Rule-writers hate Eagles

[Dalek Prime]

You gents had to import eagles from Canada, because you killed most of them. Same as buffalo. We had to take in your retired cavalry horses because you were going to slaughter them as useless.

Buffaloes are in Asia.

Bison are in North America.

Buffalo sounds cooler though. Bison Bill lacks panache.

Sadly Americans don't know the difference.

Like where the fuck did Buffalo Bill live? Singapore?

'Oh, give me a home, where the buffalo roam, and the deer and the antelope play.'

[vegetariantaxidermy]

'Oh, give me a home, where the buffalo roam, and the deer and the antelope play.'

They have antelopes in the US?

[Dalek Prime]

'Oh, give me a home, where the buffalo roam, and the deer and the antelope play.'

They have antelopes in the US?

No. But like the bison, they call the pronghorn an antelope. So that's two mislabeled animals.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

'Oh, give me a home, where the buffalo roam, and the deer and the antelope play.'

They have antelopes in the US?

No. But like the bison, they call the pronghorn an antelope. So that's two mislabeled animals.

So they were poorly educated back then too.

[Dalek Prime]

They have antelopes in the US?

No. But like the bison, they call the pronghorn an antelope. So that's two mislabeled animals.

So they were poorly educated back then too.

Seems to be the case.

[Walker]

By the reasoning you quoted, wishful thinking justifies killing eagles.

The practicality of windmills is wishful thinking. This is why the industrial revolution replaced wind power.

What if wishful thinking determines that a certain number of human deaths are acceptable for a rosy future.

Oh, wait a minute …

Wishful thinking for the future is sometimes the determinate of irrevocable death in the present, but always for another individual eagle than the rule-writer.

Hummm.

People can find other ways to turn on their little machines without erecting irresponsible totem poles across the landscape, worshiping the goodness of the weather and themselves.

Wishful thinking you say. You seem to have a pessimistic view of government. Let me know when you come up with hard evidence as to how many more eagles would die under the proposed changes. And btw, I don't equate animal life with human life as humans do care - can you say the same about animals?

PhilX

Since eagles don’t follow the rules of rule writers, the ethical action for the rule writers is to write new rules that dismantle the silly windmills that are killing the eagles. In response to death that they cause the rule writers say to the eagles, your death is acceptable within our parameters. Therefore evolve or die, sucker.

[Philosophy Explorer]

By the reasoning you quoted, wishful thinking justifies killing eagles.

The practicality of windmills is wishful thinking. This is why the industrial revolution replaced wind power.

What if wishful thinking determines that a certain number of human deaths are acceptable for a rosy future.

Oh, wait a minute …

Wishful thinking for the future is sometimes the determinate of irrevocable death in the present, but always for another individual eagle than the rule-writer.

Hummm.

People can find other ways to turn on their little machines without erecting irresponsible totem poles across the landscape, worshiping the goodness of the weather and themselves.

Wishful thinking you say. You seem to have a pessimistic view of government. Let me know when you come up with hard evidence as to how many more eagles would die under the proposed changes. And btw, I don't equate animal life with human life as humans do care - can you say the same about animals?

PhilX

Since eagles don’t follow the rules of rule writers, the ethical action for the rule writers is to write new rules that dismantle the silly windmills that are killing the eagles. In response to death that they cause the rule writers say to the eagles, your death is acceptable within our parameters. Therefore evolve or die, sucker.

Apparently my rebuttal is very good since you're trying twice to rebutt it.

You're just repeating yourself in trying to clarify your position. So far you still haven't rebutted my rebuttal.

PhilX

[Walker]

Sounds kinda nasty. Time for Frank. Zappa.

Truth is, I've forgotten whatever might have been in your noggin.

Metaphorically, and with kind humor:

The Mighty Eagle is under attack. That is serious business.

Whose hair looks like Defender Duck?

[Philosophy Explorer]

Sounds kinda nasty. Time for Frank. Zappa.

Truth is, I've forgotten whatever might have been in your noggin.

Metaphorically, and with kind humor:

The Mighty Eagle is under attack. That is serious business.

Whose hair looks like Defender Duck?

I happen to like the eagle too, but I think you're going overboard about it.

PhilX

[Walker]

Sounds kinda nasty. Time for Frank. Zappa.

Truth is, I've forgotten whatever might have been in your noggin.

Metaphorically, and with kind humor:

The Mighty Eagle is under attack. That is serious business.

Whose hair looks like Defender Duck?

I happen to like the eagle too, but I think you're going overboard about it.

PhilX

If you were an Eagle you would drop your period right where that comma is, and skip the rest.

[Philosophy Explorer]

Sounds kinda nasty. Time for Frank. Zappa.

Truth is, I've forgotten whatever might have been in your noggin.

Metaphorically, and with kind humor:

The Mighty Eagle is under attack. That is serious business.

Whose hair looks like Defender Duck?

I happen to like the eagle too, but I think you're going overboard about it.

PhilX

If you were an Eagle you would drop your period right where that comma is, and skip the rest.

But I'm not, but I can think of better places to drop periods.

PhilX

[Walker]

I happen to like the eagle too, but I think you're going overboard about it.

PhilX

If you were an Eagle you would drop your period right where that comma is, and skip the rest.

But I'm not, but I can think of better places to drop periods.

PhilX

Yes, you are not. Clearly.

But being what you are, you theoretically have the imaginative capacity to put yourself into the eagles’ situation. By so doing surely you can contemplate cause of death by idiots.

[Philosophy Explorer]

If you were an Eagle you would drop your period right where that comma is, and skip the rest.

But I'm not, but I can think of better places to drop periods.

PhilX

Yes, you are not. Clearly.

But being what you are, you theoretically have the imaginative capacity to put yourself into the eagles’ situation. By so doing surely you can contemplate cause of death by idiots.

Eagles wouldn't know anything about idiots. And I wouldn't put myself into their situation. Why don't you set up a place where they can have a safe haven?

PhilX

[Walker]

Tell that to an eagle as its being killed by a windmill.
(Yes, I know, you don't speak eagle.)

Cost benefit is way off. Run the numbers if you can't see it in death,
and are too callous to empathize with life by putting yourself in the eagles' position.

Zoos have been getting bad press lately.

[Philosophy Explorer]

Tell that to an eagle as its being killed by a windmill.

Cost benefit is way off. Run the numbers if you can't see it in death,

and are too callous to empathize with life by putting yourself in the eagles' position.

Zoos have been getting bad press lately.

I'll let you talk to the eagles since you seem to be the expert on them.

PhilX