Seagull Attack!

[Teabags]

The image of a human being fighting a panda is' date=' all at once, absurd, ludicrous, unlikely and ridiculous.[/quote']Why exactly? apparnelty we're the dominant hunters etc.

Why do we think and act this way? Is it because we're stronger and more dominant or because we're a fucking plague destroying the entire planet with no respect for anything else that needs parts of it to survive until one day, its all fucking dead and we're fucked??

I'm with the latter.

Also...

We humans have guns

Do you? Cos I don't. I have no fucking diea how I'd kill a panda or an elephant or a tiger if they decided they were fed up with us. But I'm a human, so surely I must know how to, cos I'm so fucking intelligent.

Maybe I'm not human then. Yas.

[Guest DustyDeviada]

Well the best that Google Image could come up with is a panda fighting a gingerbread man.

Question 1: Where does the gingerbread man come in the food chain?

Question 2: Is it the same gingerbread man from the song of the same name by much missed Aberdeen space rockers, The Void?

[Shaki]

Can just see the Evening Express:

NE Man Fights Panda in Seagull Dispute

[The Kernel Loaf]

This is purely conjecture as obviously' date=' being the ecologist that you are, you'll know that increasing seagull numbers is also bad for the ecosystem (before you yakk on about it i know humans are too)[/quote']

I totally agree with you there, but I think thats going astray from my original point that they are not a pointless existence as you thought they were.

I reckon the problem lies with the increasing amount of seagulls and the fact that they do not technically have an organism to predate upon them and keep their numbers in check (not sure about elsewhere, but certainly not here), and this is going to be a problem in time to come.

Also, with greater numbers becomes greater demands for resources, meaning less available per bird, so culling (although this may sound stupid) can actually increase survival chances for the species.

Fish are a small part of a herring gulls diet (if at all)' date=' so how can they keep the dominant fish species in check.[/quote']

Obviously it isn't just gulls that eat fish in the sea. They are part of a massive group of other organisms that are on the next level of the food chain from fish. They contribute to help keeping the dominant species in check, just like seals etc. as I mentioned.

[Benji]

Do you? Cos I don't. I have no fucking diea how I'd kill a panda or an elephant or a tiger if they decided they were fed up with us. But I'm a human' date=' so surely I must know how to, cos I'm so fucking intelligent.

[/quote']

We !!! We humans !! Our Race !!! Humanity!!! Have Guns.. that much your aware of, right?

As a race we have have taken intelligent design and built ourselves a defence against our predators. And against each other.

If our frequency changed one day, and the harmony that we exist in; decided to reverse itself, and an all out War - Humans Vs Every other living organism broke out - I'm quiet confident we would get the living shite knocked out of us.

But untill that day comes, We own!

[Teabags]

So basically, yes, we're all fucking shit, our race aint superior and the only reason we are still here is becasue we are able to exploit nature and get away with it...for now.

I'm happy with that conclusion.

[Shaki]

So basically' date=' yes, we're all fucking shit, our race aint superior and the only reason we are still here is becasue we are able to exploit nature and get away with it...for now.

I'm happy with that conclusion.[/quote']

So, we going gull culling tonight or what?! ;-)

[Teabags]

Nope, next best thing, Dangerfields FREE at The Moorings. Then afterwards, "Whack-A-Junkie" down at the beach.

[Benji]

Nope' date=' next best thing, Dangerfields FREE at The Moorings. Then afterwards, "Whack-A-Junkie" down at the beach.[/quote']

Knock em deed son..

[Shaki]

Nope' date=' next best thing, Dangerfields FREE at The Moorings. Then afterwards, "Whack-A-Junkie" down at the beach.[/quote']

you know Junkie's only feed off the things they steal and beg from humans because the human race criminalised, therefore inflating the price of Heroin. This once proud species has been forced to sit on our streets begging us for money and breaking into our homes and shops, threatening violence etc because of OUR SELFISH ACTIONS........

The seagulls of the mammal world I tell ya!

[dougfast]

what about a junkie seagull...........

"Man gets killed by panda while sticking up for junkie seagull rights"

now thats a fucking head line

[Mouse]

Only way to reduce the seagull population - eat them!

[Flash@TMB]

I'd like to see Bux trying to shoot down the AIDS virus (or any other dangerous human preying virus/bacteria, members of Filthpact excepted) with a gun.

***

Whether or not a species is dominant, preditor or prey, surviving because it is the fittest (which has been scientifically disproven BTW), or whatever is not particularily relevant. The key point here is whether it is acceptable to torture and kill gulls. It is not. It is laughable that in a thread taking the piss out chavs/neds, a bunch of politically correct do-gooders get in about and start giving it the high and mighty bullshit.

So from this it would appear that's WRONG to slag off chavs but perfectly OK to poison/torture a particular species of bird to an exceptionally unpleasant death???

[Benji]

I'd happily arm myself with a flamethrower and waltz the streets of Aberdeen hunting gull.

Even go one step further....

... AFS (Aberdeen fried seagull).. home delivery service. Set the bastard alight and watch it fly!!

[Alkaline]

surviving because it is the fittest (which has been scientifically disproven BTW)

Thats wrong. I'm a fully qualified biochemist with years of experience. The only reason variants of species are still on this planet is because they had the strongest attributes in relevance to their surroundings. The reason they had this advantage was due to their genes giving them more suitable traits, thus making them the 'fittest' to survive in that particular environment.

That is the 'survival of the fittest'.

Back to seagulls though, i won't cow tow to their regimes when their in charge, i'll be leading a selfish one man terrorist cell with only military intervention on my mind

[Alkaline]

So basically' date=' yes, we're all fucking shit, our race aint superior and the only reason we are still here is becasue we are able to exploit nature and get away with it...for now.

I'm happy with that conclusion.[/quote']

You're speaking for yourslef there dude. I personally fancy my chances of outwitting any animal i'm pitted up against.

[Benji]

I personally fancy my chances of outwitting any animal i'm pitted up against.

How about a Great White Shark?

or

An Irrate Giraffe?

Personally' date=' I'd be staying the fuck away from em.

Unless it was a Guinea Pig or something, then I'd be all:

[img']http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/9285/post552111152308466thumb5va.jpg

[Alkaline]

How about a Great White Shark?

or

An Irrate Giraffe?

Personally' date=' I'd be staying the fuck away from em.

Unless it was a Guinea Pig or something, then I'd be all:

[/quote']

An irrate giraffe would be less manouverable than myself, so that one would be easy enough. Great White, hmmmm don't fancy its chances on land to be honest

[Alkaline]

We're not.

When was the last time you' date=' or anybody for that matter, actually hunted your last meal??

In fact, whenw as the last time you even saw the animal whose meat you were eating?[/quote']

Errrr, yes we (as a species) are. We've hunted every species on earth successfully, be it for food or sport.

And the last time i 'hunted' for my last meal would've been last night. I fucking hate it when they move stuff in Sainsburys

[Guest bluesxman]

Seagulls are fucking thick as mince. I was out fishing in Stonehaven bay the other week, was hauling in loads of mackerel but a lot of them were on the small side so we were putting them back. Needless to say a huge number of seagulls were paddling along behind us so we thought we'd give them a treat and throw the occasional wee fishy their way. Not one fish passed their beaks, they just sat looking vacant as the fish splashed in beside them and swam away.

So to sum up, seagulls should spend more time on their fish catching skills and less on their stealing chips and attacking people skills, they are turning into the Burberry capped neds of the bird world.

[Flash@TMB]

Thats wrong. I'm a fully qualified biochemist with years of experience. The only reason variants of species are still on this planet is because they had the strongest attributes in relevance to their surroundings. The reason they had this advantage was due to their genes giving them more suitable traits' date=' thus making them the 'fittest' to survive in that particular environment.

That is the 'survival of the fittest'.

Back to seagulls though, i won't cow tow to their regimes when their in charge, i'll be leading a selfish one man terrorist cell with only military intervention on my mind [/quote']

Well if you have a degree in biochemistry, then you should smart enough to realise that you are neither a zooologist nor an evolutionary biologist.

The work on debunking the theory of survival of the fittest, something that had persisted from Darwin, was carried out by many far better qualified people than you. Take it up with them not me.

We are all qualified at something. That does not make us experts.

[Alkaline]

Well if you have a degree in biochemistry' date=' then you should smart enough to realise that you are neither a zooologist nor an evolutionary biologist.

The work on debunking the theory of survival of the fittest, something that had persisted from Darwin, was carried out by many far better qualified people than you. Take it up with them not me.

We are all qualified at something. That does not make us experts.[/quote']

No it doesn't, but as a large part of my course i did field studies in zoology, ecology and genetics so shut your pirate arse and fuck off up some yard arm.

But seriously, the people who were teaching me are experts and might know something about it, so i'm more likely to believe them and common sense than some washed up old man who runs a bar.

And i'm not basing my knowledge on Darwinism, because yes that is bullshit.

[Flash@TMB]

i'm more likely to believe them and common sense

"Common sense is an excuse for ignorance" - Isaac Newton.

Dear boy. I'm not about to get in a pissing contest with you regarding qualifications. You are just one of a very large number of students that graduate every single year, an insigificant statistic. What do you want a fucking medal?

As all of us who attended University are well aware, the pass mark is umm 40%, maybe 50% at a push? These days do they even bother with exams, or is it just *DUN DUN DUN* continuous assesment?

My course also covered a broad spectrum of subjects, but I would not be so delusional as pretend to be an expert on any of them.

As for Charles Darwin - you are not even fit to lace his boots.

If you want to call someone names, then try growing a spine and doing it to their face, that way it comes across as much more credible. It's not like we are geographically separated by several thousand miles.

PS - this washed up old drunk features in this months issue of Neurology magazine Funny old world...

[pogofish]

The image of a human being fighting a panda is' date=' all at once, absurd, ludicrous, unlikely and ridiculous.

Let's stop it right here before this argument descends any further.[/quote']

Quite right!

Pandas are pussies. We don't let our lot out till they can whup a real bear:

[Alkaline]

"Common sense is an excuse for ignorance" - Isaac Newton.

Dear boy. I'm not about to get in a pissing contest with you regarding qualifications. You are just one of a very large number of students that graduate every single year' date=' an insigificant statistic. What do you want a fucking medal?

As all of us who attended University are well aware, the pass mark is umm 40%, maybe 50% at a push? These days do they even bother with exams, or is it just *DUN DUN DUN* continuous assesment?

My course also covered a broad spectrum of subjects, but I would not be so delusional as pretend to be an expert on any of them.

As for Charles Darwin - you are not even fit to lace his boots.

If you want to call someone names, then try growing a spine and doing it to their face, that way it comes across as much more credible. It's not like we are geographically separated by several thousand miles.

PS - this washed up old drunk features in this months issue of Neurology magazine Funny old world...[/quote']

I don't claim to be an expert though, check through my posts and find a reference to me claiming to be an expert.... All i said was that i am a qualified biochemist, which gives me some knowledge of what i'm talking about, not that i'm the leading authority on the subject. What qualifies you to be more suitable than me on taking my propositions to task.

And i'd be more than happy to call you anything to your face, someone like you doesn't scare me at all. Its more fun this way though because you can't do anything about it, and haven't done any of the times i've been in the moorings. Nothing against you like, i just hate your pretentious 'holier than thou' attitude: 'Oh i'm in my late 30's/ early 40's, i know better than ANYONE else.'

I don't purport to know everything, as i don't. I present an opinion on things which i have established from the things i do know, its my perogative as to whether i have an opinion on things or not. Whether my opinion is 'sound' or not doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

As for the 'survival of the fittest' debate. Yes i have seen studies that relate to what you were saying but i've never seen any concrete or well presented evidence to suggest whether they have any true scientific basis or not. Whereas the other side of the arguement does. I'm quite happy to be proved wrong when such evidence does actually mount up to something feasible though.