If that video depicted the Ady Gil being "suddenly rammed", I'll have to reevaluate my definitions of both of those words. Sort of like when people stop a car on a highway just after a high-speed semi-blind turn and wait to get hit so they can sue the driver, because rear-ending another car is almost always automatically determined to be the fault of the rear-ender.>> ^Sagemind:
...
Captain Watson said the Ady Gil was idling in Antarctic waters when it was suddenly rammed by the Japanese ship Shonan Maru, which was providing security to Japan's whaling fleet.
...

>> ^moodonia:
It seems brutal and grotesque because it is brutal and grotesque and not remotely like what happens in a slaughterhouse.
None of the slaughterhouses I've been in kill animals by impaling them with a projectile that then explodes inside them, before using the wound created by the exploding projectile as a towing point from which the very heavy living animal is then dragged while it thrashes about in agony before suffering a slow death.
Whales are also far more intelligent than a cow or sheep, who in my experience get an instant kill in slaughterhouse conditions, as opposed to the Whales that get a savage lingering death that would have been outlawed long ago if it was occuring on land. Can you imagine elephants being routinely impaled by a spikey RPG then dragged around by it while still alive?
Comparing throwing stink bombs to terrorism is beyond nonsense.


Sorry, I should have been more specific. Slaughterhouses are very "humane" now, but they weren't always. I'm sure that if there's enough pressure for it, they'd develop a less violent way to kill the whales.

If they are whaling in another nations waters, then by all means, that government should step in and raise hell. Are these anti whalers members of the navy? Are they official representatives of the government in question?

I did make a bit of an assumption while stating my opinion, in with that assumption, I did technically commit a logical fallacy. Since this seems to upset KnivesOut, I will attempt to correct the wording of said opinion.

Ahem:

"While I can not see the future, nor accurately predict the reactions of my fellow man, I propose the following: Had these anti whaling activists been of a different skin color,and nationality, and had they been harassing American fishing vessels, I believe the American government would consider them to be committing acts of terrorism and would take action accordingly."

I know I had a bit of a run-on sentence there, but I figure I can always correct my grammar later.

>> ^KnivesOut:
>> ^LordOderus:
I'm glad their ship got rammed. I don't care one way or the other if the Japanese kill whales. It is not my place to tell the Japanese what they can and can not hunt. That is a decision to be made by the Japanese government. The only reason I side with the Japanese in this case, is because what the folks from Whale Wars are doing would be considered terrorism if it were done to us.
Imagine if the crew of that ship wasn't white, and was harassing American crab fishermen or something of that nature. They would all be locked up in one of our lovely maximum security hotels and interrogated for information on their terror cell connections. It is a ridiculous double standard. If groups of Hindus (to whom cows are sacred) started racing around American cattle ranches on 1.5 million dollar ATVs and harassing farm hands, we would have a whole bunch of arrested (and probably dead) Hindu activists on our hands.
The crew of that little ship should consider themselves lucky that the Japanese aren't as trigger happy as we are in the "civilized west".

They're whaling in waters where they're not supposed to be. It's not up to the Japanese government because they're outside their legal jurisdiction. They're poaching animals in international waters, or in US waters.
Does that change your ridiculous logical fallacy at all?

>> ^LordOderus:
I'm glad their ship got rammed. I don't care one way or the other if the Japanese kill whales. It is not my place to tell the Japanese what they can and can not hunt. That is a decision to be made by the Japanese government. The only reason I side with the Japanese in this case, is because what the folks from Whale Wars are doing would be considered terrorism if it were done to us.
Imagine if the crew of that ship wasn't white, and was harassing American crab fishermen or something of that nature. They would all be locked up in one of our lovely maximum security hotels and interrogated for information on their terror cell connections. It is a ridiculous double standard. If groups of Hindus (to whom cows are sacred) started racing around American cattle ranches on 1.5 million dollar ATVs and harassing farm hands, we would have a whole bunch of arrested (and probably dead) Hindu activists on our hands.
The crew of that little ship should consider themselves lucky that the Japanese aren't as trigger happy as we are in the "civilized west".


They're whaling in waters where they're not supposed to be. It's not up to the Japanese government because they're outside their legal jurisdiction. They're poaching animals in international waters, or in US waters.

Does that change your ridiculous logical fallacy at all?

When two ships meet at sea they dont play chicken until theyve determined the comparative tonnages.

It doesn't take a very close eye to tell the difference between a seadoo, a medium sized powered boat and a large ocean vessel. It's pretty safe to say in this case both sides were aware of the significant differences.

The give-way vessel (whalers) must take early and substantial action to keep well clear.
The stand-on vessel (trimaran) may take action to avoid collision if it becomes clear that the give-way vessel is not taking appropriate action.

And from this clip we have no idea what early action the whalers took. I made it through one episode of the show following the Sea Shepherd crew, and if that was any indication at all you can be certain that the trimaran did everything in it's power to get directly in the way of the whalers ship. They are the ones who's entire method IS based on playing chicken with the whalers vessels. They call their small boats like this their 'attack' craft for pity sake.

When you've got a small agile craft trying to collide and otherwise mess with a ship this much larger, the blame for what happens is entirely on the smaller agile ship, the larger ship couldn't avoid a collision without going to full stop and waiting for the trimaran to go away. Experience shows that even if they do full stop the trimaran's crew will then try to board them. I don't blame them for not going to full stop every time these guys try to attack and threaten them.

>> ^ponceleon:
Fukka u Waaru! And Fukka u Dorufin!


♥
http://www.videosift.com/video/South-Park-Fuck-you-dolphin-fuck-you-whale

I give the whaler an additional 500 points bonus per crewman sprayed off the ship AFTER it was split open.

Again I have to ask, in what court are you suggesting they sue for damages? How far will this get in a japanese court? and what are the limitations on damages awarded in these cases in japan anyway? It certainly wouldn't be decided by an emotional jury, so I'm pretty sure a lawsuit is a non starter.

I suppose you could try to sue in an Australian (or even American) court, if you can convince the judge he has jurisdiction, but there is no way you'd collect anything if you won.

"I'm gonna sue you" or "there aught to be a law" just doesn't make sense in this context.

>> ^vaporlock:
I don't give a f^ck what your political bent is. You can't ram a ship in the middle of the ocean. They will be able to buy twenty of those little boats after the lawyers get done with them. WTF

>> ^aspartam:
Hey jackass, did you watch The Cove yet? Do it before you make yourself look any dumber than you already have.
>> ^westy:
[...] Fact is the whalers are doing this for a living and its been in there culture for a long time



Watched the documentary and well 60% of it was over emotional bullshit.
the whole thing could have been edited into a 45 min documentary that included mostly factual information and maby a tiny bit of emotional bullshit to get that "crowd" interested and then some footage to drive the story and keep things interesting.

also if they were truly trying to get the information out there they would do a youtube edit that included the most factual information and interesting stuff so it would go viral.


The facts ( to spare people watching all the needless shit they included)

1) dolphin and whale meet has large quantity of mucuray in it
2) dolphin meet is been sold falsely as whale meet
3) Japanese are killing dolphins in mass for varouse bullshit reasons.

4) so far countries have not put enough political pressure on them to stop it
5) people in japan and the world in general are not particularly aware of it

Now What i said before still stands the reasons behind whaling and dolphin fishing are cultural and economic. Japanese don't want to be told what to do because of stupid national pride and they believe in bullshit whale meet making you healthy , and economically people are making a tun of money selling live dolphins for shows and illegally selling dead whales and dolphins as other meets.

Its also the case that USA and uk have fucked up the world far more and probably caused more problems and continue to do so for humans and for animals with what we do with oil and needless wars which has allowed Manny western countries to become strong economically. I'm not saying we should ignore the dolphin issue but its only a small component of something that we are quite likely more responsible of at home. I'm all for people making films like the documentary and protesting getting into government or putting pressure on the government. But im not for people spending a shit load of cash on a retarded boat that really will have fuck all affect.

although i agree dolphins are intelligent and have thought so for a long time the documentary instead of using science to demonstrate this falls back on emotional bullshit with only small segments that talk about the science , Evan though there is plenty of science proving the intelligence of dolphins , iv personal seen dolphin brains and you can see compared to other creatures why it is so likely that they are of high intelligence.


anny way , point is the SHitty boat they were trying to use to stop the whalers is an idoitic way of trying to stop it Evan the porely edited and badly put together documentry will have been infinatly more productive then there idoit 1.5milloin boat.

It still stands that ultimately these groups will only succeed by putting pressure on the government and educating people , not by attacking the issue directly with over priced bat mobile boats.



So in conclusion aspartam in this instance i would think its more likely that you are the "jack ass"

Apparently you've never driven a boat before or if you did you were a hazard to other vessels if you were at sea thinking that way. When two ships meet at sea they dont play chicken until theyve determined the comparative tonnages.

There are specific rules to follow to prevent collisions at sea. The Japanese ship didnt follow them and then after ramming the trimaran and nearly cutting it in two they tried to hose the crew into the freezing water. The work of cunts imo.

Briefly:
A steamer gives way to a sailing ship.

When two power-driven vessels are crossing, the vessel which has the other on the starboard side must give way.

The give-way vessel (whalers) must take early and substantial action to keep well clear.

The stand-on vessel (trimaran) may take action to avoid collision if it becomes clear that the give-way vessel is not taking appropriate action. Hence throttling up to get the boat moving to get out of the way of the ship (not to mention sonic weapons and water cannons), not to be cut in half or run over.

No collision can happen between two passing ships whilst a Green(starboard) light is opposed to a Green light or a Red(port) to Red.

PORT is the left-hand side of a ship looking to the bow, and is denoted at night by a red light.

STARBOARD is the right-hand side, and is denoted after dark by a green light.

If to your starboard RED appear,
It is your duty to keep clear;
To act as judgment says is proper;
To Port — or Starboard — Back — or Stop her!
But when upon your Port is seen
A Steamer's Starboard Light of GREEN,
There's not so much for you to do,
For GREEN to Port keeps clear of you.



>> ^bcglorf:
>> ^vaporlock:
I don't give a f^ck what your political bent is. You can't ram a ship in the middle of the ocean. They will be able to buy twenty of those little boats after the lawyers get done with them. WTF

Apparently you've never driven a boat before. One of the most basic rules is that the largest ship ALWAYS has the right of way. The reason is fundamental physics, the larger the ship, the more momentum it has meaning stopping or turning it is going to take much longer. A small boat like the one here doesn't get by hit a large ship like this unless it gets too close ON PURPOSE.
A boat that much smaller could literally run circles around the larger ship all day long and no matter how hard the larger ship tried it could never ram the smaller boat, it's just too slow and unwieldy by comparison.

>> ^bcglorf:
>> ^vaporlock:
I don't give a f^ck what your political bent is. You can't ram a ship in the middle of the ocean. They will be able to buy twenty of those little boats after the lawyers get done with them. WTF

Apparently you've never driven a boat before. One of the most basic rules is that the largest ship ALWAYS has the right of way. The reason is fundamental physics, the larger the ship, the more momentum it has meaning stopping or turning it is going to take much longer. A small boat like the one here doesn't get by hit a large ship like this unless it gets too close ON PURPOSE.
A boat that much smaller could literally run circles around the larger ship all day long and no matter how hard the larger ship tried it could never ram the smaller boat, it's just too slow and unwieldy by comparison.


Actually, if you watch this footage and the footage from the Bob Barker closely you'll see two things occur: in the video from the Shonan Maru, you'll see the water at the back of the Ady Gil churn just before the impact; and in the video from the Bob Barker, you'll see the bow of the Ady Gil lurch out of the water and move forward a bit.

Now I'm not a marine expert but I can tell you from the fair amount of boating I've done, both of those factors imply that the Gil throttled up just before being hit. My take is that they wanted to be hit and moved the boat into position to be struck.

Also the Ady Gil, formerly Earth Race, was designed as a highspeed craft, so it's very likely that even at "idle speed" it moves through the water with some vigor.

The footage from the Barker is also rather deceptive, because it appears to show the Shonan Maru turning toward the Ady Gil, but what is actually being seen is the camera angle change as the Barker sails forward and pans the camera to the right of the scene. You can tell this is what is occurring because the Gil's profile changes as well.

They had a big report on CNN last night on this - I guess there are certain countries standing up against Japan on this. If anyone can find an online version of the report, I'd be interested to see it again, I only caught it half way through.

My opinion is "Stop Poaching & Killing Whales" but then my voice means nothing. I'm not an environmentalist, but I know when humans have no respect for other creatures. Whales aren't like fish, there aren't thousands of them under the surface. There are only so many pods out there. Why should we let people (who cares about what country they are from), over-fish them into extinction. Aparently the pods they were targeting here were a protected species.

The smashed boat was just a boat - The guys in the boat don't care about their boat - They only care about protecting the whales and put their own lives at risk for their cause. They are out there to interrupt the whalers. Yes they parked their boat in front of the whaler, who in turn could have stopped. They didn't need to just ram through. That's why they call it Whale Wars.

The whalers don't care about the wales or the people, they only care about their profit. Maybe they are just paying the bills but they truly don't care about what they destroy. And that's the bottom line here. Of course the activists will use the footage in their favor if it means they can slow down the company. Their only plan is to cut into the profits so they can slowly put the waling company out of business.

This isn't about who hit who, it is about buying some time. The longer they are not whaling, and the closer the company is to bankruptcy, the more the activists win. This could be a big win, despite the wrecked boat.

>> ^vaporlock:
I don't give a f^ck what your political bent is. You can't ram a ship in the middle of the ocean. They will be able to buy twenty of those little boats after the lawyers get done with them. WTF


Apparently you've never driven a boat before. One of the most basic rules is that the largest ship ALWAYS has the right of way. The reason is fundamental physics, the larger the ship, the more momentum it has meaning stopping or turning it is going to take much longer. A small boat like the one here doesn't get by hit a large ship like this unless it gets too close ON PURPOSE.

A boat that much smaller could literally run circles around the larger ship all day long and no matter how hard the larger ship tried it could never ram the smaller boat, it's just too slow and unwieldy by comparison.

Idling?? I see it moving against another ship, and a big one. Not that I know much about ships, but if I was the one on the small high-tech touch-me-and-i-will-break-down ship, I would have steered away from the big i-eat-whales-for-breakfast ship instead of "idling" against it.
>> ^Sagemind:
Captain Watson said the Ady Gil was idling in Antarctic waters (...)

>> ^schomg:
So in your world non-human animals are only eligible for life and dignity if they're endangered? Do you consider killing animals an act of harvesting a resource, and if the resource isn't running out it's all good?
>> ^TheFreak:
The Japanese are catching Minke whales in Antarctica. This whale is nowhere near endangered by anyone's estimation.



No, if they are delicious and not endangered it's all good.

The corollary is that if they are cute then they should also be spared. The only moral dilemma is when an animal is both delicious and cute, then you have to weigh the two against each other. For example, baby chicks can be cute, but, they grow up.

And endangering human life like the Sea Shepherd crew does is an automatic nomination for a ticket out of the gene pool IMHO.