Hmmm. I thought I would get some screeching. All I got was blinking. And a bit of beak-flapping.

the geese were then shot to death after refusing orders to drop their beaks

>> ^Chaucer:

actually, if you want closely, he doesnt kick the bird like he's trying to kill or hurt it. Soccer players will know a move called 'lofting the soccer ball'. Basically, you are trying to get the ball into the air at your location. If he was trying to kill the bird, he would have kicked it and the bird would have just rolled along the ground. Instead the see the owl take a very vertical trajectory. This would jive with his story that he was trying to get the bird in the air to make it fly away.
He still shouldnt have done what he did though because there are to many idiots out there which would misunderstand the situation and make a big deal out of it.
On a side note that you guys also seem to be forgetting is that owls are very dangerous. They have insanely sharp claws and sharp beaks. I wouldnt want to touch an owl that is confused and have it tear my hand off.
The owl likely died from being hit by the soccer ball which was likely moving much faster than his foot.

Horseshit. You don't kick a clearly injured animal unless you want to hurt it more. I can't imagine any circumstance in which I would think "This creature might need my help. I will, therefore, kick it". But then again, I'm not a fucking idiot fucking brainless footballer.

actually, if you want closely, he doesnt kick the bird like he's trying to kill or hurt it. Soccer players will know a move called 'lofting the soccer ball'. Basically, you are trying to get the ball into the air at your location. If he was trying to kill the bird, he would have kicked it and the bird would have just rolled along the ground. Instead the see the owl take a very vertical trajectory. This would jive with his story that he was trying to get the bird in the air to make it fly away.

He still shouldnt have done what he did though because there are to many idiots out there which would misunderstand the situation and make a big deal out of it.

On a side note that you guys also seem to be forgetting is that owls are very dangerous. They have insanely sharp claws and sharp beaks. I wouldnt want to touch an owl that is confused and have it tear my hand off.

The owl likely died from being hit by the soccer ball which was likely moving much faster than his foot.

At times I had identifying the beak and the surrounding feathers as just that. It kinda looked like tentacles. Did Cthulus canary go missing?

@dannym3141 Cartainly not. Discussions are always a good thing, I am just annoyed with people on both extremes of the issue - people who condemn the game, because they don't like it or it is different than the type of game they like, and fanboys protecting it with beak and claw.

Some people feel to entitled to things they are not entitled to. "Rogues are underpowered, this is a personal attack on me.. blah blah" those kinda people

I think it's a good game, better than most, but in the end, if I don't enjoy it anymore, as it has been for a while, I just don't play it and vote with my wallet.

I guess I'm just the flaccid middle part in this, calling for everyone to calm down.

No offense intended.

>> ^srd:

Ah come on. 65 feet is plenty with TV cameras. 300 feet is over the top and I would be able to understand. But do you REALLY need to stick your TV camera up a stressed out oiled birds beak to get the images needed to penetrate the jaded mind-shell of the average TV viewer who is happily munching his TV dinner, exhilirated in his induced 30 second outrage? And do you need to get closer than 65 feet to a clean up boat to shoot it? Maybe you'd be interfering with their work if you're any closer? And not just one, but a whole flock of journalists in boats.
You're behaving as if a media black out was being enforced - and all that's happening is getting the media to give a little room. So what?


40 Thousand dollar fine, and Class D felony charges. Pretty much says, "Fuck you 1st ammendment." As if the media being two feet from boom on the beach is a problem. Perhaps you weren't watching the same video as I was. But it's not just a water 65ft rule. It's also for beaches too, if not by extension but by use. If a boater cannot get to an island that is affected by oil because of the rule, then they cannot photograph the impact it has having on said beach.

It's not the rule itself, or the numbers. It's a matter of principle. If you can't understand that, go read a constitution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_powers#United_States:_three_branches

The Media should be up the cleanup crew's, coast guard's asses with a flashlight and magnetic probe, after all that's exactly what we expect of them.

The article below is beside the point, but interesting nonetheless.
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/05/26/the-missing-oil-spill-photos.html

Ah come on. 65 feet is plenty with TV cameras. 300 feet is over the top and I would be able to understand. But do you REALLY need to stick your TV camera up a stressed out oiled birds beak to get the images needed to penetrate the jaded mind-shell of the average TV viewer who is happily munching his TV dinner, exhilirated in his induced 30 second outrage? And do you need to get closer than 65 feet to a clean up boat to shoot it? Maybe you'd be interfering with their work if you're any closer? And not just one, but a whole flock of journalists in boats.

You're behaving as if a media black out was being enforced - and all that's happening is getting the media to give a little room. So what?

You never fuck with a dude with a beard that epic or a t-shirt that says I AM A MOTHER FUCKER.

Other warning signs that are cause for pause:
-Cauliflower ear
-Flat, beaked or crooked nose
-Lower eye scar tissue
-EG&A, Triangle(delta) or Frogman tattoos

That old guy was built like a sailor made out of equal parts whoop-ass and concrete.

Won't somebody just kick them in the head already?? The foot is mightier than the beak!

Bird Aerodynamics
or why Herons, Cranes and Egrets don't extend their necks when flying.


There is a point where the length of the neck is no longer aerodynamic and the sharply pointed beak is better kept right in front of the body. They would not get any "lift" from their narrow, pointed beaks but, that shape does pierce the air quite nicely. Just like the nose of a jet aircraft.

Ducks and geese fly with their necks outstretched.
The flat bills of ducks and geese aid in acquiring "lift". I'm willing to bet that they can actually rest their "chins" on the wind as they fly. They now design highly efficient aircraft that utilize the canard (fr. duck) profile that features a small wing way out in front.

All flying birds also get lift from the way air flows easily over their straight backs but, pushes their rounder undersides upward as they propel themselves through the air with their wings.

Want more? lol
The pointed, elongated cone shape of the Heron's beak pierces the air and makes a cone shaped vacuum that is widened even further by the shape of the front of the bird. As the air is forced around the bird, frontal drag is reduced. If the neck was extended, this effect would be lost and the vacuum would collapse right behind it's head, in front of the bird's body, and the air would rush back in, the bird's body would fly into turbulence.

The wide, flat bills of ducks and geese create a wedge shaped vacuum as the birds propel themselves through the air. If you have ever noticed, their wings beats have a very short up and down travel distance, staying just on the edge of the vacuum wedge that their bills have created. Even the geese flock formations are based on creating an even larger wedge shaped vacuum for all of them to travel within.

The vacuums that birds create not only reduce drag, they create thrust. That is how the shape of a Peregrine Falcon enables it to exceed the pull of gravity ("freefall or "terminal velocity") without flapping it's wings. In a dive, the Peregrine's form, past it's head, becomes a very long cone shape. The vacuum that it's head creates while moving through the air, collapses behind it's head and the air starts rushing back in around the contoured shape of the bird, from front to back, propelling the bird forward. Same design as fish. If you've ever tried to tighten your grip on the tapered back end of a fish, you know that it shoots forward out of your grasp. And, the tighter you try to squeeze, the faster it goes. Lost a couple of good ones that way.

>> ^Payback:
Second time in two days Obama has been interupted by someone beaking off.



HA!


The date in the video seems to say June 29th, actually. </Buzz Killington>

Second time in two days Obama has been interupted by someone beaking off.







HA!

>> ^Payback:
The Grinder- Being killed in less than a second is fairly humane. I hope to go that quickly.
The Cracks- The chicks falling off the equipment are not systemic cruelty but poor handling. It could even be argued that Vegan Camera Person is being more cruel by just videotaping its suffering rather than killing it. I wonder if they turned off the camera and walked away, tutt-tutting while it writhed on the floor.


You nailed exactly what I was thinking. The chicks being dropped in the grinder are getting a quick and humane death, which is the best that can be done for anything you kill for food. If you want to see something inhumane try raising a more than a dozen chickens in even a partially enclosed space. Inevitably one of the chickens will be weaker than the others, and will be gradually pecked to death by all the others. That's the reason for 'cruel' de-beaking of the chicks as they are moved on. All in all animal's raised for food usually die in a more humane fashion than their wild and free counterparts which is should count for a lot.

I prefer it but I wouldn't say better. Just more obvious. A girl like me needs obvious...

In reply to this comment by schmawy:
Better without the beak? http://img188.imageshack.us/img188/9683/schmawybirdnobeak.jpg

In reply to this comment by alien_concept:
When I saw your avatar small in the comment thread, I thought you'd transposed Serious Cat onto the owls face. That would be so frickin cool if you could mate!