Is it possible the penguin thinks this is his mate?
[deleted]
Penguin travels every year to visit man who rescued him (2016)
151–160 of 311 posts
Re: Penguin travels every year to visit man who rescued him (2016)
#152Dindim goes off for months at a time,
swimming thousands of miles,
avoiding predators,
encountering other penguins,
better looking and more interesting penguins,
but in his mind there's a picture of a man,
and a location,
from many years ago,
that he feels compelled to return to,
every year.
I got a little teary thinking about this.
Re: Penguin travels every year to visit man who rescued him (2016)
#153Re: Penguin travels every year to visit man who rescued him (2016)
#154When I was a child, a school teacher showed me this hoax video of flying penguins: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dfWzp7rYR4 . Unfortunately, for a brief period of my childhood, I was under the assumption that penguins could indeed fly. By the time I had uncovered my teacher's subterfuge, I had already made a fool of myself by publicly positing that such penguins existed. Admittedly, my teacher was only playing a p…
In French, "pingouin" is the name for a flying bird[0] though very few people know it and most mix up pingouins (auks) with manchots (penguins, literally "armless"). Saying that penguins can fly is technically correct but people will laugh at you unless you are prepared to spend a long time explaining it. I think it's a shame that a teacher would mislead a child the way yours did. Having worked with penguins (the fli…
Crows seem in a relative sense very intelligent, I'm impressed with them. I think penguins main appeal is there cuteness.
Re: Penguin travels every year to visit man who rescued him (2016)
#155Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We don't need categories to be so rigid. For the purposes of law we do. > I don't particularly like the idea of laws getting in the way of my relationship with animals, even if they are wild. And yet there is a case to be made for these laws to prevent animals from abuse, etc. These kinds of laws are usually well-served by having an attached definition of what constitutes a pet as it is used in the law. The more de…
For the purposes of law we do. Law is a good servant and a bad master. Ultimately decisions are imposed by humans and unthinking obedience to the law is just as totalitarian as unthinking obedience to a leader. It's the unthinking obedience bit that's the problem.
I will much, much rather have a clear cut law than uncertainty. It is not hard to make clear laws but it's impossible to make "interpretation" clear and always the same.
I hate the Finnish judicial system.
Re: Penguin travels every year to visit man who rescued him (2016)
#156To forgive the tautology, intelligent creatures are intelligent. Which also means that love is possible. I mean... every person who's ever had a pet (of any sort) understands this (as I stare at the photo of my recently-deceased and very-charismatic cat). It may not fit into any naturalistic model that clearly separates humans from these other intelligent creatures (and ascribes all perception of humanlike feeling to…
Ya I'm troubled by this too. I'm really into bodybuilding but the human body simply can't recover unless it eats beef/salmon/eggs/chicken/etc at least one or more times per week, especially after the minor injuries that inevitably come with lifting weights. As a general rule, I never eat mammals that are omnivores or carnivores, so pigs and anything higher in the food chain are out. Veganism is a little unrealistic I…
I'm not even close to a vegan or vegetarian, but your claims are just not true. There are a plethora of other sources of food sources for "recovery". There are quite a few vegan bodybuilders. There are even Vegan NFL players and MMA fighters, both of whom require far more in the way of "recovery" than a bodybuilder.
Re: Penguin travels every year to visit man who rescued him (2016)
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We don't need categories to be so rigid. For the purposes of law we do. > I don't particularly like the idea of laws getting in the way of my relationship with animals, even if they are wild. And yet there is a case to be made for these laws to prevent animals from abuse, etc. These kinds of laws are usually well-served by having an attached definition of what constitutes a pet as it is used in the law. The more de…
> For the purposes of law we do No we don't. That's why we have judges
Judges are not lawmakers. They serve to interpret the laws accurately. Of course, often the laws are not codified very specifically, so it is left to judges to interpret it as straightforwardly as possible.
Re: Penguin travels every year to visit man who rescued him (2016)
#158Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We don't need categories to be so rigid. For the purposes of law we do. > I don't particularly like the idea of laws getting in the way of my relationship with animals, even if they are wild. And yet there is a case to be made for these laws to prevent animals from abuse, etc. These kinds of laws are usually well-served by having an attached definition of what constitutes a pet as it is used in the law. The more de…
Meh, I'm just talking about everyday interactions with squirrels in the yard. You're not telling me I'm going to need a lawyer to negotiate that, are you? :-) It's consensual, the squirrels enjoy the interaction and so do I. Either is free to defect anytime. Fun fact. Squirrels in most north american cities are not wild creatures, they were deliberately introduced into parks to create what was called 'communal pets'.…
Of course. I am not addressing whether or not the law is appropriate. But if the law is there, it should be codified properly, so that you shouldn't need a lawyer to deal with something the law was never intended to address.
Re: Penguin travels every year to visit man who rescued him (2016)
#159To forgive the tautology, intelligent creatures are intelligent. Which also means that love is possible. I mean... every person who's ever had a pet (of any sort) understands this (as I stare at the photo of my recently-deceased and very-charismatic cat). It may not fit into any naturalistic model that clearly separates humans from these other intelligent creatures (and ascribes all perception of humanlike feeling to…
I think many humans are guilty of over-anthropomorphizing themselves.
Re: Penguin travels every year to visit man who rescued him (2016)
#160Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We don't need categories to be so rigid. For the purposes of law we do. > I don't particularly like the idea of laws getting in the way of my relationship with animals, even if they are wild. And yet there is a case to be made for these laws to prevent animals from abuse, etc. These kinds of laws are usually well-served by having an attached definition of what constitutes a pet as it is used in the law. The more de…
For the purposes of law we do. Law is a good servant and a bad master. Ultimately decisions are imposed by humans and unthinking obedience to the law is just as totalitarian as unthinking obedience to a leader. It's the unthinking obedience bit that's the problem.
As I mentioned in another comment, I am not addressing whether or not the law is appropriate. Any law is better served by being more specific, thus reducing the chance that it is inappropriately applied. Of course, there is always the recourse to change the law.
(I am going to assume for the purposes of this discussion that we are not discussing what might be termed immoral laws, where the argument can be made (quite strongly) that they should be disobeyed even if it is the law.)