters as the target population declined, and selective harvesting.
Conclusions:
- Ground-based shooting can be effective but is not guaranteed to reduce animal abundance or damage.
- Failures were often due to an inability to remove a sufficient proportion of the population to cause a decline.
- Managers contemplating ground-based shooting should carefully consider its suitability for their goals, establish clear objectives, and ensure sufficient resources.
Implications:
- Managers should:
  - Evaluate whether ground-based shooting aligns with their objectives.
  - Define clear objectives and allow for continuous improvement.
  - Ensure adequate resources for achieving and maintaining objectives.

This report provides valuable insights for wildlife managers considering ground-based shooting as a wildlife population management strategy.

B.C. SPCA ’not opposed’ to mass deer kill on Sidney Island

### Key Takeaway The B.C. SPCA supports a planned mass deer kill on Sidney Island, aiming to end the ineffective seasonal hunting cycle that has persisted for decades.

### Summary

Background:
- B.C. SPCA expresses support for a mass deer kill on Sidney Island.
- The organization aims to break the ineffective cycle of seasonal hunting that has been ongoing for many decades.
Involvement and Consultation:
- B.C. SPCA has been consulted by Parks Canada since 2017 during the planning stages of the deer eradication plan.
- The animal welfare agency is actively engaged and will have personnel on the ground when the deer hunt commences on Dec. 1.
Reasoning:
- The key rationale behind supporting the mass deer kill is to halt the historical pattern of ineffective and seasonal hunting.
- B.C. SPCA sees this approach as a more decisive and humane solution compared to the past decades’ hunting practices.
Collaboration with Parks Canada:
- The collaboration between B.C. SPCA and Parks Canada highlights a cooperative effort to address wildlife management issues.
- This collaboration spans several years, indicating a thorough and considered planning process.
Preventing Ineffective Killing Cycle:
- The main goal of the mass deer kill is to put an end to what B.C. SPCA perceives as an “ineffective killing cycle” associated with seasonal hunting.
- By supporting this approach, the organization seeks a more sustainable and impactful solution to manage the deer population.
Timing and Execution:
- The deer eradication plan is scheduled to begin on December 1.
- B.C. SPCA’s active involvement during the hunt underscores its commitment to ensuring the process aligns with ethical and humane standards.
Overall Implication:
- The stance of B.C. SPCA indicates a shift towards more strategic and comprehensive wildlife management practices, moving away from traditional seasonal hunting approaches.
- The collaboration with Parks Canada suggests a multi-stakeholder effort to address ecological challenges while considering animal welfare.

Black-Tailed Deer In The City: A Scientific Approach To Population Control Using Immunocontraception

[00:04](https://youtu.be/VyEudCmFdUQ?t=4s) Monique Principe introduces the webinar on Black-Tailed Deer population control.
[01:04](https://youtu.be/VyEudCmFdUQ?t=64s) Dr. Jason Fisher and Dr. Adam Herring present on Black-Tailed Deer population control and their backgrounds.
[03:06](https://youtu.be/VyEudCmFdUQ?t=186s) Presentation focuses on Oak Bay, a densely populated urban area with growing deer conflict.
[05:09](https://youtu.be/VyEudCmFdUQ?t=309s) Urban Wildlife Stewardship Society proposes evidence-based immunocontraception program for deer management.
[09:28](https://youtu.be/VyEudCmFdUQ?t=568s) Density estimation using camera traps; public engagement crucial in obtaining permissions.
[10:55](https://youtu.be/VyEudCmFdUQ?t=655s) Array of 39 camera traps strategically placed across Oak Bay for monitoring deer population.
[12:06](https://youtu.be/VyEudCmFdUQ?t=726s) GPS collars track deer’s spatial use; vital data for accurate density estimation.
[13:31](https://youtu.be/VyEudCmFdUQ?t=811s) Darting deer for immobilization and vaccination; strong public outreach to ease concerns.
[15:07](https://youtu.be/VyEudCmFdUQ?t=907s) Immunocontraception process, including anesthesia, vaccinations, and boosters.
[17:10](https://youtu.be/VyEudCmFdUQ?t=1030s) Community volunteers assist with fieldwork; unique learning opportunity and community engagement.
[18:06](https://youtu.be/VyEudCmFdUQ?t=1086s) Deer management involves careful darting, ethical handling, and minimizing risks.
[19:18](https://youtu.be/VyEudCmFdUQ?t=1158s) Health monitoring samples collected for archival purposes.
[21:30](https://youtu.be/VyEudCmFdUQ?t=1290s) Timeline of project phases: population estimation, immunocontraception, data analysis.
[23:05](https://youtu.be/VyEudCmFdUQ?t=1385s) Urban environment influences deer population dynamics; small home ranges and hyper-concentration.
[24:43](https://youtu.be/VyEudCmFdUQ?t=1483s) Camera data reveals changes in fawning rate post-treatment, indicating population control success.
[25:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VyEudCmFdUQ&t=1510s) Fawning rate reduction: After immunocontraception implementation, fawning rate decreased significantly over short-term periods.
[26:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VyEudCmFdUQ&t=1575s) Immunocontraceptives working: 57% reduction in fawning rate indicates that immunocontraceptives are effectively preventing pregnancies.
[26:43](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VyEudCmFdUQ&t=1603s) Population decrease expected: Reduction in fawning combined with natural mortalities is expected to lead to a decrease in the adult deer population over time.
[27:09](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VyEudCmFdUQ&t=1629s) Monitoring stage: The project is now in the monitoring stage to observe how the population responds to the pulsed application of immunocontraceptives.
[28:09](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VyEudCmFdUQ&t=1689s) Community engagement: Public perception and engagement are crucial factors in the success of the project, focusing on coexisting with deer harmoniously.
[29:47](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VyEudCmFdUQ&t=1787s) Social progress: Efforts by the urban Wildlife stewardship society and immunocontraception have contributed to increased acceptance and coexistence with urban deer populations.

Concerns remain over methods used in Sidney Island deer eradication

### Key Takeaway The first phase of the Sidney Island deer eradication project has concluded, but lingering concerns persist among experts regarding the methods employed.

### Summary

Sidney Island Deer Eradication Project:
- First phase completed.
- Ongoing concerns among experts.
Concerns Raised:
- Methods used in deer eradication.
- Specific concerns not detailed in the provided information.
Expert Opinions:
- Some experts express reservations.
- Nature of concerns not explicitly mentioned.
Project Status:
- Completion of initial phase.
- No information on subsequent phases or future plans.
Overall Impression:
- Unclear whether concerns impact the continuation of the project.
- Lack of specifics regarding the nature of concerns.
Need for Transparency:
- Call for detailed information on methods used.
- Transparency may address lingering concerns.
Future Developments:
- No information on potential adjustments to methods.
- Lack of clarity on community and stakeholder involvement.
Public Perception:
- No mention of public sentiment.
- The article focuses on expert concerns.
Conclusion:
- The completion of the first phase does not alleviate concerns raised by some experts.
- Lack of details hinders a comprehensive understanding of the situation.

Confessions of a Sharpshooter: How a Deer Cull Actually Works

### Key Takeaway The key takeaway from the web page is that a deer cull, which involves controlled hunting to manage deer populations, can be a contentious issue, even leading to unlikely alliances between animal rights groups and hunters. The article also highlights the complexities and challenges involved in implementing a successful deer cull.

### Summary

An animal rights group and a hunters’ rights group join forces on Long Island’s East End to protest a plan to cull up to 3,000 deer from the local population, leading to a polarized community and unexpected partnerships.
This is the first landscape-level cull in the region, sparking opposition due to concerns about wildlife management methods.
Local hunters are unhappy with hired guns being used for the cull and question why taxpayers are funding a service hunters could provide for free.
Animal rights groups are equally opposed, launching protests, petitions, and contacting officials to stop the cull. They raise concerns about removing a significant number of keystone species from the ecosystem.
The author, a wildlife specialist with USDA Wildlife Services, shares insights from participating in three deer culls over five years.
The author describes a specific culling operation where night hunting takes place, with techniques like drop-and-go methods from vehicles and stationary positions near bait.
Various challenges arise, including the difficulty of baiting older, wiser deer, the limited effectiveness of suppressed firearms, and concerns about animal welfare and clean kills.
The article explains that culls are more common where hunting isn’t a viable management tool, such as areas with discharge laws, lawsuits, or changing hunting cultures.
The collaboration between government wildlife control agencies, hunters, and animal rights groups is motivated by a shared goal of maintaining a healthy and sustainable deer population.
The article concludes by suggesting that as urbanization continues, deer culls may become more common as a means of wildlife management.

(Note: This summary report is based on the provided web page content and does not include any additional information beyond the given text.)

Conflict of interest concern raised for Sidney Island deer-cull contract

### Key Takeaway Jordan Reichert of the Animal Alliance of Canada is concerned about a Parks Canada contract for eradicating invasive fallow deer on Sidney Island due to potential conflicts of interest and perceived misallocation of funds.

### Summary

Jordan Reichert, West Coast director of the Animal Alliance of Canada, has raised concerns about a $5.9-million Parks Canada contract for eradicating invasive fallow deer on Sidney Island.
The project involves marksmen in a helicopter and on the ground killing European fallow deer over a 10-day period, followed by additional measures to contain and remove any survivors.
The contract was awarded to Coastal Conservation, a company specializing in removing invasive species from islands to promote ecosystem recovery, which also played a significant role in planning the project.
Reichert questions the procurement process, stating that using millions of tax dollars for this project is “unnecessary” and that the funds could be better allocated elsewhere.
A complaint was lodged by Reichert with the Office of the Procurement Ombudsman, but it could not be pursued due to the contract’s value exceeding its jurisdiction.
Documents obtained through freedom of information requests show that concerns were raised by Parks Canada staff about potential conflicts of interest involving Gregg Howald of Coastal Conservation.
Coastal Conservation was previously awarded a contract of $724,500 to develop an eradication operation plan before being awarded the current contract for execution.
Parks Canada asserts that the fallow deer population’s impact on the ecosystem is still negative and justifies the eradication project.
The population estimates vary, with Parks Canada estimating 300 to 900 deer, while some residents claim the population is closer to 300 due to previous culling efforts.
Reichert questions the justification for a $5.9-million eradication project without accurate population data.
Parks Canada controls a portion of the island’s land, and residents, who own the majority of the land, were given a vote on the culling decision.
Coastal Conservation had been involved in a similar deer-eradication project on Haida Gwaii in 2017, which was eventually canceled.
Public feedback on the deer cull is being accepted by Parks Canada until August 23.

Please note that this summary report is based solely on the provided web page content and may not include any additional context or developments beyond the provided text.

Deer Friendly

A site dedicated to providing news and issues relating to deer slaughter. It also provides extensive information on humane methods of deer control. Unfortunately, some of the links don’t work, but the site is still a good resource that is well-organized and thorough.

Demonstrators protest Sidney Island deer eradication

### Key Takeaway The key takeaway from the web page is that approximately 50 people gathered in Beacon Park to peacefully protest the planned deer eradication on Sidney Island by Parks Canada. The protesters are questioning the justification and methods of the $5.9-million project, urging government officials to consider alternative approaches and seek more scientific data before proceeding.

### Summary

Protest Gathering:
- Around 50 people gathered in Beacon Park to protest the planned deer eradication on Sidney Island.
Organizer’s Perspective:
- Protest organizer Sharon Glynn expressed opposition to the mass kill, arguing that the fallow deer population is already under control due to safe hunting parties on the island.
Park Canada’s Project Purpose:
- Park Canada aims to eliminate invasive fallow deer to allow native black-tailed deer to recover and restore the native understory growth.
Deer Eradication Details:
- The $5.9-million project involves sharpshooters in helicopters and hunters on land with tracking dogs, scheduled between Nov. 25 and Dec. 15.
Government Spending Concerns:
- Protesters question the government’s allocation of funds for the project, especially since the majority of the island is private.
Hereditary Chief Support:
- Tsawout First Nation hereditary chief Eric Pelkey supports the project, emphasizing the restoration of the forest to its original state.
Appeal to Saanich-Gulf Islands MP:
- Protesters are urging Saanich-Gulf Islands MP Elizabeth May to raise the issue in Parliament, requesting a postponement for more scientific data and consideration of alternative solutions.
BC SPCA Involvement:
- BC SPCA was consulted in choosing sharpshooters to ensure humane dispatching of deer, emphasizing the expertise and training of the individuals involved.
Public Reaction:
- The article notes a previous incident of a deer with an arrow stuck in it in Saanich, drawing attention to public concerns about deer welfare.
Government Support and Historical Context:
- The government project has received support from some members, including the Tsawout First Nation hereditary chief. Historical context is provided, referencing the utilization of the forest by ancestors.
Media Coverage:
- The report acknowledges contributions from Ella Matte and highlights the Peninsula News Review as the source of information.
Request for Parliamentary Action:
- The protesters are hoping for parliamentary attention and action, asking for a postponement and a thorough examination of scientific data.
Additional News Highlights:
- The web page includes links to other news highlights and features a community poll unrelated to the deer eradication issue.

This comprehensive summary covers the main points of the protest, reasons for opposition, government perspective, and the wider context of the issue.

Effectiveness and costs of helicopter-based shooting of deer

### Key Takeaway Helicopter-based shooting is an effective method for reducing deer populations over large areas, but the extent of reduction depends on the effort put into the operation.

### Summary

The study evaluates the effectiveness and costs of helicopter-based shooting for controlling fallow deer and chital deer populations in eastern Australia.
The research aims to measure reductions in deer density, the relationship between deer killed per hour and density, costs of control, and the relationships between effort, outcome, and cost.
The study analyzes 12 aerial shooting operations targeting fallow deer and chital deer at nine sites characterized by fragmented woodland.
Population reductions achieved varied between 5% and 75% for fallow deer and 48% and 88% for chital deer.
The most significant population reductions occurred with higher effort per unit area, especially when shooting was conducted in consecutive years.
The functional response of hourly kills to deer density follows a modified Ivlev model, with an estimated asymptotic kill rate of 50 deer per hour.
There’s no evidence of a prey refuge, indicating no density threshold below which no deer could be shot.
Helicopter charter costs were the main expense, followed by labor, while firearm and ammunition costs were relatively minor.
The study recommends pre-control population surveys to establish measurable objectives, estimate required effort and costs, and evaluate realized population reduction.

### Keywords abundance, aerial gunning, aerial shooting, aerial survey, Bayesian statistics, chital deer, culling, density, effort–outcome, fallow deer, functional response, mark–recapture distance sampling.

(Note: The above report is based on the provided web page content and does not include any external information beyond what is present in the content.)

EPA gives thumbs up on vaccine to manage deer populations humanely

### Key Takeaway The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has approved the registration of an immunocontraceptive vaccine called Zonastat-D for managing deer populations humanely. This vaccine aims to reduce deer populations gradually without resorting to lethal methods, offering an alternative approach to conflicts with wildlife in urban and suburban communities.

### Summary

The EPA has given approval for the registration of the immunocontraceptive vaccine, Zonastat-D, which is designed for managing deer populations humanely.
Previously, communities often resorted to shooting or killing deer to address conflicts with wildlife in neighborhoods.
Zonastat-D is adapted from the Zonastat-H vaccine used for wild horse population control, and it is based on the porcine zona pellucida (PZP) vaccine. PZP blocks fertilization by triggering the production of antibodies that bind to the protein envelope surrounding the egg.
The approval of Zonastat-D offers an alternative approach to population control, enabling wildlife managers to reduce deer populations gradually and avoid lethal methods like sport hunting or sharpshooting, which are often considered unsafe and impractical in urban and suburban areas.
The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) has been involved in studies and research that provided the foundation for the registration of this vaccine. They have administered PZP-filled darts to deer in various locations, and evidence suggests that when used properly, PZP reduces fawning rates by 85 to 90 percent.
The EPA’s approval of Zonastat-D confirms the safety and effectiveness of this vaccine for managing deer populations. The HSUS plans to work with state wildlife agencies and communities to implement non-lethal programs and build comprehensive, humane solutions for coexisting with wildlife.
The approach of using PZP vaccines offers a more humane alternative to mass killing and aims to better manage localized overabundance of certain species in urban and suburban environments.
The vaccine approval highlights the need for more options in 21st-century wildlife management and encourages a more compassionate approach to dealing with conflicts between humans and wildlife.

Eradication And Restoration Options On Sidney Island

5 page doc by Jack Albrecht Ruth Albrecht Fred Anderka Frank Nielsen Robin Bassett

Harpa:

### Key Takeaway The key takeaway from the web page content is that the issue at hand revolves around the restoration and eradication options for fallow deer on Sidney Island, with differing perspectives on the necessity of eradication, the ecological impacts, ethical considerations, and the need for well-informed decision-making.

### Summary

The document discusses the ongoing debate regarding the restoration and eradication of fallow deer on Sidney Island.
The process involves a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) approved by Sidney Island, and there are documents available on the Sidney Island website under the Parks Canada Proposal.
The issue has caused disagreement among owners and involves concerns about access to hunting, with the potential eradication of fallow deer ending hunting on the island.
The history of discussions and attempts to communicate with the Council regarding eradication is outlined, including various documents shared with the owners.
Some owners took it upon themselves to communicate with Parks Canada, leading to the drafting of the MOU, which states that “eradication is critical for restoration.”
Relevant documents include a UBC research paper discussing the recovery of woody plants on the island and a paper on ethical wildlife control principles by Dr. Sara Dubois.
Questions raised include the necessity of eradication for restoration, the definition of restoration, the ethical implications of eradicating invasive species, and the impact on black tail deer.
The document highlights the lack of clarity on what “restoration” truly entails and whether eradicating the fallow deer is essential for achieving it.
The presence of invasive species and the potential ecological improvements observed are discussed in relation to the fallow deer population.
Concerns are raised about the cost of Parks Canada’s proposal, the methods of eradication, and the impact on the community.
The MOU was authorized by 80% of owners, with a final vote requiring a 75% majority for approval.
The Eradication and Restoration Committees have met multiple times, but there are concerns about a lack of alternative narratives to eradication and potential groupthink.
The involvement of Parks Canada personnel in eradication efforts and their associated costs are mentioned.
Recent correspondence suggests the consideration of a “population ecologist” to assess population numbers and the viability of management control instead of eradication.
The concept of “restoration” is explored further, with emphasis on the need for well-informed decision-making and compromise.
The document concludes by stating that the issue extends beyond a hunters versus non-hunters debate, touching on ethical and moral obligations toward the fallow deer population.

(Note: The summary includes the main points covered in the web page content. For a comprehensive report, the text has been condensed into bullet points while maintaining the core ideas and information.)

Bing:

The text is a summary of the issue of fallow deer eradication and restoration on Sidney Island, written by some owners who are not opposed to restoration but have questions and concerns about the process and the impact of eradication. The text provides some background information on the communication between the owners and the Council, and the documents that were shared on the website. The text also mentions a survey question on hunting and a new disease affecting black tail deer.

Perplexity: [incorrect conclusion]

The document titled “Eradiation and Restoration Options on Sidney Island” discusses the issue of overpopulation of fallow deer on Sidney Island and the proposed plan to eradicate the deer population. The document outlines the reasons for the proposed eradication plan, including the negative impact of deer on the island’s ecosystem and the risk of deer-vehicle collisions. The document also discusses the potential alternatives to eradication, such as relocation and contraception, and the challenges associated with these options. Ultimately, the document concludes that eradication is the most effective and efficient option for managing the deer population on Sidney Island.

Citations:

Chatgpt:

The document discusses the topic of eradication and restoration options for fallow deer on Sidney Island. It begins with a background explanation, highlighting the efforts of a Steering Committee and Working Groups to develop a plan for fallow deer eradication and restoration, based on a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) approved in March 2020. The document emphasizes the importance of addressing new owners and responding to Council’s recent material.

The authors clarify that they are not opposed to restoring the island’s ecology, but their concerns were about the process used for open dialogue on deer eradication. They mention efforts made to communicate with the Council and their involvement in discussions with Parks Canada to reset the process. They refer to various documents on the Sidney Island website that provide historical context and viewpoints supporting eradication.

Two key documents are highlighted:

A UBC research paper from May 2019, which presents empirical evidence regarding flora restoration on Sidney Island, indicating a general 30% improvement over six years. This paper neither states eradication is “critical” nor examines alternatives to eradication.
A paper by Dr. Sara Dubois on ethical wildlife control principles, suggesting that the term “invasive” should not solely justify extermination and emphasizing minimal harm in wildlife control.

The document raises several fundamental questions:

The necessity of eradicating fallow deer for restoration and defining the concept of “restoration.” It questions the specific goals of long-term forest recovery and what this entails.
The ethical considerations of labeling species as “invasive” and whether eradication meets ethical and ecological standards.
The adequacy of lowering the fallow deer population to under 200, given observed ecological improvements, and why a management control plan isn’t considered.
The potential costs, safety concerns, and ethical implications of eradication methods, including helicopter hunting and hunting with dogs.

The document recounts the authorization of the MOU in March 2020 and notes the ongoing work of the Eradication and Restoration Committees. Concerns are raised about a lack of diverse perspectives in these committees and the secrecy of their proceedings.

Recent correspondence from Parks Canada suggests exploring management control rather than eradication, utilizing a “population ecologist” to assess population numbers and hunting history. This is seen as a positive step by the authors.

The document concludes by stating that the issue goes beyond hunters versus non-hunters and emphasizes the moral and ethical obligations towards fallow deer. It calls for an informed decision-making process and finding a compromise to this emotionally charged issue.

The document is signed by multiple authors: Jack Albrecht, Ruth Albrecht, Fred Anderka, Frank Nielsen, and Robin Bassett.

Fallow deer eating their way across Gulf Islands

### Key Takeaway Invasive fallow deer with voracious appetites are spreading across Gulf Islands, devouring native trees and plants, posing a threat to ecosystems, vineyards, and gardens. Parks Canada and local residents are seeking a final solution to control the deer population.

### Summary

Invasive European fallow deer, distinct from native black-tailed deer, have become a problem on Gulf Islands due to their indiscriminate eating habits and rapid population growth.
The deer were originally introduced to James Island for sport hunting and have since spread to Sidney Island and other areas.
Efforts have been made to control the population through annual culls using methods like corral systems, bolt guns, and mobile meat processors.
Despite culling efforts, the fallow deer population has continued to grow on Mayne Island, with some deer island-hopping to other locations like Saturna Island.
The deer’s impact includes stripping vegetation, outcompeting native species, and threatening the rare Garry oak ecosystem, vineyards, and gardens.
Cameras are being set up to monitor deer numbers on Saturna Island, and community input will be sought for the next steps.
The preferred solution is to remove all the animals, but this approach is controversial and requires expert consultation.
The lack of natural predators has contributed to the deer population’s unchecked growth.
The deer are also affecting the native black-tailed deer population on Mayne Island due to a lack of predators.
The deer’s impact is particularly significant on plants such as arbutus, Garry oaks, and conifers.
Concerns about the deer’s movement into developed areas where hunting is restricted are growing.
There is debate on Mayne Island regarding a complete cull, as some residents oppose this solution.
Efforts to determine the density of the deer population and secure funding for management strategies are ongoing.
The situation highlights the need for a comprehensive approach to address the ecological and economic challenges posed by invasive fallow deer.

This report summarizes the issue of invasive fallow deer on Gulf Islands, their impact on ecosystems and communities, and the ongoing efforts to find a solution to manage their population.

Fast action needed to stop mass kill of deer on B.C. Island

### Key Takeaway The planned mass killing of all deer on Sidney Island, British Columbia, particularly targeting fallow deer, has sparked significant outrage among residents and visitors.

### Summary

Location and Ownership:
- Sidney Island, situated north of Victoria, is comprised of approximately 20% national park land, with the remaining area being privately owned and inhabited by full- and part-time residents.
Personal Connection:
- The author expresses personal fondness for the island, having enjoyed camping there multiple times, highlighting its peaceful and beautiful qualities, especially given its proximity to the city.
Controversial Action by Parks Canada:
- Parks Canada has announced its intention to carry out a mass kill of fallow deer on Sidney Island, citing them as a non-native species.
Public Outrage:
- The planned mass kill has generated widespread outrage among both residents and others, emphasizing the emotional response to this conservation strategy.
Environmental Context:
- The island is described as a small but valuable oasis close to the city, emphasizing its ecological and recreational significance.
Conservation Rationale:
- The primary motivation behind the mass deer kill is framed as a conservation effort, with a focus on eliminating the non-native fallow deer species.
Call for Action:
- The overall tone of the article suggests an urgent need for intervention to prevent the planned mass killing, urging for reconsideration of the conservation strategy.
Unresolved Questions:
- The article does not provide detailed information on alternative conservation measures or address potential ecological consequences of the mass deer removal. [However, there are plenty of viable alternatives as outlined in the Resources section.]
Author Perspective:
- The author positions themselves as part of a larger community that opposes the planned action, adding a personal and community-oriented dimension to the narrative.
Absence of Detailed Information:
- The article lacks specific details on the methods Parks Canada plans to use for the massdeer kill or the timeline for implementation.
Overall Impact:
- The controversy surrounding the mass deer kill on Sidney Island reflects broader debates about conservation strategies, raising questions about the balance between protecting native ecosystems and ethical considerations in wildlife management.

Humane dispatch

### Key Takeaway The web page provides comprehensive guidance on humane dispatch procedures for injured deer, covering legal aspects, safety considerations, methods of dispatch, and operator competency.

### Summary

The web page focuses on providing guidance for the humane dispatch of injured deer, emphasizing legal, safety, and ethical considerations.
Legal Aspects:
- Section 25 of the Deer (Scotland) Act 1996 exempts individuals from guilt if they take or kill deer to prevent suffering, including injured, diseased, or starving deer.
- Firearms or ammunition that are otherwise prohibited can be used for humane dispatch under certain circumstances.
Safety and Welfare:
- Situation assessment is crucial, considering factors such as operator safety, public safety, deer welfare, and operator competency.
- Risks associated with using firearms and potential danger from injured deer’s antlers or hooves should be considered.
- The dispatcher’s aim should be to ensure rapid loss of consciousness and death without causing unnecessary suffering.
Methods of Dispatch:
- Shooting with firearms is the preferred method, following proper authorization and safety measures.
- Other methods include the use of drugs (administered by qualified individuals), captive bolt (by trained slaughter personnel), and the use of a knife (only by experienced operators).
Dispatching Scenarios:
- Dispatching is required for wounded, diseased, injured, or trapped deer.
- Trapped but uninjured deer should be assessed for appropriate action.
Operator Competency:
- Dispatch should only be attempted by individuals with necessary skills, training, and experience.
Carcass Disposal:
- The person responsible for carcass disposal should be identified and aware of the proper procedures.
Insurance and Liability:
- Individuals involved in deer management are advised to have adequate public liability coverage.
Specialized Practitioners:
- Those specializing in the humane dispatch of Deer Vehicle Collision (DVC) injured deer should have relevant experience, training, and competence.

Note: The summary covers various aspects of humane dispatch procedures, including legal provisions, safety precautions, dispatch methods, operator competence, and carcass disposal.

For more details, please refer to the original web page.

Is Sterilization the Answer to Too Many Urban Deer?

### Key Takeaway Sterilization of urban deer populations, although controversial, has shown potential in reducing deer numbers in certain areas. While the method is met with skepticism, studies indicate a decline in deer populations through sterilization efforts.

### Summary

Sterilization is being considered as a method to address urban deer overpopulation in various US cities and suburbs.
Tony DeNicola, a wildlife biologist, has initiated deer sterilization programs in different locations to control deer numbers.
DeNicola’s sterilization program in Cincinnati, started in 2015, has resulted in a 19 percent decline in the deer population over three years.
Similar successful sterilization results have been observed in other areas, including Cayuga, New York (34 percent decline), Fairfax, Virginia (20 percent decline), Bethesda, Maryland (47 percent decline), and San Jose, California (37 percent decline).
Opposition to sterilization comes from hunters who have traditionally been involved in deer population control. However, studies suggest that hunting may not effectively reduce deer numbers for ecological impact.
A case study in a gated community in San Jose, where sterilization was employed due to landscaping losses caused by deer, resulted in a reduction of the deer population from 153 to 60.
Despite skepticism, a sterilization project on Staten Island saw an 8 percent decrease in the deer population.
A grassroots deer sterilization project in Cincinnati’s Clifton neighborhood, initiated by residents, successfully raised funds and implemented sterilization efforts.
The Cincinnati project involves sterilizing does, and it has a goal of achieving 95 percent sterilization to maintain a sustainable approach to wildlife management.
The sterilization procedure involves surgical removal of ovaries, tagging the deer, and releasing them after a reversal drug is administered.
Sterilization efforts have potential for reducing urban deer populations, but the method remains controversial within the wildlife management community.

For the full analysis and context, please refer to the provided web page content.

Letter by Film Maker Wendy Ord (pdf)

Wendy is a award winning writer, director and producer with credits for “Christmas Carol” (2023), “Perfect Manicure”, “The Way To The Heart” and more! You can find her IMDb Bio here. Summary of her letter follows:

### Key Takeaway The key takeaway from the web page is that the author strongly opposes the plan to eradicate deer on Sidney Island proposed by Parks Canada. The opposition is based on various grounds, including concerns about the accuracy of deer population estimates, lack of social license, credibility issues with project execution, potential negative ecological impacts, disruption of island residents’ lives, and potential financial misallocation.

### Summary

The author opposes the eradication of deer on Sidney Island proposed by Parks Canada, both European Fallow Deer and native Black-tailed Deer.
Parks Canada lacks a clear definition of “social license,” and the author believes they do not have it due to legitimacy, credibility, and trust issues.
There’s a conflict of interest since Coastal Conservation, a company involved in pushing the project, is leading the contractors, potentially benefiting financially.
The eradication plan doesn’t have 50% of island owners’ permission; only 45% of strata lots voted in favor.
The author questions the credibility of information provided by Parks Canada, including the lack of mention that all deer on the island will be eradicated.
A UBC study from 2013 to 2018 shows the island’s ecology improved, but PC presents a negative image of the island’s state.
The author questions the urgency of eradication, as restoration is observed through a hunt and cull program.
The success of the eradication is uncertain, and non-compliance with fencing and potential negative impacts on the ecosystem are concerns.
Trust in Parks Canada has eroded due to misinformation and mishandling of the project.
The author, along with many others, opposes the eradication due to concerns about cruelty, ecological impacts, disruption of residents’ lives, and loss of local food sources.
The project’s timeline is outlined, involving aerial and ground operations over several months, leading to significant disruptions for residents and the environment.
The author believes the loss of deer will upset the balance of nature, increase invasive species, and pose forest fire threats.
Repopulation of Black-tailed Deer is mentioned as a potential concern, while repopulation of fallow deer is questioned.
The author calls for reconsideration of the project, asserting that it lacks social license and questions the allocation of taxpayer dollars.

(Note: The summary aims to capture the main points from the web page content and might not include every single detail.)

Looming deer slaughter called ‘disturbing, terrifying’ by Sidney Island residents

### Key Takeaway The residents of Sidney Island are divided over Parks Canada’s plan to kill all European fallow deer, with concerns about the use of helicopters, potential harm to other wildlife, and the emotional impact on the community.

### Summary

Parks Canada plans to eradicate European fallow deer on Sidney Island, including native blacktails, to restore ecological balance.
Residents are divided; some, like Wendy Ord, argue the mass slaughter isn’t necessary due to already low deer numbers.
Concerns include the inability to distinguish between deer species by sharpshooters, the use of helicopters, loudspeakers, and drop nets for capture, causing distress to residents, pets, and wildlife.
Rob Milne raises concerns about the impact on bald eagles and raptors due to low-flying helicopters.
Proponents argue the deer eradication is essential for the ecological balance, citing disappearing understory plantswith medicinal value for the W̱SÁNEĆ people.
Parks Canada has awarded a $5.9-million project to Coastal Conservation, covering deer eradication, public consultation, support for indigenous community hunting, invasive plant removal, and replanting native species until 2026.
Shooting is estimated between Nov. 25 and Dec. 14, with a second phase in the following winter.
Saanich-Gulf Islands MP Elizabeth May, still recovering from a stroke, is examining the plan; key permits for helicopter use are pending.
Critics argue Parks Canada lacks accurate deer counts, with estimates ranging from 300 to 900; no formal counts by scientists have been conducted.
A 2019 UBC study suggests increased vegetation on the island due to sustained managed hunting since 2019.
Over 18,000 people signed a petition to cancel the deer killing.
Janice McLeod supports eradication, fearing the island will resemble Mandarte Island without intervention.
The community is emotionally divided, with concerns about the impact on the island’s character, wildlife, and the prolonged nature of the hunt.
Residents express horror at the prospect of on-the-ground fenced hunting seven days a week for four or five months.
Despite differing opinions, there is a call for reasonable discussions and exploring alternative solutions to the deer issue.

Non-Lethal Deer Population Control for Urban and Suburban Environments

### Key Takeaway The web page discusses non-lethal methods for controlling deer populations in urban and suburban environments, primarily focusing on contraception and sterilization. It highlights the challenges and benefits of these approaches, as well as their potential impact on managing deer populations.

### Summary The web page emphasizes the use of non-lethal methods for managing deer populations in urban and suburban areas. The key points include:

Deer Population Control Methods:
- The article advocates for non-lethal strategies such as contraception and sterilization to manage deer populations.
- It highlights the limitations and ethical concerns associated with lethal methods like culling.
Deer Contraception:
- Various forms of contraception are discussed, such as Gonacon and Spayvac.
- Contraception can be effective, with success rates often reported in the 90 to 95 percent range.
- Costs vary depending on factors like labor and the number of deer.
- Contraception needs to be reapplied after a few years.
Sterilization:
- Sterilization methods, including spaying, ovariectomy, and tubal ligation, are explored.
- Sterilization can be more expensive but offers long-term effectiveness (97-100 percent) and needs to be done only once.
- Challenges include surgical interventions, equipment, and potential attraction of bucks to sterilized does.
Examples of Sterilization Programs:
- The web page provides examples of cities and regions that have implemented sterilization programs.
- Oak Bay in British Columbia successfully reduced fawn numbers through immunocontraception, leading to a decrease in the deer population.
- South Euclid, Ohio, initiated a sterilization program, aiming for long-term impact on deer numbers.
Challenges and Considerations:
- The article acknowledges challenges in implementing non-lethal methods, such as cost, labor, and legal regulations.
- Different communities have debated and implemented various strategies based on local contexts and preferences.
- Public attitudes, government regulations, and local decision-making influence the choice of methods.
Benefits and Implications:
- Non-lethal methods help avoid negative consequences associated with culling, such as public opposition and the need for ongoing killing programs.
- Successes in reducing deer populations through sterilization and contraception programs are highlighted, providing evidence for the feasibility of these approaches.
Debate and Research:
- The web page also touches on the ongoing debate about optimal deer density and the relationship between deer populations and issues like Lyme disease.
- The role of fertility control programs in reducing deer populations without resorting to lethal methods is emphasized.

The overall message of the web page is that non-lethal methods like contraception and sterilization offer promising alternatives for managing deer populations in urban and suburban settings, with evidence of successful programs and ongoing research in this area.

Not tonight deer: A new birth control vaccine helps reduce urban deer damage

### Key Takeaway A new birth control vaccine named GonaCon™ has been developed to control white-tailed deer populations in urban areas. This vaccine reduces dangerous reproductive behavior, preventing collisions with automobiles and damage to gardens. It also has applications in managing undesirable behaviors in other animals.

### Summary

A birth control vaccine called GonaCon™ has been developed to address the issue of white-tailed deer overpopulation in urban areas.
The vaccine eliminates the reproductive behavior responsible for the surge in automobile-deer collisions during autumn.
The vaccine was discussed at the 242nd National Meeting & Exposition of the American Chemical Society (ACS).
GonaCon™ has the potential to reduce or eliminate undesirable behaviors in household pets and farm animals such as scent-marking, fighting, caterwauling, and wandering in cats, as well as aggressive behavior in horses.
The vaccine blocks the action of male and female sex hormones (testosterone and estrogen), responsible for these behaviors.
It could also be used for prairie dogs, wild horses, and feral dogs.
The vaccine addresses the population explosion of white-tailed deer, which cause damage to gardens, landscaping plants, and attract predators into residential areas.
Deer-auto collisions result in deaths and significant property damage.
GonaCon™ is developed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service/Wildlife Services National Wildlife Research Center.
Unlike other birth-control vaccines, GonaCon™ prevents mating behaviors in vaccinated deer, eliminating dangerous situations.
The vaccine blocks a biological signal triggered by decreasing day length in autumn, inducing infertility by targeting gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH).
The vaccine was effective in various animals including white-tailed deer, ground squirrels, rats, swine, and wild horses.
A single injection of GnRH led to infertility lasting up to five years in penned white-tailed deer.
The vaccine needed to be registered with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and requires concentration data of the active ingredient.
GonaCon™ is the only EPA-registered multi-year, single-injection wildlife contraceptive for female white-tailed deer.
It must be administered by USDA or state game and fish department staff members and has been approved for use in Maryland and New Jersey.
The vaccine ensures that female deer remain sterile for years, reducing the risk of accidents caused by deer in traffic.

Note: The report has been generated based on the provided web page content, and some information might be missing or inaccurately interpreted due to the limitations of the content provided.

Parks Canada seeks input 230801

### Key Takeaway The key takeaway from the web page is that a cull of fallow deer on Sidney Island is being conducted due to the negative impact these deer have had on the ecosystem, even though it contradicts the teachings of the island’s elders. The cull aims to address the decimation caused by the deer population.

### Summary

Sidney Island is undergoing a cull of fallow deer to combat their negative impact on the ecosystem.
The cull has been met with resistance due to the conflict with traditional teachings and practices of the island’s elders.
The overpopulation of fallow deer has led to a significant reduction in the island’s forest understory.
Black-tailed deer, once hunted by the community, are now virtually extinct on the island.
The cull involves shooting animals from a helicopter, which has raised ethical concerns about suffering.
Critics, such as the Animal Alliance of Canada, question the lack of data on the deer population and suggest exploring non-lethal methods like immuno-contraception.
The proliferation of fallow deer has adversely affected the ecosystem’s biodiversity and plant growth.
Traditional foods, medicines, and habitats for animals are impacted by the loss of lush plants in the understory.
Sidney Island hosts the coastal Douglas fir ecosystem, which is unique to the region.
Public feedback on the cull can be provided until August 23 via specific online links.

(Note: The provided text does not include links, so the URLs are not complete in the summary.)

On the eve of mass fallow deer kill, pleas to stop the helicopter cull

23-11-30

### Key Takeaway The mass kill of fallow deer on Sidney Island, scheduled to start on Friday, is proceeding despite appeals claiming it is unnecessary. The $6-million plan aims to restore the island’s ecosystem, but there are opposing views on the necessity and methods involved.

### Summary

Deer Eradication Operation:
- A mass kill of fallow deer on Sidney Island is set to begin despite last-minute appeals.
- The operation, costing $6 million, is aimed at restoring the island’s fragile Coastal Douglas Fir ecosystems.
Opposition and Appeals:
- Private property owners and some citizens have appealed to the prime minister, federal environment minister, and the B.C. SPCA to halt the deer cull.
- First Nations confirm the operation is underway, emphasizing the damage caused by fallow deer to the land and ecosystem.
Execution Plan:
- A company will shoot deer from a helicopter, assisted by ground hunters with dogs.
- First Nations members will set up camps, locate carcasses marked by GPS, and handle the skinning and butchering.
Differing Perspectives:
- Some island residents argue against the eradication plan, stating the deer numbers are not critical and suggesting alternative uses for the allocated funds.
- A local hunter and wildlife biology professor assert that organized hunts and culls in the past have reduced the deer population effectively.
Animal Welfare Concerns:
- The B.C. SPCA’s endorsement of the mass kill has sparked outrage among some citizens, with concerns about inhumane practices and a lack of widespread public support.
- An online petition against the deer kill has garnered over 20,000 signatures.
Utilization of Deer Resources:
- Despite opposition, First Nations plan to use fallow deer resources for cultural purposes, such as making drums and moccasins.
- Blacktail deer are set to be reintroduced to the island after the fallow deer eradication.
Environmental Impact Claims:
- Arguments exist that the island’s ecology has already improved due to previous hunting efforts, and a more elaborate plan may not be necessary.
Potential Alternatives:
- Some island residents propose reallocating funds to address pressing needs in First Nations communities rather than focusing on deer eradication.
Long-term Effects and Future Phases:
- A second phase of killings is planned a year later, involving fencing and dogs to round up any remaining deer.
- Concerns are raised about the broader impact on the ecosystem and public perception, with potential consequences for the B.C. SPCA.
Cultural Utilization of Deer:
- The planned use of fallow deer resources by First Nations for cultural purposes adds a dimension to the debate beyond ecological concerns.

This summary captures the multifaceted nature of the deer cull issue, involving ecological, cultural, ethical, and financial considerations, with differing opinions among stakeholders.

Plan to eradicate fallow deer population from B.C. island faces backlash (Terrace Standard 230809)

Animal Alliance of Canada speaks out about alternative methods to preserve Sidney Island ecosystem

### Key Takeaway Animal advocates, led by the Animal Alliance of Canada, are opposing the plan to exterminate an invasive fallow deer population on Sidney Island, British Columbia. The plan aims to restore native plant habitats, but critics argue that more humane alternatives should be considered.

### Summary

Parks Canada’s plan involves culling the fallow deer population on Sidney Island to help restore native plant habitats and create a suitable environment for songbirds and other wildlife.
The cull is scheduled for the upcoming winter and will use sharpshooters from White Buffalo Inc. in helicopters and on the ground to eliminate as many deer as possible.
Jordan Reichert, campaign director of the Animal Alliance of Canada, criticizes the plan, suggesting that contraception or birth control would be a more ecologically responsible and humane alternative.
Kate Humble, superintendent for the Gulf Islands National Parks Reserve, counters that capturing, relocating, serialization, and contraceptives were considered but wouldn’t achieve the goal of population removal.
The fallow deer were introduced to Sidney Island by European colonizers and have been damaging vegetation, including medicinal plants used by local First Nations.
The fallow deer population on the island is estimated to be between 300 and 900. The culling process could also impact the native black-tailed deer population.
Critics argue that the chosen eradication method could negatively impact both deer species and the island’s ecology as a whole.
Humble defends the culling as a necessary action for ecosystem restoration, emphasizing that it’s a last resort when other methods cannot be applied.

Points covered:

Parks Canada’s plan for fallow deer cull on Sidney Island.
Use of sharpshooters by White Buffalo Inc. to eliminate deer.
Jordan Reichert’s criticism, proposing contraception or birth control.
Kate Humble’s response, highlighting limitations of alternatives.
History of introduced fallow deer damaging local vegetation.
Estimated fallow deer population and potential impact on native black-tailed deer.
Concerns about the chosen eradication method’s broader ecological impact.
Humble’s defense of culling as a necessary action for ecosystem restoration.

Note: The summary is comprehensive and covers the main aspects of the web page content.

Protest planned as Sidney island helicopter deer kill set to begin

### Key Takeaway The mass killing of fallow deer on Sidney Island, utilizing sharpshooters in helicopters and hunters on land, is set to begin between Nov. 25 and Dec. 15. The action aims to restore native plants and biodiversity, but it has sparked protests due to concerns about the tactics’ inhumanity and the high cost of $5.9 million.

### Summary

The mass killing of fallow deer on Sidney Island is scheduled to take place between Nov. 25 and Dec. 15.
The approach involves sharpshooters in helicopters and hunters on land with tracking dogs.
Parks Canada asserts that the deer eradication is necessary to restore native plants and biodiversity on the island, partly parkland and partly privately owned.
A protest is planned at Sidney’s Beacon Park against the perceived inhumane tactics and the significant cost of $5.9 million for eradicating the invasive species.
Protest organizer Sharon Glynn aims to halt the “unscientific and costly” eradication or at least postpone it until further research is conducted.
Parks Canada, along with First Nations partners and contractor Coastal Conservation, has finalized an operational plan, confirming the deer kill will proceed.
The initial phase is set to last over 10 days at the end of the month, with a second roundup and kill scheduled for a year later.
Critics, including wildlife biology professor David Bird, question the necessity of the expensive contract, suggesting traditional hunting has already reduced the deer population significantly.
The estimated fallow deer population on Sidney Island is between 300 and 900, according to Parks Canada.
A lack of proper, science-based censuses of the deer population is criticized by opponents.
The contract covers the project until 2026, including invasive plant removal and replanting native species.
A 2019 UBC study on Sidney Island indicated that reducing deer populations led to increased native species richness and diversity.
The deer kill will involve marksmen from the U.S. and New Zealand, utilizing helicopters and ground-based hunting, with precautions for humane kills and no nighttime helicopter hunting.
Notifications about the shootings will be sent to residents, and First Nations will participate in harvesting crews.
The B.C. SPCA will oversee the killings to ensure humane practices.
Sidney Island residents have organized well-managed hunts in the past, significantly reducing the deer population.
The protest aims to stop or delay the deer eradication project, citing successful traditional hunting and lack of scientific basis for urgency.

Q&A Parks Canada’s Proposal to Collaboratively Restore Sidney Island’s Forest Understorey

### Key Takeaway Parks Canada is proposing to collaboratively restore Sidney Island’s forest understorey by safely and humanely eradicating invasive fallow deer. This proposal aims to address the significant damage caused by the deer population to the island’s ecosystem. The restoration efforts involve extensive planning, community engagement, and consideration of various factors.

### Summary

Parks Canada aims to restore Sidney Island’s forest understorey by eradicating invasive fallow deer that have damaged the ecosystem through overgrazing and negatively impacting native birds and plant species.
The proposed eradication operation involves collaboration with Sidney Island landowners, local First Nations, and stakeholders. An organization specializing in invasive species eradication is studying the plan’s design.
Fallow deer are classified as invasive species, and their removal is essential for the island’s ecological health. Eradication is intended to restore the native forests and songbirds.
The decision to remove invasive species is based on the impact they have on native plants and animals. Parks Canada’s policy is to control invasive species within its jurisdiction.
Techniques for eradication will be developed with a focus on safety, effectiveness, and environmental suitability. Parks Canada is committed to humane methods.
Eradication efforts would likely take approximately a year to plan and finalize, followed by active eradication over two winter seasons.
Public safety is a priority, and efforts will be made to minimize risks during eradication, including communication plans and safety measures.
Community support is crucial; a vote among Sidney Island landowners will determine project approval. Parks Canada respects the decision of the community.
Parks Canada is collaborating with local academics and institutions for research opportunities following eradication, with a focus on monitoring and restoration.
Restoration efforts, including support for native plants and black-tailed deer management, will follow the eradication of fallow deer.
The project aims to involve professional hunters with a proven safety record to minimize impact on private property and ensure success.
Funding will be allocated for forest restoration activities in collaboration with Sidney Island landowners.
Plans for identifying and distinguishing between fallow and black-tailed deer are being developed.
Necessary approvals from provincial authorities are sought for eradication techniques outside normal hunting regulations.
Private landowners have the choice to allow access to their property during eradication; their involvement impacts the feasibility and timeline of the operation.
Efforts will be made to minimize property damage, and Parks Canada is prepared to compensate for any damage that may occur.
Meat from culled deer will be processed, and various options for distribution, including Indigenous communities, schools, and wildlife rehabilitation centers, will be explored.
Parks Canada will maintain transparent communication with landowners through various methods during planning and operational phases.
Media communication will be managed by Parks Canada’s local communication staff, ensuring fair representation of community perspectives.
Eradication personnel will use various means of transportation to and from the island, and accommodations will be arranged for them if needed.

Please note that this report provides a comprehensive summary of the provided web page content, but it may not cover every single detail.

Restoration of Sidney Island ecosystem ’not feasible’ without full eradication of invasive deer, Parks Canada says

### Key Takeaway Parks Canada asserts that eradicating invasive fallow deer from Sidney Island is essential to restore the ecosystem’s balance and prevent their population from rebounding, leading to significant biodiversity loss.

### Summary

Parks Canada is planning a $5.9-million project to eradicate invasive fallow deer from Sidney Island and restore native plant species in the fall.
Frank Nielsen, a property owner on Sidney Island, disagrees with the eradication, stating that the deer population is already under control due to regular hunting.
The Parks Canada project involves aerial and ground-based marksmen eliminating as many fallow deer as possible over a 10-day period, followed by flushing out and containing any survivors.
Invasive fallow deer have significantly reduced Sidney Island’s biodiversity by overbrowsing and removing native species, motivating the eradication project.
A report on harvest numbers indicates a decline in deer removal, including both invasive fallow deer and native black-tailed deer.
Kate Humble, superintendent of Gulf Islands National Park Reserve, notes that despite population reduction efforts, the ecosystem’s sustained recovery requires complete deer removal.
The eradication project cost covers public and Indigenous community consultations, support for community member hunting, removal of invasive plants, replanting of native species, and the deer-eradication initiative.
Gregg Howald, director of Coastal Conservation, mentions that using helicopters will enhance deer location efficiency and aid in the ground-based eradication phase.
The project has divided the local community; a vote resulted in 52% support for the cull to proceed.
Interested individuals can access a draft detailed impact-assessment report for better understanding of the project.

Please note that the report is based on the provided web page content and may not include information external to it.

Restoring A Precious Ecosystem (To: Sallas Forest Strata Council 191010)

### Key Takeaway The key takeaway from the web page is that the Sallas Forest Strata Council discusses the importance of eradicating invasive deer to restore the precious ecosystem of Sidney Island. The removal of invasive deer is seen as a necessary step in achieving a biodiverse ecosystem that benefits both the island’s native species and its human residents.

### Summary

The Sallas Forest Strata Council aims to restore the ecosystem of Sidney Island by removing invasive deer, focusing on eradicating a source of degradation to facilitate ecosystem recovery.
The Council has partnered with Parks, which contributes resources and funds towards restoration, including eradication of invasive plants like hawthorn and broom.
Invasive deer have been damaging the ecosystem by consuming a wide range of plant species, reproducing rapidly, and causing hyper-abundance.
Islands Trust, BC Wildlife Branch, and Parks Canada advocate for eradication due to the negative impact of invasive deer on the island’s ecosystem.
Native deer have co-evolved with the ecosystem and are protected, while invasive deer are considered pests and can be removed without restrictions.
Despite efforts like recreational hunting and volunteer captures, the management of invasive deer has proven insufficient, leading to population increases.
The Council believes that eradication is essential for ecosystem recovery, as evidenced by the increase in biomass, grasses, and a softened browse line after aggressive removal efforts.
However, species diversity and recovery are still in progress, with many shrubs, flowers, and small trees missing, which impacts wildlife and water retention.
Eradication is crucial for the survival of various plant and tree species, supporting songbirds, pollinators, and overall species diversity on the island.
The supporters of eradication recognize that some residents value hunting and consuming fallow deer, and the decision may represent a loss to them.

### Supporters of Eradication The following individuals, as undersigned, support the eradication of invasive deer:

Lot 32, Susan MacLean
Lot 33, Roy Smitshoek & Janice McLeod
Lot 34, Phoebe Gilday & Mike Stask
Lot 40, Gaire & Lorraine MacLean
Lot 43, Michael Law & Carolyn Russell
Lot 44, Jeff & Debbie Paul
Lot 61, Russ & Marna Iwanson
Lot 62, John Mawdsley & Lisa Brattland
Lots 63 and 64, Mark Allison & Stephanie Holmquist
Lot 65, Peter, Penny & Sarah Pearse
Lot 67, Judith Fisher
Lot 68, Julia Hedley
Lot 72, Stan Semrau & Maureen McDonald
Lots 75 and 110, Ken & Val Poskitt
Lot 76, Bruce & Dianne Ledingham
Lots 98, 99 and 100, John Palmer
Lot 107, Mike Parfit & Suzanne Chisholm
Lots 128 and 129, Kirk & Rhonda Caza
Lots 132 and 133, Paul & Holly McNally

Semi-automatic assault style rifles to be used for Sidney Island deer kill

### Key Takeaway The use of semi-automatic assault-style rifles is approved for a deer cull on Sidney Island, beginning on December 1. The cull is aimed at eliminating European fallow deer, an invasive species, but will also result in the killing of native black-tailed deer.

### Summary

Start Date: The deer cull on Sidney Island is scheduled to commence on December 1.
Methods: Sharpshooters will employ semi-automatic assault-style rifles to cull the deer population. This will occur from a helicopter, by land, and from boats.
Duration: The cull, organized by Parks Canada, is expected to last for 10 days.
Objective: The primary goal is to eliminate European fallow deer, recognized as an invasive species on Sidney Island.
Unintended Consequence: Native black-tailed deer will also be killed as part of the cull.
Geographical Context: Sidney Island is situated east of Sidney, and it is just four kilometers away.
Participants: The cull involves property owners on Sidney Island.
Invasive Species Focus: The emphasis is on eradicating European fallow deer, indicating an environmental conservation effort.
Firearm Approval: The notable detail is the authorization of semi-automatic assault-style rifles for the cull.
Parks Canada Involvement: The cull is organized and overseen by Parks Canada, suggesting a government-backed initiative.

Overall, the cull on Sidney Island involves a comprehensive approach, including aerial, land, and marine methods, and aims to address the issue of invasive European fallow deer, although it comes with the unintended consequence of native deer casualties.

Sidney Island Deer Eradication AA

### Key Takeaway Parks Canada plans to eradicate fallow deer on Sidney Island using aerial gunning, despite concerns from Animal Alliance of Canada regarding a conflict of interest in the procurement process, lack of accountability, and potential ecological damage. The organization advocates for humane alternatives and transparency in the eradication process.

### Summary

Parks Canada is proceeding with a $6 million fallow deer eradication plan on Sidney Island using helicopter aerial gunning and ground hunting with dogs.
Animal Alliance of Canada (AAC) is concerned about a potential conflict of interest in the procurement process, lack of accountability, and ecological damage resulting from eliminating all deer on Sidney Island.
AAC discovered through an Access to Information Request (ATIP) that a contractor with financial interest was also the Chair of the steering committee overseeing the eradication options.
AAC raised concerns with the Office of the Procurement Ombudsman and the Canadian International Trade Tribunal, but formal investigations were not possible due to AAC not being a contract bidder.
AAC proposed observing the eradication process for transparency, but this was rejected by Parks Canada.
Parks Canada has misrepresented the project’s scope as only targeting introduced European fallow deer, when the plan actually includes eliminating all deer on the island, including native black-tailed deer.
AAC suggested a non-lethal option using immune contraceptives for population control, but Parks Canada opted for eradication.
AAC asserts that the entire process for deer eradication has been unethical and flawed and calls for transparency, accountability, and consideration of humane alternatives.
Parks Canada is seeking public input on the eradication process.
Sidney Island, part of the Gulf Islands National Park, is targeted for deer eradication through aerial gunning and dog-assisted hunting despite concerns.
Fallow deer were introduced to nearby James Island in the early 1900s and migrated to Sidney Island, causing a peak population of around 3000 in the early 2000s.
Despite a UBC report suggesting ecosystem improvement and an estimated current population of 300, Parks Canada aims to eliminate the deer population.
Parks Canada allocated $5.9 million to contractors for eradication, similar to a 2018 project on Haida Gwaii.
Concerned landowners formed the Sidney Island Deer Management Society to expose and challenge the eradication project.
AAC questions if humane options, like immuno-contraception, were considered and highlights the lack of scientific evidence for the eradication.
Parks Canada’s ecological restoration specialist contradicts the claim of excessive deer population and justifies eradication.
Parks Canada’s narrative and cost estimates for eradication are challenged by AAC.
Despite a failed vote, the eradication proposal passed due to a legal challenge.
AAC continues to oppose the eradication, advocate for humane options, and work towards transparency and accountability.
Contact information for Animal Alliance of Canada is provided for those interested in supporting their efforts.

Sidney Island Deer Management Society

This site is an excellent resource for the Sidney Island Deer Issue. It is very organized and easy to get a good overview from, as well as find details!

The site provides an excellent analysis of the FOI request as well as specific items such as the following:

Insurance coverage

“The key to this is that we are not taking on the liability, we are transferring liability to those who have insurance. This is limited in scope to Sallas lands”

Conflict of interest

CC’s Head of Global Affairs is the Chair of SIERP. In an email dated April 6,2021 Parks Canada staff advice “If CC gains financially or otherwise in some way from an approved eradication going forward, then [the Chair] should not be running the show – it’s a conflict of interest.” (Page 306)

Chair writes the following: “…the numbers of deer on the Island have been reduced dramatically and the impacts of fallow deer are not really obvious and it is unlikely that the BENEFIT of eradication will be clear on implementation.” (Page 219)

relying on owners’ vegetable gardens and arbutus saplings. (Page 219)

the long-term benefit of fallow deer removal to the biodiversity of Sidney Island will depend on continued project support from Parks Canada, Sallas, and the public to maintain a deer free island” Parks Canada questioned the long term sustainability of biosecurity. (Page 187)

Ethics

“Lethal Methods may only be used when an animal’s presence is an ongoing threat to human health and safety”. (Page 389)

an ecological restoration specialist for Parks Canada advises the following: “an ecosystem can support some number of fallow deer, we could consider them naturalized (our italics) and work to maintain the species”

Sidney Island Ecosystem Restoration Project, British Columbia, Canada

This page is from Coastal Conservation’s site and its contents are summarized below.

The removal of the invasive fallow deer is likely to have a significant impact on Sidney Island’s native wildlife and the island ecosystem as a whole. !!!

### Key Takeaway The introduction of non-native European fallow deer to Sidney Island 70 years ago has led to overgrazing that negatively impacts native plant species and federally designated Species at Risk. Coastal Conservation is collaborating with Gulf Islands National Park Reserve and private landowners to investigate the feasibility of eradicating these invasive deer for ecosystem restoration.

### Summary

Sidney Island, located at the southern end of the Gulf Islands archipelago between Vancouver Island and mainland British Columbia, faces the issue of overgrazing by non-native European fallow deer.
The introduced fallow deer have multiplied over the years, posing a significant threat to the native plants and animals on the island.
The browsing and grazing activities of the invasive fallow deer have led to reduced habitat and food availability for forest birds and insects, resulting in decreased species diversity and abundance.
Coastal Conservation is partnering with Gulf Islands National Park Reserve and private landowners on Sidney Island to explore the possibility of removing the non-native fallow deer to mitigate the negative impacts on the ecosystem.
The removal of the invasive fallow deer is expected to have several positive effects on the island’s ecosystem, including the reestablishment of native plants and plant communities, increased abundance and breeding of forest-dwelling birds, avian raptors, native small mammals, insects, amphibians, and reptiles, as well as the restoration of ecosystem processes like nutrient cycling and disturbance regimes.
The collaboration between Coastal Conservation, Parks Canada, and other partners is working towards implementing the Sidney Island restoration project to restore the island’s ecosystem and counter the impact of the invasive species.
Coastal Conservation is a group of experts with extensive knowledge in biological systems and invasive species eradication, with a mission to promote the natural restoration of island ecosystems by removing invasive species.

(Note: The provided content was limited in scope. If more detailed information is available on the webpage, the summary can be further expanded.)

Sidney Island resident explains deer cull complexity (Times Colonist 230808)

Only a few people in the world know how to do this with enough precision to be recognized as humane.

### Key Takeaway Expertise in humane culling of invasive mammals is rare, and only a few people in the world possess the necessary precision to carry out such culling recognized as humane. Parks Canada’s choice of a specialized team for the deer cull aligns with their past successes. The opposition to the cull is not solely based on animal welfare; a small group of sport hunters have also been actively opposing it.

### Summary

The author, a documentary filmmaker and journalist residing on Sidney Island, provides insights into the complexity of the deer culling issue.
Parks Canada’s plan to remove invasive European fallow deer from Sidney Island has sparked debate and conflict.
Parks Canada is criticized for awarding the contract to a firm that helped prepare the proposal, potentially creating a conflict of interest. However, this is suggested to be a common practice in situations where expertise is limited.
Expertise in humane culling of invasive mammals is extremely rare, and only a few individuals possess the necessary precision to perform it humanely.
The team chosen by Parks Canada for the cull includes individuals who have successfully worked on similar projects.
The article challenges the notion that opposition to the cull is solely rooted in animal welfare concerns; it highlights the role of a small group of sport hunters who oppose the cull to maintain abundant deer populations for hunting.
Over the past two decades, a group of sport hunters on Sidney Island have actively fought to keep deer numbers high while attempting to reduce them, leading to conflicts within the community.
The article emphasizes that the culling of invasive species is a challenging but necessary endeavor that can benefit the ecosystem, including native animals, plants, and traditional practices.
Indigenous leaders support the cull due to its potential positive impact on the environment and native species.
The author asserts that without the cull, there is a risk of returning to cycles of overpopulation, animal suffering, and ecosystem degradation.
Sidney Island has the opportunity to become an example of a healthy ecosystem in British Columbia, demonstrating the benefits of well-managed culls for preserving biodiversity.
The article concludes by noting that the alternative to the cull would favor a few passionate sport hunters and perpetuate ecological imbalances.

(Note: The summary provides a comprehensive overview of the article’s content, covering the main points and key ideas presented.)

Sterilization as an alternative deer control technique: a review

### Key Takeaway Surgical sterilization of female white-tailed deer is explored as an alternative technique for managing overabundant deer populations in suburban areas, where conventional lethal removal methods might be restricted due to legal, safety, or ethical concerns. This approach can help reduce deer-related damage to vegetation, ecosystems, and vehicles in communities willing to invest in the long-term costs of the effort.

### Summary

Introduction and Context:
- White-tailed deer populations in suburban areas pose challenges and negative impacts on communities due to damage and conflicts.
- Traditional control methods, such as hunting and sharpshooting, face opposition based on various factors.
Surgical Sterilization as an Alternative:
- The study explores the use of surgical sterilization as a non-lethal technique for managing deer populations.
- Research focuses on female deer sterilization since they are the primary contributors to population growth.
- Different surgical methods, including tubal ligation, ovariectomy, and hysterectomy, have been employed.
Factors Affecting Sterilization Efficacy:
- The success of surgical sterilization depends on various factors, such as the percentage of the population treated, closed or insular population dynamics, and the potential for immigration.
- Different models predict varying levels of success, but they generally suggest the need for long-term efforts and significant sterilization rates to control population growth.
Field Studies and Results:
- Several field studies have been conducted to test the practicality and effectiveness of surgical sterilization in reducing deer populations.
- Sterilization efforts have shown some success in reducing deer numbers in localized areas, but factors such as winter conditions and population dynamics can impact outcomes.
Costs and Challenges:
- Surgical sterilization is associated with significant costs, including veterinary expenses, pharmaceutical supplies, labor, and equipment.
- The cost per sterilization procedure can be over $1,000 per deer.
- Long-term commitment and sustained efforts are required for sterilization programs to have a meaningful impact on deer populations.
Recommendations and Considerations:
- Surgical sterilization may be a viable alternative in communities willing to invest in non-lethal methods.
- Success of the approach depends on factors like population dynamics, immigration rates, and available resources.
- Combining sterilization with other methods like hunting might be necessary for effective population management.
Conclusion:
- Surgical sterilization of female deer can serve as an alternative technique for managing overabundant populations, especially in closed or insular populations.
- However, it requires long-term commitment, careful consideration of population dynamics, and significant financial investment.
Research Priorities:
- Continued research is needed to refine surgical sterilization techniques and assess their long-term impacts on deer populations.
- Understanding factors that influence success, such as immigration rates and population closures, is crucial for effective implementation.
Key Words:
- control, human-wildlife conflicts, Odocoileus virginianus, sterilization, surgery, white-tailed deer.

(Note: The summary provides a comprehensive overview of the main points from the web page content. It’s important to note that the content has been condensed and summarized for clarity and conciseness.)

The role of education, curiosity, and exploration in conservation

### Key Takeaway Building a culture of conservation for Coastal Douglas-fir forests involves fostering a connection between humans and nature through education, experiential learning, and social support. Indigenous knowledge and practices, along with collaborative efforts, are integral to successful conservation.

### Summary

Coastal Douglas-fir forests are complex ecosystems with intricate species relationships that have evolved over time. Prior to settler arrival, First Nations nurtured these relationships, but colonization shifted humans away from these ecosystems.
Parks Canada social scientist Stephanie Coulson emphasizes that rebuilding relationships between humans and nature is essential for establishing a conservation culture.
Education plays a vital role in instilling environmental empathy and conservation values. The quote “we will conserve only what we love, we will love only what we understand, and we will understand only what we are taught” highlights the importance of education in conservation.
Environmental education programs can cultivate an environmentally-sensitive society and enhance love and optimism for the future.
Environmental education complements solitary and reflective time in nature, which is crucial for fostering curiosity, enlightenment, and challenge.
Access to natural spaces, both structured and unstructured, is vital for individuals to develop a conservation ethos.
Social norms shaped by personal values and experiences in nature contribute to a culture of conservation. Supporting new arrivals, creating inclusive programs, and providing emotional support can help build this culture.
Indigenous knowledge and practices are essential for establishing a true “culture of conservation.” Collaborative efforts involving Indigenous communities, government agencies, NGOs, and private landowners are crucial for ecosystem-level conservation.
Cross-jurisdictional partnerships and the inclusion of social scientists alongside natural scientists are key to successful collaborative conservation efforts.

(Note: The summary covers the main points of the web page content. The content includes insights from Stephanie Coulson, the role of education and environmental empathy, the importance of solitary time in nature, and the significance of Indigenous knowledge and collaborative efforts in establishing a conservation culture.)

Too many decisions being driven by parks department

### Key Takeaway Decisions in Saanich are predominantly driven by the parks department, leading to controversial measures like leashing dogs to protect flora and exterminating deer to preserve the environment.

### Summary

Issue Overview:
- There is a growing concern about decisions driven by the parks department in Saanich.
- Controversial actions include leashing dogs to preserve local flora and exterminating deer on Sidney Island to protect the environment.
Argument Against Parks Department Influence:
- The author criticizes the parks department for prioritizing the protection of dandelions over the well-being of local fauna and the freedom of dogs.
- The author argues that the attempt to control nature is flawed and suggests a more fluid approach, acknowledging the natural cycle of species evolution.
Extreme Measures and Satirical Proposal:
- The author employs satire by suggesting that if the logic is extended, cities should be demolished, and all human-made structures like sidewalks, parking lots, and roads should be removed.
- This is presented as an exaggeration to highlight the perceived extremity of the parks department’s decisions.
Nature’s Adaptability:
- The author emphasizes the natural process of evolution, stating that when one species of flora is removed, another naturally takes its place.
- Implies that interference, especially drastic measures, may not be necessary as nature has its way of balancing itself.
Call to Rethink Park Department’s Role:
- The letter concludes with a critique of the parks department, claiming that virtually every decision in Saanich is driven by this entity.
- The author suggests a need to reconsider the role of the parks department in municipal policy-making.
Author’s Identity:
- The letter is signed by Doug Coulson from Saanich, indicating a local resident’s perspective on the issue.
Additional Information:
- The web page includes links to other news articles and sections such as podcasts, videos, sports, weather, and trending topics.
- The publication date is November 15, 2023.

This letter to the editor expresses dissatisfaction with the parks department’s influence on decision-making in Saanich, using satire and arguments centered around the balance of nature and the perceived overreach in controlling local flora and fauna.

To restore Sidney Island’s ecology, a push to kill hundreds of fallow deer (Vancouver Sun 210517)

A coalition of First Nations, property owners and Parks Canada is planning a “final eradication” of the invasive species that will see up to 500 of the animals rounded up and killed.

### Key Takeaway A coalition involving First Nations, property owners, and Parks Canada aims to eliminate up to 500 European fallow deer on Sidney Island, as they have been detrimental to the island’s ecology and native plant species.

### Summary

The coalition, comprising First Nations, property owners, and Parks Canada, plans to eradicate European fallow deer to restore Sidney Island’s ecology.
Fallow deer were introduced to James Island in 1902 for hunting and later moved to Sidney Island in the 1960s.
The deer’s population grew to thousands, causing damage to native plant species and ecosystems.
Despite previous efforts to control their numbers, a final eradication of the deer is being considered for the fall of 2022.
Parks Canada leads the initiative, along with the W̱SÁNEĆ Leadership Council, Islands Trust Conservancy, and island residents.
The plan requires majority strata owner approval, with the goal of restoring native plants and aiding ecosystem recovery.
First Nations also seek to return the island to its natural state, preserving ancestral sites and native species.
The eradication process would involve humane methods, such as netting, penning, and possibly hunting dogs or helicopters.
The BCSPCA acknowledges the ecological intent of the project but awaits a full review before taking a position.
Parks Canada intends to restore native plants and prevent deer from returning to the island.
A camera system monitors fallow deer movement to and from Mayne Island, where the deer population has grown due to escapees from farms.
The proposed cull aims to avoid continued hunting and maintain ecological balance.

(Note: The summary captures the main points from the web page content, focusing on the key aspects of the situation and the proposed eradication plan.)

Urban deer in Greater Victoria community to be put on birth control

### Key Takeaway Esquimalt, a community in Greater Victoria, is adopting a contraceptive vaccine approach to control the population of urban deer, following the success of a similar project in nearby Oak Bay. This method aims to reduce the number of breeding deer and manage their population more effectively.

### Summary

Esquimalt is implementing a birth control strategy for its urban deer population, inspired by a project in Oak Bay, to reduce their numbers.
Urban deer have become a contentious issue on Vancouver Island due to damage to landscaping, potential spread of Lyme disease, and risks to vehicles.
Jason Fisher, an adjunct professor at the University of Victoria, is leading the Esquimalt Deer Research project, mirroring Oak Bay’s 2019 project.
The Oak Bay project, which provided contraceptives to deer, succeeded in reducing breeding numbers. The vaccinated deer will receive booster shots in the upcoming season.
Approximately 60 to 80 female deer in Esquimalt will receive a contraceptive vaccine. These deer will be tagged and monitored through remote cameras to assess the project’s effectiveness.
The birth control approach aims to significantly decrease pregnancy rates among does, with expectations that about 90% of treated does won’t have calves.
The initiative emerged after an unsuccessful cull attempt in Oak Bay. The alternative of bringing in hunters proved challenging due to the need to trap and euthanize the deer.
This contraceptive method is preferred over mass culling, as removal of deer from an area leads to the influx of new deer, filling the vacant territories.
The objective is to achieve a stable deer population through contraception, preventing new individuals from overwhelming the area.
Esquimalt’s project is part of ongoing research to ensure its effectiveness in managing urban deer populations sustainably.

[End of Report]

Vasectomy strategy cuts Staten Island’s deer population by 30%; encouraging data on multiple fronts

### Key Takeaway The vasectomy program implemented in Staten Island over the past six years has led to a 30% decrease in the deer population, resulting in positive effects on factors such as fawn births, Lyme disease cases, and motor vehicle collisions with deer. However, there are differing opinions among officials regarding the effectiveness of the program and the need for potential new strategies.

### Summary

A vasectomy program introduced six years ago in Staten Island has resulted in a 30% reduction in the deer population, with the Department of Parks and Recreation estimating the current deer count at 1,452 compared to around 2,053 in 2016.
Borough President Vito Fossella is optimistic about the program’s impact on the deer population, anticipating further significant reductions in the coming years.
The reduction in fawn births has also been notable, with nearly 90% fewer fawn births reported.
CouncilmanDavid Carr acknowledges the positive trends in population and birth rates but raises concerns about the time it will take for the deer population to diminish fully and the associated risks like vehicular collisions and Lyme Disease.
Data indicates a decline in Lyme disease cases, with fewer cases reported in recent years, attributed to the reduction in deer population and fewer ticks.
Motor vehicle collisions with deer have dropped in the past five years, with a noticeable decline starting in 2020, potentially linked to a change in NYPD policy regarding reporting non-injurious collisions involving deer.
Some officials, including Councilman Joe Borelli, express skepticism about the effectiveness of the vasectomy program and suggest exploring new approaches to managing the deer population.
Wildlife biologist Dr. Paul Curtis from Cornell University suggests that for a meaningful reduction in interactions with deer, a larger reduction in the deer population would be needed than what has been achieved so far.
The vasectomy program has faced criticism from some experts and officials who argue that other strategies, including female sterilization, might be more effective in reducing the deer population.
The overall impact of the program on vegetation remains relatively stable, with around 39% of local deer-affected vegetation.
Requests for deer carcass removal from the Department of Sanitation have increased, indicating more interaction between residents and deer.
Despite the positive outcomes, there is debate about whether the vasectomy program is the most cost-effective approach to managing the deer population on Staten Island.
There are varying opinions on the program’s success, with some officials calling for new strategies to address the ongoing challenges posed by the deer population.

Note: The report provides a comprehensive summary of the web page content, covering key points related to the vasectomy program’s impact on the deer population in Staten Island and its effects on various factors such as birth rates, Lyme disease cases, motor vehicle collisions, and opinions from different officials and experts.

Wildlife Contraception and Political Cuisinarts

This chapter describes how cultural perspectives, political agendas and purposeful ignorance influenced the development of valid, effective and humane techniques for wildlife population control. The concept of wildlife contraception was introduced in the 1970s and grew slowly but steadily to the present where it is a well-used management tool. However, the path for this endeavor was littered with many human-placed boulders weighted by inertia and obstructive self-interest. Various people and organizations were able to place these boulders often behind the veil of group-diffused anonymity. The two best examples for examination of this process lie in the development of contraception for wild horses and for urban deer. These will be the focus of this https://www.timescolonist.com/local-news/conflict-of-interest-concern-raised-for-sidney-island-deer-cull-contract-7366573chapter.

Hacking the Fireworks Firewall

Fri, 30 Jun 2023 15:17:55 -0700

Fireworks are a severe problem for many: wildlife, farm animals, pets, people with PTSD and anxiety. They are seen by some as a traditional and/or cultural means of celebration. Hence, jurisdictions often allow such activities which are a blatant abuse of an individual’s basic rights.

This document was created after a discussion on 2023-06-29 with Rob Harris who is one of the CVRD officers that respond to illegal fireworks discharge. He kindly explained the process for dealing with complaints made to the CVRD. Other jurisdictions likely have very similar mechanisms and situations. Rob also made several insightful comments regarding the necessity for neighborhood education.

Throughout the article, we reference links to illustrate salient points.

Pilgrim’s Process

Most people know that we have laws. What they do not know is the process by which a law is enforced. An understanding of this process by the neophyte goes a long way to facilitate enforcement of those laws. In the CVRD, it is against the law to sell fireworks, and one needs a permit to set them off. Everyone doesn’t follow the law though.

There are only 3 officers that patrol the CVRD’s 9 electoral areas consisting of a population of over 31,000. It is not an easy job.

When we call the bylaw enforcement number (250-746-2655) to report a violation, we need to do a bit more than exclaim “Yo! I hear fireworks somewhere towards the east and it’s driving me bleeping bonkers!!”

While officers can be sympathetic, in order to spring into action, they really require something more tangible, such as the name of the violating person(s) or an address where the transgression is taking place.

Having that information allows the officer to question the suspect who will either confess to committing the crime or deny any wrongdoing.

In the former case, the officer can simply ticket the individual who will be charged according to the law (and having been identified for posterity, will likely not want to pay a fine again).

In the denial situation, the officer requires some evidence such as fresh fireworks fodder or the statement of a witness for the matter to be taken to court.

A Ban Done Fireworks

Let’s be clear on why we need a ban on fireworks. A ban puts the law on our side!

Having the law on your side goes a long way to ending fireworks, because most people will obey a law that is just. Most people appreciate the necessity of maintaining an orderly and safe neighborhood. If a law is designed to promote such an environment, most people will obey that law.

For instance, we do not rob banks because there is a law that essentially says we should not rob banks. Our subsequent exemplary behavior has little to do with the actual enforcement of this law. The law aligns with a standard of proper conduct and most people abide by it, even if they think they can avoid the consequences.

IckyBad! IckyBad!

There is no glory to insisting that something worthwhile cannot be done.

One of the arguments against a ban is that it would be very difficult to enforce. This is an impotent attitude which does not seem to understand that enforcement is not the key issue. A law can have an effect regardless of whether it is enforced or not - just as in chess a threat can be more influential than its execution. Nor does the law need to be exhaustively applied. We don’t catch all the bank robbers, but catching some of them certainly serves as a deterrent for the ambitious few who may be looking for a career change.

Another misguided manueuvre is to incorrectly blame others for one’s state of misfortune. Hence, some feel we will get nowhere with the present lamentable situation because those Indigenous are selling the fireworks. What is overlooked here is that even if those Indigenous didn’t sell the fireworks, they still could be purchased online as well as from a variety of non-Indigenous sources!

Finally, when some get tired of blaming the Indigenous, they turn to blaming the enforcement officers for not doing their job, without actually thinking about how difficult that job really is! Enforcement officers are not uncaring, apathetic individuals. They can only do so much given the resources and they deserve our support, cooperation, and encouragement - not merely our complaints about the fireworks or them!

If we chain our posteriors to the problems, we will never get up to reach the solutions.

Charge of the Right Brigade

The biggest hurdle to overcome is not the selling of fireworks or the inability of 3 officers to police 31,000 individuals!

The real problem lies on two fronts: the ignorance of those discharging fireworks, “the bangbang” (not to be confused with an expressive classical pianist, by the way) and the tolerance of the victims, “the meek”.

The bangbang are not necessarily inconsiderate so much as they are simply uninformed. Many of them just do not know the irritation and even trauma their ‘celebrations’ cause others. Some are animal lovers and would be horrified to learn they are harming wildlife or pets. Some are fine individuals who just haven’t thought about the effect their activities are having on fellow neighbors. Some are even environmentally conscious, but haven’t realized that fireworks leave behind toxic debris that cannot be recycled.

The meek, on the other hand, are too complacent. They have indoctrinated themselves to think fireworks are just a part of life we put up with. It is what it is!

Or is it?!

A tenet of civilized society is that each law-abiding member should be safe from harm. Each individual has the right to live free from damaging pollution, be it deafening noise, blinding light, or noxious toxicity. No individual should be expected to forsake those rights and endlessly endure improper behavior from others!

If you accept the above principle, then realize the following:

It is not your responsibility to be tirelessly tolerant. It is the responsibility of those who violate your basic rights to stop their boorish behavior!

Fences may make good neighbors, but offences certainly create bad ones! And fireworks are an offence no different from wild partying or property damage or hooliganism. These are not things to accept. They are unethical behaviors to call out, vigorously oppose, and permanently extinguish!

The meek shall speak!

One of the things the CVRD encourages is to politely talk to your neighbors and build an awareness of the damage fireworks cause.

Civilized people are also considerate. They do not want to do things that directly harm those that live around them.

Building a neighborhood awareness that fireworks are not wanted and the reasons why are key here. We have Block Parents and Neighborhood Watch. These initiatives make it very clear that certain behaviors are unacceptable and will not be tolerated.

Fireworks are no different. Such harmful behaviors should not be allowed to hide under the guise of celebration, subterfuge of cultural tradition, or panacea of personal enjoyment, when clearly they create a major problem for so many others.

It is therefore the task of those who do not want fireworks, to speak up against them. We need to let the politicians know through letters and presentations that we want fireworks to be banned! We also need to let our fellow neighbors know through courteous, but uncompromising communications that fireworks discharge is in reality a most hurtful activity to the community.

Doing so maybe the most effective form of enforcement there is!

Going and Coming Back

Tue, 27 Jun 2023 22:25:06 -0700

This is a story we often tell to those who feel they have suffered a loss of a loved one of any species.

When my son Kyron was about 7, he and I were having a discussion concerning death. Suddenly he said, “If you don’t go, you can’t come back.”

It was a surprising moment because we had never broached the subject of reincarnation before. Then again, the young have left the source of wisdom more recently, so perhaps these things are still fresh in their minds and hearts.

Since we rescue animals (including the humanoid kind), we are constantly having to say good-bye, but we find it interesting that repeatedly those who leave, seem to re-appear within the personalities of those who haven’t left.

So always keep watch, because I don’t think any being who is cherished ever goes too far away.

Fallacy in Animal Rights Discussions

Mon, 12 Jun 2023 14:56:15 -0700

Fallacious argumentations in animal rights and vegan discussions are identified according to the rules of logic. This guide exposes standard logical fallacies that repeatedly appear and demonstrates their invalidity.

This article is a modified version of the original Fallacy in Animal Rights and Vegan Discussions which has been on the internet since 2012. As in that article, Data explains why Lore’s efforts at belittling animal rights and vegan positions are not logically valid and also proceeds to provide analysis for specific situations illustrating the fallacy.

For general exploration of fallacies consult the following sources:

Alternate names for a fallacy is provided in italics and abbreviations used in the document are listed in the table below:


¬ NOT	∧ AND	∨ OR
C C is true	¬ C C is false
> greater than	< less than
→ implies	∈ is element of	∴ therefore

Table of Contents

1 Ad Hoc

Special pleading. Relativist. Subjectivist fallacy. False attribution. Fallacy of quoting out of context. No true Scotsman. Shifting ground fallacy. Doublespeak.

By arbitrary introductions of excuses one attempts to make the argument appear valid. Special pleading unjustifiably requests that certain things be not applicable to certain personal situations.

Data: Do you understand that there are moral implications involved in killing animals? These are sentient beings who experience emotions such as joy, fear and love, just as humans do.
Lore: Well that’s no doubt true about the animals, but while the moral implications may apply to you, they don’t apply to me.
Data: Since we are agreed that animals are sentient beings, everyone has a moral obligation to act towards them appropriately.

_Form_
A accepts C for B.
A rejects C for A introducing arbitrary circumstances.
∴ C doesn’t apply to A.

1.1 Banana allergy

One of my co-workers says she can’t do veg, cuz she has a banana allergy. When I pointed out that you don’t have to just eat bananas and can eat all sorts of other fruits, she said “Well I have allergies to all of those too”. Ok how about vegetables? “Nope, I’m just allergic to eating veggies as well unless with some meat!”

_Datanalysis_
While there may be a condition known as carbohydrate intolerance (lactose intolerance being the most common version), congenital forms of this are extremely rare. It is the inability of the body to process carbohydrates well due to missing enzymes (supplying the enzymes externally can resolve the dilemma). However, it is clear here that the co-worker is just making up excuses on the go.

1.2 Foie gras compassion

Some protestors cornered a restaurant owner who sold foie gras in California back around 2000, pointing out how horribly the birds were treated. He agreed about the treatment and then just said “I don’t share your compassion.”

_Datanalysis_
Here we have a case of rationalization in the form of “you can be compassionate, but I do not have to be (because I am so special etc)”. A better argument might have been to fabricate something along the special pleading lines of “The inhumane treatment of the birds provide my livelihood”, but even that fails dismally since livelihood does not justify cruelty.

1.3 Life is supposed to be fun

Life is about having fun. Eating just fruit and vegetables is way too serious and boring.

_Datanalysis_
This is a case of special pleading. The individual pleads that she will not have fun eating just fruits/vegetables, therefore she should not have to do so. By this reasoning, some could claim that they should not have to go to the bathroom, because doing so smells and is therefore not fun. Of course, if they would eat fruits and vegetables, instead of corpse parts, they might find that the experience is possibly not quite as unpleasant.

1.4 I don’t want to live forever!

I don’t want to be so healthy that I keep living on and on. Therefore, it is fine to eat things that make me less healthy.

_Datanalysis_
While the logic employed is impeccable, one wonders about the degree of sincerity. For instance, at what age does the individual consider to be ’long enough’? Will the individual terminate his/her own existence at that age? If so, why not live healthy and then self-terminate at the appointed time? The issue would seem to have nothing to do with being healthy and everything to do with consuming whatever one is tempted by.

1.5 The peer-reviewed, published study is useless as far as I’m concerned

The unfortunate thing about this study and the Harvard study is that they both relied on phone and face to face interviews in which they just asked people about what they ate. I find this type of study almost worthless since most people can’t remember day to day what they ate let alone over a period of time.

_Datanalysis_
The above comment is in reference to Red Meat Consumption and Mortality which was not only conducted with great thoroughness, but also accounted for factoring out known contributors of disease. The criticism is similar to the one generated by The Meat Institute: “A new study in today’s Archives of Internal Medicine tries to predict the future risk of death from cancer or cardiovascular disease by relying on notoriously unreliable self-reporting about what was eaten and obtuse methods to apply statistical analysis to the data.” (AMI) who naturally have a vested interest in maligning the study, but seem to be having some difficulty in coming up with sensible arguments to that effect.

1.6 Diet is a personal choice

My spouse eats meat. I don’t. It’s just a personal choice we’ve made.

_Datanalysis_
Any action is essentially a personal choice. However, the fact that one has made a personal choice doesn’t provide the justification of the action. For instance, killing your boss or restraining a child are also personal choices. However, to justify either requires more than just the obvious claim that these are personal choices. One may be able to justify the former because your boss was attempting to kill you (ie self-defense), while the latter may be justifiable in a situation where the child was trying to harm a sibling (ie defense of another), but neither uses the idea of personal choice as a rationale. Eating corpse supports the imprisonment, exploitation, abuse and murder of sentient beings and is not legitimized by the personal choice rationalization.

1.7 I have special requirements of science

Denyer: Animals are incapable of demonstrating altruism.
Response: You are just unaware of the past 3 decades of cognitive ethology.
Denyer: You are completely correct about that! I don’t like modern ethology much.
Response: That is indeed a pity! I believe there is a lot being lost then.
Denyer: I don’t think so. I’m selective and modern ethology generally does not meet my requirements for science.

_Datanalysis_
There is considerable inconsistency in the responses. If the person is unaware of cognitive ethology, how can he claim to not like it. Also, whether his requirements for science are met is irrelevant since it is merely a personal attitude irrespective of the facts. What we are dealing with here is a faith-based individual, so it matters little to him what science and reality clearly demonstrate. This person will always resort to “I don’t believe it”. Of course, belief has nothing to do with any of this. The research evidence clearly shows animal sentience and real scientists accept it. This individual will likely stay on his flat earth until he falls off the edge.

2 Ad Hominem

Against the man. Against the person.

Attempt to invalidate an argument by attacking the character of the person making the argument: kill the messenger if you can’t kill the message.

Data: Vegan is the nutritionally intelligent, environmentally sustainable and ethically correct diet to follow.
Lore: Data you’re just an incompetent android who doesn’t know anything so you’re wrong!!!!
Data: While you are doing a fine job attacking me personally, you have done nothing to attack my argument.

_Form_
P claims C.
Q says derogatory things about P.
∴ ¬ C.

2.1 You eat rabbit food

I was explaining the benefits of eating vegetarian to my friend and a colleague sticks out his front teeth and starts taunting me with “You’re a rabbit. You eat rabbit food.”

_Datanalysis_
Evidently this colleague doesn’t know much about vegetarian eating or comparative anatomy or he would not mistake a homo sapiens for a leporid.

2.2 You’re insane for helping animals

Mai was involved with animal rescue and she had helped a lot of creatures, but when a neighbor found out he got irate and called her insane for trying to save these varmints.

_Datanalysis_
The neighbor doesn’t provide any evidence to substantiate his claim that Mai is insane. Rescuing animals is not grounds for insanity. In fact, considering the Canadian Revenue Agency Charity Registration views rescuing animals to be a legitimate charitable activity and of societal benefit one might think that this neighbor could benefit himself from doing the same.

2.3 Excessive reliance on sarcasm

Sometimes an argument is punctuated with sarcastic comments. Here is a series of excerpts attempting to defend a particular PETA advertisement by making sarcastic remarks about the attitudes of those who are in opposition (from forum posts):

yes sex is evil and nasty! appealing to sexual sentiments, and attempting to use humor! how Dare they! monsters!! it should have been the guy being beaten!!
it so sexist! the woman should be repairing the walls dammed stereotypes, the woman shoulda had a strap on
even your name is offensive to me… I don’t know why… but it just is!!! ;)

_Datanalysis_
Sarcasm may appear to be clever, but it essentially amounts to saying “I disagree” in a rather unpleasant sort of way. Since it usually tends to be nothing more than a ‘disguised’ personal attack, sarcastic remarks tend not to contribute concrete or persuasive information. The intent is not to make a point, but to demoralize, abuse or injure the opponent. Resorting to such tactics often exposes an inability to formulate viable arguments (possibly because there may not be any). What is more unfortunate is that succumbing to such tactics (usually a result of inadequate self-discipline), demeans, degrades and on occasion even destroys what might have been considered a legitimate argument.

3 Ad Hominem: Abusive

Against the man. Against the person.

Attempt to invalidate an argument by making abusive remarks about the person making the argument: kill the messenger if you can’t kill the message.

Data: Vegan is the nutritionally intelligent, environmentally sustainable and ethically correct diet to follow.
Lore: Data you’re just totally ****** and a real ****** too!!!!
Data: What a potentially interesting challenge in cryptography, Lore! Each of those bleeped out expressions represent 268 potential word possibilities. However, since we know they failed the censor test, it is not necessary to perform an exhaustive search - heuristics will be adequate. You of course realize that you have failed to provide any rationale to counter my initial statement.

_Form_
P claims X.
Q says nasty things about P’s character.
∴ ¬ X.

3.1 The pie attack

Three vegans attacked Lierre Keith (The Vegetarian Myth author) by pieing her in the face during a talk she was doing. Abusive monsters like you show just how ***** you vegans really are. You should all be locked up, nevermind being allowed to speak in a forum!

_Datanalysis_
While it is quite correct to call such actions as abusive attacks, it is inappropriate to label the action as a ‘vegan’ one simply because it is thought that some vegans executed it. Furthermore, there is no rationality in insisting that anyone should be locked up or not permitted status on a forum due to the actions of three individuals.

3.2 Winning an argument vs discrediting an opponent

Some people think that if they can discredit an opponent by calling the individual names, they have won the argument. Here is an example of such a situation.

Cretin: You wrote “It’s not that you’re trying to win an argument, it’s that you’re trying to discredit an opponent.” Well that is absolutely retarded because those two intentions are essentially the same thing.
Civil: Well no they’re not. Winning an argument requires that one uses proper reasoning that is logically valid as well as sound. Discrediting an opponent can be done without even producing an argument. Some people try to do it with various outbursts like:

That is absolutely retarded
Stop defending your stupid comments
You are not using the full capacity of your brain
I can’t take this stupidity
You are either stupid or being stubborn

_Datanalysis_
These ad hominem fallacies don’t actually add strength to any argument. They are an attempt to discredit the individual you are talking to by attributing various features to them. As with typical ad hominems the idea is primarily to abuse the opponent into submission.

4 Ad Hominem: Flattery

Appeal to flattery.

This is really a variation on the ad hominem theme. Instead of rubbishing one’s opponent, one does quite the opposite in the hopes of gaining agreement on a claim, regardless of whether the claim has any merit.

Data: The high mercury content of fish makes it a most unwise choice for consumption.
Lore: Data you are brilliant! It’s amazing how you can gather facts from all over and you present things so remarkably well too! I am always impressed by your knowledge and am so glad to call you my brother! By the way, one of my good friends runs a fish store, so let’s not make a big deal out of the mercury - I’m sure you can use your cleverness to find some way of pointing out how minimal the toxic effects are anyway.
Data: Flattery will get you nowhere, Lore. You can’t really alter the facts and the dangerous effects of mercury poisoning, by hurling compliments.

_Form_
A flatters B.
A claims C.
∴ C.

5 Ad Hominem: Circumstantial

Against the man. Against the person.

Attempt to invalidate an argument by claiming that the person making it is acting in own interests: kill the messenger if you can’t kill the message.

Data: Vegan is the nutritionally intelligent, environmentally sustainable and ethically correct diet to follow.
Lore: Data you’re just saying stuff like that because you’re one of those bleeding hearts animal rights activists who wants all creatures to live happily ever after.
Data: Whether I want all animals to live happily ever after has little to do with my point that a vegan diet is what it is: specifically the nutritional research which clearly shows the health advantage of vegan diets; the environmental statements from various organizations such as even the United Nations; the ethical analysis from various philosophical viewpoints and authors.

_Form_
P claims X.
Q says nasty things about P’s character.
∴ ¬ X.

5.1 The Bully Card

Do me a favor and don’t be a forum bully. I think you were completely rude … back off and don’t be so **** about it. Your tone was clearly not a friendly one so don’t backpedal. I feel abused by you!

_Datanalysis_
This is sometimes a ploy to create a distraction and at other times an attempt to discredit an adversary. Note that the accusations likely have nothing to do with the topic being discussed. In these situations, the chances are that the person complaining just didn’t like how the discussion was going. There was likely no bullying, but a fair bit of whining.

6 Ad Hominem: Poisoning the Well

Against the man. Against the person.

Attempt to invalidate an argument by trying to discredit the person making it: kill the messenger if you can’t kill the message.

Data: Vegan is the nutritionally intelligent, environmentally sustainable and ethically correct diet to follow.
Lore: Data you were made as an imperfect android by Noonien Soonng and so anything you say is wrong.
Data: By focusing on my ’lack of perfection’, you will deem whatever I say to be wrong, even when I am right. Neither does this ’lack of perfection’ alter the facts which support my statement about a vegan diet: specifically the nutritional research which clearly shows the health advantage of vegan diets; the environmental statements from various organizations such as even the United Nations; the ethical analysis from various philosophical viewpoints and authors.

_Form_
P claims X.
Q says P said or did something discreditable in the past.
∴ ¬ X.

6.1 Insider trading and deer slaughter

Sometimes individuals like to throw irrelevantly incriminating information into the mix. An example, is shown here in an articles relating to an injunction to stop deer slaughter in the Invermere community in BC, Canada where mention is made of the financial activities of one of the architects of the effort:

Explaining why he got involved in the issue, Mr. Suman said he and his wife, Monie, moved to the valley a year-and-a-half ago, and were instantly enamoured with the deer that live within the town. He acknowledged that he is the same Shane Suman who was recently found guilty, along with his wife, of insider trading by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, and ordered to pay over $4 million dollars in fines and profits, but stated that the issues are completely unrelated, and he has nothing to hide in relation to the case.
Invermere ordered to put brakes on cull (Joshua Estabrooks, Pioneer Staff)

_Datanalysis_
While Suman’s financial activities did result in a guilty verdict against him, his past dealings have no relevance to his trying to stop the deer slaughter in Invermere. To bring up the matter may be an attempt to discredit his character and thereby sway opinion against his efforts, even though there is no connection between trying to help deer and the prior monetary misdealings.

6.2 PETA kills everything!

DeerAdvocate: Hey Shishkabob! Good news for the deer! Even PETA is getting into this and asking people to write to Invermere to stop the killing.
Shishkabob: Oh, are they asking Invermere to send the deer to PETA’s HQ so they can ‘send’ them to a better place, via needle?

_Datanalysis_
This is one of those PETA-hating attitudes some people have even though they may be in favor of animal protection. Since PETA endorses euthanization in certain situations, some people feel that that they have to malign everything the organization does. Even when PETA acts in alignment with their own cause, they feel they have to take a potshot at them. This sort of bigotted behavior is not conducive to unity within the ranks, but these people are usually more interested in sounding off immaturely than engaging in any meaningful action.

7 Ad Hominem: Tu Quoque

You too. Two wrongs make a right. Appeal to hypocrisy.

Attempt to invalidate an argument by claiming the person making it has done things which are counter to the argument: kill the messenger if you can’t kill the message. Here is a good video on this fallacy: Are You PERFECT?!!

Data: Vegan is the nutritionally intelligent, environmentally sustainable and ethically correct diet to follow.
Lore: Data you don’t eat, are made from environmentally unfriendly materials and kill millions of microorganisms when you simulate breathing and so you’re spouting nonsense!
Data: My personal and behavioral parameters do not have any influence on the realities of a vegan diet. I may be lacking in certain areas, but my inadequacies do not alter the established facts: specifically the nutritional research which clearly shows the health advantage of vegan diets; the environmental statements from various organizations such as even the United Nations; the ethical analysis from various philosophical viewpoints and authors.

_Form_
P claims X.
Q says P has acted in the opposite way to X.
∴ ¬ X.

7.1 You plant-eating mass murderer!

The hole in the vegan argument that meat is murder is this: more animals die to prepare and harvest crops.

_Datanalysis_
Factually, the above statement is simply incorrect because between 50-80% (varies with country and time period) of the grain harvested goes to fattening animals. Additionally, calculations show clearly that eating strict vegetarian kills far, far fewer animals than eating from the corpse industries: Number of Animals Killed to Produce One Million Calories in Eight Food Categories.

Of course, the accuser usually knows that he/she is spouting nonsense. The argument presented has little to do with fact and everything to do with pathetic bravado. It can be summed up as simply as “You kill some animals with your plant-diet, so you shouldn’t complain if I kill far more with my corpse eating fetish.” There is no really argument here beyond a fallacious whining.

7.2 You can’t attack my animal abusings because you aren’t 100% pure vegan!

A vegan diet is a simple to do. Avoiding animal products completely doesn’t seem so. Do you have a right to attack others for eating animals when you continue to use them? Products such as rubber and tires involve the use of animal products, and that plastic shoes devastate the environment? Unless you ran away naked from the society, you are contributing to animal exploitation in some way.

_Datanalysis_
This is a typically simplistic case of “you too”! The idea behind this attack on vegan advocates is that they likely use some slaughterhouse by-product (eg stearic acid in rubber or plastic) and therefore are somehow barred from criticising those who eat animals or wear fur etc. It is a frequent effort by some people to deflect attention from their support of the imprisonment, exploitation, abuse and murder of animals.

One can run a line of defense such as in modern society it is impossible to be 100% vegan, but one can come pretty close. This is a reasonable answer which justifies one’s actions while acknowledging certain short-comings. After all, it may be difficult to stop breathing to avoid killing thousands of microbes.

However, because we have a clear fallacy here of the lowly ad hominem family, the opportunity for attack is ever-present. The accusatory argument has no merit because:

The personal action of an individual does not change the morality of a situation. If robbing a bank is unethical, having a bank robber speak out against the act, does not miraculously alter the morality of the act. Harming sentient beings is unethical (except in select situations such as self-defense). So even an animal abuser is entitled to speak against animal abuse.
The fact that the individual who speaks out against animal abuse may engage in some sort of incidental action (often unknowingly) such as driving on tires which have been manufactured with some component derived from an animal, does not absolve those who regularly participate in various forms of animal abuse.

The above two realities negate the legitimacy of such immature, whiney onslaughts.

7.3 Nobody is vegan!

You’re not vegan because you use car tires which are made from slaughterhouse by-products (stearic acid)! You’re not vegan because your computer keyboard may have some sort of animal product! You’re not vegan because the stickers on your organic bananas probably aren’t vegan! You’re not vegan because you may have stepped on an ant when you walked outside. You’re not vegan because you kill microbes when you breathe!

_Datanalysis_
While technically it can be argued that nobody really is vegan as per above, the attack is rather flawed due to its confusion between an ideal and the manifestation of the same. Vegan is a spectrum with a minimum threshold such as not participating in the imprisonment, exploitation, abuse and murder of animals. Incidental anomalies that appear as a result of the manufacturing process and breathing hardly constitute a violation of that threshold. A particularly fine analysis is presented in this article: Nobody Is Vegan.

8 Analogy: Extended

False analogy. Faulty analogy. Questionable analogy.

The utilization of an analogy is deliberately misconstrued here. If two things have a basis of similarity, then one can be used to illustrate the other on grounds of that basis. Each does not need to be identical or similar in all aspects for the analogy to be valid. However, a critic will take exception to the analogy itself on grounds of whatever dissimilarities can be conjured up.

Data: Humans oppress animals in the same way they have oppressed other humans examples being the slave trade or the ethnic cleansing campaigns throughout history.
Lore: So what are you saying? That these humans were animals? Are you seriously equating humans to animals!
Data: Humans and animals do possess many similarities. However, the comparison was not between humans and animals, but between the treatment some humans received and the treatment some animals receive. Some humans and some animals continue to be kept in slavery. Some humans and some animals continue to be exterminated under the expediency of ‘cleansing’. The analogy merely reveals the common mentality of the oppressors who do not seem to hold speciesist attitudes towards their victims.

_Form_
A has some similar characteristics to B.
A is used as an illustration to clarify aspects of B.
The illustration is criticized because A isn’t identical to B.

9 Analogy: Weak

False analogy. Faulty analogy. Questionable analogy.

The apparent similarity between two situations is utilized to insist that the properties belonging to one also belong to the other.

Data: Bees make honey for themselves, not for humans. Therefore, it is morally wrong to steal honey from them, an unnecessary act which kills countless numbers of bees.
Lore: Well don’t you know that you kill bugs when you ride in a car? It’s unnecessary for you to drive too!
Data: In present day society, driving is not always unnecessary (eg ambulance, fire brigade, food distribution etc). Furthermore, one doesn’t drive to kill bugs deliberately anymore than one drives to kill humans deliberately, yet accidents kill members of both species. One does end up killing bees deliberately by taking their honey because the bees will fight to the death to keep what is theirs. Furthermore, bee industry practices end up destroying many bees that starve to death because they are not left with sufficient honey to see them through the winter. Death cause by driving is quite incidental while the deaths caused by the bee industry are invasively more deliberate.

_Form_
A appears to be similar to B.
B has property P.
∴ A has property P.

9.1 Horses and dogs should work too for their living

Animals should have to earn their living. After all, humans have to earn a living. So why shouldn’t animals as well? There’s nothing wrong about making a horse pull a carriage or a dog pulling a sled.

_Datanalysis_
There seem to be a couple of problems with this sort of analogus reasoning.

First, it is not true that all humans have to earn a living. Many don’t work or can’t work (eg children). They are often appropriately supported by family, friends or society.

Second, animals and some people work in their own way to ’earn their living’. Horses graze, some dogs hunt in packs and many humans gather and eat fruit. There is no reason to think that creatures who live in a way that is natural for them, necessarily need to fit into the modern society 9 to 5 schedules.

Third, hooking up a horse to a carriage or a dog to a sled is nothing short of exploitation. While there may be rare isolated situations where a symbiotic partnership is necessary (say someone who rescued a horse, but has no means of supporting his care, so the two of them go into business together), it is clear that the intent is almost exclusively to make money for the person at the expense of the animal.

Therefore, it is an unsound notion to suggest that animals should have to earn their living in a fashion as adopted by some humans.

9.2 Don’t eat and drive!

The American Meat Institute once whined:

A new study in today’s Archives of Internal Medicine tries to predict the future risk of death from cancer or cardiovascular disease by relying on notoriously unreliable self-reporting about what was eaten and obtuse methods to apply statistical analysis to the data. This imprecise approach is like relying on consumers’ personal characterization of their driving habits in prior years in determining their likelihood of having an accident that kills them in the future.

_Datanalysis_
The analogy forced between ‘what was eaten’ and “personal characterization of driving habits’ is a meaningless one. The former is tangible and can be objectively established in a variety of ways. The latter is purely subjective and prone to whims of the ego. Therefore, the attempt has no validity at all.

Nor is the last sentence correct, because statistics tend to show that poor driving habits will increase the likelihood of an accident. In fact, statistical data on driving habits is what insurance companies use to determine premium rates.

9.3 In defense of dog fighting

Rep. Steve King (R-IA) fielded a question about his opposition to animal rights and recently introduced legislation that would undermine local standards preventing animal torture. “It’s wrong to rate animals above human beings,” he told the questioner. To make his point, King argued that “there’s something wrong” for society to make it a “federal crime to watch animals fight” but “it’s not a federal crime to induce somebody to watch people fighting.”

_Datanalysis_
What is really wrong is not with society, but with King’s reasoning. The analogy attempted between people fighting voluntarily (ie boxing) and animals being forced to fight (ie dog/cock fighting) is inappropriate. One could argue that there is something wrong with a society that induces people to watch any sort of fighting of any species, but it is an incorrect argument to suggest that it is wrong to punish people for going to fights of species A simply because you do not punish them for going to fights of species B.

10 Appeal to Authority

Argumentum ad Verecundiam. Ispe dixit. Fallacious Appeal to Authority. Misuse of Authority. Irrelevant Authority. Questionable Authority. Inappropriate Authority.

The attempt to validate a conclusion based on some statement by some authority. While providing legitimate authority as backing for one’s arguments is reasonable, the fact that some authority agrees with your point of view is insufficient as the sole basis. For instance, the authority may actually not be an authority or may have changed viewpoints or may be just plain wrong. Usually, the appeal to authority is invoked because other avenues lead to a deadend and there is no real support for the argument. For a more thorough presentation, see Nizkor Appeal To Authority.

Data: I find the attitudes and practices of humans towards other sentient beings most disturbing.
Lore: Well get over it because Descartes said that animals are just automatons.
Data: While citing authority to support an argument may be legitimate if the authority’s statements are correct, no argument can be negated or validated purely on the solely the word of a specific authority - especially when the comment is demonstrably untrue, as it is in this case with Descartes who while being a competent mathematician was prone to “creating a world to suit his fancy without the slightest regard for the known facts” (Ref: A. D’Abro - The Rise of the New Physics Volume One p11.)

_Form_
P claims A is an authority on subject S.
P claims A supports C being true.
∴ C.

10.1 Authority in reverse!

Sometimes carnists call you out for being “emotional” about the plight of animal suffering and continues to attacks and trivialize your sympathetic sentiments. However, when you throw facts, clinical studies and data suggesting animal eating is bad, they resort to such classic rhetoric as “you shouldn’t believe all you hear”, “you are being too logical” and eventually “I’ll believe you when you are a doctor”.

_Datanalysis_
This is the classic case of appeal to authority reversed. While the corpse eater is able to not deal with facts, it is easy to accuse the opponent as being ’emotional’ (see Appeal to Emotion below). However, there is no where to run when the actual data appears, so backed against a wall, the plea is fallaciously made to ’lack’ of authority. Obviously, this effort reveals only the desperation, because it makes little difference what the qualifications are of the individual who presents the demonstrated facts.

11 Appeal to Authority: Age

Appeal by age.

The idea here is to claim an argument is correct because the person making it has more experience by virtue of having existed longer. The fact that the experience may not have any connection to the argument or that the person might be just plain wrong, is thus circumvented. The age/experience of an individual may be used to some extent to strengthen an argument, but has nothing to do with its correctness.

Data: I find the attitudes and practices of humans towards other sentient beings most disturbing.
Lore: Look my young friend, I’m older than you are and have been around longer than you. I say things are fine just the way they are. How do I know this? Because I’ve seen things this way for a longer time than you.
Data: You are just a few months older, Lore. Furthermore, you are only providing a personal opinion without any verification of its correctness.

_Form_
A is old/experienced.
A claims C.
∴ C.

11.1 The age card

I can use the age card. I’ve been a passionate vegan for 25 years, which is probably about the time that you’ve been on earth. Vegan for 25 years baby! Did you hear that? Let me say it again! VEGAN FOR 25 YEARS!!! I’m proud of being a 25 year vegan!! Nothing wrong with that. What comes with 25 years of veganism that many of you don’t have? A lot of wisdom from making a lot of mistakes with other vegans through the years.

_Datanalysis_
Judging by the repetitive nature of the statement, one could surmise that what comes with 25 years of veganism, in this particular case, is senility rather than wisdom. Correctness is not proportional to age. An argument cannot be substantiated simply by the age or experience of the presenter even if he is a vegan. The validity of an argument rests on its logical form and the evidence presented for its substantiation and not on the posturing of the one who is making it.

12 Appeal to Consequences of a Belief

Argumentum ad consequentiam. Wishful thinking.

Here one tries to utilize the consequences of a belief to verify the belief itself. If believing something produces positive consequences, then one asserts the something is true.

Data: The fur industry is cruel.
Lore: I get money for the pelts and will hopefully be rich soon, so trapping and killing furry animals is the correct thing to do.
Data: Simply because you believe you will benefit from by engaging in these inhumane practices promoted by the fur industry, doesn’t provide an argument that is contrary to my original statement.

_Form_
C is (un)desirable.
∴ (¬)C.

12.1 Worrying is unhealthy

It’s unhealthy to worry so much about animals and the environment. It’ll stress you out. Just live and be free! Don’t get so involved! Don’t worry! Be happy!

_Datanalysis_
While there is merit in not worrying and not getting stressed out, the above is nothing more than a rationalization for apathy. Interestingly enough, such rationalizations come from both those who oppress animals as well as those who presumably advocate the opposite. The latter though tend to do a balancing act on the fence when pressed. They don’t want to confront the oppressors, but like to believe they are also not contributing to the oppression. One’s own ‘peace of mind’ takes priority and therefore overrides any attempt at producing an effective argument.

12.2 Veganism should not be a religion

Some people in Western society already view veganism as a kind of religion, cult, or extreme point of view, and therefore reject it. We should be very cautious about trying to associate veganism with religiousness and or religious rights.

_Datanalysis_
The concern that if veganism is viewed as a religion there will be bad consequences should not determine whether veganism is viewed as a religion. If veganism meets the appropriate criteria for being considered to be a religion, then it has a legitimate claim to be categorized as such. Gain or loss as a result of outlook, does not determine the validity of the outlook.

12.3 Honey is vegan!!

Rejecting honey as a vegan product hurts the vegan movement, therefore such a position on honey just doesn’t make any sense. You’re talking about some quasi-religious personal purity, rather than about stopping animal abuse. No wonder veganism can seem nonsensical to the average person.

_Datanalysis_
Since there is so much evidence clearly demonstrating that honey is not vegan and that bees are sentient animals, what is indeed nonsensical is to take the incorrect stand that honey is vegan based on concern of the dire consequences such a stance might bring. One doesn’t stop animal abuse by fictious arguments where we take from Peter with the hopes of giving to Paul: it is illogical and unethical to condemn bees to servitude and death, simply because we have hopes of appearing more ‘reasonable’ to a public who will thereby miraculously refrain from supporting the slaughter of cows and chickens.

12.4 This store made me who I am today!

I get a lot of good stuff at this store! They have great prices! Fantastic service too and they are so convenient! Wow! They even have rare things I want which I probably can’t get anywhere else. It’s unfortunate that they sell some shoddy books like How To Make Millions Off Your Fighting Dogs and 35 Ways To Pack Meat Into Your Pig! Well, I am a vegan after all, so I can’t approve of this stuff. Oh yeah and they sell corpse parts like beef jerky and some foie gras too. Disgusting! I don’t approve of this stuff at all! Ok, so they also sell live animals and ship them to wherever. I don’t like that either. Geez! But you have to understand that they do so many other good things, like give me excellent discounts and the more I buy, the better chances I have at winning their monthly jackpot! Think of all the good I can do with that money, eh? And all stores in the world must do something wrong, I’m sure, so why pick on this one? That’s why I gotta buy from these folks. They’re the best deal going anywhere! They are a miracle! Ya!!

_Datanalysis_
It would seem that the above individual is drowning in an overdose of self-indulgence. To justify an act simply because one stands to benefit from it is one of the most self-serving rationalizations that exist. The morality of an act is determined by its adherence to established criteria, which deal with questions such as:

does the act produce any victims?
is there any harm done indirectly as a result of the act?
are there any intended casualities caused by the act?
is the act even necessary to commit?

To support a commercial enterprise that is harmful to other lives and/or promotes harm towards other beings, for the sake of convenience (as opposed to basic need) is selfish and unethical.

13 Appeal to Emotion

Ad misericordiam. Appeal to sympathy.

Here the argument is based not on facts or construction, but on manipulation of emotion.

Data: Culling ’excess’ deer is an unethical activity since deer are sentient beings and it is human activity that has reduced their habitat.
Lore: Think of all the poor hungry people the venison will feed!
Data: Having poor hungry people is a fault of the social and municipal mechanisms in society. One may sympathize with their situation, but the deer should not have to compensate for human failings.

_Form_
C produces emotions favorable to stance we hold.
∴ C.

13.1 Traitor to one’s species!

How dare you put the rights of animals above those of humans?! Have you no sense of loyalty? You are a traitor to your own species!

_Datanalysis_
There is no rational basis for insisting that any member show loyalty to its species. Dogs will fight dogs to save a human. Horses often relate better to humans than to other horses. Cats can co-exist with with various creatures (even birds and mice) and still show animosity towards other cats. Humans, as well, will defend their animal companions or even wildlife against the onslaught of other humans.

The notion that we should give priority to our own species is absurd. If it were otherwise, we should support legislation which would cause all pet owners to be traitors to the human species because they have not turned in their animals to medical research to supposedly benefit other humans.

Furthermore, a natural application of this ’loyalty’ to one’s own kind, produces dangerous precedents, such as

men who oppose sexism are traitors to all men → label them pro-feminists
whites who oppose racism are traitors to other whites → call them nigger lovers
Hindus who supported religious tolerance were traitors to other Hindus → they are our mortal enemies (Gandhi was murdered by a Hindu.)

13.2 The Guilt Trip

So you won’t buy a ticket for the Shiners Circus because you don’t like them using animals in the acts! What about thinking of the poor burn victims who are just children? Won’t you find it in your heart to help these unfortunate children?

_Datanalysis_
The argument here is a non sequitur effort which tries to associate not getting a ticket to the Shiners Circus with not wanting to help children. Just because one doesn’t support that circus doesn’t mean that one is opposed to supporting children.

An appropriate clarification would be “I do have it in my heart to help children, but I have no intention of supporting your Shriners who utilize children as a front while abusing animals in order to draw in money so their members can wear silly hats and throw parties”.

14 Appeal to Emotion: Fear

Argumentum ad metum. Argumentum in terrorem.

The idea here is to scare people into thinking you are right by deception within the argument.

Data: The Ministry of the Environment has ordered killing of wolves because they seem to be showing up more frequently in inhabited areas.
Lore: Well, of course they did. Wolves can eat your babies and must be prevented from doing so.
Data: One does not need to kill off wolves in order to protect babies. One merely needs to not leave babies irresponsibly unattended. A program to relocate wolves would be a more humane solution than killing them.

_Form_
¬ C produces fear.
∴ C.

14.1 Doctor using scare tactics

A remarkably healthy person goes to his doctor after several years and makes a very positive impression.

Doc: After going this long without having to go to the doctor I’ve got to ask, “What’s your secret?” RHP: Well, I’m a vegan and I… Doc: What??? A vegan??? Why??? Don’t you know how unhealthy that is??? … you won’t be able to get enough protein … I’m being erious as a heart-attack! … You can’t get enough iron in your diet … to start eating red meat 3 times a week or do massive supplements … You have to be careful or you may even have serious mental issues.

_Datanalysis_
The interesting aspect of the doctor’s position is that there is not a single piece of factual evidence being presented. If RHP chose to pursue the matter, he could show decades of amassed evidence clearly demonstrating the beneficial health conferred by a vegan diet. However, doing so is not likely to cause this doctor to rethink his position since the intention is to frighten his client into submission. The doctor unfortunately also reflects the deliberate ignorance shown by the medical profession in that they are unwilling to even learn about proper nutrition.

14.2 They won’t like you

Don’t tell people about not eating meat, they won’t like you.

_Datanalysis_
This is a rather poor rationalization that some people utilize in order to justify not taking action. The merit of whether an action is proper or not is not dependent upon whether one is liked. Furthermore, this attitude doesn’t take into account these two possibilities:

many people may like you because you stood up for values of compassion many people will not like the person who is telling you what not to do thereby that statement should not be made by its own logic

14.3 You’ll lose your following

If only people that agree 100% with every aspect of vegan lifestyle are allowed on this forum, including only parents that feed their children 100% vegan foods and did not get them vaccinated, you’d end up with 100 people MAX.

_Datanalysis_
It is unclear as to how the number of 100 is calculated. The argument assumes that restrictive parameters will be a detriment to the forum the assumption being that more is better. However, restrictions often encourage more people to join a group simply because they do not want to deal with spam and nonsense. Furthermore, if the goal of the forum is to maintain the standard of veganism, then it makes sense to have it populated by vegans: quality over quantity.

15 Appeal to Emotion: Force

Ad baculum. Scare tactics. Appeal to force.

The idea here is to force people into thinking you are right with a threat.

Data: The Ministry of the Environment has ordered killing of wolves. This an act of cruelty towards sentient beings.
Lore: You need to cut out these nonsensical statements. If you don’t, you see this phaser I’m holding? I just have to use it to melt your mouth shut!
Data: Your phaser does not negate the correctness of my statement. Besides, I took the precaution of discharging yours, Lore.

_Form_
¬ C produces fear.
∴ C.

15.1 Boycotting businesses and more

Sometimes scare tactics can be used effectively on behalf of victims, especially when one has real power to wield. Here is an excerpt from an event in 2006 in which activist and business man Bruce Foerster ‘persuaded’ the Belize government, that it would not be in their interests to support Japan’s slaughtering of whales:

As a business owner here in Belize I am ashamed that you would betray the world’s few remaining whales by helping authorize their slaughter and should you indeed pursue this I will immediately sell my large resort and take all of my capital out of the country, compromising the 100 full time positions which this resort provides and the millions of dollars we invest annually into the local economy. I simply cannot tolerate such a destructive move on your part and will not live nor invest in a country which pretends to care for the environment but in reality cares only for the dirty money that they can earn by voting to destroy the relatively few whales that these butchers have not already painfully and mercilessly slaughtered.You are risking a huge economic backlash and a tourism boycott should you make the mistake of voting for the destruction of these rare and intelligent mammals! The Power of One Can End the Killing of the Whales

Note that the idea of a boycott involves the application of the appeal to fear, however, it is not necessarily a logical fallacy. Here, Bruce substantiates his future actions giving reasons why whale slaughter is ethically immoral as well as environmentally absurd, then follows up with a statement of consequences. Bruce spoke and Belize listened!

16 Appeal to Emotion: Pity

Ad misericordiam.

By trying to create pity, one hopes that the claim will be accepted.

Data: The practice of sucking oviductory excretions, drinking bovine secretions and eating corpse parts is proven to be harmful to birds, cows and various other sentient beings.
Lore: Oh come on Data! Don’t be such a heartless android! These poor people get heart disease, cancer, osteroporosis, constipation and a lot of other diseases. Just let’em be, eh!
Date: I do appreciate the pity you show these individuals and what is happening to them is certainly unfortunate. However, they are the ones who are deliberately engaging in these practices which are harmful to themselves. They have a choice not to do so. Their victims do not have any choice.

_Form_
C is presented surrounded by an aura of pity.
∴ C.

16.1 But they’ll just starve!

I recognize that the mass killing of animals isn’t pretty, but they are doing it for food.

_Datanalysis_
The implication is that somehow certain unfortunates would starve horribly to death if factory farms were shut down. Evidently, those who put forth such pitiful arguments haven’t discovered vegetarianism yet despite its centuries old existence.

16.2 Those vegetarians are picking on the poor bashers of baby seals!

Anti-seal hunt advocates are vegetarians who have set their sights on struggling East Coast hunters rather than fighting the beef cartel, says a Liberal senator.

Sen. Céline Hervieux-Payette told The Huffington Post Canada that Liberals and Conservatives have been united in trying to prevent rogue Liberal Sen. Mac Harb from tabling a bill banning Canada’s commercial seal hunt for several years because it is “disturbing to the whole scene.”

“It is giving the vegetarians a big opportunity,” Hervieux-Payette said. (excerpt from Huffington Post Article)

_Datanalysis_
Apart from the complete inaccuracy of this remarkably absurd statement (most anti seal slaughter advocates are not vegetarians given that the campaign is so large and worldwide), one does have to wonder about the capacity for reasoning of Hervieux-Payette. If they really were vegetarians, then it would make sense that they would protest the beef cartel and not the seal slaughter because the vast majority of corpse eaters never eat seal flesh. So why would vegetarians come out in great numbers to protest something no one would eat in the first place? This would seem to be yet another effort to desperately draw pity for the “struggling East Coast hunters” who like to bash in the skulls of helpless baby seals.

17 Appeal to Nature

Argumentum ad naturam.

Nature is utilized axiomatically as an authority. If it happens in nature then it is assumed to be good/optimal. The fact that nature doesn’t always do things that are good/optimal is ignored. Furthermore, it is never really defined exactly what ’natural’ means. For instance, if a beaver builds a dam that is supposed to be natural, but if a man builds a house that is considered unnatural.

Data: The fur and leather industries are exploitative towards sentient beings.
Lore: Oh come on! Do you realize that these are natural products rather than synthetic! Nature does things right! So do it her way!
Data: In nature, no creature takes the skin off another creature’s back to wear it. Furthermore, leather and fur undergo extensive processing which is detrimental to the environment. Finally, calling these products of cruelty ’natural’ doesn’t address the issue of exploitation at all.

_Form_
C is natural.
∴ C.

17.1 Arguing the tooth

We have the teeth to tear and chew and grind flesh therefore we should eat meat.

_Datanalysis_
Here we have one of the most blatant denials of reality. The argument is that nature provided humans with the proper physiology to eat corpse parts, so we should.

The first error is the fallacy itself. Simply because it appears nature provided something is no reason to argue that using it is the correct thing to do. For instance, gorillas have large canines, but are vegetarians. Nature also provided humans with an appendix, but it isn’t used because it isn’t necessary. Nature also provided humans with fists to injure each other, but most humans seem to realize that such usage of these gifts of nature may not be in the best interests of the parties concerned.

The second error is that humans really don’t have the teeth to ’tear’ with and the ‘chewing and grinding’ isn’t done with corpse parts anyway since carnivores general swallow pieces of flesh without chewing or grinding. Some humans point to their canines with pride, yet don’t seem to understand that these are actually rather small compared to those of a bear, dog or cat. However, human canines have proven their immense value at tearing cellophane after hunting down bargain slabs of meat in grocery stores.

17.2 The Carnivore Mantra

A common implementation of this fallacy involved the “carnivores must eat meat” mantra which appears with equal enthusiasm in both veg and nonveg discussions.

Despite the healthy, documented existence of veg dogs and cats for more than 2 decades, some people insist that pets classified as carnivores must eat meat.

The argument usually develops something like this display of goal post moving:

Try 1: Dogs must eat meat to survive … ooops that’s wrong because there are plenty of surviving dogs who do not eat any meat.

Try 2: Dogs must eat meat to thrive … ooops that’s wrong too since it is regularly shown that veg dogs at the very least match their meat-fed counterparts as per clear eyes, great coats, energy, disposition and every other criteria (including longevity).

Try 3: Well it’s not their optimal diet … ooops that can’t be demonstrated either since we have surveys and studies showing veg dogs actually are less susceptible to meat induced diseases like infections, skin problems, arthritis, heart problems, weight issues, digestive difficulties, hypothyroidism, cancer.

Try 4: Not much left, so what can be done except to claim they should eat meat because they have big teeth …

Well obviously the “my what big teeth you have” hypothesis, while useful for Little Red Riding Hood, isn’t particularly valid as an argument in light of the preponderance of evidence which goes beyond just the studies to the fact that mainstream pet food companies have a veg line simply because many dogs just can’t handle meat based diets.

Now what is interesting to note is the form of the argument used by the mantra chanters:

If dogs eat meat, there are positive consequences (by the “my what big teeth you have” hypothesis). ∴ dogs should eat meat.

or in its wishful thinking form

I wish it to be true that eating meat is good for dogs (because I believe in the “my what big teeth you have” hypothesis). ∴ eating meat is good for them.

Utilization of this fallacy of course makes it possible to disregard all evidence to the contrary.

18 Appeal to Novelty

Argumentum ad novitatem. Appeal to the New. Newer is Better.

The idea here is to assume that some newer item or approach is better because it is more recent.

Data: The bones-and-raw-food-paleos (BARFPal) diet that just came out is not very intelligently designed as far as human nutrition is concerned.
Lore: Geez Data! This is the latest and greatest way of eating. It’s gotta be fantastic!
Data: Being the latest and greatest is not an indication of optimal or even intelligent. Sometimes each latest and greatest item is a short-lived fad or even a risky venture as demonstrated by all the latest and greatest drugs which get recalled.

_Form_
C is new.
∴ C

19 Appeal to Popularity

Argumentum ad populum. Appeal to the people. Appeal to the masses. Appeal to belief. Appeal to the majority. Argument by consensus. Consensus fallacy. Authority of the many. Bandwagon. Argumentum ad numerum. Appeal to the number. Consensus gentium.

This is an attempt to win an argument through the claim of it being supported by some majority of opinions. The assumption is that since most people agree with a conclusion, the conclusion must be correct. In these situations, what ‘most people’ really constitutes or whether ‘most people’ actually exists isn’t always clear. Even if ‘most people’ do a certain thing, there is no reason to think they are doing a good/correct thing as repeatedly evidenced by political elections.

Data: Drinking bovine mammarian secretions is hazardous to one’s health not to mention the animals that are subjected to exploitation and abuse to produce it.
Lore: Oh c’mon! Most people in the USA like to drink milk, so doing so is ok!
Data: Most people in the USA also end up being afflicted with heart disease, cancer, arthritis, eczema, asthma, respiratory infections,diabetes and osteoporosis (2nd highest in the world next to the Inuits) for instance, which are diseases linked to dairy consumption.

_Form_
Most people agree on, approve of, believe in, support (etc) C.
∴ C.

19.1 We have 80% of the population on our side, so we must be right!

Furthermore, Americans just don’t support the killing. In a survey of Americans’ attitudes towards outdoor cats, over 80 percent responded that they believe it is more humane to leave a cat outside than to have her caught and killed.

_Datanalysis_
The above argument utilizes a specific statistic in order to assert its correctness. Even if an overwhelming majority support a concept, such support doesn’t validite the concept. If ethics were simply a matter of voting, the state of moral judgment would be as precarious as the state of politics.

20 Appeal to Popularity: Belief

Argumentum ad populum family.

This is an attempt to win an argument through the claim that many or most people believe the conclusion to be true: “If many believe so, it is so.” There are situations though where the belief of a certain number of people does align with the reality.

Data: Vivisection is a very cruel form of animal abuse.
Lore: Many medical researchers experiment on animals because they believe it’s all for the greater good, so they can’t all be wrong.
Data: Having a majority of believers doesn’t make something correct. For instance, at several points in history a majority believed that the earth was flat and that bats are blind.

_Form_
Most people believe that C is true.
∴ C.

20.1 My parents told me, so there!

Eating meat is part of most people’s nutrition regimen. They were taught this by their parents.

_Datanalysis_
In certain parts of the world, children are taught by their parents to do certain things. Most children grow up believing that what they have been taught is correct which is why most adults tend to follow common practices. Unfortunately, most adults do not necessarily contemplate whether the practices they follow are beneficial or even morally appropriate. Hence, a wrong action can be propagated over generations justified purely on the basis of parental tutelage.

21 Appeal to Popularity: Common Practice

Argumentum ad numerum. Part of the Argumentum ad populum family.

Here the attempt is made by reference to the fact that many people engage in the action supported by the argument.

Data: Factory farms are a very cruel institution.
Lore: Oh really now! Most people eat meat!
Data: The fact that many people eat meat isn’t a justification for eating meat.

_Form_
Many people do C.
∴ C.

22 Appeal to Ridicule

Appeal to Mockery. The Horse Laugh.

This is an attempt to prove that C is true because ¬ C is made fun of.

Data: Vegetarians tend to be comparatively healthy compared to corpse eaters.
Lore: That’s so totally laughable my circuits are fusing! Don’t you know that vegetarian means lousy hunter?
Data: Actually, vegetarian doesn’t mean lousy hunter. That is simply an ill-conceived effort at weak humor. Besides, ridiculing vegetarians does not change the fact that they tend to exhibit a superior level of health as well as health awareness than non-vegetarians.

_Form_
¬ C is presented in an aura of absurdity.
∴ C.

23 Appeal to Spite

Argumentum ad odium.

Here a conclusion is asserted to be true based on one’s personal spitefulness rather than the conclusion’s validity.

Data: Vegans do hold the moral high ground.
Lore: Well if you keep up this self-righteous stuff, you’ll turn everyone off! That’s why I’ll never be a vegan because you guys go around wearing your judgemental halos all the time.
Data: That vegans hold the moral high ground can be demonstrated via ethical arguments as well as numerous examples of vegans accepted for their ethical leadership and perspectives. The fact that you do not seem to like them, is not an argument to negate my point.

_Form_
¬ C is presented in an aura of spite.
∴ C.

23.1 Vegan be ashamed! Vegan be grateful!

Geez, people are dying of starvation all over the world and here’s you with your ‘fad’ diet turning down food they would kill for. You should be ashamed…

I don’t see why vegans are so ungrateful vegans should just shut up and eat the meat , they should be happy to have food at dinner …

_Datanalysis_
The statements above has no merit since neither even attempts to formulate any sort of an argument. Rather each is an effort to denigrate vegans simply because of their choice to not adhere to the standard corpse eating fare. The logical impact is equivalent to “You should be chastised because you stayed sober when the rest of us are sloshed out of our minds”. In other words, the translation is simply, “You choose to be vegan and we don’t like you because of that.”

24 Appeal to Stupidity

Argumentum ad plumbeum. Deliberately dullard. Feigned ignorance. Thinking hurts my head.

Usually argumentative individuals try to show off the cleverness of their case. However, when there is a paucity of that quantity, an attempt is occasionally made to be excused from understanding why they are wrong and the opponent is right. The hope is to put issues out of sight and out of mind.

Data: It is cruel and unethical to imprison, exploit, abuse and murder sentient beings.
Lore: Ok but, ummm, what does that even mean? My circuits are frying up thinking about it. This stuff is too complicated, so it can’t be right.
Data: Whether or not you can understand the moral significance of my statement, does not affect its correctness. However, I would be happy to explain the details to you as soon as you are willing to undergo an upgrade, followed by a reboot.

_Form_
C is viewed as being too complex.
∴ ¬ C.

25 Appeal to Tradition

Ad antiquitatem. Appeal to the Old. Old Ways are Best. Fallacious Appeal to the Past.

This is the it’s “been always done this way”, it’s traditional, it’s cultural and so it must be correct, attitude.

Data: The Canadian Seal Slaughter is a brutal and barbaric massacre of defenseless baby seals.
Lore: Ya but so what! It’s a tradition in Newfoundland. It’s cultural. It’s in their heritage to brutalize helpless animals.
Data: Just because something is traditional, does not make it morally acceptable. Culture is not equivalent to correctness.

_Form_
C is traditional, cultural, old.
∴ C.

25.1 Killing for a long, long time

We have been killing animals for food since the discovery of fire. That’s a long time! A lot of history supports these actions!

_Datanalysis_
History merely records what has happened. It does not justify what has happened. Humans have been killing each other even before the discovery of fire, but it seems some have at least managed to understand that there is something wrong with such actions. Many have evolved away from traditional barbarities to recognize that there really is something wrong with killing animals as well. As Leonardo da Vinci is believed to have said, “The time will come when men such as I will look upon the murder of animals as they now look upon the murder of men.”

26 Begging the Question

Petitio Principii. Circular Definition. Circular Reasoning. Reasoning in a Circle. Chicken and Egg argument.

The premises of an argument claim that the conclusion is true. The fallacy can be very short and usually obvious or appear in many parts, thereby disguising the claim.

Data: Abuse of animals should not be permitted in civilized society.
Lore: Ha! If abusing animals really were illegal, it would be prohibited by the law.
Data: Since the law determines what is illegal, the truth of your conclusion is assumed by your premise. In other words, your premise essentially states your conclusion. While such arguments have to be logically ‘correct’, they are also quite useless since they are equivalent to arguing that “if 1 is a number, then 1 is a number”.

_Form_
If C, then C.
∴ C.

26.1 It’s against the law!

You can’t kill humans for food. That is against the law. [animal abuse is] not [analogous to] owning slaves because even though humans were at one point able to buy and sell other humans, that is no longer lawful.

_Datanalysis_
Note that both of the above have the same form: It is against the law to kill/buy/sell humans, because it is against the law.

Such a presentation has no merit logically since it does not actually say anything at all. However, it is thrown as a counter into arguments where humans are substituted for animals in situations of suffering, in the hopes that the absurdness of the fallacy will go unnoticed.

27 Burden of Proof

Ad ignorantiam. Appeal to Ignorance.

When a claim is made, the burden of proof lies on the side of the claimant. Sometimes an unscruplous debator will try to transfer the burden of proof to the other side. A variation of this fallacy is to suggest that if you can’t prove something to be false, then it is automatically true.

Data: Vivisection causes horrendous suffering to animals.
Lore: You can’t prove that animals feel pain. Though they exhibit pain behavior, since they have no consciousness, they feel no pain.
Data: While we cannot conclusively ‘prove’ that animals (or humans, for that matter) feel pain, there are several factors which support the premise that they are capable of suffering just as humans. These factors include physiological and behavior similarities to humans as well as evolutionary evidence provided by homology which demonstrates that humans developed their traits on the foundations provided by their animal ancestors. Based on these findings, the burden of proof lies not with me, Lore, but on you to prove that animals feel no pain. Finally, the inability to conclusively prove something as true (ie animals/humans feel pain), does not automatically make it untrue (ie animals/humans do not feel pain).

_Form_
C is claimed by A.
¬ C is unprovable.
∴ C.

28 Complex Question

Loaded question. Presupposition.

Two points which are not related are joined in a single question so that they have to both be accepted or rejected together. Generally, one is acceptable while the other is not.

Data: Many humans engage in animal abuse and need to be stopped from doing so.
Lore: So you vegans must support animal rights and hate humans, eh?
Data: You are actually making two disconnected points here, Lore. One is that vegans hate humans. The other is that we support animal rights. The two have nothing to do with each other, yet your question requires me to either affirm or deny both. As such, your question needs to be appropriately rephrased in order to deserve an answer, beyond what I have provided just now.

_Form_
C,D are unrelated.
C,D are phrased in the same sentence with a connective such as ∧.
∴ (C ∧ D) ∨ ¬ (C ∧ D).

28.1 Still arsoning?

Are you animal rights fanatics still burning down legitimate animal production facilities or have you finally stopped this sort of illegal activity?

_Datanalysis_
The argument is setup with two separate questions each of which makes assumptions which are not verified. The first question implies that those who support animal rights are committing arson. While some activists do engage in arson, there is no grounds to assume and accuse one of arson simply because he/she is an animal rights activists. The second question assumes that the implication of the first is valid and asks if the activity has been terminated. However, since it has not been established that animal rights activists do engage in arson, the second question is inappropriate to ask.

29 False Cause of Effect

Non causa pro causa. Cum hoc ergo propter hoc. Questionable cause. False cause. Ignoring a common cause. Wrong direction.

When events A and B occur in close proximity and established order, it is falsely assumed that A is the cause of B.

Data: Animal sacrifices were a brutish pastime of savage cultures.
Lore: What are you talking about? They sacrificed animals and got good rains and decent crops as well as victories in wars.
Data: The slaughter of animals does not affect natural events or military exploits just because the former precedes the latter. The same primitive mentality exists with vivisectors who think sacrificing animals will somehow lead to curing human illnesses even though there is plenty of evidence to the contrary.

_Form_
A is seen to be followed by B.
∴ A is the cause of B.

29.1 The Meatgasm!

“And then there is the kind of instantaneous healing that occurs with the first bites of animal food. In The Vegetarian Myth, Lierre says “I could feel every cell in my body - literally every cell - pulsing. And finally, finally being fed.” Tasha says “I had only eaten a small piece of cow flesh, and yet I felt totally full, but light and refreshed all at once.” Eating meat also instantly improved her heart rate!

_Datanalysis_
Since one actually has to digest the nutrients and have them find their way to those ‘pulsing cells’, the accounts above are physiologically not possible. Therefore, one must conclude that either Lierre and Tasha were being influenced by a strong desperation which manifested itself as a placebo effect or they were under the influence of drugs that animals are routinely subjected to or may be they did their own.

29.2 People live longer now than ever before!

Everyone lives longer now than in the past so they must be doing things right like eating meat and taking medicines.

_Datanalysis_
First, the statement idea of everyone living longer these days is not correct. Longevity has much to do with sufficient, proper nutrition, hygiene and genetics. In the past, there were many who lived well past the average expectancy of modern times. In third world countries, the life expectancies are still quite low due to factors such as malnourishment and unclean living conditions.

The assertion that longer life spans are attributable to eating corpse parts and doing drugs, is a variation of questionable cause since the consequent is assumed from two cherry-picked antecedents without any rationale. One could also have made the claim that people live longer these days because of global warming or the increased levels of mercury in fish.

29.3 Tallest people in the world eat corpse!

Dutch people are the tallest people in the world, and the amount of animal products they consume is enormous, much higher than any other country.

_Datanalysis_
First, though the Dutch are presently the tallest people in the world, they certainly don’t consume a higher amount of animal products than any other country. A 1997 report shows that they ranked 7th (while a 2022 article say one-quarter of consumers hope the future of meat will be animal free). More importantly, to attribute one factor as the cause without proper controls is improper. One may as well argue that most Dutch are fair skinned and that is what causes their height. Nor is it correct to argue that diet is closely connected to physical features because it depends upon what features we are talking about (eg an animal based diet results in atheromas and osteoporosis, but not height except through hormones). We also have a case of misapplication of the general (diet is closely connected to some physical developments) to a specific (therefore, diet determines height).

30 False Dilemma

Black and white. Bifurcation. False dichotomy. Morton’s fork. False choice.

Here alternatives are limited to an either-or situation. The argument is presented in such a way that one choice becomes true because the other choice is false. For instance, consider the phrase “either you are with us or against us” which doesn’t take into account the concept of neutrality. In some situations, of course the argument can be valid: “either you are alive or dead, and since you are not dead, you are alive”.

Data: Many humans oppose experimentation on animals for the benefit of humans.
Lore: Well that’s ridiculous! How can anyone prefer an animal to a human?! They must be anti-human! You’re either with us or against us!
Data: Just because a human is against exploiting an animal for the purpose of supposedly serving a human, does not make the person anti-human. It merely makes the person anti-exploiting animals. Besides, Lore have you forgotten you really aren’t a human?

_Form_
X ∨ Y.
¬ Y.
∴ X.

30.1 Your child or your dog

You are on a boat with a baby and a puppy. The boat starts to sink. Which are you going to save?

_Datanalysis_
This is the classic false dilemma. The instigator has not only set the hypothetical environment and the players, (s)he has also established the rules in that you have to save either one or the other. The reality is that you’d be pretty foolish to go in a boat with a baby and a puppy without taking precautions for their safety in the first place. Furthermore, the situation overlooks the possibility of your saving both because you can utilize existing resources or saving neither because you can’t swim. The intent of the effort of false dilemma is to force a kobiashi maru (no-win) where you appear to be either a traitor to your species or a traitor to your cause. It’s a pathetic and stale effort, but it is still attempted by immature individuals.

30.2 The baby, kitty and coin variation

If a baby and a kitten were about to be run over by a train, would you save the baby, save the kitty, or flip a coin to decide which one to save? _Datanalysis_
This is essentially the same scenario with a choice selector mechanism attached. Note that the choices are still the same: save either the baby or the kitty. The only difference is to offer an additional value statement which amounts to “I do not really care whether I save the baby or the kitty”.

Sometimes people erroneously think they have presented a new scenario via this value selector, but it should be emphasized that the choices are still the same. Merely the mechanism for making one has been augmented.

One could extend this mechanism ad absurdum by

consult with a priest to help make the decision discuss the matter with the Libertarian Advocacy Group regarding rights of babies on train tracks ask for guidance from The International Society of Cat Right Lovers correspond with the Train Engineers Association These efforts do not change the choices allowed anymore than the coin-toss, which is why the False Dilemma exists.

Boolean logic allows only four possibilities as far as who gets saved:

Baby Kitty Result T T both get saved T F squished kitty F T squished baby F F both squished The scenario, despite introduction of any mechanisms ad absurdium, still permits only the middle two choices, disallowing the bottom and unfortunately the top items (both demonstrate with different results that no value preference is given to one party over the other). Having only the choices which necessitates a death, is what makes the scenario a False Dilemma.

31 Gambler’s Fallacy

Post Hoc. Attribution Theory. Fundamental Attribution Error.

The idea here is to conclude that because a number of events contrary to expectations have taken place, the next one is going to be what is expected.

Data: There are several cohort studies showing the long-term benefits of vegetarian diets.
Lore: Well obviously they got lucky with the first 76000 over the decade long observations. If they’d gone to 76001 and continued for a few extra days, then you’d undoubtedly see how dangerous these animal-product-free diets really are!
Data: If you throw dice 10 times and get snake eyes each time, there is no reason to think that it must be otherwise on the 11th try. In fact, there is good reason to appreciate that the dice are loaded. So it is with strict vegetarian diets because they are indeed loaded, for optimal health.

_Form_
X is contrary to expectations.
X has occurred N times in a row.
∴ next time ¬ X.

31.1 You need to be vegan for eternity to convince me!

I’ve got a mate I’ve known for 7 years now and he supposed to be into healthy eating. He is getting fatter, sicker and slower, but he won’t go veg even though he knows I’ve been that way for a long time. He says “Yeah, I’m not so convinced man! I need you do be vegan longer than 11 years before I really commit”.

_Datanalysis_
The above is a puzzling instance of the gambler fallacy in that the individual in question seems to want to anticipate failure of the veg diet at some point in the future despite the obvious long-term benefits already demonstrated. The underlying motivation likely has nothing to do with fear that the veg diet will fail. It is more plausible to assume that the person just wants to consume corpse products and is determined to find excuses, however absurd, for doing so.

32 Generalization: Composition

Faulty Induction.

The characteristics of parts of a group are erroneously applied to the entire group. For instance, Hitler was a brutal tyrant, therefore the human race is brutal and tyrannical.

Data: The brutal mass killing of 50000 dogs in China due to a rabies scare is ethically unjustifiable.
Lore: They had to kill all the dogs because a few of them were found to have rabies. So it is obvious that all of them had rabies!
Data: By that reasoning, we should have to kill all dogs everywhere. If a few of them were found to have rabies, then it is likely that only a few did have rabies. An entire barrel should not be judged by a few rotten ones.

_Form_
A,B,C ∈ S.
A,B,C has characteristic K.
∴ S has characteristic K.

32.1 That’s why they’re called animals!

Chimpanzees of one group have wars over territory with chimps of another group. Dogs, and many creatures, are capable of rape. Cats will kill their young if they show some defect. In effect: Animals have been known to display bad behavior. Bad behavior is in opposition to moral reasoning. Therefore, all animals are incapable of moral reasoning.

_Datanalysis_
It is illogical to conclude that because some animals act viciously, hence immorally, all animals act immorally. The science of cognitive ethology over the past few decades clearly shows that many animals have a very clear sense of ethics as demonstrated by the works of Mark Bekoff, Jonathan Balcombe and Jeffrey Masson for instance.

Curiously, this line of reasoning is devastating for humans who have had (and continue to have) a far worse record of brutality and aggressiveness towards each other compared to any animal:

… the ultimate disobedience to this fantasy is the continuous predation by humans on other humans. War, famine, theft, rape, child abuse, and numerous varieties of discrimination based on race, gender, class, religious belief, appearance, language, age, height, economic status, …
The Common Sense Animal Rights Argument

The obvious conclusion by the prior reasoning is that: All humans are incapable of moral reasoning.

It does appear evident though, that some humans seem to be incapable of logical reasoning.

32.2 Meat has protein

Meat is one of the highest sources of protein! You need protein! So you need meat!

_Datanalysis_
This is a typical argument produced in favor of corpse eating. It is true that certain meat products have a high protein content. Furthermore, it is true that humans need to consume a certain amount of protein. However, those two antecedents, despite their correctness, does not lead to the consequent that one needs to eat meat in order to get protein. There are plenty of vegetarian protein sources. These are not only of higher quality from an assimilable point of view, they do not contain the various chemicals, toxins, hormones and other hazards corpse products invariably have. The argument is as absurd pragmatically as saying engine coolant has water; you need to drink water; therefore, you need to drink engine coolant.

33 Generalization: Division

Faulty deduction.

The characteristics of a group are erroneously applied universally to the individuals of a group. For instance, humans are greedy and selfish, therefore Gandhi was greedy and selfish.

Data: Dogs generally tend to like to be playful and friendly.
Lore: Right and any dog who isn’t should be killed because there’s something seriously wrong with it and could be a danger.
Data: Each dog has his/her own personality. While all dogs share certain characteristics, it is erroneous to think that all dogs will possess exactly the same characteristic.

_Form_
A,B,C ∈ S.
S has characteristic K.
∴ A,B,C have characteristic K

34 Generalization: Hasty

Insufficient statistics. Insufficient sample. Leaping to a conclusion. Hasty induction.

Being somewhat similar to composition, here a conclusion is drawn about population P, based on an insufficiently small sample S from P.

Data: A new poll shows that there are more than 9 million vegans in USA.
Lore: No way! I asked 10 people on the street if they were vegan and not one of them said yes.
Data: A sample size of 10 people is not sufficiently large to draw meaningful conclusions about a population of over 311 million. A recent poll showed that 3% of the population was vegan, so that would mean in your sample size you’d have only a 0.3 part of a person admitting to being vegan. You could ask 100 people and you may find that there would be 3 in that sample who were vegan.

_Form_
C is shown to be true from sample S of population P.
∴ C for all P.

34.1 So how come I’m not dead already?

If meat is so bad for you, why am I not sick? If meat eating is so bad than why haven’t I heard of it yet. Whatever doesn’t kill you, makes you stronger - so eat corpse parts!

_Datanalysis_
This is a common class of attitudes based on a restrictive, temporal sampling. Eating products from the corpse industries don’t do immediate, visible damage any more than smoking does. Therefore, it is easy to claim that because one doesn’t see any harm done, no harm is done. However, illnesses such as cancer, atherosclerosis, cardiovascular disease, ischemic strokes, osteoporosis do develop over a period of a couple of decades to the point where good health is not only hampered, but one’s quality of life and even the life itself is jeopardized. Sometimes the first symptoms result in sudden death, so there is no one around to say “I’m not dead already”!

So while it is true that eating a little meat will not kill you, it will nevertheless ‘kill’ you a little bit each time.

35 Generalization: Prejudiced

Biased statistics. Prejudiced statistics. Loaded statistics. Biased induction. Biased generalization. Loaded sample. Prejudiced sample. Unrepresentative sample.

Here a conclusion is drawn about population P, based on a small or biased sample from P.

Data: A strict vegetarian diet has been repeatedly shown in peer reviewed literature to be a very healthy one.
Lore: Well I met two vegheads yesterday and they looked pretty skinny to me. Vegetarians are all weak and emaciated you know.
Data: A sample size of two is not particularly significant. Additionally, it is likely you may be exaggerating the appearence of these individuals since you are on record for opposing vegetarian diets. Just so you are not under any further delusions about vegans necessarily being weak and emaciated, take a look at these vegan bodybuilders and strength athletes.

_Form_
C is shown to be true from sample S of population P.
∴ C for P.

35.1 You don’t look like a vegan.

These body builders can’t be vegan! They are too muscular to be vegans! Ok if they are vegan and you aren’t vegan, how come you don’t look like them?

_Datanalysis_
Initially we have a denial of fact by the individual who seems unable to shake some bigoted idea of what vegans should look like. That is followed by the continued bias that all vegans must have the same physical appearance. The person seems to have lost touch with more than biological realities and is wandering in the realms of fantasy.

36 Generalization: Vividness

Misleading vividness. Spotlight.

A small number of striking examples are used to justify a conclusion which should be reached by more thorough statistical evidence.

Data: Vegan babies get a great start in life.
Lore: You mean a great start in death. Didn’t you hear about the Moaligou case where an 11 month old vegan baby died or the death of the 9 month old Manuelyan baby or the 6 month old Moorhead baby? They all died due a vegan diet.
Data: Actually they died because they were malnourished through an inadequate diet which did not contain necessary nutrients. Non-vegan babies die from malnutrition too. Both vegan and non-vegan diets can be poorly designed, so the issue is by no means restricted to vegan diets. A few sensational headlines does not alter the benefits of nutritionally sound vegan diets.

_Form_
P is set of observed events Y,Z ∈ P.
Y >> Z. But, Zs are more ‘spectacular’ than any Ys.
∴ Z applied to P.

36.1 The long-living grandfather

My grandfather smoked, drank and ate meat all the time! He lived to the ripe old age of 99. So you can’t tell me that there’s something wrong with doing what he did!

_Datanalysis_
This is a typical case of generalization based on inadequate sampling size with a bit of spectacularness thrown in! Such grandfathers are what are known statistically as ‘outliers’ (one in ten thousand live past 100 yrs in USA), anomalies from the vast majority of results which clearly show the hazards of such lifestyles. Most ‘grandfathers’ of this sort, don’t live long enough to see their grand children grow up.

In these situations, it is unwise to have the exception formulate the rule.

37 Genetic Fallacy

Appeal to origin. Genesis fallacy.

The correctness of a position is mistakenly based upon its origin. This is an extreme form of appeal to tradition in that something is considered to be right (or wrong) dependent upon whether it was originally so.

Data: Eating parts of dead animals lead to various health issues.
Lore: Look eating corpse parts is good for you! Early humans did it all the time!
Data: Early humans who ate considerable amounts of animal products were prone to mostly the same illnesses that present day humans suffer from. For example, the Inuits were affected by atherosclerosis and severe osteoporosis due to their heavy consumption of animal foods (Nat. Geog., A. Dekin Jr, Sealed In Time p12).

_Form_
C occured during its early origins.
∴ C.

37.1 Respect for our ancestral heritage!

Our ancestors all ate wild-meat based diet so we should too!

_Datanalysis_
Neanderthals left the planet quite some time ago. Even though some people try to act like ’neanderthals’, their rude behavior really does not provide dietary affirmation. There is considerable evidence from anthropologist Robert Sussman that indicates early humans spent far more time being hunted than hunting. As a result, it is unlikely that most of them even had an opportunity to eat much meat. Of course, those that did, fell prey to the same diseases that eating corpse parts produce in modern times.

38 Guilt by Association

Bad company fallacy. Company you keep fallacy.

A claim is accepted or rejected because of the people who accept or reject the claim.

Data: Gestation crates were banned in Florida since 2002 when over 2.5 million voter opposed the cruel confinement of pigs in factory farms.
Lore: Well I’m all for being nice to animals, but did you know that those wacko, human-hating animal rights activists supported this ban? So I’m not in favor of it.
Data: The population of Florida decided that the crates were excessively cruel and therefore voted accordingly to ban them. The fact that animal rights activists also have opposed this practice does not alter the inherent cruelty of gestation crates, something that the voters (who are not by any means, all animal rights activists) obviously recognize.

_Form_
Group A likes C.
P doesn’t like group A.
∴ ¬ C.

38.1 Hitler was a vegetarian

You vegans should realize that Hitler was a vegetarian! That means all you vegans are Hitlers!! So there!!!

_Datanalysis_
In actual fact, Hitler wasn’t remotely close to being a vegetarian. However, from the logical perspective it wouldn’t impact on anyone even if he were. If Hitler had a big nose, should everyone with large noses go for surgery? Since Hitler was a Catholic, should all Catholics be excommunicated? Hitler spoke German, but that still remains a common language in constant use. Furthermore, since Hitler wasn’t a vegetarian, should this revelation mean that all those who do not follow the vegetarian diet, can now be considered Hitlers?

Obviously, this sort of ‘bad company’ argument has no legitimate place in rational discussion.

What is interesting though is that vegetarians can cite within their ranks, several historical figures (eg Gandhi, Einstein, Newton, Leonardo da Vinci, César Chávez), athletes (eg Scott Jurek, David Zabriskie, Brendan Brazier, Georges Laraque, Molly Cameron) and celebrities (eg Ellen DeGeneres, Michael Dorn, Bryan Adams, Heather Mills, Brian Greene, Alicia Silverstone). Doing so does not become a fallacy so long as one is not is not insisting that all vegetarians can be historically prominent, athletic, or achieve celebrity status, simply by being vegetarian.

39 Inflation Of Conflict

Wrong by apparent disagreement.

The idea here is to pick on a disagreement by experts on a topic and thereby ‘inflate the conflict’ to the point of claiming that the experts know nothing or the topic itself is inherently wrong by virtue of the inconsistencies.

Data: Animal rights has a rich and diverse foundation.
Lore: Nonsense! The leading authorities on the subject can’t even agree on anything. Singer says one thing and Regan says another. Francione wears abolition as a badge of honor, while Dunayer accuses him of being a welfarist! You guys are all mixed up because animal rights is just wrong!
Data: You are confusing multiple paths to a destination with the destination itself. Animal rights activists do not disagree on the fundamental issue of ending the imprisonment, exploitation, abuse and murder of sentient beings. There exist various ideas on how to achieve this goal which is one reason why the philosophy has developed such a rich basis.

_Form_
A,B,C disagree on some aspects of C.
∴ ¬ C.

39.1 Scientists don’t know what they are talking about

So one minute coffee’s good then it’s bad. Then meat is bad, now it’s good. Science studies contradict each other all the time, so since science hasn’t figured it out yet so why should I care.

_Datanalysis_
While science studies do sometimes contradict each other, this fact does not make science illegitimate. There is overwhelming evidence spanning decades which show that corpse industry product consumption is detrimental to health. These studies are done independently and with very large sample sizes which range from the thousands and even into the millions. Often opposing studies which favor corpse consumption are financed by specific industries and utilize poor methodology. Even so, sometimes these latter studies demonstrate exactly the opposite of what their financier intended: that meat, milk, eggs are harmful to health. So there is nothing wrong with the science, though there definitely is much to be desired as far as the bought-and-paid-for ‘scientists’ who engage in such unscrupulous activities.

40 Middle Ground

Golden mean fallacy. Fallacy of moderation.

One assumes that the middle or moderate ground between two separate items must be the correct choice.

Data: Animals being sentient beings have rights and these should not be violated.
Lore: Well I sorta agree with you Data my boy! Animal abusers are just meanies and no one should abuse animals who can be used to provide food and clothing. They should be treated humanely.
Data: The problem with your welfarish stance is that it is inadequate. While it pretends to be helping animals to some extent, it is equivalent to suggesting that slaves are alright to keep just as long as you treat them reasonably well. Compromise in principle is never a virtue and those who walk along the middle of a road are likely to get hit from both sides.

_Form_
A < B.
A < C < B.
∴ C.

40.1 Let’s agree to disagree.

So we have a difference of opinion here. I think it is fine to kill animals for human use and you think it’s not. We’re obviously not going to resolve this, so let’s just agree to disagree.

_Datanalysis_
This is a standard cop out when one does not want to deal with actual issues. The idea is to acknowledge the opponent’s position as well as one’s own. Then, regardless of examining the validity of either, to escape into the safety of diplomacy. It is a gesture by which one through a minor compromise (recognition of the opposing side), hopes to also acknowledge the validity of one’s own, sort of an all inclusive version of showing up on middle ground with both viewpoints in tact. Unfortunately, acknowledging a disagreement has no bearing whatsoever on either position’s correctness.

41 Red Herring

Ignoratio Elenchi. Smoke screen. Wild goose chase. Ignorance of refutation. Irrelevant Thesis.

The presentation of an irrelevant item is done to divert attention from the actual issue being discussed. It can also apply to any argument where the premises are logically irrelevant to the conclusion and can thereby theoretically include a wide variety of other fallacies. However, usually the term applies to attempts to distract by introduction of irrelevant information.

Data: Many activists protest animal abuse.
Lore: Well I don’t really see why they do since most of them probably didn’t protest in the 60s when they took to the streets against the Vietnam war.
Data: It is unclear what your point is, Lore. Most of these activists weren’t even alive in the 60s and so their failure to appear in those protests have no bearing on what they are doing now.

_Form_
X is discussed.
Y is suddenly introduced though it has no relevance to X.
X is abandoned because Y takes precedence.

41.1 I’m bad but he’s worse, so I’m ok

Yes I do eat meat and know that is bad for the animals. But I don’t actually put them in those horrible factory farms like some people. I don’t cause them agony when it’s time to slaughter them. I also don’t rob banks or bomb places like Iraq. I don’t even park my car in handicapped spots! So why don’t you go pick on some of those other people?

_Datanalysis_
If action A is morally unethical, it remains so regardless of whether actions B, C, D are also morally unethical. One cannot justify committing crime A because others commit crimes B, C, D. As a result, even the claim that B, C, D are worse than A, is insufficient to justify or excuse A. The introduction of B, C, D is merely an attempt to distract from A.

41.2 What about humans?!

I don’t see why you animal rights activists are so hung up on the orangutan sex trade. As bad as orangutan sex slavery is, not much is done about human sex slavery: 500,000 women are annually trafficked into Western Europe!

_Datanalysis_
There is no relevancy to this statement since the topic is about orangutans and not humans. Additionally, just because one protests orangutan abuse, doesn’t mean that one automatically doesn’t protest human abuse as seems to be implied.

A way to bring some relevancy to both issues though is to realize that oppressors are not speciesist. They will oppress anyone and everyone in order to make a buck or get what they want. As such, the fight for orangutan rights aligns well with the fight for human rights provided we focus not so much on the victim, but on the oppressor.

41.3 What about everything else!

I seriously doubt if any country outside the USA or Europe has ever wondered aloud if it is ethical to eat meat. Given the multitude of crises facing the world at present, doesn’t it seem a little bit silly to be a cape-wearing “crusader of the cows”? I can think of a lot more serious and relevant issues to be debated intelligently by the times.

_Datanalysis_
The ethics of eating corpse parts is not determined by the ‘wonderings’ of any country. Neither is it affected by all the other problems on the planet. If one is going to legitimize such irrelevancies one might as well argue that we shouldn’t deal with any issue (eg child slavery) because some countries never think about the matter and/or there are so many other problems on the planet. The most ‘serious and relevant’ issue to be debated for the individual bringing the matter up is that he/she debate the seriousness and relevancy of his/her comment which is merely an effort to evade and distract from the issue at hand.

41.4 Happy slaves

Limba the elephant gets along fabulously with her trainer. I’m making a little film about an elephant I knew and her keeper. I have a short trailer here. The bond between the 2 and the dedication of this elephant’s keeper is obvious. You want to call this slavery? What would that make this dedicated keeper? A slave driver? If your answer is yes then we really have nothing more to discuss. http://youtu.be/-s_SPHt4M_M

_Datanalysis_
The fact that the elephant has a bond with the trainer (apparently anyway) doesn’t alter the fact that Limba has been made into a performer through force (we somehow doubt she applied for the position submitting her resume of talents).

We also do not know if the video was ‘canned’ - after all, perhaps Limba was being made forcibly to perform as though she has a bond with the trainer. Or perhaps the trainer is the only high point in her life. So this bond is quite irrelevant to the issue which is that Limba is being exploited by her ‘owners’.

42 Slippery Slope

Camel’s nose. Absurd extrapolation. Thin edge of the wedge.

The argument insists that taking some small actions will invariably lead to some enormous consequences: sliding down a slippery slope begins slowly, but picks up speed as you go down.

Data: Going vegan is the best thing we can do for the planet.
Lore: Look if you go vegan, then you’ll save some cows. If more people go vegan, more cows will be saved. Pretty soon we’ll be overrun with cows and that will be the end of the world!
Data: Going vegan doesn’t necessarily equate to saving cows, but even if it were so, having some people go vegan doesn’t result in everyone going vegan at once. Furthermore, going vegan has nothing to do with increasing the bovine population to the point of bringing the world to an end.

(Note that there is no slippery slope here: “Don’t vegans run the risk of having protein deficiency? I mean if the whole world went vegan then we would all be undernourished and die.”, because the correct and demonstrable answer to the question about deficiency is just no. End of discussion!)

_Form_
Y >> X.
X -> Y.

42.1 Voting rights for plants!

Animal rights! That’s ridiculousness! Next thing you know you would want pigs to vote in our elections and I will have to ask permission to the ants before I build a house! You probably won’t be happy till we have a poinsetta for president!

_Datanalysis_
Considering the dubious record politicians have maintained, one might think that a poinsetta may actually be an improvement in the presidency. Nevertheless, the concerns about voting pigs and requiring land transferences from ants does not follow from granting animal rights which maintains that we give due consideration to the interests of other beings. Therefore, since a pig really has no interest in voting to elect human politicians and ants due to their marvellous adaptibility manage to make homes practically anywhere, concerns of such magnitudes are somewhat exaggerated.

42.2 Overrun by animals!

If animals weren’t used for food, couldn’t the planet become overrun with those animals?

_Datanalysis_
This remarkable suggestion is still made in moderately intelligent company to rationalize corpse consumption. The idea of course is that humans must keep eating animals or they will over-populate the earth. Interestingly enough, no mention is made of the idea that it is humans who are breeding the animals in the first place. If people stopped eating animals, there would be no effort to breed them and therefore the planet would be perfectly safe from cattle, pig and chicken stampedes.

Note that though this item is placed as a slippery slope fallacy, it could just as easily have been a false dilemma if phrased as “eat animals or sacrifice the planet!” Obviously those are not the only choices available. Nor does the latter follow necessarily from the former.

43 Straw Man

Fallacy of Extension. Aunt Sally.

Here a distorted version of the argument is presented and shown to be false in the hope that the argument itself will be thought to be false.

Data: Stopping oppressors is an important step towards creating a civilized society.
Lore: I just don’t get it! Why are you working so hard to suppress human freedom and human dignity? Don’t you know our civilization was built through the blood, sweat and tears of human endeavors?!!
Data: My statement has nothing to do with suppressing human freedoms or dignities. In fact, stopping oppressors of sentient beings is an important step in maintaining human freedom and dignity.

_Form_
X is misrepresented as Y.
¬ Y → ¬ X.

43.1 Meat replacements aren’t healthy

Meat substitutes are highly processed, contain GMO soy and are a threat to the health of a vegetarian!

_Datanalysis_
While the argument presented is quite valid for the most part, the argument suggests that one must eat meat substitutes if one is a vegetarian. This is by no means the case, since no vegetarian ever needs to eat meat substitutes. Therefore, the health hazards of meat substitutes do not apply to vegetarians in general. The argument, concocted through ignorance and/or malice, has no relevance to vegetarians at all and hence, its denouement is irrelevant as an attack on vegetarian diets.

43.2 Vegan cult and X

Vegan cult indeed has some downsides. The distrust towards vaccinations is one.

_Datanalysis_
The distrust towards vaccinations is not a vegan cult issue. There are plenty of corpse munchers who oppose vaccination and there are plenty of members of that vegan cult who insist vaccination is a good thing. Of course, ‘vaccination’ can be replaced with other items such as modern medicine, public education, science etc depending upon how absurd one wants to make the argument.

44 Supremacy

Argumentum ad imperium. Might is right.

The argument here is based on the idea that if one has supremacy over some being, then one can do whatever one wants. It appears in the animal rights arena in the form of humans reign supreme over animals and therefore are free to take advantage of this dominance.

Data: Some humans need to learn to control their behaviors and eliminate those which are intentionally detrimental to other sentient beings.
Lore: What’s with all this now, Data? Haven’t you heard of “survival of the fittest”? Humans are at the top of the food chain and can do whatever they want to animals because they are superior.
Data: By this reasoning, humans should be preying on other ‘unfit’ humans too since clearly, depending upon how it is defined, ‘superior’ characteristics are not homogenously present amongst all humans. Your comment of humans being at the top of the food chain is illogical except for those humans who resort to cannibalism as well as incorrect due to the fact that bacteria feed on humans, enabling them to ascend to the top of this imaginary pyramid.

_Form_
H > A.
∴ H can do whatever to A.

44.1 The Animal Holocaust

This is the mass killing of animals by certain humans and parallels the Nazi mass extermination of Jews. The animals are primarily domesticated animals on factory farms of various sorts that are imprisoned, exploited, abused and murdered. Animal Holocaust victims also include any animals and their populations that humans control and systematically destroy, such as on fur-farms, in laboratories as well as in the wild.

_Datanalysis_
Some humans try to justify this mass murder of animals using arguments ranging from “who cares they’re just animals” to “we need to clean-up the place from these varmints”. These are generally the same arguments utilized by those who kill off large populations of humans abitrarily using excuses such as “they’re not like us” or “we need some serious ethnic cleansing around here”. The rationalizations are the same, because the oppressor mentality is a consistent one.

44.2 Compassion for our own

No one is gonna stop killing animals until we find compassion for our own species.

_Datanalysis_
This is yet another attempt to segregate humans from the rest of the population of the planet. There is no evidence to show that humans who are compassionate to other humans don’t want to kill animals. In fact, history has shown quite the opposite because humans who ’look out’ for their own species do so by subjugating other species (animal exploitation for medical research, food, entertainment, clothing etc). In fact, it is even worse than that because segregation based on notions of supremacy have serious effects within the human species itself:

racism (whites being compassionate about whites and doing so the expense of races of other colors), sexism (men being compassionate about men becoming misogynists), nationalism (american being compassionate about americans implanting a new world order) Segregation becomes merely a vehicle to continue oppression through the supremacy syndrome.

44.3 Deer are criminals in British Columbia

Last year the province of British Columbia Canada decided to begin promoting the culling (slaughter) of wild deer, especially those living in and around populated areas.

These culls can now be decided by individual municipalities, and there are currently four places planning culls. Why? One mayor actually called deer “criminals”. Can you imagine? Lots of people want a sanitized environment, with no animals or birds, or anything that might eat their plants.

_Datanalysis_
Human supremacy rears its ugly head for the most trivial things. These deer are being slaughtered because of pressure from The Poop and Flower Crowd. Expediency and the politics of convenience nurture brutal measures which wreak havoc on other lifeforms and eventually other humans as well.

Internet Discussion Strategies

Sun, 11 Jun 2023 10:51:33 -0700

The following article (taken from the ESA website) provides large number of ideas and insights into animal rights (AR) discussions on internet forums which are useful for both the beginner as well as the experienced communicator. While the items here are not directly related to writing eletters, they may help individuals engaged in general discussions both on and off the net (and not just in the area of animal rights).

Tips For Those Starting Out

Below are some ideas from experience in internet discussions that immediately may be helpful to keep in mind.

Always post within the forum guidelines. Remember you are a guest on someone else’s forum. Even if you are at diametric odds with forum policy, it usually does little good if you get your post or yourself booted off.
When possible, back up your statements with sources or logical verification. It usually isn’t useful to suggest something with “… because i say so” or “… because that’s how I feel” or “You are wrong and I am right”. Even though all of these may be valid and even correct, remember that they don’t make your point necessarily and your opponents can use exactly the same arguments on you.
Be careful of falling into the ‘absolutes traps’. For instance, while most primates are almost exclusively veg, it is foolish to argue that humans should be veg because monkeys are veg (because the latter isn’t true and it’s a non sequitur anyway). Another trap is that veg folks are always healthier than corpse eaters (you don’t have to call them that btw), because it isn’t true. What is true is that statistics greatly favor veg folk to not suffer from a variety of diseases such as atheromas, obsesity, cancer, osteoporosis etc which frequent corpse eaters.
Don’t get into name-calling unless there is a very good reason. For instance, it doesn’t accomplish much to call your opponent a heartless brute, because it really doesn’t have a great impact beyond the retort that you are a bleeding hearts, anti or what’s recently been worse, a liberal! It’s a good idea to stay away from political name calling too since some conservatives are far more aware and compassionate towards animals (and people) than some liberals or socialists.
Be wary of deflections of various sorts. One of the usual efforts against pro-animal folk is the anti-abortion lobby - ie you care for animals but not unborn fetuses. Or here’s a speciesist deflection, “Why are you telling us to stop killing seals when you should be complaining about the slaughterhouses!”. The key to remember here is that if you protest A, it doesn’t mean that you don’t protest B. In other words, it is perfectly legitimate to protest something without protesting everything.
An interesting counter-effort that doesn’t always take place consciously is rationalization. Here the person doesn’t so much oppose you, but justifies why he or she should keep status quo. Corpses eaters come up with stuff like “Grain destroys more soil, so I have to eat meat”, or “My doctor (or professor - i came across that believe it or not) said I have to eat meat”, or “We can’t let the cow population explode” or “Animals gladly give their lives for us” (a most interesting anthropocentric fantasy) or “It tastes good” (that, btw, is the only valid excuse and it’s a pretty poor one), or “They’d do it to you if the situation were reversed” (at this point, we’re getting borderline crazy), “We’re on top of the food chain” (no way, unless you take up cannabilism) or “Monkeys do it” etc. The last one is the appeal to nature fallacy which was hilariously countered by my friend sheepdog:

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I put it to you that it is not for vegetarians to justify our diet, but it is for the meat eaters to justify meat eating. And I further put it to you that anyone who has a choice about his diet and chooses to eat meat can only justify it with reasons all of which fall into one category, the “Because I want to screw like a chimp” category. Look:

“Because I want to (and I want to screw like a chimp)” “Because it tastes good (and it feels good to screw like a chimp)” “Because my ancestors ate meat (and they were chimps and I want to screw like a chimp)” “Because it’s natural (and chimps naturally screw a lot and I want to screw like a chimp)”

And if someone insists that you tell them why you do not eat meat, it is enough to say, “Because I do NOT want to screw like a chimp. We can do better than that.”

A simple, clear, ethical choice. And therein lies the paradigm shift.

This is an example of the Natural equals Good? or Appeal to Nature fallacy. You can find first-rate rationalization and denial all over the internet.

Watch out for the divide and conquer technique. Animal rights is a very wide field with many factions some of whom are usually fighting with each other. You have the reformists, welfarists, abolitionists, pseudo-abolitionists, militants, etc. Sometimes your opponents will lump all AR together and accuse you of preaching violence or stopping people from having pets or causing animal suffering or loading your own wallet with cash etc. We can choose to be in a certain camp to get a certain job done and not expend ourselves badmouthing what others are doing. If you don’t like what some others are doing, then don’t do it. However, the movement is too large and diverse for any one person to say “Only this is AR” especially when all of these factions are part of AR in some way or another.

There are a lot of other ideas and experiences which get into more specifics below.

Posting According To Scenario

It is important to be aware of the environment you post in.

For instance, certain forums welcome detailed, analytical exchanges. You can actually work your opponent’s arguments into the ground through refutations, error findings, evidence, even laughter. People will actually read what you write.

On the otherhand, some situations are rather like a bad party with everyone talking at once with no one paying particular attention to another’s very sensible arguments. Here, it may not be worth making the same kind of effort. It is likely preferable to try to keep the individuals’ attention with short posts which don’t require much effort on their part to understand. Here, quantity will likely override quality, so if you post frequently to drive a point home, the posts don’t need to be brilliant, just forceful.

Also remember that you can write the most elegantly crafted post, but your audience may not be able to understand your cleverness. Intellectual posts work well when talking with people who have a similar disposition, but fail miserably with others. Sometimes very intelligent people are brought to their knees in frustration, because their opponent while not nearly as ‘intelligent’ or ’educated’, happened to be a good deal smarter and came across as more straightforward, honest and actually understandable!

So it’s a good idea to adjust one’s efforts to maximize efficiency and use the appropriate techniques for the particular situation, while still maintaining one’s integrity of course.

Being Outnumbered

We are often outnumbered 5,10, even 20 to 1 in discussions. This is usually not a problem because we have stamina and the opposition doesn’t. Additionally, there are always several in any audience who admire our efforts even if they can’t quite bring themselves to agree with our message.

So being outnumbered should never worry you. Here is the correct viewpoint on the matter: every time someone opposes you, it is an opportunity to speak the truth, so being outnumbered can actually be turned into a massive advantage.

It obviously takes effort to keep responding, but there are ways to pace oneself by various means such as

shorter posts
staggering replies over time (never hurts to keep some people waiting)
focussing attention on one person at a time
addressing more than one person in one post

These techniques will help you provide a wonderful demonstration of the power a single person actually can wield when one is on the right side of the argument and has the courage to follow one’s convictions.

Name-calling

Generally in adversarial situations it is not a good idea to do unto others what you would not want to have done unto yourself. In other words, fight fairly … or reasonably fairly … or at least, so it looks like you are fighting reasonably fairly!

Name-calling is one of those childish efforts which usually doesn’t accomplish much and often does more to hurt your image than that of your victim. It is usually

unsubstantive: it is unlikely the person will fit your description 100% of the time so technically your assertion is likely not correct
unverifiable: if you called someone an stupid idiot, could you prove it?
unintelligent: any mindless individual can do this sort of thing

The usual rule to follow is to attack the idea not the person.

So when someone says “cats are for petting and cows are for eating”, it is perfectly alright to say the statement is speciesist or that the person is acting speciesist or even that the person often makes speciesist statements (assuming it is true).

If you are going to go after the person try to do it somewhat obliquely. A very clever example of this was demonstrated by B in the “Horse Set On Fire in Columbia” thread:

Suvine: I love horses. That is my dream job to work on horsebackriding farm.
B: Um Suvine just curious did you happen to read the entire discussion headline beyond the word ‘horse’?

If you attack the person for say being threatening or ranting, you are really attacking the behavior and if you can gather together the person’s own words demonstrating such, the effect can be absolutely devastating! Not only does it expose the individual to others, it holds up a mirror right in front of that person’s face as it is frothing at the mouth.

Above all, don’t do anything in this inept fashion that the remarkably out-of-control, rightwingnut SVW was goaded into while screaming at Blacklung about hominid brain development:

Blacklung: What a load of rubbish! rubbish, let me say it again…rubbish. Can you spell speculation?
SVW: Yes I can you idiot!! Can you spell idiot?
Blacklung: “S” “V” “W”

The Anthropocentric Dilemma

This can be a tough one if not approached properly. Anthropocentrism is the idea that humans are at the center of everything and all revolves around them.

You see this sort of comment:

Humans are more important, I think. Humans come first because I am human.

Now one needs to be a bit careful as to how to handle this, because as speciesist as it is, the idea has considerable merit in most people’s minds. After all, it’s giving the universe to humans and it might be difficult to go and tell someone they can’t have it all!

Furthermore, if you attack the idea directly, you may be seen as a traitor to your species or even a terrorist (that word is very popular these days). Unfortunately, such labelling can make it difficult for you to make any point for some time to come.

There are, however, several methods to counter this nonsense - none of them involving calling the thing nonsense, btw … not at least without some preparation.

A. The web

One of the most famous speeches that environmentalists rely on is Chief Seattle’s Web of Life (here are several versions). The key phrases are

The earth does not belong to man; man belongs to the earth.
All things are connected like the blood which unites one family

These phrases are understood by even the densest of egotists and are certainly acknowledged by a strong majority. It serves as a good counter, attacking anthropocentrism with a follow-up on the mess humans have made on earth by not paying attention to these truths.

B. The evolutionary argument

A natural insistence of anthropocentrics is that through evolution, humans are at the top of the food chain (every chain for that matter) and therefore have the right to do whatever they please. The first thing to point out is that one would really need to resort to cannibalism to be truly at the top of the food chain or that possibly bacteria are really at the top since they end up consuming humans.

Then, one can turn the argument around to what evolution is really all about. Scientifically, evolutionary development is not hierarchical as popularly propagated. It is fractal in nature with random branchings at various points.

Philosophically, other opportunities offer themselves. Is it really survival of the fittest (this is Spencer’s phrase, btw not Darwin’s) or should we expect more than survival at the expense of other creatures? Is evolutionary progress indicative of parasitic domination or symbiotic progression? There is considerable scope for development along these lines that keep humans off the oppressor’s pedestal and permit productive association with other lifeforms for mutual benefit.

C. The image argument

Some people think that humans are the Apple of God’s eye. This wouldn’t be so bad if they’d also remember that there is much responsibility that comes with this position. Did the Christian God really intend subjugation or stewardship using the word dominion? It depends to some extent upon the particular translation and interpretation in the bible, but you can see that the former has dire consequences while there is considerable possibility for decency in the latter.

The ‘made in the image of god’ permits a great opportunity though:

“pretty well all religions, in some form or another, use the ‘we are made in the image of god’ line. i do not think this is done to promote anthropocentricity (though the idea certainly has been abused for that purpose). rather, i think it is intended as an evolutionary magnet which entices us to live our potential.
god being an ideal requires ideal characteristics. therefore god has the wonderful qualities of compassion, kindness, dignity, courage, awareness and respect for the myriad of creations.
if we are indeed made in god’s image then surely our creator also blessed us with these same qualities. may be we should start living up to that image. it’s only natural.”
(From Natural equals Good?)

D. Moral responsibility

Some people like to think that humans are the only ones capable of moral judgement. This idea is not correct at all (see, for instance, Marc Bekoff’s works in cognitive ethology), but it does provide an opportunity to use the anthropocentric thesis to do some good. If humans do indeed have a high moral capacity, then does it not follow that they should be compassionate, kind, generous and fair?

Steve Sapontzis uses such a backdrop:

“He argues that basic moral principles such as fairness, protecting the weak against the strong, and aiming to reduce suffering cannot logically be limited to humans because suffering, distress, enjoyment, and fulfillment are not exclusively human conditions. The basic standards to which a moral person should adhere do not simply evaporate when considering nonhumans rather than humans.”
(From Consistency and Traditional Morality)

E. Tiliri (Tell it like it really is)

The above four ideas use aspects of anthropocentrism against itself in an aikido-like fashion. This last one exposes the real intent behind such statements: specifically, the very unanthropocentricness of anthropocentrism. It’s quite tilirious!

What some people try to do is link anthropocentrism to the idea of a ‘people first’ movement. They even try to make it sound like a great humanitarian mission. However, a closer examination shows this is just nonsense. The actual, practical application of has nothing to do with humanity and everything to do with “What’s in it for me!”

Therefore,

I eat meat at the expense of other sentient beings because I want to;
I wear fur at the expense of other sentient beings because I want to;
I wore nike shoes at the expense of other sentient beings (working in sweat shops) because I want to;
I shop at Walmart at the expense of other sentient beings (some of the worst employee treatment) because I want to;
I eat chocolate at the expense of other sentient beings (Ivory Coast child slavery) because I want to.

This is really what anthropocentrism is in most forum discussions: hiding the small weeds by appealing to the big forest. It is not people first at all, it is me first.

So above are 5 ways to handle things when anthropocentrism rears its not so pretty head. The list is not exhaustive and the ideas can, of course, be used in coordinated combination as well.

The Foo-Foo (or new-agey narcissism)

This is a curious syndrome that people sometimes fall into because they think they’ve just discovered not only how the entire universe works - but that it works for them exclusively! It is usually a combination of the worst of new age nonsense, anthropocentrism and just plain ego-gratification.

Now, there is nothing inherently obtuse about the new age movement that was so ubiquitous in the 80s. Many of the ideas were even good ones, though there was certainly nothing new in any of them for you’ll find pretty well every one in some form if you scan the mainstay religious texts. However, we have to remember that the new age movement provided a very lucrative business too and often had little to do with helping people to discover their inner potential.

As a result, you had the rather amusing situation where the various ‘gurus’ or ‘coaches’ go around telling their clients how wonderful and magnificent they were and how the universe itself was conspiring to support, guide and nurture them. The client, no doubt, can not help but feel all wonderful and magnificent and takes to spending a lot of time telling everyone else how wonderful and magnificent he or she was, with a euphoric orgasm that continues for days and days.

There is probably nothing wrong with people telling themselves how wonderful and magnificent they are. There may not even be a problem with the universe being devoted to their interests should the universe choose to be so inclined.

The difficulty comes when these narcissitic ejaculations lead to some really bigoted conclusions such as:

We create our own reality and therefore all suffering is the person’s (or animal’s) own creation – tell that to the victims.
The universe does what is best for you, therefore you should just accept whatever happens to others – there’s a sure way to glorific apathy.
Animals exist to serve human consciousness development – huh? even though they were here well before humans (whether you look at it biologically or religiously)
Animals gladly give their lives so that we may thrive – as though animals really have nothing better to do on the planet.
We are here to learn from all our experiences – that’s terrific! … but we can surely be strive to be a decent student, graduate and put our knowledge to some good use.

No doubt you can add your own ’encounters of the bizarre kind’ to this list we have affectionately called “foo-foo” over the decades.

Some of these people really do mean well and like all of us, are “continuing to grow”. Many of them even do wonderful and even magnificent things - they may say and believe foo-foo, but their actions indicate they are not spining their wheels at all!

However, when you see something that really has the appearence of foo-foo, the aroma of foo-foo, and even has potential to win a medal in the foo-foo olympiad, there is a pretty good chance that it is the real foo-foo itself!

One should gently remind foo-fooers of obvious things such as animals are here for their own purposes or that those who are made to suffer don’t benefit a great deal by being told that they brought it onto themselves so they could learn from the experience.

One doesn’t have to say things in a nasty way, one should be honest for your evidence is certainly truthful while theirs is usually just nebulous fantasizing.

Depending upon the person you are dealing with, you may get a surge of anger (they are just creating their own reality, I guess) or quite possibly an interesting discussion. Some of these people really are open to new ideas, even when these contradict their own old ones.

The Hallucinatory Hypothetical

“You are on a boat with a baby and a puppy. The boat starts to sink. Which are you going to save?”

This is one of those old things from decades ago that anti-animal cheerleaders should know better than to try these days. It appears with various characters, but one is always a human while the other is always an animal. The idea is to force a ‘Kobiashi Maru’ (no-win) scenario upon you.

Here’s why the cheerleaders think they are being so clever. If you say you’ll save the baby, they can criticize you for not being true to your animal rights cause. If you choose the puppy, then they’ll scream that you don’t value human life hurling various other condemnations.

This can be a frustrating situation, but only if you allow it to be. What some people do is freeze up, because they detect the embedded kobiashi maru. Of course, that invites insistences such as “Hurry up!” or “Answer me now!” from the other side, because they think they’ve really got you!

The important thing to remember is to stay calm. It’s not a kobiashi maru by any means. In fact, it’s actually a silly logical fallacy known as False Dilemma.

You can point that out or have a bit of fun.

Here are a series of ways one can deal with this amusing absurdity in order of increasing ‘aggressiveness’.

A. The reveal-it for what it is, a hallucinary hypothetical

You don’t know and (neither does the cheerleader) exactly what they’d do in a given situation. So it’s a lousy question because it can’t really be answered other than hypothetically.

This is a pretty staid response, but can often be a starting point for more enjoyable pursuits which follow.

B. The return-the-gift

This response can sometimes make even the cheerleader think (well at least to the extent of his/her attention span).

You: What can you tell me about the dog and the child?
Cheerleader: Huh? Stop stalling and answer the question!
You: Well suppose the dog grows up to be Lassie, but the child grows up to be Hitler? Who would you save?

Notice you’ve taken the cheerleader’s hypothetical, dressed it up a bit and passed it back.

C. The super-person play

This proves to be an enjoyable exercise and claims that you’ll save both. There are variations and can lead to a delightful deadlock or even better:

Scenario A:
You: I’ll save both.
Cheerleader: No you can’t save both.
You: Yes I can. Really!
Cheerleader: No you can’t.
You: Yes I can. You don’t know what a good swimmer I am!
Cheerleader: Look! You can’t save both - understand???!!!
You: Yes I can. You gotta trust me - I can do this!

Scenario B:
You: I’ll save both.
Cheerleader: No you can’t save both - only one.
You: Why can’t I save both?
Cheerleader: Because you can’t! Now answer me!
You: But I want to save both and here’s how I’d do it [creating an elaborate rescue mechanism]. What do you think?

Scenario C:
You: I’ll save both.
Cheerleader: You can’t save both - you can save only one.
You: Why can’t i save both?
Cheerleader: Damn it! Because I say you can’t!! Now answer me!!!
You: Okay I’m not saving anyone because I can’t swim and thanks to your heartlessness and total lack of compassion you have drowned not only a puppy and a child, but me as well!

D. The topsy-turvey approach

A more vicious approach is effected here.

You: What’s the matter with you?
Cheerleader: Huh? What are you talking about?
You: What sort of person hypothetically or otherwise puts at risk the life of not just a puppy, but also an innocent child? You’re the one creating this stupid scenario - so just what is wrong with you?

Many years ago I was challenged by a forum’s resident looney (SVW from above, in fact) with would you kill your cat to save my grandchildren? Now this fellow was supposedly an elderly rightwing nut (though you never know on forums), so I wanted to be reasonable.

I asked him to explain the situation, but he kept pushing it with the usual “Answer me! Yes or no!!” I said that I couldn’t really answer him unless he provided some parameters - for instance, there may be a way to save everyone.

So he got angrier blurting out something like he’d gladly give up his cat for my son without even blinking. I kept trying to explain to him that we need to know the circumstances of the situation. Just what danger are his grandchildren in? Exactly how does my cat’s life fit into the picture?

This brought on another tirade on how my answers should be a lesson for the people on the forum demonstrating that AR activists value human life below that of their precious animals.

So it was evidently time to suggest to him that it would appear that he shows very little value for his own grandchildren. He’s the one who is putting them in this life or death scenario. He’s the one who is not providing me, the one person who could save them, with any information whatsoever. He’s the one who will bear the responsibility for their deaths. And all for what? Just so he can try to make his petty point?

He was not seen on the forum for several weeks afterwards. Perhaps he was spending some time with his grandchildren.

So in summary, remember that the situation is only a hypothetical one. As such, you have as much right to paint the scenery as does the anti-animal cheerleader. The attempt is to discredit you by getting you to either be ‘untrue’ to your cause or to demonize you as a traitor to your species.

You don’t have to play the cheerleader’s silly game and if some of them are reading this, one would hope they wouldn’t waste everyone’s time with such immature and ridiculous riffraff.

Despair And Anger

AR activists are continually bombarded with scenarios of abuse and torture inflicted upon the very creatures they are fighting for. This is understandably a concern because many activists get burned out from the bombardment while many a would-be activist tends to avoid getting involved because doing so would be too emotionally painful for them.

So how can activists deal with this very important concern?

The very first thing to understand is that ’negative’ emotions such as Despair, Anger, Hatred, Jealousy, Greed and those other items that sprang forth eons ago from Pandora’s Box, all stem from a single source, Fear.

The good news is that Fear is no match for the last entity that came out of that cursed container, Hope.

By Hope we are not talking about some comforting ‘want’ for a more convenient existence. In fact, it is most important not to let ‘wanting’ poison the mix, for it too, is a close cousin of Fear.

Lao Tzu said, “By not wanting, there is calm and the world can straighten itself.”

Therefore, for your own peace of mind, never ‘want’ things to be a certain way.

Please understand that ’not wanting’ is by no means synonymous with ’not acting’. In fact, action is at its purest when there is no wanting, for it is uncluttered with expectations.

The problem of disappointment comes from linking an expectation to an action. One engages in an action fully expecting a certain result. If the result materializes, euphoria usually follows. If the result is unsatisfactory, one or more of Fear’s relatives start up a party. Either way, calmness is sacrificed to glandular secretions.

What needs to be understood is that a particular action may not produce the desired result simply because causality is a tricky business - there are invariably many factors involved which may take the flow of events in a different direction than what one might expect. This doesn’t mean one shouldn’t plan the action with specific goals in mind. It only means that one shouldn’t attach one’s wishes with superglue to events that haven’t even occurred.

Therefore, do not harbor expectations for your action.

Ok, but suppose things go really bad. Suppose after all your efforts, the situation looks even worse than it did before? Surely, you are entitled to some modicum of misery? Well, of course you are entitled to this anytime, but if it doesn’t help you or your cause, why bother?

There is a saying, “Life owes us nothing. We owe life everything. The only way to happiness is to squander oneself in a worthwhile cause.” So what is important here is the squandering - never what you (or those you advocate for) are owed.

This idea appears throughout the ancient texts in various forms such as “The battle cannot be won. It cannot be lost. It can only be fought.” or the beautifully concise Zen koan, “Working hard, accomplishing no thing”.

Therefore, act according to your conscience and damn the consequences!

Please understand that the suggestion is not that one becomes an impassioned robot though there is nothing at all wrong with being so, if this is the style you wish to adopt.

Some wear their Compassion on their sleeve and can sooth the wildest of brutes.

However, understand that Compassion’s closest relative is Courage. Those who protest atrocity, those who oppose cruelty, those who rescue sentient beings from torture and death, do so because of their Compassion and also because of their Courage.

What does this mean? It means that if one has Compassion, alongside also travels her close companion, Courage.

Therefore, never feel you lack courage, if you are compassionate. One is never far from the other.

Some people get traumatized by events. They need to understand that events are like waves of water in a stream, part of the flow. The stream cannot be determined from a few waves. In fact, if you get too close to any wave, you’ll likely get wet.

Keeping the bigger picture in mind, is a popular saying, but what is being suggested here is quite different. When swimming in a stream one needs to adapt one’s motion to coordinate with the larger motion. This is like the ‘go with the flow’ idea, with one major addition: keep the head above the water.

The flow is nice and energizing, so one doesn’t have to be buffetted by the individual waves. However, it is important to watch where the stream is headed or if someone has diverted its course from its true destination, the grand ocean. After all, one doesn’t want to end up in someone’s resevoir.

Therefore, go with the flow, but only if the flow aligns with integrity.

Many people get depressed because they feel they are not doing enough. In fact, they worry so much, that they end up doing very little. This is not an uncommon occurence because there is no shortage of causes in this world. However, the matter is not to be dealt with by time management alone. It needs to be handled by a realization that one doesn’t have to do it all.

Many years ago, we invited a tree-sitter (protesting the Claycot Sound logging), Leanne Mallet, to speak to our environment and animal rights group. She provided possibly the most significant idea which relates to activism.

She said that “some of us are good at writing letters; some are good at organizing events; some like to be out there to protest; some have legal skills; some like to do public speaking; some engage in direct action - we need everyone!”

So just because one doesn’t have the resources or inclination to ram whaling ships, doesn’t mean that one can’t write letters. Similarly, just because one is protesting the seal slaughter, doesn’t mean that one must hold talks at the library denouncing factory farming.

Therefore, you don’t have to do everything, but you can always do something.

Isolation and loneliness are often a reality that activists face. Depending upon location, there may appear to be no one around who shares similar ideas and ideals. Some people handle such situations well - in fact, they like to work alone, but many don’t and wish they had some support even within their own home (which is quite often not the case).

Many things have, however, made things better for activists, particularly the internet through which one has contact and access to resources that were not available only a decade ago. Furthermore, even if an activist is unable to do things in the immediate area, it is possible to assist other activists all around the world.

Loneliness though, is something which is more illusory than real.

There was an episode in the Kung Fu series from the 70s where young Kwai Chang Caine had lost his parents. He was very sad and complained of loneliness to his blind teacher, Master Po. “Do you not hear the birds singing?”, Po asked, “Do you not notice the crickets jumping or the snakes moving in the grass? In such a crowded place, you feel you are alone. Now tell me, which one of us is the more blind?”

It is well to remember that in addition to the birds, crickets and snakes one has companions such as Pythagoras, Leo Tolstoy, Francis of Assisi, Albert Schweitzer. Ok so they’re all dead, but even so their existence is undeniable. Plus we have many to add to the good company in the form of present day activists whose numbers abound!

Therefore, remember you are not alone and not isolated. In fact, you ride in kindred spirit with the best humanity has to offer!

Knowing that one is in the company of good people is reassuring, but what many aren’t aware of is that there are other forces at work too.

Historically, humans have become more civilized. It doesn’t always look that way of course, but generally, there are more mechanisms in play to encourage good behavior (eg laws, rehabilitation, even therapy) than ever before in the past.

There is greater awareness of the plight of non-human sentient beings. In fact, one of the common whines by animal abusers is that people seem to care more about animals than other people (which is quite understandable after an inspection of the whiner). Due to technological advances as well as education, the animal rights movement has grown faster and larger than any social justice movement (eg anti-racism, feminism, rights for handicapped, rights for children) in history!

And so it should be. For the true measure of one’s worth is always tested by how one acts towards those most vulnerable. Do we choose kindness or do we choose cruelty?

The ramifications of such a choice have been expressed by many throughout history:

“For as long as men massacre animals, they will kill each other. Indeed, he who sows the seed of murder and pain cannot reap joy and love.” (Pythagoras, mathematician)

“As long as there are slaughterhouses, there will be battlefields.” (Leo Tolstoy, author)

“Until he extends the circle of his compassion to all living things, man will not himself find peace.” (Albert Schweitzer, missionary and statesman)

“If you have men who will exclude any of God’s creatures from the shelter of compassion and pity, you will have men who deal likewise with their fellow men.” (Francis of Assisi, saint)

Our choices do shape our destiny for we can choose to be in alignment or in opposition with the unrelenting and unstoppable force which drives the universe, the force of evolution.

Therefore, know that the force really is with you!

As you can see, there is much beyond despair and anger.

There is hope. She embraces us whether we recognize it or not. She nurtures us through our grief and sorrow as she does all those who suffer in life. She travels with us on our eternal journey, providing cosmic companionship.

For hope is that single candle, whose light no amount of fearful darkness can ever diminish.

Feeling Bad For Doing Good

So how can something like this possibly happen? Shouldn’t one who does good things by supporting worthwhile causes also feel good? One would think so, but there are factors which can make it difficult.

When you have a social justice cause, you can be sure you are going to be opposed by others - well it wouldn’t be a social justice cause otherwise. Now the opposition usually oozes themselves into 3 groups:

First, there are the oppressors. They are well-defined, clear in their purpose and intent. You know just where you stand with them.

Then there are the apathetics. These are usually a bunch that don’t really care to speak out one way or another. They just want to be left alone so they can keep their hands over their eyes and ears (though not always their mouths).

Finally, there are the saboteurs, those who do know the score (even better than you might) and claim to support you in principle, but seem to have considerable difficulty with the actual practice.

It is important to be aware of these 3 groups simply because each is motivated differently. Understanding the motivation often helps in how we deal with the reactions we get. In fact, it’s actually amusing to see all three sides uniting against you but for entirely different reasons. So let’s see how this happens using specific attacks made on your efforts - attacks that can make you feel bad, even when you are doing good!

A. The Don’t Tell Others What To Do

This is an old standard. For some reason, even though everyone is always telling anyone within reach what to do, your efforts are deemed particularly offensive. Well we know the oppressors don’t want to be told to stop oppressing and the apathetics don’t want to be told to do anything. However, the saboteurs seem to feel that your efforts somehow undermine their appearence of nobility. Because they agree in principle with you, they think you are giving them a bad name, so they attack you forgetting who the real enemy is.

If you remind them of the real enemy, you’ll get responses like ‘There are no enemies’ or the humanitarian ‘We are all humans’ or the spiritual ‘We are all spirits’.

In any case, this entire idea of not telling others what to do is a self-referential piece of silliness because the person has just told you what to do! As such, the effort is not merely contradictory, but also self-annihilating!

If you want to tell people what to do, by all means do so. Just do it politely, sensibly and accurately. You’ll likely get impolite, insensible fantasies in response, so someone has to be the voice of sanity and it might as well be you.

So go ahead and tell people what to do, but remember,

Don’t feel bad when you are doing something good!

B. The Oh But We Must Be Tolerant

A multitude of evils is sheltered underneath this umbrella. The oppressors are tolerant towards everyone except those who criticise what they do. The apathetics jiggle with their equitable outlook on existence. The saboteurs congratulate themselves for their ability to hold tight to their own highly ethical beliefs while ‘understanding’ those of the opposition.

When confronting cruelty, hatred and injustice there is no honor in tolerance. In fact, if you tolerate, you are complicit.

Some people have this idea that we should be tolerant because other people just “see things differently”. Unfortunately, they also go out of their way to not be tolerant of those see this tolerance thing differently from them. So they’ll defend the oppressor (for seeing things differently) and attack you for criticizing the oppressor.

The underlying reasoning here isn’t remarkable. At the top of their logic hierarchy sits “Thou shalt be tolerant”, but because they are unwilling to go after the oppressor (that would conflict with the top commandment), they go after anything else - forgetting that by not playing fair, they have violated their own standard.

They also don’t consider the ramifications of their “not finding fault because others see things differently” premise. It’s not really a bad premise, but it can be misapplied very inappropriately because by their reasoning we shouldn’t find fault with:

serial killers … just because they see things differently
child molesters … just because they see things differently
slave traders … just because they see things differently
racists … just because they see things differently
misogynists … just because they see things differently

Possibly some of them may want to test their TQ (tolerance quotient) by watching these videos: Animal Rights Songs.

So you don’t need to subscribe to their school of tolerance, but more importantly,

Don’t feel bad when you are doing something good!

C. The We’ve Got To Spread The Love

There’s a lot of gibberish written about love these days - in fact, this has been going on throughout history. It is really a pretty mushy topic anyway, but some self-proclaimed pilgrims have chosen to take it upon themselves to smear the good word everywhere they can.

So the oppressors are full of love for their families whom they feed the broken bodies of sentient beings. The apathetics indulge themselves in the substance feeling love regardless of the horrors they choose to ignore. The saboteurs are practically overflowing with the elixir spilling it with wild abandon upon anyone including those who commit atrocities claiming these are the ones who need compassion for they have merely strayed.

Now love is probably a good idea. However, one really needs to establish what we’re talking about here. Going around just ’loving’ everyone in sight, might give you warm fuzzies, but it is of little consolation to the veal calf, the battered wife or the tortured prisoner.

So we should really be clear on this matter. Those who profess to ‘spread the love’ do so for their own benefit. It makes them feel good and much of the time does diddle else.

Those throughout history who really loved, who really understood it, all practiced agape which is the divine love, in fact, the only love. Their love was not of empty words, but of resolute and courageous action. What else could you possibly expect from the divine? When agape appears, there is no room for any petty absurdities such as whimsical tolerance.

Here is a beautiful excerpt from a write-up by Kelin on love and that other stuff:

Even Jesus (and I’m sorry if this offends anyone, but as a Christian this is my life), who was often thought of as extremely accepting of everyone because he kept company with prostitutes, murderers, thiefs, and various other sinners, differentiated between love and tolerance. He LOVED the people, but he made it clear that they needed to turn their back on their sinful actions. I think (obviously) that His is the perfect example…we should love people, not judge them (where judging means thinking that because we “saw the light” sooner than they did that we are somehow better), but still let them know why it is so important that they change their ways.
(From Judgement and tolerance thread on the 30bananas site which is no longer available.)

So when you advocate for the downtrodden, when you defend the weak, when you scream for those whose screams cannot be heard, you are actually practising the only love that exists, and therefore,

Don’t feel bad when you are doing something good!

D. The But You Mustn’t Be A Fanatic

Well just why not? Has anyone done anything of value without being a fanatic?

Now it’s important to understand that people don’t want you to be a fanatic because the repercussions upon them would be quite severe. The oppressors are faced with a single-minded, determined adversary. The apathetics are worried they may be rudely awakened from their snoozing. The saboteurs just don’t want someone to do their job better than they are likely not doing in the first place.

Fanatics are a real problem for those wanting to maintain the comfortable status quo. They can prick, fester and gangrenize. They may even force a necessary amputation. They are not nice to have to deal with because they really are serious disturbers. As the saying goes, “Every society honors its live conformists and its dead troublemakers.”

If you are planning on being a fanatic, it shouldn’t surprise you that you may not win too many popularity contests. It is more than likely you will be assailed by those whose comfort zone you have invaded for “being too extreme”.

Well obviously, fanatics are invariably extremists too.

People who complain about extremists rarely know on what hallowed ground they dare to tread. Those who further humanity, people like Schweitzer, Beethoven, McClung, Gandhi, Street, Thoreau were all fanatics, all extremists. Of course, in desperation, you’ll be reminded that Hitler was one too! However, the matter is quite easily resolved and was done so eloquently by Martin Luther King from Birmingham jail:

… though I was initially disappointed at being categorized as an extremist, as I continued to think about the matter I gradually gained a measure of satisfaction from the label. Was not Jesus an extremist for love: “Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you.” Was not Amos an extremist for justice: “Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like an ever flowing stream.” Was not Paul an extremist for the Christian gospel: “I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus.” Was not Martin Luther an extremist: “Here I stand; I cannot do otherwise, so help me God.” And John Bunyan: “I will stay in jail to the end of my days before I make a butchery of my conscience.” And Abraham Lincoln: “This nation cannot survive half slave and half free.” And Thomas Jefferson: “We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal … " So the question is not whether we will be extremists, but what kind of extremists we will be. Will we be extremists for hate or for love? Will we be extremists for the preservation of injustice or for the extension of justice? In that dramatic scene on Calvary’s hill three men were crucified. We must never forget that all three were crucified for the same crime - the crime of extremism. Two were extremists for immorality, and thus fell below their environment. The other, Jesus Christ, was an extremist for love, truth and goodness, and thereby rose above his environment. Perhaps the South, the nation and the world are in dire need of creative extremists.

It is really important to recognize your part in this play and be aware of whom you are understudying. When you say your lines, know that they were written long, long ago and repeated over and over again by the best of who ever went on this stage!

When you speak, it is to achieve the right that we strive for.
When you speak, it is about the peace humanity longs for.
When you speak, it is to nurture that spark within, all but extinguished through complacency, greed and fear.

So be a fanatic, be extreme and,

Don’t ever feel bad when you are doing something good!

Digital Dexterity

Sat, 10 Jun 2023 11:11:15 -0700

You want to get good on the internet so you can get things done effectively and efficiently. This article will show you how.

If you don’t need to be a hacker (likely good person with a good purpose who does no harm) or a cracker (probably a bad person who breaks into systems for malicious purposes), you should find the ideas here to be helpful. If you want to be a hacker or cracker, read this first and then use the ideas here to kickstart your destiny!

(Reading the article on a phone may result in images being a bit small for your viewing taste, so move your device sideways into landscape mode and/or enlarge the image with your fingers.)

Introduction

The process we outline below is called FOE (Find-Organize-Engage) and is quite foenctional! We will take a recursive approach and figure out what we can do to develop digital dexterity (DD) using FOE. There are tasks to complete along the way - so do them!

Find

The first step of a DD effort is to get information and the internet offers several tools to do so.

Search Engine

There are many search engines (some generalized some specialized).

Task: Goto google.com and type search engines and you should see a page like this:

You have searched for and found search engines on the net! Notice that your page may look a bit different from the above because the internet changes rapidly and search engines often customize their searches to your browsing habits. The key point to understand though is that there is much more than the familiar google search engine. If you go to the Wikipedia article List of Search Engines, you will find lots of information on the different search engines that are out there and what they are for.

The ones we mostly use are:

duckduckgo, because we like the fact that it scrolls infinitely
bing, because it integrated with chatgpt giving ‘complete’ answers
google, because there will be a lot of goodies coming eventually

You will notice that the search engines often provide additional assistance such as definitions, wikipedia links and even questions (with answers) based on what others have asked about your topic.

Wikipedia

This is a excellent boon to the internet with content curated by the community. Some peculiar people like to claim that Wikipedia is “unreliable” or “untrustworthy”. These people not only have low self-esteem which they try to bolster by being critical, they often have poor research skills preferring faith (which does not require researching) to facts.

Nothing stays for long on Wikipedia because someone ‘believes it to be true’. Statements have to be verified often from multiple sources and if there is insufficient support for an item it will be stated as such. Furthermore, the actual documentation used as support is footnoted. As such, looking for a particular topic on Wikipedia not only provides the summary the volunteer editors have produced and verified, you get a list of the references used to produce the content. It is a great starting point for any honest researcher who is willing to check out the links and citations provided in the article!

Task: Goto wikipedia.com and type into its search bar “search engine”. You should see the following:

Presently, the page acknowledges the need for better citations and asks for help to improve the article. Also notice how well referenced and linked various items are in the article. Finally, there is a section at the bottom of the page which lists material for “Further Reading”.

Wikipedia is a superb resource that search engines often link to and could form an important component in your set of tools!

Chatbot

Captain Kirk, landing on planet Earth, contacted the Enterprise stating with some insistence:
“Beam me up, Scotty! There’s no intelligent life here!”

Well now there is!!

Task: Goto google and type in “what is a chatbot”. You will see results from the dictionary stating that it is “a computer program designed to simulate conversation with human users”.

Task: Goto wikipedia and type in “chatbot”. You’ll find lots more information.

In fact, why don’t we try to see what a chatbot knows about chatbots!

Task: Goto to bing and type into the “Ask me anything” box something like “Tell me about chatbots” and press your enter/return key. If you don’t see a “Ask me anything” box, click on “Chat” in the upper bar and you’ll be able to get a place to type your request. The bing ai chatbot will answer you.

The most famous (for now) chatbot is ChatGPT and it is particularly well-suited for generating text, but it doesn’t give you link references for its answers.

Bing’s chatbot is fairly good too and does provide links for reference and follow-up.

Our favorite (at present) is Perplexity though. It combines, in our opinion, the best features of a chatbot and search engine. It writes well, though not as well as ChatGPT (unless you ask it to use ChatGPT!!), provides reference and follow-up links, is easy to set up an account, and just works very smoothly!

There is also Google’s Bard, which looks very impressive because it will work with other programs like your wordprocessor or spreadsheet, but it isn’t available everywhere yet. It’s likely going to be worth the wait!

Well! You’ve just made a great friend! Actually, I kid you not: Woman creates and ‘marries’ AI-powered chatbot boyfriend.

What can this friend do for you? Well just ask your new friend (one of the above chatbots)!

Task: Type in the send message box, “What can a chatbot do for me?”

Your friend, btw, has many similar acquaintances. Find out who some of them are.

Task: Type in the send message box, “What other chatbots are there?”

A chatbot is not quite a substitute for a search engine. For instance, it will not give you the volume of information. However, it can certainly do what any good friend will - be at your side with encouraging information, possible solutions and even companionship!

Specialized Options

Certain websites have content that is directly suited to your needs. If you are interested in a specific area, you may want to look for things with something other than the general search mechanisms outlined above.

For instance, say you are interested in academic research on the “retrieval effectiveness of search engines”. Instead of typing that into google.com, go to the scholar version of google instead.

Task: Goto Google Scholar and type in “retrieval effectiveness of search engines”. You’ll get something like this:

Notice that you are not taken to typical sites, but are given links to actual research papers that have been published in journals!

An additional approach to try is going to an academic site which collects and organizes papers.

Task: Goto academia.edu and type in “retrieval effectiveness of search engines”. You’ll see a collection of papers as well as some other goodies:

This site lets you access a lot of papers relevant to your topic, but with a premium membership, it will give you a lot more of particular benefit to active scholars.

There are many sites similar to academia.edu that some researchers may prefer.

Organize

Now that you know how to acquire all the world’s knowledge, you need some ways to get at it when required.

Browser Bookmark

The bookmark system on your browser is a most valuable organizational mechanism. It can bookmark webpages you visit so you can go to these when you want to. If you make the effort to sort these bookmarks into proper categories, you may find it easier to access them later. In conjunction with the categorizing method is often found a tagging setup where you give certain webpages a tag. Then when you ask for that tag in your browser, all the pages with that particular tag show up!

Some well known browsers are Chrome, Firefox, Edge, Whale and you can find about their merits here.

Our browser of choice is Vivaldi which has more surprisingly helpful utilities than any other browser we have worked with.

Browsers usually have third party extension written for them which can do specific tasks. For instance, here is the Chrome Web Store which you can search for the Chrome Browser extensions. Extensions install in seconds and are often quite useful.

Browsers often have synchronizing abilities so that if you use say Vivaldi on your phone and desktop, your bookmarks and histories can be made the same.

Each browser is setup differently and has some unique capabilities, so the best way to get to know you browser is through its help page. Often your browser will have several youtube videos other users have posted which can help you to learn how to use it better.

Task: Learn about your browser by opening it and pushing the F1 key (which will usually bring the help page).

Personal Online Library

Bookmarks are great for keeping track of websites and webpages. A similar mechanism which offers different opportunities are personal online library sites. These let you store articles (and other items) from the web for later retrival in more ways than one!

The best example of such a system is Pocket. When you save an article to pocket from the web, it will be accessible much as it would be with a bookmark on your browser. However, the items can be accessed from your desktop or your phone or some other computer so long as you log into your pocket account. You can tag the articles and keep things organized.

Even more spectacular is that Pocket grabs the text of the article and stores it so that if the original webpage disappears in the future, you still have the text of the article! The premium version of Pocket also lets you do text searches in your collection.

If all this is not enough, Pocket will even read the article to you if you don’t feel like using your eyes!

Task: Learn about Pocket - it’ll be worth your time if you read a lot!

Calendar

Do you need to do more than accumulate information which you are quite competent at doing by now? Do you actually need to get things done?

There are two mechanisms that can be particularly helpful to you. The simplest is to create a tasklist and just work on things one after the other. You can learn about this revolutionary method in this Time Management Essentials article.

However, if you want to be more than revolutionary, you need a calendar because you can not only put down tasks, but you can indicate when these need to be done. The best calendar software should be webbased, so you can access it (and vis a versa) from anywhere.

We use Google Calendar because we’ve always used google calendar and for no other particular reason. The software lets you create appointments, reminders, and tasks. You can view in various formats such as weekly or daily.

How it rates with other calendars such as Microsoft Outlook Calendar, Zapier Calendar, Apple Calendar, or Fantastical, we haven’t a clue.

Task: Check out The 5 best calendar apps in 2023 and try them if you want to.

Just remember you want to access your calendar from both your destop and your phone, so be sure that there are suitable apps for your phone or tablet.

Converters

Ah so!! You niet speckenzie anglais, eh?

Not a problem because these days you can convert one language into another through the miracle of translation.

There are many sites that will do this sort of thing for you. Some sites even have translators built into them so you can read what’s on the site if it is written in a language you don’t speak. Translators are getting better and better, some even incorporating artificial intelligence.

Task: Go to the Cambridge Dictionary Translator and type “How are you?” into the English box. Then in the box below pick Czech as the language to translate your entry into. Click translate and voila (pardon my French), you get “Jak se máš?”. How about that, eh?! Is it correct? I haven’t the faintest idea, but you can czech it out yourself.

Not only are there converters that let you express yourself in different languages, you can do neat things like change all British units of measurement all over the planet into metric (which is what they should have been in the first place!)

Task: Go to calculator.net and you’ll find an excellent system that provides multiple conversions at once. Using the Length tab put a 10 into the From: box. Then click on mile and you’ll see the results in the adjacent box!

This is setting the world right one metric at a time!

In addition to the above, there is a myriad of document converters that come to the rescue when required. For instance, fine Linux folks have to endure awkwardness caused by Apple and Windows (ok so I married a windoze user, but I hadn’t got wind of it back then!) which use propriety protocols so that only their software can open their documents (they can’t even open each others’ stuff!). Such deplorable behavior is overcome using various online tools. For instance, say some unfortunate sends you a “.pages” document and you can’t open it because you are not an Apple user! Just go to FreeConvert and change it to a pdf! These conversion sites can be a documentsaver in an emergency!

There are other converters designed for various uses, but you can find these when you require them (since you know how to search).

Engage

Now that you are organized with huge amounts of information at your digital tips, it’s time to go and make use of your abilities! Being involved on the web can be a multi-mutually rewarding one, but you should be aware that there are miscreants out there who just like to be nasty (aka troll, cyberbully, hostile). There are some who just like to yap a lot and though these can be annoying, they tend to be harmless. You may find this Internet Discussion Strategies guide useful when confronting the unsavory elements.

Email

Writing emails to others is a primary form of communication for most people. One sends text (or more elaborate html) messages to others. To do so, one can use a standalone software (eg Outlook Express, Evolution, Thunderbird) or one that works through your browser (eg Gmail, Yahoo Mail).

These items are known as email clients and often they also work with Calendars, Tasks, Contact Lists and other things to provide an integrated experience. Additionally, emails can send attachments such as photos or pdf documents. Good email clients will also let you do complex searches through all your emails so you can find just the one you are looking for.

Sometimes, you may want to send the same email to multiple recipients. There are 2 primary ways to do this.

If the list is fairly small you can put the primary recipient in the To: field and others in the Cc: or Bcc: fields. The difference between Cc: and Bcc: is that the Cc: email addresses are visible to everyone receiving the email, but ones in the Bcc: field remain invisible. One would use the Bcc: field when the email address of that recipient does not want to be identified. Email addresses are usually separated by commas or semi-colons. The receiver of the email can press ‘Reply’ (to reply to the original sender) or ‘Reply All’ (to reply to everyone on the list).

If the list is large, you’ll have a lot of email addresses to put in the To: or Cc: fields! Furthermore, you email may not even get out because some email client put limits on how many people you can send to. For example, Outlook has a maximum 500 recipients per message which is more than enough for most people, but it’s still pretty messy. A better solution to handling large lists is to use a Listserv such as Gaggle. People can get onto the list and any email they send to NAMEOFLIST@gaggle.email goes out to everyone. They can reply to the group (by default) or to the individual sender. You can also get daily digests of email conversations on the list if you don’t want to receive large numbers of emails.

Remember that emails sent to lists should follow rules of email etiquette. After all, other people have to read your work so here are some things practice:

Always have a relevant title in the Subject: field. People who leave this field blank or put something useless like “Hello”, make it difficult for readers to know what they are opening.
Post with precision. Don’t go spilling your innermost guts in your posts. Not only does it make for nauseating reading, it can be bothersome to do so. Also do not reply just to say thank you! It’s not worth the trouble of opening the email to read such heartfelt gratitude! By all means, express your appreciation, but add something useful along with it such as how you intend to use the info (that might help others too), or suggestions for modifications, or listing others who might find such items of interest, or …
If your post contains information that should be examined further on the web, provide the links! Be helpful to your readers so they don’t have to surf the net all night to see what you want them to see.
Minimize the frequency of postings. By all means, post when you should, but responding to every person (unless doing so is important) becomes a disturbance to members of the list.
Do not spam! Do not post off topic items! If the list is for discussion on sportscars, then do not post something regarding jellybeans. It will annoy people. If the topic is related, say racing buses, may be that might be alright, but you should be cautious. If there is any doubt, check with the administrator of the list. If you keep posting spam, you run the risk of being removed from it.

Email on a list should be mostly viewed not as a conversational hobby, but as a communications facility. Treat it and your readers with the respect they warrant.

A variation of the email system is texting on your mobile phone though this is best suited for individual conversations rather than group texting (though that can be done as well with something called SMS).

Forum

Some people find receiving email convenient, but some don’t! For the latter, there is the forum mechanism. Also, known as bulletin boards, these systems let people post and read posts on a website. These systems are particularly effective when specialized notation is required (something that isn’t always possible with email). For instance, take a look at the Continuation of Coordinates Across Black Hole Horizons on the PhysicsForums. Beautiful isn’t it!

Here is a forum for programmers who use the Clojure Language called Zulip. Notice it is able to insert computer code for discussion.

Forums usually have advanced search, follow a particular author, notification of new postings and many other features that make this venue a very powerful one!

The same etiquette rules for email lists apply to forums.

Website

If you want to go all out and have your place on the internet, you need a website!

The steps to follow are outlined in this article (and many others - just use your find skills!), but the essential ideas are

to create content (designing), which can be done in a wordprocessor and converted to html (the website scripting language that let’s browsers display your work) or with blogging software such as Wordpress
put it somewhere on the net (hosting), on someone else’s site or on your own site (with your own domain name)

There are many organizations that you can do these things through. Some have a turnkey operation where you build your site with its own domain name from their templates. They will have software with which to create content, get you the domain name of your choice (provided it is available), and host the site for you. Examples of such outfits are bluehost, wix, godaddy, and weebly.

Variations on the website theme are social media (eg facebook, instagram, mastedon) and video channels (eg youtube, vimeo). Many find building a presence using these systems simpler and more effective (for their purposes) than having an actual website (though some use combinations of all).

Conclusion

You are now well-armed with that which you wanted!

You know how to Find information on the net!
You know how to Organize this information!
You know how to Engage with others to make an impact!

So go FOErward henceFOErth!

Cosmic Soulmates

Mon, 28 Mar 2022 20:50:29 -0700

While I tend to be agnostic, there are many aspects of various religions I admire, a viewpoint which permits one to not hold arrogant perspectives like ‘my religion is better than yours’.

This competitive attitude has been largely responsible throughout history for barbaric behaviour in the name of God who would be least appreciative of having One’s ‘children’ slaughtering ‘children’ - with self-proclaimed Christians mutually slaughtering self-proclaimed Muslims mutually slaughtering self-proclaimed Hindus mutually slaughtering self-proclaimed whatevers etc etc

This is not religion - it is politics … and of the worse kind.

I have found, when properly interpreted, there is much beauty in pretty well all religions. The faiths I have some idea about include Hindu, Buddhist, Christian, Jain, Bahai and of course Zen (which isn’t really a faith, I suppose).

One of the most endearing descriptions of God, I have ever seen, is by Sister Nivedita (Margaret E. Noble) regarding Shiva. In the Hindu trinity, Brahma is the Creator, Vishnu the Preserver and Shiva is the Destroyer. Now you may think that makes Shiva a rather nasty sort of fellow, messing up the work of the others, but one must be clear about what this guy is really doing and Nivedita presents Shiva’s character in a memorable way. For brevity I have summarized and rephrased parts of her writing:

In wild and lonely places, one may chance on the Great God. Once seen, there is no mistaking Him. Yet He has no look of being rich or powerful. His skin is covered with white wood-ashes. His clothing is but the religious wanderer’s yellow cloth. In one hand he carries the begging bowl, in the others His tall staff, crowned with the trident.

High amongst the Himalayas is Shiva throned, rapt in silence, absorbed in his own eternal meditation. He is full of radiance and can cast no shadow. With each breath of His, it is said, worlds are created and destroyed! Yet He has nothing of His own, for in all these that He has created, there is nothing - not kingship, nor wealth, nor power that could for a moment tempt Him to claim it. One desire alone, has He, to destroy the ignorance of souls, to dispel the darkness so that in all the worlds, there is no longer blindness and sin.

It is by the face of the Great God, that we may know Him. One look is enough: that radiance of knowledge, one glance from the pity and tenderness in His benign eyes. It is impossible to think of the Great God as being angry. He sees only two things, insight and want of insight. Whatever be our sin and error, He longs only to reveal to us its cause, that we may not be left to wander in the dark. His is the infinite compassion.

In matters of the world, He is but simple, asking nothing in worship. His offerings are only bael leaves and water. And He will accept these in any form: the tears of the sorrowful are to Him like the pure water of his offering.

He keeps for Himself only those who would otherwise wander unclaimed. He rides, not on horse or elephant, but on a shabby old bull. Because the serpents were rejected by all others, did He allow them to twine about His neck. And amongst human beings, all the crooked and hunchbacked and lame and squint-eyed, He regards as His very own. For loneliness and deformity and poverty are passwords sufficient to the heart of the Great God. And He, who asks nothing in return, He the Lord of the Animals, who refuses none that come to Him sincerely, He will give His very Self, with all its sweetness and illumination, merely on the plea of our longing or our need.

Now, I hope you don’t, for a moment, think this guy’s a sissy. I would give a path of wide respect to anyone who can create and destroy entire worlds with a single breath! All the other gods certainly did!

Ever the destroyer of Ignorance, Shiva arises to slay our ‘beloved’, which is our vanity, our greed, and our fear. In the middle of His brow shines the great Third Eye of spiritual vision with which He pierces all hypocrisy and sham. With one glance, He can burn to ashes, that which is untrue, for though simple in worldly matters, in spiritual things He can never be deceived.

Yet, this is only half the story of the divine. In Shiva manifests the concept of perceptive knowledge, known as Jnana. However, standing with him is his consort, Maha Shakti, the Primal Force. Together, He and She, Insight and Strength are perpetually entwined, each part of the other, each honoring the other, and together giving meaning to existence itself … cosmic soulmates engaged in the eternal dance of the universe!

Pradbird

Sun, 27 Mar 2022 19:26:32 -0700

We used to live near the water when we moved in 1995 to Duncan, BC on Khenipsen Road, beside a First Nations area. It was a very nice place, except for the hunting and fishing that took place there.

Unfortunately, not only were these activities legalized, but there were many instances of illegal killings as well. That’s what this is - killing regardless of the euphemisms used or the appeal to Indigenous ‘rights’ that are often put forth as an excuse to commit murder. [For more thorough discussions on this Indigenous issue, see KG’s FAQ.]

Admittedly, some of the First Nation population do kill animals necessarily for food, because our dominant ruling class stole their lands and forced inexcusable indignities upon them. Our politicians pay mere lipservice, bravadoing putrid political properness, accomplishing little else to improve the often horrible living conditions. No amount of redundant repetition of “We greet you from the unceded lands of …” blather does anything useful for those who can’t subsist on such well-meaning words.

On the other hand, some murders in societies are for cultural and traditional reasons, indefensible by any deplorable debate.

The person we rented our house from was a lawyer and had made some attempts to ban hunting in the area at least for non-Indigenous individuals. However, he was in favor of fishing. When my son Kyron, who had recently turned six asked him why killing fish should be allowed, he provided an anthropocentricity remarkable in its absurdity: “The fish would just go to waste if we didn’t harvest them.” Adults lie to kids a lot which is likely why many kids grow up to be adults who lie to kids a lot, repeating the cycle in perpetuity. Kyron gave the lawyer a sincere look of disgust and decided he wasn’t worth talking to any further.

The shooting of eagles, at that time, had been made illegal.

In late November 1995, we witnessed such a illegality. Kyron and his friend Leia drew our attention to an eagle they saw plummeting into the estuary, just in front of our house. The bird was flopping around in the water.

Fortunately, the property had a canoe (in dubious condition) that I utilized to go out to the bird. The eagle actually helped me to put him into the canoe by grasping the side with his beak as I used an oar to lift him in.

By now, the canoe was starting to fill up with water. Trying to manoeuvre a half-filled boat apparently made quite a sight. I was told that Leia started to laugh and asked Kyron why I was going around in circles. All Kyron said was “My daddy is doing good.” This is one of the best gifts any parent can ever receive from his or her child.

Providence kept the boat barely afloat till we got to shore, but it was evident that the eagle was going to need medical help. That night, I drove him to Nanaimo where there was a eagle rehab facility.

I thought the bird would be safe now, but was astonished to learn that the veterinarian there, was inclined to kill him, because he thought the bullet had broken a wing bone beyond repair, making the bird unable to fly. He wouldn’t let me take the bird elsewhere either. He was a high-profile vet who had set many of the wildlife guidelines through the government.

He kept saying he was powerless to make any other decision, but didn’t seem too pleased when I offered to break into the facility to take the bird without his knowledge, thus relieving him of this burden his conscience was so weighed down with.

Therefore, the next day I started phoning around trying to see what the actual laws were, only to learn that the vet had the upper hand, legally.

On the same day, we also found out, from a conservation officer named Jamie that the eagle had likely been shot because some brave braves, no doubt were upholding their rite of passage into bravehood, by plucking eagle feathers. It was likely that they didn’t come for the eagle they shot, because they saw I was heading out and didn’t want to risk being caught for their illegal activity. The officer took down any details I could provide, because he was keenly interested in going after these culprits.

When the law is there to work against you, it is necessary to create alternative approaches.

I found 5 facilities throughout North America (including one within 50km of where the eagle was at), who were willing to take the bird, even if he couldn’t fly. These facilities were sanctuaries for animals who could not be released into the wild. I also tried to put some pressure on the government’s Ministry for Wildlife as to the ridiculous position they were upholding, specifically fly or die!

After many exchanges (part of the effort is to wear down the opposition with argumentation and revelation of possible legal, publicized future actions), I received a phone call from the Ministry saying they would only kill the eagle if amputation was absolutely necessary … so the sanctuary finding effort likely paid off.

However, our eagle had other ideas!

The next day, I received a call from the Nanaimo rehab facility saying that the surgery had been done and our vet felt that amputation was not necessary. He wanted to give the bird a chance to recover before release into the wild.

Several weeks later, the facility called me again asking if I would like to come up to see the release of whom they had named, Pradbird!

Kyron, Ranjana and I drove to Nanaimo on the appointed day and just before they released Pradbird, the person who ran the sanctuary held him right in front of us. The eagle looked straight at me and gave a cry. Then they threw him into the air and he flew off, landing on a branch of a distant tree!

Ranjana likes to think that it was a cry of recognition. Perhaps it was.

The Stone

Sun, 27 Mar 2022 13:06:37 -0700

Nanak was a travelling guru. He visited many places in India, Arabia and Mesopotamia.

In Mecca is the Ka’aba, the sacred stone of the Muslims.

One morning nanak was found sleeping with his feet turned to the stone! Some Muslims were furious!

“How dare you be so insulting! How dare you sleep with you feet towards the face of God!”

Gently, Nanak says: “Very well then. Turn my feet to where God is not.”

Source: Pictures From Mystics

The Ailment

Sun, 27 Mar 2022 13:03:23 -0700

The following is a well-known tale from the Liezi attributed to Taoist Lie Yukou.

It appears in various translations such as A.C. Graham’s The Book of Lieh-tzu (p82 pdf) and Eva Wong’s Lieh-tzu: A Taoist Guide to Practical Living. The following is quoted from the Thomas Cleary translation (details provided at the end):

Lung Shu said to the physician Wen Chi, “Your art is subtle. I have an ailment; can you cure it?”

The physician said, “I will do as you say, but first tell me about your symptoms.”

Lung Shu said, “I am not honoured when the whole village praises me, nor am I ashamed when the whole country criticises me. Gain does not make me happy, loss does not grieve me. I look upon life as like death, and see wealth as like poverty. I view people as like pigs, and see myself as like others. At home I am as though at an inn, and I look upon my native village as like a foreign country. With these afflictions, rewards cannot encourage me, punishments cannot threaten me. I cannot be changed by flourishing or decline, gain or loss; I cannot be moved by sorrow or happiness. Thus I cannot serve the government, associate with friends, run my household, or control my servants. What sickness is this? Is there a way to cure it?”

The physician had Lung Shu stand with his back to the light while he looked into his chest. After a while he said, “Ah! I see your heart; it is empty! You are nearly a sage. Six of the apertures of your heart are open, one of them is closed. This may be why you think the wisdom of a sage is an ailment. It cannot be stopped by my shallow art.”

Source: The Spirit of the Tao - Thomas Cleary (1998) - Shambala IBSN 1-57062-370-8

We think there is much merit in not being affected by things like criticism (praise is merely criticism in disguise), reward or punishment. Also, the wisdom of this budding sage seems to be much preferable to some sages in Hindu mythology who would fly into remarkable rages (ie sage rage) leading to very uncivil behaviors. However, being a sage does not mean one is exempt from action - the only exemption is from attachment to the result of the action.

Understand Me

Sun, 27 Mar 2022 12:59:51 -0700

A zen master was teaching a class.

One fidgety student was bored and gradually got irritated, because he had decided he couldn’t grasp the ideas. This is not surprising since zen is not something to grasp. After all, when one asks “How do you carry zen?”, the answer is often “in your empty hand.”

In any case, such koans were not something this student wanted to deal with, so eventually he spoke out in frustration:
“I can’t understand a thing you are saying.”

Master looked at him while all waited in hushed silence at what the master was going to do.

Master said: “Please stand up.”
The student stood up.

Master said: “Please come here.”
The student walked to the master.

Master said: “Please sit down right here.”
The student did as asked.

Then master said: “There! You see how well you understand me!”

Needless to say, the student progressed very well afterwards, so well, in fact, that one day the zen master typically threw him out the window, because there was nothing left for him to learn in that class.

Source: Zen Comics by Ioanna Zalajan

Thousandfold

Sun, 27 Mar 2022 10:50:39 -0700

There is a fine story of a poor old lady who was selling some fruit she had gathered in order to make ends meet.

As she walked back and forth on the streets calling people to come and buy, the child Krishna, disguised as a beggar boy, walked up to her asking to eat some fruit from her basket.

She was a kind one and though it would cost her, she didn’t refuse him. The child ate every one, thanked her and left!

As she wondered about her loss, she looked down at her empty basket to find it was filled with jewels.

So it is that when you give selflessly to Krishna [or to something truly worthwhile], you are returned a thousandfold!

Source: Pictures from Mystics by T.L. Vaswani

Here is another version of this famous story.

The Poor Rich Girl

Sun, 27 Mar 2022 10:15:25 -0700

Buddha asked his disciples to help the poor during a great famine. A very wealthy man spoke up, “Not all my wealth can feed the hungry - there are so many!”

Others talked loud and long with great consternation wondering how they could possibly solve such a dilemma even for the Buddha!

Then a young girl rose to speak, “Master I am a beggar. I shall feed the hungry as you ask!”

“You?”, many sneered. “You who are so poor. You can barely feed yourself. How will you feed so many?”

Calmly the girl answered, “Yes I am the poorest in your midst, but am I not also the richest, too? Have I not my share in the wealth of the wealthiest who give me alms. I shall call at every home and ask for my share to go the service of the poor.”

All were moved by her devotion to Buddha’s request and gave out of their abundance to feed the poor and the true famine was thus overcome.

Source: Pictures from Mystics by T.L. Vaswani

The Wallet

Mon, 07 Feb 2022 01:29:28 -0800

My mother related this story to me about my grandfather. She lived in his household as was often customary with East Indian families in the 1900s. These extended families were usually quite closely knit and often mutually supportive. My mother adored her father-in-law and it was through her that I found out about his character.

One day he came home with a large collection of Indian sweets. Everyone in the large household was surprised. It wasn’t anyone’s birthday. There was no religious festival. It wasn’t even dinner time! What was this all about!

He was nowhere to be seen, so his wife directed the servants to set the sweets out. Lured by the spread, the rest of the household migrated to the very large table, but didn’t partake in the goodies because they didn’t know if they should.

After a short time, my grandfather showed up and encouraged everyone including the servants to help themselves! He was always known to be a most honest and kind gentleman, but his generosity usually had some rationale behind it. So between munching, the others kept asking him why he had bought all this for them!

Finally, he said with a mischievous smile, “My wallet was stolen today.”

The congregation went into the typical hysterics that good family members are supposed to display at such a time of crisis. The servants, who also loved my grandfather, were quick to offer their sincere sympathies as well.

After recovering from the shock, my grandmother put a few pieces together and sharply asked him “Why are we eating sweets when your wallet was taken?!” This was followed by a similar chorus of inquisitiveness from the throng!

My grandfather ushered them to calm down and said, “I thought we should celebrate. The person who took my wallet probably much needed the money and will be able to celebrate with his family tonight. I wanted to celebrate his good fortune with my family!”

Time Management Essentials

Mon, 20 Dec 2021 17:37:04 -0800

“I’m too busy!” “I don’t have time!” “I have too many things to do!”

Is this you?

Well, at least you aren’t bored! One solution may be to do less, but Murphy’s truism “Tasks always expand to fill the time allotted” ensures that you will only get less done in more time! Another solution is to use organizational tools that help you to work more efficiently. Though we can’t make more time (there are only 24 hours in a day), we can make ourselves more effective.

Time Management Systems (TMS) provide tools for greater efficiency. These tools range from simple tasklists to elaborate planners even to computerized systems. They’re great if you use what’s right for you.

A good way to develop the ideal TMS is to start with a daily tasklist. Write down things you would like to do for today. As you complete each task, cross it out and as a new task appears, put it down. This simple, effective system ensures you don’t spend more time on your TMS than on doing the tasks! If scheduling is important, get a daily planner and place your tasks in there. As you acquire a deeper understanding of your lifestyle, you may look at the other possibilities that are available.

Tools are fine, but what they are used for is essential. We need to carefully consider what it is we do. This goes deeper than merely ‘doing less’ to the key issue of one’s purpose. Establishing ‘our purpose’ isn’t just a matter of writing down a handful of goals or dreams. It really deals with the question “Who am I?”. The answer to the question “Who am I?” will determine “What I do”.

Let’s look back through our own history and examine things we have done (remembering that hindsight is 20/20). Why is it that some of these events seem to be worthwhile and others worthless (or even downright regrettable)? The ‘worth’ has to do with you. Some actions align very well with who you are and others don’t. Ever say “It’s just not me”? Sometimes that phrase is used to get out of doing something, but often it is a sincere expression of your existence.

In practical terms, a task is worth doing if it is in honest alignment with who you are. If you are ever in doubt, if a job feels uncomfortable, if you have too many things to do, or if you are doing them poorly, it is worth questioning “Does this align with who I am?”.

The answer may surprise you.

“But there are lots of things I have to do even if I don’t want to ….” Well, this is the whole point. It is time to examine those things. For instance, I get to spend a lot of time with my seven year old, Kyron, because I work from our home. He is very creative and sometimes his efforts result in a trail of imaginations all over the house. I don’t want to clean it up, but it is a job that has to be done. I could deal with the urgency of the matter and clean it up, but I don’t. The “Who am I?” says my role is to foster a sense of personal responsibility in my son. That takes priority over the urgency (which doesn’t look all that urgent anymore). So guess who cleans up? Kyron says he dislikes cleaning and insists he will never take anything out ever again to play with, but he does and he cleans up too (in fact, he voluntarily did the vacuuming for me the other day).

We must not let urgencies pollute those things that really are important. It is easy to ’lose the forest for the trees’ and so we must realize that getting wrapped up in a myriad of urgencies keep us from participating in things of value. (Urgencies, by the way, vaporize as quickly as they seem to appear - just get sick for a few days and see what happens to them as the world continues to spin.)

As written in The Magnificent 7:

“We all have 24 hours in each day: here at last is equality. What should we do with this time, which is our life? Do we invest our time in actions that fulfill our purpose here? Live your time well, for it is all you can call your own!”

The Loincloth

Mon, 20 Dec 2021 17:37:03 -0800

There is a delightful story told by Sri Ramakrishna about a man who chose to become a sadhu (a holy man who relinquishes worldly possessions and takes a vow of chastity).

Under the instruction of his guru, this sadhu lived in a small hut in the middle of the forest. Each morning after his devotional exercises, he would wash and hang his loincloth up to dry. One day, he found that his cloth had been torn to shreds by rats. So he went into the village to beg for another.

Unfortunately, the new cloth met the same fate a few days later. The sadhu was quite perturbed, but one of the villagers suggested that he get a cat to frighten away the rats. This arrangement proved to be quite satisfactory as far as the safety of the loincloth was concerned. However, though the sadhu had no need now to beg for loincloths, he needed to beg for milk since the cat had to be fed.

Another villager suggested that the sadhu keep a cow. All things considered, this seemed like a good idea so that is what was done and the cat had plenty of milk. However, though the sadhu had no need now to beg for milk, he needed to beg for straw in order to feed the cow.

To deal with this dilemma, it was advised the sadhu take to tilling the land in order to grow his own crops. However, since this was not an easy feat for one person, the sadhu had to engage some labourers and found it necessary to build barns to store the crop in. Eventually, he became a landlord and then had to take a wife to look after his large and growing household.

When his guru came to see him, the man fell at his feet in great shame and cried, “My Lord, all for a single piece of loincloth! "

The story ends here, so we don’t get to hear the guru’s response, but I somehow doubt he accepted that the cloth purloined the sadhu! The path to a noble goal may have potholes, but we can choose whether to walk the path or work for the Department of Roads and Transportation.

The Mahut God

Mon, 20 Dec 2021 17:37:03 -0800

Once there was a holy man who had many disciples. He taught them well and revealed how God is in all things.

One day his disciples went out to gather firewood for their ashram and they heard a great commotion!

“Mad elephant! Mad elephant!” was the cry and it seemed to be coming their way. Suddenly, they saw a huge elephant tearing down towards them with others following in desperate pursuit.

The mahut of the elephant was shouting “Run! Run!” to everyone who could hear and that is just what they were doing. The disciples took flight right away … all except one bhakti soul who remembered his master’s teachings only too well.

He steadfastly stood in the middle of the elephant’s rampaging path.

“Get out of the way!” shouted the mahut, “Get out of the way!”

The disciple held his ground and bowed in unwavering reverence as the elephant was almost upon him.

Then, the elephant ran over him and disappeared into the forest.

The disciple was scraped out of the ground and carried back to the ashram, where, after a while, he regained consciousness.

“Why did you not get out of the way?” the others asked.

He replied, “Master taught us that God was in all things! I therefore, recognized the God in elephant and wished to acknowledge his great being.”

The holy man shook his head while chuckling.

Then he said to his disciple, “My poor devoted one! You are so right that God is within the elephant! But did you not hear God in the mahut telling you to get out of the way?”

The Rosebush

Mon, 20 Dec 2021 17:37:03 -0800

A rosebush can show the many opportunities one can pursue, if one stays honest and aware.

This article was inspired by Angelkate who has been kind enough to let me stowaway on her pirate ship. She has taken me on many an adventure while steering a true course between the water and the sky. We have seen glorious storms and traveled under the vibrant rainbows they leave behind. Perhaps she may agree that what follows is a proper compensation for the never-ending voyage.

Imagine a rosebush.

The roots secure deep into the earth, embedded within a foundation of worthwhile values. We have the support for honorable convictions.

The stems rise up with confidence that comes from strength and flexibility. When the winds blow, they do not break. They bend, but always return to their position of integrity.

The branches spread seeking, each reaching out beyond the stem from which it emerged. Through their explorations, knowledge is continually discovered.

The leaves look out towards the light. Bathed in radiance, they absorb the truth that fuels existence itself.

The rosebush is nourished by the power of the earth, the excitement of the wind, the illumination of the sun and the joy bourne by the tears from the clouds.

Nature delights in her creation.

Take this picture and see it has been etched indelibly into the smooth canvas of eternity.

Call it what you will: it is you, your true self, your spiritual essence.

It is indestructible and everlasting and waiting …

Now put some tracing paper over the canvas. Start tracing the rosebush with your pencil. Be precise and accurate for every line, every curve, every detail and nuance is of utmost importance!

When you are finished, you will have a replica of what is there. It looks indistinguishable, carrying all the qualities of the original.

Your tracing paper has much empty space. You can customize it!

Put in some birds and bugs - a willingness to share.

Add some large thorns - a protector offering haven.

Create a mist all around - abode for an enigmatic magician.

Draw some roses of various colors - a bit of heaven is blossomed in.

Each tracing paper work is an image for you to be - it is a role you choose to play on the stage of life. You can have many such roles and to live them out, all you need do, is create it with a new page.

You can be many things …

the mischievous daemon playing pranks on the unsuspecting
the emotionless watcher observing the dance between life and karma
the courageous knight charging forth to right all wrongs
the kind empath listening, healing and rejuvenating
the pirate princess seeking hidden treasures beyond illusion

However!

There is need for care.

If one stays not alert, the tracing paper carrying whatever creations will move out of alignment from the source whence it came. Most things may look the same at the beginning of a shift, but the page appears blurry as though there is conflict. The formerly precise lines become muddled as the image on the paper becomes disharmonious with what is underneath.

Quick! Move the paper to find its proper position!
Too far!
No! That’s not correct either!
Try again!
Now this area looks reasonably alright, but it is off over here.

There is bewilderment, confusion, stress. Too much trouble is this!

I want to take the paper off the canvas! Then at least there will be only one view with no conflict! Yes that at least looks good to me off the canvas! May be this will be fine.

But no! There is no support and the thin paper flutters with the slightest disturbance. Without connection and substance, it soon wrinkles and rips. The once valiant image becomes a mere caricature. No amount of patchwork can repair it.

What is to be done?

Alright. Get another piece of tracing paper and let’s do this again.

Trace carefully with sincerity and awareness.
Avoid nothing.
Miss nothing.
Keep the work as true as its source.

It is done - you always have another chance! Even if you run out of tracing paper, you can get some more. However, don’t be wasteful - that would be treesonous!

This time keep the alignment firm! Draw beautiful things, but don’t let the paper lose alignment with what is underneath. If you do, both the beauty and the things are lost.

Stay aligned!
Always stay aligned.
Do not be drawn astray by temptation, by want, by enjoyment.
Become not irresponsible, apathetic, false.

Protect the alignment. It is all you have.

Aligned, there is no blurring. There is no bewilderment, there is no confusion, there is no stress, and most important, there is immunity from delusion.

The canvas belongs not to you, but the tracing paper does.

Use it well.

The Battle

Mon, 20 Dec 2021 17:37:02 -0800

We revisit the famous conversation between a warrior and his charioteer before the battle of Kurukshetra.

The above image was modified using GIMP from an illustration by Anna Bhushan for Folio Society’s Bhagavad Gita. See other illustrations by Anna at her website.

On the field of Kurukshetra all was tranquil the evening before the battle between the forces of the Kauravas and the Pandavas. Arjuna who was the greatest archer of the latter group, pondered heavily on what was to come. For you see, the Kauravas were his brothers too and when the slaughter began, he knew he would be killing members of his own family.

He turned to the Lord Krishna in anguish:

“Alas what heinous sin are we about to commit from greed of sovereign and power, that we are prepared to slay our kith and kin! Happier would I be if my Kaurava brothers were to strike me down on the battlefield, unresisting and unarmed.”

Krishna proceeded to instruct him on how delusion leads one to differentiate between atman, the permanent universal spirit and the transitory body, which is mistaken for the true self. He taunted Arjuna:

“How is it that at this perilous moment, thoughts unworthy of the noble have overtaken thee?”

Arjuna lamented:

“How can I engage with arrows my teachers Bhishma and Drona who are worthy of my reverence? Nor do we know whether it is better that we conquer them or they conquer us. I will not fight. I will not kill my teachers or my kinsmen.”

Krishna then spoke:

“You are a kshatriya [warrior caste] and it is your duty to fight injustice and oppose wrongfulness. The struggle you seek to avoid is the struggle within your own self. It cannot be escaped …

Renunciation [sannyasa] and action [karmayoga] can both lead to salvation, Arjuna, but of the two the latter is essential, while the former is necessary.

One who is always in action can be a good renouncer, but the one who avoids action, excused through poetic lies told to oneself repeated to oneself like a monotonous mantra, is a hypocrite.

We all must act, but it is the attachment to the result of our action, that we must renounce.

You grieve for naught, O shining prince.

You kill no one, for I have already slain everyone!”

Natural = Good ?

Mon, 20 Dec 2021 17:37:00 -0800

Some well-intentioned people create arguments by equating the concept of natural with the concept of good. I say they are well-intentioned because it is by no means done out of malice or prospects of winning debate points. However, the equation is not valid. In fact, within philosophical circles it is known as the ‘appeal to nature’ fallacy.

The first problem we have is that it is unclear what ’natural’ really means. The second problem, though perhaps not as difficult, is understanding what is ‘good’. Most people seem to realize at a personal level that pain, ill-health, death are probably not good things while vibrancy, well-being, some extent of self-determination generally are good things. However, the idea of ’natural’ is wrapped in murkiness and therefore lends itself to most peculiar self- serving manipulations.

Let’s look at the idea of natural and good through some examples and see how they relate.

What is natural?

The usual definition for natural is the rather circular:

“something having to do with nature”
“being in accordance with or determined by nature”.

Often this is interpreted by some to mean that if humans didn’t do it, then it’s natural, but otherwise it ain’t so. In other words, if a human builds a house, that’s not natural, but if a beaver makes a dam, then it is.

Some go to the other extreme and argue that since humans were created by nature anything they do is natural. So if a trapdoor spider digs a hole in the ground it is no more natural than humans digging a bigger and deeper hole to look for oil.

What is natural according to biology or physiology is a particularly interesting and diverse adventure. For instance, if you have that canine tooth, it is assumed that you must eat meat.

Proponents of this assertion range from the reasonable to the ridiculous.

In the latter group fall those who defend their practice of consuming corpse parts by gleefully pointing to their ferocious-looking canines and proudly asserting that humans are hunters by nature. Well, I suppose that these canines can come in pretty handy to rip open the cellophane wrapping on the bargain steak they’ve hunted down in the supermarket.

One rather amusing fellow who was desperately trying justify his corpse-eating habit in a discussion, irked by the cellophane comment, tried to explain how humans have become the ’natural predators’ of the ‘prey’ in factory farms.

Some go even further and insist that because of that canine tooth, you can only eat meat and not other things - or if you do, dire things will occur. This is unfortunately propagated even by ethical vegetarians when it comes to their dogs and cats. They correctly describe the jaw and tooth structure, point out the shorter intestinal tract, emphasize the ph balance of the digestive juices and conclude that it has to be meat because nature so dictates!

It’s a fine argument and appears very difficult to refute were it not for the fact that it completely overlooks

the apparently ‘unnatural’ fact that dogs and cats do eat all sorts of things other than meat when the opportunity is present
that even if they aren’t given any animal products at all and are provided with properly supplemented and balanced meals, they do just fine

The phrase ‘just fine’ is not intended to be a term for mere adequacy. More rational feed-meat advocates at least acknowledge that dogs and cats can indeed ‘survive’, but insist they cannot ’thrive’. Exactly what is meant by ’thrive’ becomes a bit unclear though. It seems to have something to do with having a great coat, plenty of energy, a delightful disposition and some other things, which apparently meat-eating dogs and cats possess. If you demonstrate that a veg dog or veg cat meets exactly the same criteria set here for ’thrive’, for some reason your arguments are not always accepted as being credible by this faction.

Why? Because you are not feeding the ’natural’ diet.

In other words, what is natural is good and what is not natural is bad, even if it is demonstrated to be good (and with dog and cat diets, often better).

Below is the fallacy in full swing: the equating of ’natural’ with ‘good’ and ‘unnatural’ with ‘bad’, completely ignoring the actual realities.

Is something natural necessarily good?

In nature, some animals bully, attack and even kill others not for food, but just because they feel like it. As with humans, there are various motivations of territory, dominance or even cruelty. Masson’s book, When Elephants Weep analyzes numerous documented instances of these behaviours that occur in nature. Is this behaviour natural? Some would say so. Is it good? Certainly not for the victims … and possibly in an evolutionary sense, not for the species either.

(Masson also writes about many instances of animal compassion and altruism as well. In other words, animals display the same sorts of behaviours that people do.)

It’s not that there isn’t morality in nature. It’s that there seems to be no enforcement of any moral code. Civilization at least has made some attempt (albeit quite counter-productive in many situations) to institute laws to discourage immoral acts. In nature, there just isn’t any police force.

Some people think their dogs should be allowed to hunt - the assumption being that hunting is natural for the canine family and natural is supposed to be good. What they don’t seem to take into account is that their dog may not have the foggiest idea how to hunt, that there may not be sufficient or suitable prey, that the catch may be diseased or full of parasites, that hunting can be hazardous to the hunter sometimes resulting in serious injury, that hunting is a low-success proposition (wolves for instance average under 8% success rate).

For some reason, advocates of vegetarian diets point backwards to primates, claiming that these are vegetarians and therefore humans should be as well. This is a non sequitur to begin with: just because certain apes are vegetarian, doesn’t mean that all primates are also vegetarian. A larger difficulty is that chimpanzees display not only non-vegetarian dietary habits, but somewhat cannibalistic ones too:

“The gorilla, chimpanzee, and orangutan are generally considered to be strict herbivores, although there is evidence that chimpanzees may hunt and eat termites and smaller monkeys (van Lawick-Goodall 1968).”
(Other “Apes Are Vegetarians” Claims)

This is nature, but if we base our existence on following nature, we may end up devouring each other!

A more amusing attack on this illogical line of reasoning was presented by my friend Sheepdog during a physics forum discussion ironically against a creationist trying to utilize the evolutionary chimps-eat-meat argument for his own purposes.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I put it to you that it is not for vegetarians to justify our diet, but it is for the meat eaters to justify meat eating. And I further put it to you that anyone who has a choice about his diet and chooses to eat meat can only justify it with reasons all of which fall into one category, the “Because I want to screw like a chimp” category. Look:

“Because I want to (and I want to screw like a chimp)”

“Because it tastes good (and it feels good to screw like a chimp)”

“Because my ancestors ate meat (and they were chimps and I want to screw like a chimp)”

“Because it’s natural (and chimps naturally screw a lot and I want to screw like a chimp)”

And if someone insists that you tell them why you do not eat meat, it is enough to say, “Because I do NOT want to screw like a chimp. We can do better than that.”

A simple, clear, ethical choice. And therein lies the paradigm shift.

Sheepdog’s post rocked the forum with an intensity comparable to the big bang.

Unfortunately, some proponents of natural theory do run the argument in very dishonest ways by doing a reverse application. They take a particular practice and from it dictate what is natural. For instance, they isolate behaviours such as stealing or bullying or even murdering and argue that since some people do greedy, unkind or vicious things, it is in their nature to be greedy, unkind and vicious. After that, it is just a small step to claim that people really are greedy, unkind and vicious. Philosopher Barrows Dunham wrote an entire book Man against Myth to refute this sort of nonsense (Faulty Induction Fallacy), but you don’t need to read it to realize that there are plenty of people whose actions resonate generosity, compassion and gentleness. Surely, these behaviours have just as much merit as those unsavory ones the self-proclaimed ’naturalists’ are putting forth with their selective filters.

Quite often, the loudest voices that try to ’naturalize’ damaging, unproductive qualities do so in an attempt to justify their own behaviors. Greed and selfishness are made into virtues by the corporate world who maintain they are merely following the ’natural’ law of the jungle or worse, Darwin’s survival of the fittest to give it a more scientific bent. This latter rationalization is especially unfortunate, since Darwin never used it as a scientific description (the phrase was actually coined by Herbert Spencer). Unfortunately, “we must annihilate” has become the war-cry of nationalistic pride and in its most extreme forms is used to justify genocide.

Our rabbits live in a very unnatural setting. They have to put up with existing in a space of about 300 sq ft (which is our bedroom) and endure eating fresh organic veggies that cost $150/mo during the winter season. They aren’t even allowed to go out on their own - they have to be carried to an enclosed area near the compost where they play each warm day with our veg cats for about an hour, under supervision of our veg dogs (who don’t seem to have the slightest interest in eating them, by the way).

Some would protest this treatment most vociferously! Rabbits should be free and in nature! They should be allow to play in the wind blown grass with the wild hares, fight and injure each other over territory, and multiply to their hearts’ content so predators don’t deplete their population too drastically. We think not.

Which leads us to the practice of spaying and neutering. Permanent prevention of reproduction is one of the most unnatural things that can be inflicted on an individual. As my friend jeff on Veghaven says, “Detaching your dog’s balls or ovaries might deprive them of the greatest joy in the world, and it’s not natural.”

However, responsible guardians ensure that the reproductive mechanisms are surgerically removed and not just to avoid progeny. Altered cats and dogs usually live longer and are in better health because their bodies don’t have to deal with urges that are being prevented from fruition. It is very unnatural, but so is being a pet - a case in this instance of 2 ‘wrongs’ making a ‘right’.

Let us consider emergency medical treatments (please note that i am not talking about medicine in any of its forms allopathy, homeopathy, natureopathy etc). When one breaks a bone, the thing to do is to set it properly. This is a very unnatural act and it certainly doesn’t happen in the wild. In fact, deer rescuers sometimes don’t even set the broken leg of injured deer simply because it is too stressful for the animals, who do manage to live out their lives with a ‘weak’ limb. However, one would be hard-pressed to argue that we shouldn’t set broken bones and just let them heal on their own without interference. Several other emergencies fall under the same category suggesting that unnatural intervention in certain cases is quite a good thing.

An example that is closer to the fruitarian communities are the completely unnatural fruits being consumed. First, early humans weren’t able to eat exclusively fruit because they lacked the convenience of supermarkets. They ate what they could when they could and spent a large part of their time trying not to be eaten themselves. The man as hunter idea is a bit of a myth.

They certainly didn’t eat cultivated, hybridized fruits or vegetables because these didn’t exist. There were no red rome, winesap, macintosh apples for instance. Many of the myriads of hybrid creations were done by Luther Burbank in the latter half of the 1800s. Watermelons likely didn’t exist since historically their appearence is noted around the time of the ancient Egyptians. Durian has been known since only the past 6 centuries and oranges likely for even a shorter period of time.

So what is being eaten by fruitarians is not natural beyond the frugivoric criteria that fruit is being eaten. Does this mean eating fruit isn’t good? The anecdotal results, at least, for say the 811 system would indicate that it is very good indeed!

Most would agree that civilization is probably the most unnatural product ever created. Should we simply decide that civilization is bad because it is unnatural? Some would certainly argue that civilization is a bad epidemic on the planet and could produce ample evidence to justify this assertion which is valid to some degree. However, one cannot deny that much good has also come as a result of civilization, such as an attempt at societies where the strong don’t oppress the weak, where those in need are not left to perish, where internal moral qualities such as honesty, sincerity, compassion and co- operation are encouraged and instilled in progeny. So it seems that again, it is not the unnaturalness that is the issue, but what one does with it. As Gandhi said when asked what he thought of western civilization, “I think it would be a good idea”.

Summary

The various examples above demonstrate the pitfalls of the appeal to nature fallacy. Neither statement:

If natural, then it is good
If unnatural, then it is bad

is necessarily correct.

What seems to be of greater value is to weigh the actual merits of an action and evaluate its ‘goodness’ or ‘badness’ based on the circumstances, the action itself as well as the results it is likely to produce.

Executive Summary

Some find this task of weighing merits daunting because they are unwilling to commit their mental facilities to notions of ‘goodness’ or ‘badness’, as though such matters are always open for debate. There are others who, for some reason, line themselves up exclusively on one side or another with sweeping generalizations such as ’everything that happens is good because nature is beautiful’ or ’everything we do is bad because we were born in sin’.

One may never be able to determine if an event is good or bad, because we really don’t know how the results will play out - causality is a tricky business. What is of significance though is how we conduct ourselves, because here we can take responsibility. We do have an innate understanding of morality, numerous individuals throughout history to guide us, as well as inspiration from the highest of sources.

Our conscience was not put there by accident.

Pretty well all religions, in some form or another, use the ‘we are made in the image of god’ line. I do not think this is done to promote anthropocentricity though the idea certainly has been abused for that purpose. Rather, I think it is intended as an evolutionary magnet which entices us to live to our potential.

God being an ideal requires ideal characteristics. Therefore god has the wonderful qualities of compassion, kindness, dignity, courage, awareness and respect for the myriad of creations.

If we are indeed made in god’s image then surely our creator also blessed us with these same qualities. May be we should start living up to that image. It’s only natural.

Not a Spoonful of Sugar

Mon, 20 Dec 2021 17:37:00 -0800

Gandhi’s “become the change you wish to see in the world” is unfortunately one of those horribly misapplied items that is circulated with wild abandonment by some people who feel they’ve suddenly been struck with enlightenment. The idea nevertheless is a good one provided one understands what it really means and where the phrase really has relevance. Below is one such instance.

You may know the delightful story about the mother who went to Gandhi to get him to ask her boy to stop eating sweets (the kid wasn’t listening to her apparently and she figured she’d bring in the big guns!). Gandhi said he would but asked her to come back in 2 weeks. When she did, he told the kid to stop eating sweets with some rationale for doing so. Awestruck by the great Mahatma, the boy readily agreed!

The mother was puzzled though and asked Gandhi why he didn’t just talk to her boy two weeks ago.

Gandhi acknowledged with some embarrassment that he would have, but before he could legitimately ask another to do so, he first had to shake his own ‘sugar habit’.

If eating sugar sweets isn’t healthy, one shouldn’t do it. Gandhi’s conscience evidently came to his rescue since he had to face that little boy!

P Equals M C Snared

Mon, 20 Dec 2021 17:37:00 -0800

This work came about as a result of having to defend two venomous onslaughts on the nobility of physics. Unfortunately, certain people don’t seem to realize the universality of this simple truth - physics is everything! The word physics means the knowledge of nature and nature is all encompassing.

Those engaged in other disciplines have a great deal of difficulty appreciating the immeasurable debt they owe to physics. They don’t seem to like it when they are told that their discipline is really physics, but called by a different name. For instance, math is just numerical physics, chemistry only wet physics, biology but living physics, history merely old physics, languages necessarily talkative physics and psychology purely thoughtless physics. The list can go on and on.

Those unable to accept such truths generally put forth bravado posturing initially, invariably succumbing in short order to the inevitable. It is, however, worth relating the parrying of the two most blatant attacks ever.

The first was The Chemical A Salt which claimed that chemistry preceded physics. The second was The BigMath Attack which insisted that physics was a part of mathematics. Their subsequent and necessary annihilations were brought about by a close examination of the role physics played over the centuries.

As you read the following, you will see certain phrases are italicized. We recommend you pay particularly pensive ponderation to these, simply because they are italicized. Finally, you should have little trouble figuring out what the letters in the title stand for. Let us begin.

The Chemical A Salt

(Confused conundrums by crass chemists)

The perpe traitor of this attack insisted that chemistry came before physics via alchemy - and wanted me to look it up if I didn’t believe him. So being a fair individual, I went to Google and typed up “did chemistry come before physics via alchemy”. Not surprisingly there were no documents at all making it highly likely that either the answer is negative or that some sinister being had deleted all pages supporting the statement (a very implausible idea considering the security the internet offers). I have tried to look it up so my conscience is clear and can now proceed to tell the real story.

It is true that alchemy was the predecessor of chemistry. It is also true that it was an early science. Though most references will tell you it started around the 1400s or so, its roots were probably much older and appeared in many different countries too. For example, Indian alchemists existed in the 7th century and the Chinese alchemist Ge Hong lived in the 4th century.

Be that as it may, what I will tell you is how alchemy transmuted into chemistry with the help of physics. This will be a rather occidental version of the story so please orient yourselves accordingly.

The ancient Greek Empedocles (well he really hadn’t aged that much) established in 430 BC four elements Earth, Air, Water and Fire. (This was not the birth of chemistry just because the word element is used!) It was believed that everything else was made from these though Aristotle added a fifth element, Aether, which haunted humanity right into the 20th century.

So the alchemists set to work trying to make gold (and some other stuff) primarily because they thought they could get rich. Well! It wasn’t that simple now was it? Things didn’t quite work out and so some tried dishonest things like creating impure mixtures and passing these off as gold. Fortunately, the brilliant physicist Archimedes foiled one of these attempts while taking a bath. So elated was he that he ran out into the streets where he met people who had not taken a bath and quite justifiably started shouting “eu reek a” at them.

Anyway, as alchemy developed in later centuries, it was reasoned that any substance could be changed into another by merely combining things in the right proportion. Again the primary effort was to produce gold, but in that unsuccessful attempt many other chemical elements were found. Now, some unscrupulous alchemists tried to fool people into thinking that all that glitters was gold (whence fools gold ) and their profession fell into disrepute. So the remaining good ones, who suddenly had all these other elements in hand, decided to change their name to chemists (removing anyone with the name of Al lan or Al bert from their ranks) and their science to che mistry (so that people would think there was something mysterious about them).

One of the first of these new chemists was Robert Boyle, who in 1661 published a journal called The Sceptical Chymist, because he was sceptical about being a chemist (therefore the unusual spelling), since he figured he should be a physicist due to his discovery of Boyle’s Law of Gases which of course had nothing to do with chemistry at the time.

Within a couple of centuries, the physicists had worked out some of the principles of atomic theory and so that gave the chemists something to do with all the elements they kept on discovering. So the Italian chemist Avogadro created a large number that proved to be useful (though it irked the mathematicians who liked to keep numbers to themselves - more on this later though) and Mendeleev was brought in from Russia periodically to help organize the elements onto a table.

Now the biggest problem the chemists faced though, was finding names for all these elements. Therefore, they started naming them after their own countries scandium Sc and germanium Ge, after gases such as oxygen O and hydrogen H, and then just to confuse everyone they also did really weird things like calling sodium Na and gold Au and mercury Hg!

There was still the problem of identifying further information about the elements such as atomic numbers, so several physicists such as Roentgen, Barkla, von Laue and the Braggs used xrays to help determine crystalline structures. Characteristic xrays of atoms were later used to help pin down the element to Mendeleev’s table by its atomic number. Thus, hydrogen was given the number 1, and helium the number 2 and so on. Unfortunately, the table had become so crowded that the chemists actually lost four elements, numbers 43, 61, 85 and 87. Some chemists looked around and claimed they had found these elements, but since no one else could find them (even under Mendeleev’s table), for a while, they remained lost.

When the chemists had come to the end of collecting and losing elements, physics opened a whole new door for them - that of radioactive elements. Marie Sklodowska, a polish chemist, married Pierre Curie and became a physicist and the two of them proceeded to discover radioactivity. Radioactive elements consist of large atoms (sometimes called fatoms ) that transmute or split into smaller elements. For example, uranium U could break down into ura and nium , but it doesn’t because those elements don’t exist, so instead it breaks down into other elements that do exist, because it was so fat to begin with. Those other elements wind up being something like Sr and Xe which have nothing to do with U, but that’s because of the weird way they were all named in the first place, isn’t it!

So, by looking in all the debris produced by some of these fatoms, chemists were able to find those lost elements which they promptly proceeded to name any way they felt like. The final element of the group to be discovered was not 87 by the way, because that would just be far too sensible a thing to do. Instead, they discovered 61 last and called it promethium after the Greek chemist Prometheus who had stolen fire for mankind. Well, they thought he was a chemist because of the fire thing since chemists use fire in their bunsen burners, but really he was a physicist because he invented astronomy. Some of you may recall that while he was mistaken for a chemist he got covalently stuck to a rock for a while, but was eventually freed by the physicist Hercules who performed 12 physical tasks all involving physics (occasionally called labor s, because they were done in the labor atory of the universe).

After the periodic table was filled up, the chemists tried looking for new territory by starting quantum chemistry, but it was too late since the physicists already had quantum physics. However, with typical generosity, the physicists shared a few nuclei with them because otherwise much grant money would be taken back.

So there wraps up the development of chemistry from its alchemistic beginnings. As you see, the physicists did eventually help realize the alchemists’ dream of transmuting elements, but not in the way they wanted, so they weren’t very happy and took to writing their stuff on webpages instead.

The BigMath Attack

(Malicious manipulations by maniacal mathematicians)

The Oxford dictionary defines mathematics as “abstract science which investigates deductively the conclusions implicit in the elementary conceptions of spatial and numerical relations”. We will not accept that definition partly because it is incomprehensible, but mostly since it does not permit the history of math to go back further than Thales 600 BC (ref D Smith’s History of Mathematics p2). Naturally, this would end the attack before it even starts since physics is much older than 600 BC and therefore, physics couldn’t possibly be a part of math as this particular perpe traitor insists.

So let us start much earlier when essentially there were only a few numbers. 1 was one of them. After 1 there may have been 2. And everything else was termed many, because there wasn’t any need for other numbers. Gradually though, the mathematicians wanted more. The physicists who were watching this development for quite sometime did not object them this desire - after all, they had the whole universe to play with \ but little did they know what was in store.

The mathematicians’ overwhelming greed for numbers led to the acquisition of the whole numbers first because they were the most handy (and footsy giving 20 to start with). A lot more were soon found, but it wasn’t enough so the conquests continued in barbaric fashion as numbers were fractured into pieces to produce fractions (they were sometimes called decimals because someone wanted to make a point ). How the poor fractions were able to remain rational through it all is a good question, but many decimals went totally irrational as a result of what they witnessed. The numbers were undergoing a terrible ordeal and developed multiple personalities as a result of the stress - some became very negative , for others the change was quite complex. Fortunately, through hindusight , the number zero appeared, taking a leadership role and stabilized the system somewhat.

The mathematicians’ lust however was not satisfied. In fact, they became concerned that they would soon run out of numbers (you see, infinity just was not enough for them) and began raiding the languages. First they took an x and forced it to be anything they felt like, and then the y followed and more (the one good consequence of this aggression was that algebra was born). If this wasn’t bad enough, they raided the Greek alphabet and stole an alpha, then a beta and anything else they could usurp. The noble physicists couldn’t just stand by and watch this mayhem taking place so they kindly gave the mathematicians a useful place to put the letters. For instance, the d’s were often used for distance, and the t’s were used for time, and F for force. However, due to considerable indecision amongst the mathematicians certain letters wound up in strange places - like p for momentum. Actually, it wasn’t a problem initially because momentum was originally p momentum with the ‘silent p’ as in p seudopod or p sychology, but the physicists dropped the ‘p’ because they didn’t want to confuse everyone like the pseudopodologists (who were a bit of an embarrassment to biology and had to often be apodologized for) and the psychologists (who were a bit of an embarrassment to everything because they kept going psycho ).

I really should also point out here that the biologists in particular didn’t take too kindly to the dropping of the unnecessary p in pmomentum, even though it wasn’t their field, and went around taunting the physicists by name-calling (something biologists tend to do a lot) them physi cysts , physi cysts rather immaturely stressing the ‘cysts’ implying they were undesirable growths.

In any case, because the Greek alphabet had so been ravaged, the physicists even went as far as creating a whole new field, high energy physics, to help place some of those letters in the form of muons, pions, lambdas, sigmas and etceteras.

Still not satisfied, the mathematicians attacked the Roman system overworking certain letters excessively. For instance, consider the letter I - it was actually used 3 times III to represent the number 3! As a result the Roman system was severely impacted and certain letters like G, J, U, W, X, Y just disappeared. However, because they had a good army they tried to get some of the letters back from the Greeks, but with only moderate success: the Romans ran over Greece and fell (understandably), but still managed to recover everything except the J,U, and W. It really didn’t do much good though, because their mathematics never progressed too far beyond rudimentary multiplication as a result of the number system that the mathematicians had mangled, so when the Visigoths descended upon them and started dividing up the Roman empire they really didn’t know what was happening at all.

In fairness, I must state that not all mathematics was this violent. There were many peaceful developments too. For example, the first methods for counting sheep were developed by a Greek mathematician named Ewe clid. However, he realized just in time that this activity was making him drowsy and so went on to create the axes of geome tree which were subsequently used by woodcutters not warriors. As you probably know, his techniques of counting sheep are still used by people sometimes before bedtime, but mostly during math classes.

I won’t go into the many other instances where the physicists helped out the mathematicians (such as how Newton had to invent the calculus, because the mathematicians just couldn’t be bothered to since they were busy arguing about some triviality or other - geewiz, he even had to write the Principia Mathematica for them!) simply because they are too numerous and I can’t remember them anyway.

Others

Please note that not all other fields reacted like the mathematicians. Most actually worked with the physicists to create wonderful sciences. For instance, geologists who are of rock-solid character went on to create geophysics. The biologists (after that earlier bit of silliness) saw the marvels of physics in life and created biophysics. Astronomers who are stellar people created astrophysics. Even a group of philosophers a long time ago, after they met a physicist (can’t recall whom) developed meta physics. The list goes on and on.

So where did some people get the naive idea that math is the foundation of physics? I think it is because of the very poetic and beautiful statement

“Mathematics is the language with which God has written the universe”

which was made as a magnanimous gesture by the physicist Gallileo at the end of the famous Walt Disney film “Donald Duck in Mathemagic Land”. I know this to be true, because I saw that excellent film many times. Perhaps you have seen it as well.

Paper Folding for the Practical Person

Mon, 20 Dec 2021 17:37:00 -0800

The process of folding paper is a rewarding one since it provides an opportunity to exercise one’s creativity within strict outcomes. Furthermore, the finished product of this activity has various utilitarian applications as will be illustrated in the second part of this article.

Though many types of folding exist, we will restrict ourselves in this document to the class of bifolds. Future articles may be published which deal with folding of greater complexities.

Precision paper folding demonstrated

The first step for the serious and conscientious folder to undertake is to acquire an assortment of folding tools and become familiar with them. One may of course be tempted to purchase power folding equipment, but such mechanization invariably diminishes much of the joy from this activity, the ‘hands-on’ aspect having been removed. One doesn’t require much for manual folding as will be seen below.

A most pragmatic tool to have is a flat table (though a grand piano will likely do in a pinch).

A typical flat table.

Do not try to fold paper with a non-flat table as these are not as effective nor are they particularly easy to come by. Flat tables are often found in your neighbor’s living quarters such as a kitchen or dining room. Usually with minimal coercion, this item can be relocated to your work area.

Neighbor somewhat incredulous regarding table transport.

One specific advantage of effecting this course of action is that it may be difficult for your neighbor to take the table back out in which case you can emphasize that given the circumstances, you will not trouble him/her a second time for the same item.

Neighbor exhibiting possessively irate tendencies.

Having gained access to a flat table, the next required item is a standard physics book. If you were sufficiently negligent enough to separate yourself from your physics book in the past, you can always turn to your helpful neighbor rather than going out to buy one, but be sure to do so before explaining the difficulties he/she may encounter in trying to return the flat table to its previous location.

A final essential of course is to have material for these tools to work on. In other words, you require paper to fold. Once again, your neighbor may be able to supply you. Taking paper from your neighbor provides more than the benefit of house-cleaning to him/her, because you never know what documents will be gratefully handed over, such as various identifications, credit card statements, compromising correspondence etc. Not only can paper folding be a relaxing pastime, this mere hobby may eventually lead to entirely new career opportunities for you!

Now you are set to proceed.

First place the physics book on the flat table in the normal way a physics book ought to be placed for you will need to do some preliminary reading.

Physics book on table in normal position.

Open the physics book and find the table of contents which is usually near the front of the book. Start reading through it till you come to the Appendix listing which is usually inserted towards the end of the table of contents. Do not go to the actual Appendix which will likely be at the other end of the book. Instead, turn the book 90 degrees (or π/2 radians, if you prefer) clockwise. Note that the book’s right edge should be parallel to the edge of the table.

Physics book placed at π/2 radian orientation and opened.

Positioning yourself directly in front of the book, take your paper and place it so that the leading edge is against the middle of the book.

Paper placed correctly in physics book.

Then take the edge that is closest to you and line it up in the same fashion.

Folded paper in physics book.

Notice how conveniently the two edges line up with each other thanks to the effect of a physics book!

Carefully follow the paper back with your hands and crease the developing fold with your thumb, unless you prefer to use an alternate finger or some other part of your body.

Creasing paper using digital appendage.

Creasing can become increasingly fatiguing upon the body part employed and so various mechanisms can be utilized to alleivate this dilemma. One of the most effective is to take your neighbor’s math book and while holding the paper down firmly in its semi-folded position, press the former against the paper towards you thus forming the crease. Such a system is poetically appropos since physics often utilizes mathematical concepts.

Utilization of math book to crease paper.

However, if by unhappy chance you are unable to acquire a math book, as a last resort you may use an unabridged dictionary, which is arguably suitable since physics is required in the building of bridges.

Unabridged dictionary creasing technique demonstrated.

You can repeat this process a second time if you want a second fold and continue the action several times. Do not however try to exceed folding a paper in half more than x times where x has been empirically shown to be around 7 for all practical efforts regardless of the size of the paper (but up to 12 in special cases as demonstrated by Britney Gallivan in 2001).

After each paper has been folded according to the specifications required, you can take a break by reading a chapter in either the physics or math book and doing the odd-numbered problems. However, be sure to return to the end of the table of contents of the former when starting on your next page.

Various applications for folded paper

Below we list the many things you can do with folded paper. Each illustration is shown with a photograph captioned for clarity.

Brochure - very effective for advertising.

Fan - an honored, centuries old device.

Portable notepad which is easy to carry and write in.

Versatile office organizer for stationery.

Effective manual massage unit.

Holder for cd/dvd - remove items with care.

Make shift hat - don’t wear in rain or wind.

Fake moustache - use only for halloween events.

Temporary chew toy (do not try to substitute for dental floss).

Horn covers to be used when needed.

Martial arts weapon - demonstration by G’ar Thso, Master of Kungfold Clan.

Makeshift torch - handy for providing light or for the budding arsonist.

Magnificent 7

Mon, 20 Dec 2021 17:36:59 -0800

Here are 7 words to contemplate as you travel through your life.

Motivation
Most people are waiting to be motivated. They hide, hoping that motivation will seek. Being motivated before you act is an amusing game we play with ourselves. Can you imagine life functioning on that principle? Does the young eagle wait to be motivated in order to fly? Was the newborn motivated just before birth? Do a thing because it needs to be done: motivation will follow the action!

Commitment
Life owes us nothing: we owe it everything. Therefore, squander yourself in any action you take. Apathy, indifference and self-doubt are killers of commitment and will ruin your resolve: ‘one who hesitates is lost’. Become whatever you do. Commitment is life itself!

Persistence
The determined spirit cannot be chained, cannot be broken and cannot be conquered. Persistence defies failure at every turn. Persistence wears down demons and causes courage to smile. Persistence is dedication, determination and lots of hard work. Indeed, it was persistence that formed the universe!

Creation
Is there really nothing new under the sun? Why everything that we do is new under the sun. Each moment is unique and each action is an addition in the history book of existence. Therefore, don’t say I’m doing the best I can. Rather, do the best that can be done!

Enthusiasm
We hear it in the voices of the birds as they sing in each new day. We see it in the play of children. There is nothing more uplifting or contagious. Enthusiasm flows like water to cleanse away debris, leaving all in its wake bright and sparkling. It is life dancing in its own joy!

Time
We all have 24 hours in each day: here at last is true equality. What should we do with this time, which is our life? Do we invest our time in actions that fulfill our purpose here? Live your time well, for it is all you can call your own!

Faith
There is hardship, injustice and unspeakable horror for so many. Sometimes we may wonder if the sun even wants to shine upon us. We may shake our heads and keep asking why? But ‘why’ only forms a quagmire for the intellect to be trapped in. ‘Why’ only delays us from doing. Trust only what comes from deep within: this is the root of faith and is the essence of our very being. For you see, the sun will shine, again and again. In fact, no amount of fearful darkness can put out the light of even one small candle. Through faith, heroism flourishes everywhere.

Be Magnificent!

Meditating Simply

Mon, 20 Dec 2021 17:36:59 -0800

Meditation is a real chance for you to connect with yourself. Most of us go through life knowing the person we spend the most time with, the least.

What meditation is happens to be a question that volumes have been written about. Anytime there is such a lot of discussion on an issue, you can be sure that no one really knows the answer. That’s what is so nice about the Zen approach to it. Zen essentially says that it doesn’t matter what we know, because we never really do (my son Kyron says, “No one knows anything”). It’s not even important to get something out of meditation. What is important, is just to practise it. In other words, make ’the journey, the destination'.

So how does one meditate. Well it really isn’t necessary to wrap oneself up in the shape of a pretzel. All you need to do is sit quietly with calmness and empty your mind. Some may think that is impossible, because all kinds of thoughts keep running through one’s head. That’s okay provided you don’t try to get rid of these thoughts - just let them fly and they will eventually find their way out. When we try to force them not to come, they appear. Don’t believe me? Alright, so right now don’t think of a monkey! See what I mean?

As you sit there with inner silence, you begin to appreciate just how beautiful emptiness really is. We don’t meditate to get anything. In fact, if you were to do it for any ulterior motive, you may get what you want, but you would spoil the meditation. Hence, the quote ’no gain, no pain’! Meditation itself is the gift - that priceless chance to be at peace with yourself.

Narad to Nirvana

Mon, 20 Dec 2021 17:36:59 -0800

There is an ancient Hindu story about the messenger Narad who used to travel between heaven and earth to maintain ‘communications’ so to speak. On one such trip to heaven, he happened to go past two yogis practising in an effort to prepare for Nirvana. Each asked Narad to find out how long he would have to wait.

So Narad checked out the situation for the yogis up in heaven and on his way back he dropped by to tell each their ETA.

To the first, he said you have two more lifetimes.

The yogi was greatly pained.

“Two more lifetimes? Two more lifetimes! It is so long, so tediously long. I’ve worked so hard for twenty lifetimes already and now I must endure two more.”

Narad left the yogi in his despondence for he would not be consoled by any means and headed over to the other one.

“You have to wait forty lifetimes before going to heaven”, he told that yogi.

The yogi was elated!

“Forty lifetimes! Only forty lifetimes before I see my Lord! I will work all that much harder now that I know there is so little time. I will make myself worthy so my Lord will be pleased with the best I can give with my next forty lives!”

Narad said to him, “Just a second while I answer my cellphone for the Lord is calling … Hmmm, it seems that there has been a recent vacancy … and it … looks like you can leave for Nirvana right now! Congrats!”

(Ok Ok, I made the last part up, but it is sort of the way the story ended anyway!)

Importance of Improvement

Mon, 20 Dec 2021 17:36:58 -0800

People sometimes get into a tizzy about whether to help others or help themselves. There is no need to see the issue as an either-or.

Helping oneself

Sometimes people think they themselves are the primary concern. The ancient Greek story goes that Narcissus saw his own reflection in a pool of water and fell madly in love with himself, eventually meeting his demise from this affliction.

While such examples of morbid self-love do exist, most people don’t tend to follow in the flowersteps of Shelley’s narcissi from The Sensitive Plant:

Then the pied wind-flowers and the tulip tall,
And narcisssi, the fairest among them all,
Who gaze on their eyes in the stream’s recess,
Till they die of their own dear loveliness;

Self-improvement should be a sensible and beneficial endeavour, but sometimes it deteriorates into selfishness.

Helping others

Most people like to help those in need. There is likely some inherent biological urge to do so, though sometimes people like to help others because they feel they will personally benefit from the effort: they may receive gratitude or recognition. However, those are generally not the primary reasons why people like to help others.

Usually, we help others because we see that some being needs assistance and afterwards, like the swallow in Oscar Wilde’s The Happy Prince, we may feel all warm inside:

Then the Swallow flew back to the Happy Prince, and told him what he had done.

“It is curious,” he remarked, “but I feel quite warm now, although it is so cold.”

“That is because you have done a good action,” said the Prince.

Helping others should also be a sensible and beneficial action, but sometimes it escalates into meaningless self-sacrifice.

Becoming the change

Sometimes an effort is made to combine the two ideas in sequence, with ample doses of an often misunderstood Gandhi quotation:

“Become the change you wish to see in the world” is unfortunately one of those horribly misapplied items that is circulated with wild abandonment by some people who feel they’ve been literally struck with enlightenment.

There is an illustrative story about the mother who went to Gandhi to get him to ask her boy to stop eating sweets. The kid wasn’t listening to her apparently and she figured she’d bring in the big guns! Gandhi said he would speak to her son, but asked her to come back in 2 weeks with him. When she did, he told the kid to stop eating sweets providing some rationale for doing so. Awestruck by the great Mahatma, the boy readily agreed!

The mother was puzzled and asked Gandhi why he didn’t just talk to her boy two weeks ago.

Gandhi acknowledged with some embarrassment that he would have, but before he could legitimately ask another to do so, he first had to shake his own ‘sugar habit’.

What happens too often though is that people spend so much time on changing themselves that they never get out to change anything else. They feel they can’t do or say anything until they reach perfection themselves! This process, however, could continue over several lifetimes and it is uncertain whether such procrastination has any pragmatic or even personal merit.

Activists should better themselves, so that they can do better. They should acquire various skills communicative, technical, legal and academic, for instance, depending upon the areas they plan to work in.

They need to be healthy.

They need to develop self-discipline and inner strength so any bitterness towards the status quo they are fighting, doesn’t get devastatingly re-applied to themselves.

They need to last and not burn out!

View the situation as a sport where you are on a team and the bad guys are on another. If you want to win the game, you need to train hard and take care of yourself. You don’t need to go around giving everyone your food, your water or peptalks till 3am in the morning when you should be getting your own sleep.

Your efforts will do more as an example for them to follow, than your ’noble sacrifices’, because by being better, you can compete better and bring along others to do the same. A stronger team means better performance.

This idea is neither selfish nor self-sacrificing, but it requires we not fall into the sequential trap.

Simultanity over sequencing

By bettering yourself, you can better others too!

The improvement doesn’t need to be done first followed by going out and doing the job at hand. There need be no sequential aspect to the undertaking as some people try to force.

You can become the change by making the change in the world.

Gandhi didn’t become the Mahatma and then go out to liberate India.

He became the Mahatma because he went out to liberate India!

You don’t need to wait to be perfect before performing your task.

Your perfection comes through your performance!

For instance, if you are a tennis player, you don’t spend years perfecting your serve, your ground strokes, your volley, then saunter out to demolish your opponent. You work on your strokes and you play your matches.

Your perfection comes through your performance!

If you are a musician, you don’t spend your life doing scales, arpeggios, and musical exercises, finally going on stage to draw that standing ovation. You develop your technique because of your concerts.

Your perfection comes through your performance!

Those who stand up for the helpless and the voiceless didn’t sit in front of some How To Construct An Argument book till they were ‘ready’ to hit cyberspace or the lecture circuit. They earned their skills through study as well as through involvement in education and confrontations.

Your perfection comes through your performance.

If you wait around to ‘save yourself’ first, you may find there is nothing out there left for you to save.

You don’t have to have it all in order to give it your best!

Give what you can with what you’ve got.

Do it meticulously and learn from the experience.

Not only will you get better, so will your planet and the lot of those who share it with you.

By simultaneously working to be your best and giving that best to others, you follow the rhythm of the strongest force in the universe: the force of evolution.

Its flow is undeniable; its morality unquestionable; its persistence unshakable.

Evolution provides the only path; there is no other.

It is up to us to choose how to walk upon it.

Jewel in the Dust

Mon, 20 Dec 2021 17:36:58 -0800

A man and his wife having lived into their old age chose to leave behind their worldly possessions and follow the path of spirituality. They lived in the cleanliness of poverty filling their days with praying instead of preying.

As they had no longer had a home of their own, they walked the dirt roads with the same reverence as though these led to heaven itself.

One day during such a walk, the man who had moved several yards ahead of his wife saw a sparkling on the side of the road. As he moved closer to it, he realized that it was a beautiful jewel which had fallen from someone’s necklace possibly. Afraid that his wife would be tempted to covet such a treasure, he casually walked to it and started trying to kick dirt over it, all the while looking back to make sure his wife didn’t see what he was doing.

Well she did see the rather strange sight of her husband churning up a bit of a dust bowl at the side of the road ahead of her.

So she called out: “Husband, what is it you are doing?”

He replied: “Nothing at all, my wife, I am doing nothing.”

She said: “But you are all covered with dirt from the road, why is that?”

He said between coughs: “Well I walked into a soft part of the road and …”

By now, she had caught up with him and he had run out of creative explanations.

“What are you doing?” she demanded.

So he had to tell her: “Wife, I saw this jewel on the road and feared that you might be tempted into forsaking the spiritual path we have chosen to walk together. So that you would not see it, I was trying to hide the jewel with the dirt.”

She looked him in the eye for a few moments with kindness. Then she smiled.

Then she asked gently: “My husband, how is it that you see a difference between the jewel and the dirt?”

Kiyreagle

Mon, 20 Dec 2021 17:36:58 -0800

The story of our encounter with a 1981 AMC Eagle!

And so it begins

I first saw this Eagle on Craigslist while looking for a car to possibly replace my wife Ranjana’s Toyota Tercel. Of course, unlike the Tercel, this one ate gas, was large, had manual transmission and wasn’t drivable. So the idea of a replacement was somewhat ludicrous.

Still, there was an intrigue about it which is difficult to explain.

You see, we’ve never been interested in cars. My son, Kyron doesn’t drive and I don’t enjoy doing so. My son invariably falls asleep in a car, while I fortunately manage to resist that temptation. We like bicycling and find sitting in a car watching the scenery go by rather boring.

The only thing I liked about the car was that it was old and needed help. We like taking old things, be they animal, mineral or vegetable, and trying to give them a good home. However, there was no way anyone here would agree to taking a 1981 undrivable car and making it a tenant.

I watched the vehicle sit on Craigslist for several weeks and congratulated myself on having the good sense not to give the matter a second thought, even though I was giving it all these second looks.

Then one day, through a set of circumstances, I suggested that if we had a beater 4wd car just for the snow, it would solve the large problem of getting Ranjana, to her mother’s each night. This was an essential trip since my mother-in-law requires considerable care.

Well the Eagle was a 4wd … and I started thinking that while I was looking at it, the car might have been looking back. So I made the suggestion to my son that he examine the possibility, warning him that we’d have to do a lot of work on the car, automechanics being a completely new area for us. The one thing the car had going for it was the $600 price tag.

I was actually surprised when Kyron spent some time looking at the photos and reading up about AMC Eagles. Then as he usually does after evalutating something, he made a firm decision - he was interested in looking at the car.

So I contacted the owner by email and received honest answers to all my questions. The owner was very helpful, didn’t try to do a sell job on me, so we set up a time to look at the car. Furthermore, she gave me the link to the amceaglenest forum where she’d found everyone to be very helpful.

Looking on this really impressive forum, I stumbled upon the owner’s thread: The “Rescue” Eagle. The title was a curious one and as I read it, I understood why it was so named. What amazed me most, were the ‘desirous’ comments by many members wanting to possess what I honestly thought was really just an interesting piece of junk.

I also experienced the best ‘sales pitch’ by the owner, regalwizard (aka Kirsten) which was to provide a comprehensive display of the car with a multitude of photos as well as 3 videos, linked to from within the thread. Again, there was no persuasion attempted beyond providing the true picture and a sincere wish to provide a good home for this vehicle whose worth I had apparently misjudged.

I watched the thread progress with people trying to overcome the logistics of acquiring the vehicle, of creating space for it (some had more than one Eagle already), of trying to figure out how to convince a spouse that this would be a good idea. I was fortunate in that my son and I at least held a 2:1 majority, even if my wife didn’t like the idea.

Then I sensed the disappoints as no one turned up to take the car. I was amazed at the accommodation that Kirsten was willing to go to in order to find a home. The weeks turned into months with her bumping the thread at the beginning of each month.

This car just sat there from August to nearly mid-December.

The First Day

On a cold Wednesday morning, December 9, 2009, Ranjana and I went to see it overcoming the reluctance of the one hour drive. Kirsten met us in front of the storage center and then we met the car. She hoped we’d be able to fix up a few of the issues and, if we liked the car, we’d be able to drive it back.

She had brought a very basic toolkit consisting of some sockets and wrenches. I actually had brought a more impressive collection. The main difference though was that she knew how to use the tools properly and I didn’t.

The first problem was that both the front tires had gone flat. I figured this was an opportunity for me to make the one contribution I was likely capable of and promptly pumped up both tires (and possibly my ego at the same time). After that, I watched with considerable fascination as Kirsten went through the process of trying to start up the engine - unsuccessfully though.

She went to get some gasoline while I examined the car in greater detail. It was very dirty … but that could all be cleaned up. It didn’t work right … but may be it could be fixed. My wife wasn’t going to like the car … well, may be that could be fixed too.

Kirsten returned and put some gasoline into the carborator (and here I thought gasoline was supposed to go into the gas tank), and got the engine to fire up. It sounded rough and Kirsten explained that there was likely a leak in the exhaust pipe in front of the muffler. Then suddenly she yelled to me to turn off the car!

She had noticed the alternator belt was flopping and was concerned that it might damage one of the nearby hoses. The belt had become so loose that we could practically pull it off. I suggested we tape the hose to protect it and see whether it was actually hitting the hose, but when we started up the engine again, the belt just broke.

Then we noticed that there was a steady stream of oil leaking from the engine and while watching the black stuff flow out, the engine shut itself off on its own as if to say, “I’ve had enough”.

I was starting to think that I’d had enough too (there were after all two other vehicles we had in mind at lower prices), because we weren’t just looking at a car anymore, but a series of complications. However, Kirsten was undaunted by the events or by the cold.

First she removed the remains of the belt. Then she tried to determine where the oil leak was coming from and found that the oil filter ‘felt’ funny. Ok so, let’s replace the oil and filter and see what happens.

By now, I was motivated by her determination, though I thought it was a ridiculously cold temperature to do any work in. Off we went to the auto parts store - a 15 minute drive - to get something to drain the oil into, a filter wrench, some oil and yes, we were going to change the alternator belt, so I bought not one but two of these (I figured that if one didn’t work the alternate one might because it’s an alternator, right?). Kirsten would have bought all this herself, but I think it must have been too late for me. Kirsten noticed with some surprise that she had been calling it “your car” even though we had no intention of buying it at that time.

We got the oil filter off and sure enough it was banged up. After putting the new one on and putting oil in again, we started up the engine and were relieved to see that the leak was no more.

So now it was time for the alternator to have a new belt. Even though I had no idea what an alternator was, I could see that there was a place where the belt should go. The only problem was that there was this other belt in the way. Kirsten quickly undid the bolts to move that other belt so we could slip the alternator belt into position, but then we found out that it wouldn’t go onto the pulleys.

I thought it was most unfortunate that these belts couldn’t stretch like rubber bands and have some sort of link mechanism to them so they could go on without having to take the entire car apart. Kirsten and I tried to loosen some of the bolts holding the alternator in place, but I couldn’t see how it would move in the little slot I thought was for positional adjustments.

Since we couldn’t see well in the falling darkness, we thought we’d try to drive the car just a bit and forget about the alternator problem for now. Though she handed me the key, I thought kirsten should have the honor of being the first to drive it - besides, I didn’t want to mess something up. as she tried to put it into gear, all we could hear was a bit of grinding.

That was it.

It was too late, too dark and too difficult to do anything else that day. There were too many obstacles. Kirsten said that she’d contact her brothers whom she had seen restore some very difficult vehicles, so they might be able to help. I said that I might try coming down the next day and may be give the belt another try.

In a surprisingly trusting move, Kirsten handed me the TSM (technical service manual) and the keys. Now the TSM is a thick book and I like books (even if I don’t read much), so I thought we might be able to figure something out from this. Ranjana, who had most patiently endured several hours of sitting in our car, realized right away, that I was at least as enthusiastic about the book, as I was about the car. Somehow, having such a ‘bible’ made one feel more capable than one likely was.

After we got home, Kyron and I studied the alternator section of the TSM. He felt we could do something. I told Kirsten that we’d definitely have a go at it ourselves (she couldn’t be there that day), provided she was ok with that. If she prefered we wait for her brothers, we’d be happy to. Kirsten’s feeling was that her brothers could come into the picture if there was something that the three of us couldn’t figure out.

The Second Day

Kyron, much to my surprise, was looking forward to getting to the car despite the long drive. He slept most of the way there as I expected, but once he saw the car, it became evident to me that he was going to be just as determined to make things work as Kirsten had been the previous day. In fact, Kirsten had actually made a special trip earlier in the day with the alternator belt she had inadvertently taken home, leaving it under the hood of the car.

Now Kyron knew less about cars than I did, so it really was a case of the blind leading the blind for the first part of that afternoon. However, he tends to pick up on things faster than I do and so after some fiddling, he figured out that we had to move the alternator in its housing to slip the belt on. When we started the car (and it was easier this time), the belt worked perfectly.

So, on to the shifting problem. Kyron had read the night before that the clutch was a hydraulic one and a couple of workers in the storage area told us to pump it several times slowly to make sure the fluid was topped up. We did all that, but still couldn’t shift into gear.

It had gotten too dark again to work, so we headed back home, hoping we’d find some solution in the TSM.

The Third Day

On Friday, Kyron and I made the drive down and found that Kirsten was already there replacing the non-functional headlights. she had thought it would be worth trying to see if the lights rather than the circuitry was at fault.

Then we found out that I had closed the hood of the car and that we couldn’t open it using the hood release. We tried getting to the locking mechanism through the grill, tried removing the grill and even contemplated cutting the release cable and pulling on it with pliers. Instead, we went and studied how Kirsten’s Eagle, Pepper’s hood lock worked. Playing with the lock on her car, we saw that there may be a possible way to get a screwdriver up onto the release hinge. Since I was the one who created this problem in the first place, it was only fitting that I solve it, which I did with such dexterity that I’ve been considering what my prospects as a safe-cracker might be.

We had to solve two major problems before we could drive the Eagle home. one was the clutch and the other was that the signal lights didn’t work. Thinking that the former was the more essential, we headed under the car to examine if the pushrod mechanism for the clutch was even working. To our relief we found that it was, but the spring holding it to the throwout lever was just dangling. We all thought we’d found the solution - just connect the spring and we’re off and away.

It is hard to believe that something so insignificant as a disconnected spring could create such difficulties, but try as we may, we weren’t able to reconnect it. However, spending all that time and effort near the clutch mechanism reminded Kirsten that someone had said pushrods could be too short from wear. It was moving the throwout lever, but just not far enough.

Since we could barely see anymore, we decided to call it a night and ask on the nest for some advice. That night Kyron and I found out from the TSM that the spring had nothing to do with the matter. there were actually three missing pieces: the pivot, washer and seal, which would extend the reach of the pushrod probably enough so that the throwout lever moved the proper distance. The difficulty would be to get these parts - or we’d have to devise something creative ‘in a clutch’ as the saying goes.

Much of Friday night was spent trying to figure out some alternative to the parts (assuming that we couldn’t get these) and how to seperate the throwout lever from the pushrod since they seemed to like each other too much to let anything come in between.

The Fourth Day

Saturday morning, we went around asking people at auto parts stores as well as wreckers if they had something to solve our problem. Invariably the answer was negative. One of the wreckers had some jeeps, but there was nothing useable there other than some screw-on caps that may have fit the pushrod.

Saturday afternoon, Kyron and I headed out again on the long drive to the car, our plan being to do what we can with the pushrod, but at least try to get the lights working. One of the people at a store told us that it is possible (though tricky) to do clutchless shifting. I figured that if we could at least get the signal lights functional, I might be able to try my hand at driving this way in the large storage lot and possibly even ’limp’ back home with the Eagle. Of course, I realized that I’d draw a lot of attention leaving stoplights if I did try this since it would mean doing a ‘jump’ start, not having a clutch to work with.

We also had a concern about whether there was oil leaking from the gasket under the plastic valve cover of the engine and figured we’d evaluate that matter as well. Additionally, the headlights didn’t turn on so we thought we’d check the fuse box.

A New Life

When we got there, we drained some of the oil (we’d put in too much) out of the engine and ran it. Finding no leakage, we went under the car to examine the pushrod again. It became evident that we’d have to raise the car if we were to do any work under there even though Eagles perch nice and high off the ground.

We then cleaned up some of the fuses in the fuse panel by scraping the corrosion off with a screwdriver. After installing a new flasher module, we hoped that the turn signals would work which they didn’t at first because we tried them with the engine off. However, when we fired up the engine this time, not only did the signal lights come on, so did the internal ones.

In the dimming light of dusk, after four days of long trips and work in the cold, the luminous glow of the inside gave the cracked windshield a crystalline brilliance, conjuring a wondrous ‘other’ world, beckoning us to enter.

When we got home that night, we looked at the forecast - snow and rain all week. It would not be possible to work on the car. We made a decision. despite the cost, we’d tow the vehicle to our place. There, at least, we could look after it and even get some work done during the dry spells.

So Sunday morning, we met the tow truck and helped get loose ends tied up. within a couple of hours, the car was at our place.

Kiyreagle had at last come home.

You may wonder what is behind the name “Kiyreagle”. It is a way to embed the “Kir” of Kirsten and the “Kyr” of Kyron into the car’s identity. For Kirsten was the rescuer and Kyron is the restorer. Kirsten’s intervention saved this beautiful car from the scrap heap and Kyron’s work will be to justify her faith.

In one of our email exchanges, Kirsten had said to me “I just want to see the old bird fly again”.

And again shall we fly!

Food Combining Simplified

Mon, 20 Dec 2021 17:36:57 -0800

This article summarizes some food combining principles from chapter 26 of Shelton’s book The Science and Fine Art of Food and Nutrition. Shelton advocated strict vegetarianism (also known as dietary vegan) as well as eating foods in their natural raw state.

It is important to note that food combining has nothing to do with protein combining which was an amusing bit of panic prevalent in the 1970s and 1980s when some people thought that the vegetarian has to eat foods in certain proportions in order to get a proper protein balance. This misconception persisted partly because of a misinterpretation of Frances Lappe Moore’s idea that one has to combine foods in order to get the same protein balance that meat provides. Some people thought she meant the vegetarian has to combine foods so as to get the right balance of proteins which of course assumes that meat has the right balance of proteins for humans. This notion is complete nonsense as evidenced by clinical studies as well as by the historically healthy existence of vegetarians throughout history. Meat does not provide the ‘right’ combination of proteins, nor is it at all desirable to food combine to simulate that protein profile (which of course varies anyway depending upon the source).

Food combining has to do with eating certain foods together so as to optimize the digestive process. Eating a large variety of foods at one sitting forces the digestive system to try to accommodate for the different types of nutrients. As a result certain foods don’t get digested well, experience fermentation and can cause discomfort or even ailments.

For instance, it is unwise to eat heavy proteins (acidic) and heavy carbohydrates (alkaline) together. Beans are an interesting example, since many people experience great discomfort after eating them. Beans are about 25% protein and 50% carbohydrate, providing an awkward combination for the digestive system since the conditions required for digestion of acidic nutrients are quite different from those of alkaline substances. While it is possible to ‘help out’ with digestive enzymes, it is best to minimize consumption of foods and food combinations that are difficult.

Below we provide some rules derived from Shelton’s chapter:

Do not eat carbs and acid foods at the same meal
Do not eat concentrated proteins and concentrated carbs at the same meal
Do not eat 2 concentrated proteins at the same meal
Do not eat fats with proteins
Do not eat acidic fruits with proteins
Do not eat starches and sugars together
Eat only one concentrated starch at a meal 8. Do not consume melons with any other foods

For details, rationale and evidence of the above see Shelton’s book.

The chart below gets into some specifics regarding which foods should and should not be eaten together.

Simplified Food Combining Chart

(for full details see Chapter 26 The Science and Fine Art of Food and Nutrition by H. Shelton)

Eat NonStarchy and Green Vegetables with either
Proteins	Or	Starches
nuts seeds olives tofu lentil sprouts garbanzo sprouts	DO NOT COMBINE Proteins with Starches	peanuts coconuts chestnuts wild rice grains starchy vegetables legumes

Eat Subacid Fruits (All fruits not Sweet or Acid) with either
Acid Fruits	Or	Sweet Fruits
citrus pineapples strawberries pomegranates sour tasting fruits	DO NOT COMBINE Acid Fruits with Sweet Fruits	bananas persimmons sweet grapes dried fruits

DO NOT
COMBINE
vegetables, proteins or starches
with
fruits

Except
nuts with citrus
lettuce and celery with fruit

Miscellaneous notes	tomatoes	eat with green and non-starchy vegetables and protein
avocadoes	best with salad
melons	eat alone

For Men Only

Mon, 20 Dec 2021 17:36:57 -0800

This article will be of no interest to women and children so they needn’t read any further. This is a masculine issue that we do not usually wish to discuss openly. It is an awkward matter and appears unavoidable once we reach a certain age.

While we can pretend it is of no importance or even disguise the effects, we should be honest with ourselves, our loved ones and have the courage to be forthright in our integrity. This is why I wrote this article, so that all the males here who have been so afflicted can be supported by others, and, without embarrassment, can this part of their lives, face.

It is a problem indeed, this thing called facial hair. Some would even say that it is the mane of our existence. What to do though?

Well, some resort to a form of violence, shaving it off with ever increasing sophistication of weaponry. Gone are the days of the single blade! Now the arsenal isn’t effective unless there are at least 3 blades as well as a chemical strip to assist the metal swath out its path of destruction. Technology goes even further with power-assisted devastation in the form of cutters that are rotary, non-rotary, screened and who knows what else! Yes, I realize these are frightening things to think of and one can easily understand now whence came the aptly descriptive colloquism ‘hair razing’. None of this does any good though. It grows back!

So some have submitted to the inevitable. This is by no means an act of cowardice! It is merely a recognition of the grow of the universe. Go with the grow! they would tell us. As admirable as is this philosophical approach, it is not without its drawbacks or its strengths! So let us examine these in turn.

Some feel they have to work in the garden and manicure in it various designs from flamboyant flairsome mustaches to discrete goatees to simple beards with extensive sideburns. It is a creative pursuit admittedly keeping one busy, for idle hands make mischief!

Then there are others that let it all grow wild! There is a wonderful convenience to this lifestyle! One merely permits nature’s creativity without intervention - no additives are required! These individuals can be seen for a certain period of time anyway, immersed in the observation of the activity until they literally become immersed by it. The medium provides many advantages such as insulation, camouflage, and under the right conditions it can even result in a more or less complete ecosystem!

As idyllic as these paradises seem, there are problems.

First, regardless of the geometry, there is always the difficulty of eating. Those not endowed with the affliction know not the care that must be taken to insert a morsel of food past the fibrous guardians of the lips which can provide some difficulty in being found. If one misses, one is reduced to the travail of having to remove the remnants of what could have been eaten from that which has usurped them - never to be recovered!

Second, there is the undeniable itchiness. Hair just doesn’t grow straight! It curls this way and that, tauntingly finding its way back to the original bed from where it arose. There it pokes at the skin as if mockingly reminding one of its perpetual presence. It is possible, mind you, to sometimes make the most of this situation too. Facial hair has over centuries proven to be an excellent scratching device. Unfortunately, one is limited in the extent to where one can take it. Additionally, individuals other than the owner sometimes try to use it to their own advantage, finding their own relief often without asking the owner’s consent!

Third, it is dubious whether facial hair has any educational or scientific value. Certainly, mathematicians might claim that counting all the hairs may somehow contribute to number theory, but what they fail to realize is that their hard efforts would invariably be usurped by the hovering biologists who would swoop in claiming that there are cells involved and so this is exclusively their private domain! Conflicts of this nature are such follicle!

Physicists, fortunately, are beyond such petty strife. In fact, it is they who have tried to make meaningful contributions in a variety of areas that are relevant here. For instance, they were the ones who discovered that facial hair can be of immense value in emergencies when one needs to start a fire, due to its excellent combustive property. Also, they have proposed that facial hair possesses a certain tensile strength that can find application whenever those applications arise.

However, the most remarkable contribution physicists have made is in the theory of scalp hair loss that some men feel is as much of a curse as the growth of facial hair. For years, the medical profession (heavily funded by unscrupulous elements from various political interest groups) have tried to convince everyone that scalp hair loss is a result of the reasons they give and have provided numerous ‘solutions’ that are of great monetary benefit to themselves. Their conspiracy was exposed when physicists applied the simple law of conservation to conclusively demonstrate that the real source of the problem is facial hair! The given quantity of hair in a universal sense must remain constant. Therefore, what you gain on the bottom causes you to lose on the top!

Unfortunately, due to the stranglehold economics have on our lifestyles, it is unlikely this expose will gain the credibility it deserves and men will continue to lose and gain hair where they feel they would rather not. Some things in life just have to be accepted, I suppose.

However, we can talk about the problem and thereby afford ourselves some solace. Therefore, please use this opportunity to voice your concerns, tell us of your experiences, relate to others, confess that which you hadn’t dared to in the past. Let us provide comfort to one another!

Buddha and the Limping Lamb

Mon, 20 Dec 2021 17:36:56 -0800

There are many stories told about Buddha the Compassionate One. They carry the eternal message with a simplicity that any child can understand. Here is one of those gems.

The Buddha is taking a walk. He gazes at the beauty of the flowers of the field and says: “O trees and flowers of the field! How trustfully you turn your faces to the sun! And how trustfully nightingales and doves take shelter in you! Alas! man hurts the birds and slays the animals! The wisdom of man is drenched in blood!”

A herd of goats and sheep passes by. The Buddha finds that the herdsman is driving them with difficulty: there is an injured lamb who is limping and slowing the herd down. Affectionately, the Buddha takes the limping lamb on his shoulder. The herdsman tells him that the animals, 100 goats and sheep in total, are being taken to the king for sacrifice this evening. The Buddha, carrying the lamb, chooses to accompany the herdman.

At the place where sacrifice is to happen, the man in charge is about to strike the sword against the first goat, when suddenly the Buddha exclaims “Great king! let not the man strike! Take my life as a sacrifice, O king! and spare the goat!”

The words of the holyman move the heart of the king, who then asks the Buddha to speak to the people. And the Buddha says:

“O men! you can take life easily but, remember, none of you can give life! So, have mercy, have compassion! And, never forget, that compassion makes the world noble and beautiful. Remember, too, that all living beings are linked together in maitri [friendliness, compassion]. Therefore, resolve that you will live on bloodless diet. Verily, in gentleness is the crown of life!”

The next day, a decree is proclaimed by the king. The order goes forth that none shall henceforth kill for sacrifice or for private pleasure. For life is one through mercy and compassion.

Cup of Tea

Mon, 20 Dec 2021 17:36:56 -0800

A prominent western philosopher had come to Japan to study with a zen master through an exchange program. The two of them sat down for a traditional tea.

While waiting the philosopher thought he’d ‘break the ice’ by telling the zen master a bit about himself. Well, he started and a bit became more and more and more. He talked about his ideas of the history and development of philosophy and about the lack of consistency in different areas of thought and the problems associated with applying logic to situations considered unbroachable through logic.

By now, the tea had arrived.

As the zen master started pouring tea into his cup, the philosopher continued with the subjectivities of existentialisms and the attainabilities of the absurd and … then he noticed that the zen master hadn’t stopped pouring the tea into his cup.

In fact, his cup had started to overflow!

Still the zen master kept pouring and tea was spilling all over the chabudai onto the floor and even onto our philosopher who suddenly had nothing more to say about philosophy and exclaimed:

“Stop! Stop! What are you doing?”

The zen master stopped pouring the tea and with a bit of a twinkle in his eye said:

“In a cup so full, it is not possible to pour anything more.”

Dogs in Heaven

Mon, 20 Dec 2021 17:36:56 -0800

There is a very beautiful story from the Hindu mythology’s Mahabharata that provides an insight to the meaning of our existence.

Five brothers who were kings and their wife, the queen (this happened through a misunderstanding of the concept of ‘sharing’ as expressed by their mother) after a long reign were embarking on their final journey - to heaven. To do so they had to trek up a mountain and along the way they were joined by a dog. The climb was so arduous they began to die off. Even the second oldest brother, the ‘hercules’ of his era, fell.

However, the eldest, Yudhishthira and the dog made it to the top where they were greeted by Indra the king of the gods. He congratulated Yudhishthira and told him to get into his chariot to go to heaven, but the dog walked in first.

Indra was infuriated (he had this tendency): “I will not tolerate a dog in my chariot! Get him out and let’s go.”

Yudhishthira said, “Through my journey up the mountain, my queen and my brothers left me. Only this dog stayed with me - I cannot leave him now.”

Indra exclaimed, “What! Are you mad? Dogs do not belong in heaven! Do you want to give up your place for a dog?”

Yudhishthira replied, “The dog stayed faithfully by me, I will not desert him - even for heaven.”

Just then the dog transformed himself into Yama the god of the underworld and spoke: “You have chosen rightly, my son. In life all shall leave us, our passions, our acquaintances and even those we love dearest. Only our Dharma, like the dog, stays with us regardless. To this Dharma, we must be true.”

A Way to Rama

Mon, 20 Dec 2021 17:36:54 -0800

There was once a very evil robber who had committed atrocities galore. He had come to the realization that he was in big trouble with a large account of bad karma due to his egocentric activities.

Somewhat repentant, he went to a great sage to see what could be done before the revenue collectors came after him. The sage said that his actions had been so evil that there really wasn’t much hope for him and that he was due for several lifetimes of nastiness.

Nevertheless, he suggested that the robber at least make a start by saying God’s name “Rama” over and over again. Well, the robber couldn’t even say “Rama”. The word wouldn’t even come out of his mouth because he had been so sinful! This was really one bad dude!

So the sage, who was also a creative teacher of physics, changed the frame of reference and told the robber to say “mora” which is the word for death. Our robber had no trouble uttering that at all, though he really wasn’t sure what the point of doing so was. He was told to keep saying “mora” continuously and quickly.

Well, if you do it, you can see what happens:

“mora mora mora moramoramoramo ramoramo ramo rama”

And so, apparently because he had stamina, was sincere and because the conditions had been changed (that frame of reference), he managed to alter his expected karmic fate and went on to become a great sage as well (though not greater than the first sage, because he did not want to upsage his mentor).

A Chess Story

Mon, 20 Dec 2021 17:36:53 -0800

This story was initially conceived by Sangeeta as a present for a friend (who never got around to seeing it), but was written largely by prad many years ago. Sangeeta will be illustrating it sometime in the next several decades. If you know your chess or your life, you are welcome to play it out.

Light shines in and there was a deep grumbling throughout the box …

“Do we have to get up?” cried one of the contents.

“Oh stop being so cranky,” the Queen scolded. “We have work to do. The battle is awaiting.”

“What battle?” mumbled the King, “I don’t see a threat.” And then once again he fell sound asleep.

“You’re an embarrassment to Kings, past, present and future!” yelled the queen. All the pieces froze when they heard the shrill of her voice. They peeked over their resting places to see the Queen pushing the King out.

“All you do is hang around like a piece of deadwood in the middle!” she continued.

“Yes dear, but dear …” pleaded the King.

She cut him off though: “until things get rough and then you go hide in the corner!”

Ceewon Bishop chuckled as he got up and lent a hand to Effwon Bishop. They were great friends known for their slanted sense of humor, yet they were respected for their strength and swiftness of attack. One was assigned to the Queen and the other to the King, but neither was ever sure who was going to whom. What they were sure about though was that they had a lot of fun together.

The Knights galloped dutifully onto the board, and snorted out a loud, “Neighhhh!” which startled the Pawns and sent them into a flurry. They all just scrambled up to the board scurrying around here and there trying to find a place to stand. Every now and then, one of them would bump into a rather large round wall at the corners of the board and apologetically squeal “So sorry! Pardon me. Pardon me. Forgive me”. The round walls never seemed to pay any attention and merely continued being round, but the Pawns kept looking up at them and feared the worst.

Now it is time to meet our hero for this story, a quiet unassuming Pawn named Beetoo. He was considered a pawn of the lowest order - a next to the edge Pawn on the Queenside at that! You see Pawns are known for their straightforwardness, and not much else. They are small and meek, they are the disposable ones, the least appreciated and the most pushed around. Even so, the center Pawns have a special importance because they are central. The Kingside Pawns sometimes have status because sometimes they are called on to protect the King! The Pawns on the edge live close to a castle - that’s the round wall they kept bumping into because they were too sleepy to watch where they were going earlier. (About castles, by the way, you should know that they are made of rocks, but sometimes the ‘c’ looks like an ‘o’ if the typesetting is not too good which it usually isn’t and hence they acquired the misnomer of Rooks rather than rocks as should be evident to anyone.)

However, poor Beetoo wasn’t central, wasn’t recognized for protecting the King (except only a little bit on fairly rare occasions) and though he hung around across the way from a castle, he really didn’t feel particularly near to it. Furthermore, he had this rather fierce-looking horse behind him continuously snorting and it gave him the shivers! To make matters worse, suddenly he was thrust forward two squares right out into the open!

So as you can see, Beetoo was understandably not a happy Pawn at all. He was also worried. He had seen that it was the Pawns who were sent out first, while all the while the larger and powerful pieces sat around and let his kind be slaughtered one by one. The small Pawns had little mobility and therefore were almost helpless amidst the onslaught of attack. He was afraid, but even more he was furious at the lack of concern shown for Pawns. You see Beetoo was a thoughtful Pawn, a Pawn with hopes and dreams and vision.

However, right now nearly halfway up the board, Beetoo’s vision saw only one thing - the menacing glare of a black Bishop hungrily eyeing him.

“This is the end,” he thought as he closed his eyes, bracing himself for the attack … but the attack didn’t come. Breathing a slight sigh of relief, he looked around and to his surprise he saw Ceewon Bishop winking rather diagonally at him with a huge smirk on his face.

“Hey just let that fatso black bishop Effate gobble you up, eh.” Ceewon shouted with a strangely Canajian accent. “Go’on I dare him to. Eh everybody! Wanna know how come Effate is a fatso, eh? It’s because like he ate too much! Ha! Ha! Get it? He ate too much! "

“Whose side is that maniac on anyway?” worried Beetoo “he’s going to get me killed!”

Fatso, I mean, Effate became even blacker with rage! He twirled and turned. He stomped and steamed. He started charging towards poor Beetoo who was now sure he was a goner. However, Effate stopped after moving two squares. He did not come any closer to Beetoo and he certainly did not dare take him out while Ceewon Bishop was guarding him.

So Beetoo breathed a sigh of relief and felt a little better for now at any rate.

Suddenly, someone yelled “Look out Beetoo!”

“What! Where! Help!” cried Beetoo. Indeed Beetoo had something to be concerned about for looming in front of him and a bit to his right a fierce black Knight had taken up position! It was terrible. The Knight snorted (as they all do, after all, you would too if you had nostrils like theirs) and was posturing himself for a fatal leap.

Beetoo looked back at Ceewon Bishop pleading for help.

“Hey sorry bub!” shrugged Ceewon, “Think you have a bit of a problem here. Yup. No doubt about it. Can’t help you. How about you Effwon?”

“Nope not me” responded Effwon Bishop “I’m a little off color. Ha! Ha! Get it?”

“Ha! Ha!” laughed Ceewon. “I get it! Ha! Ha! Hey Effwon what say you and I go and do that I AM Canajian thing and get sloshed? Then we’ll both bishopsloshed? Ha! Ha! Ha! Get it?”

“Idiots!” thundered the Queen! “You’re both so stupid you don’t even need to get drunk to prove it!”

Well! That silenced the Bishops completely for several days - it may have even stopped their alcoholic leniencies. The King, himself, was so unnerved that he started tipping round and round and would have fallen in resignation had he not grabbed hold of a nearby Pawn to keep his balance.

Seeing the gravity of the situation, the Queen ordered her Rook to kick the Pawn in front up a square. That had a tremendous effect on the black army as they suddenly became silent, as happens whenever you feel you have lost something you thought you had, but never really did.

As if inspired by this turn in events, the white Knights pranced around. Though Beetoo was relieved, it seemed to him that the Knights were showing off, displaying their immense powers, their strength, how well they danced. He was not impressed with this ‘chivalry’.

“Pawns are simple pieces,” he thought. “We don’t ask for much and we don’t carry on much. Yet, our value is not recognized in this battlefield. This is how it always is, the meek are seen as things to throw away, as the battle is waged by the flamboyant. We pawns humbly accept our roles, but I am tired of being treated like a lesser piece.”

As he was having these thoughts, there was a sudden commotion!

“What is she doing! Don’t let her do it!” Even the King cried out, “Stop my dear - please, don’t do it!”

The Queen was charging into the enemy ranks right in front of Beetoo. With a piercing shriek she delivered her war cry, “Remember the Dharma!”

“Don’t you mean the Alamo, my dear” squealed the King as he covered his eyes.

The Queen fell into the enemy camp with a vengeance, ripping a huge hole in their lines. The white camp was incredulous and there was total confusion in the black camp. No one knew what to do.

No one that is except Beetoo. He suddenly understood what the Queen sacrifice meant.

“Come on everyone! Push forward! Push forward! Don’t let her sacrifice be in vain. Remember the Dharma! Remember the Dharma!”

“Don’t you mean the Alamo” the King asked again scratching his rather ponderous crown this time.

“No my liege” called Beetoo from far away. “This is our Dharma. It is what makes us who we are, no matter what we may appear to be. Through it we shape our destiny. My selfless Queen has shown us the way and I will not fail her! Press on! Push forward! Live your Dharma!”

And Beetoo pushed on! To the 5th rank, then the 6th. The recoiling black army recovered sufficiently to resist, but his friends were following him now, supporting him, fending off the resistance.

Now the 7th rank! Even the King got excited and took a few paces forward ensuring there wouldn’t be an attack from the rear.

A final surge and Beetoo had made it to the 8th rank!

He stood there alone, both armies looking on in silence.

“What now?” he wondered, “I am here, but where is that?”

To his amazement, his Queen appeared in crystal radiance, beyond the black and white of day to day affairs.

“You are here, Beetoo” she said kindly.

“Yes my Queen and always ready to serve you” said Beetoo bowing low.

“Not to serve me, noble little one - but to serve Dharma which is the same for all of us, though many try so hard to deny it. So little one, be whoever you are and most of all be true.”

And with that she evanesced into the air.

So what of Beetoo and his companions? Suffice to say that I can tell you no more than this, as it is only proper:

When the end of a story is here,
A new beginning is always near…