Export thread

Ok, this animal is retarded. I put for the the proposition that any animal too retarded to breed (I'm looking at you too, koala's) should be allowed to stupid themselves out of existence.


Edit: Damn it. In the poll it should say "animals" before the word "too".

Panda's. WTF?

Why did you use apostrophes to pluralize pandas and koalas?

Oh and they are too cute to die.

Panda's. WTF?

You've put apostrophes where there shouldn't be any. You have done grammar a great disservice today.

Panda's. WTF?

^5 checkeredhat

Panda's. WTF?

Honestly, I have no idea. I blame the brandy. Just ignore the insanity and know what I mean, dern it!

Considering the assault our country has made on the English language, I refuse to accept that I have done as great a disservice to the language as you imply.

Panda's. WTF?

Fuckin' Pandas. How do they work?

Panda's. WTF?

Now the question is... should Krisken reproduce?

Panda's. WTF?

Cajungal said:

Now the question is... should Krisken reproduce?

Click to expand...

While I have no doubt I could get that right, no, no I shouldn't.

Panda's. WTF?

Krisken;429966][QUOTE=Cajungal said:

Now the question is... should Krisken reproduce?

Click to expand...

While I have no doubt I could get that right, no, no I shouldn't.[/QUOTE]

You could blame the brandy for that if you didn't get it right.

Panda's. WTF?

You know, this is funny, because in my Environmental Science classes, the prof had this running joke where he'd go on rants about how the panda was an imbecile and how they ought to be allowed to die out because people had to show them panda porn. He became very animated whenever the subject came up (which was often, lol).

We were also supposed to bring in articles every week related to science and the environment, and after a while if there was a panda story, people automatically brought it in. God, that was a great class. That dude also introduced me to JibJab when he 'shopped a dean's head onto a hula-dancer and sent it around anonymously. I learned a lot in those classes (that had nothing to do with JibJab, mind).

Edit: Typos.

Panda's. WTF?

Krisken;429966][QUOTE=Cajungal said:

Now the question is... should Krisken reproduce?

Click to expand...

While I have no doubt I could get that right, no, no I shouldn't.[/QUOTE]

Awww, I kid. ^_^

Panda's. WTF?

Cajungal;429969][QUOTE=Krisken;429966][QUOTE=Cajungal said:

Now the question is... should Krisken reproduce?

Click to expand...

While I have no doubt I could get that right, no, no I shouldn't.[/QUOTE]

Awww, I kid. ^_^[/QUOTE]

hehe, I know. We decided long ago that neither of us was interested in having kids.

As for the pandas and what brought on this thread- I saw a video where a panda was having trouble navigating stairs. STAIRS. I mean, really? The block that moves upward gives you trouble? I can't help but wonder how these things lasted so long.

Panda's. WTF?

The ones in the wild are going extinct due to hunting, poaching, and the destruction of their habitat. That nice bamboo flooring you've been dreaming about? There's a cost to that.

Pretty sure it's only the panda's in captivity that are having a problem. I can't say I'd be terribly interested procreation if I was in captivity and knew my kids would be too.

-Adam

Panda's. WTF?

My brother showed me a video of two pandas trying to mate, but then the guy can't mount her. He just keeps falling over. Then my brother made me laugh by shouting in a sad, desperate voice, WHERE DOES IT GOOO???

Panda's. WTF?

Krisken said:

As for the pandas and what brought on this thread- I saw a video where a panda was having trouble navigating stairs. STAIRS. I mean, really? The block that moves upward gives you trouble? I can't help but wonder how these things lasted so long.

Click to expand...

It's probably the same problem Dalmatians are having: they've been inbred so much, they'd become dumber than most of the royal families of Europe.

Panda's. WTF?

Male Panda:
"You want me to WHAT?! NOW?! I just met this chick, I don't even know her! Do YOU know where she's been? And besides, everybody's . . . you know . . . watching me! Kind of a mood killer, you perverts!"

Panda's. WTF?

hah, reminds me of Robin Williams "That is one ugly panda bitch. I wouldn't fuck her with a koala's dick! (hah, see, the possessive belongs there. Stupid alcohol messing up my grammar.)

Panda's. WTF?

Lay off da hooch!

Panda's. WTF?

Awwwww! Thanks Ame! I really appreciate it!

Panda's. WTF?

Anyway, yeah, Pandas are idiots. I'm torn on the human struggle to keep them alive, because I do know that they are so endangered because of human meddling like deforestation and hunting, but I also do think nature has selected them for extinction, based on what an inefficient animal it is.

Panda's. WTF?

checkeredhat said:

based on what an inefficient animal it is.

Click to expand...

They are actually very efficient, and they were selected for by nature after what, thousands of years of natural selection?

checkeredhat said:

nature has selected them for extinction

Click to expand...

Only if you subscribe to the notion that humans are "natural." It's a reasonable assumption, but is it strictly true?

-Adam

Panda's. WTF?

Panda's. WTF?

checkeredhat said:

nature has selected them for extinction

Click to expand...

but life... ah... finds a way.

Panda's. WTF?

"First Lady Puffinstuff said:

checkeredhat said:

based on what an inefficient animal it is.

Click to expand...

They are actually very efficient, and they were selected for by nature after what, thousands of years of natural selection?

Click to expand...

An animal that has everything required to eat meat, yet all but ignores meat as a dietary option, relying instead on a plant that gives almost no energy in its consumption, is not an efficient animal. And do you honestly think nature is done selecting and that this is the end, that what we have on earth now is the final product? Because unless I am misreading your post, which is quite possible because its 2am and I'm only online cause I can't fall asleep despite being dead tired, that is more or less the implication of what you are arguing.

checkeredhat said:

nature has selected them for extinction

Click to expand...

First Lady Puffinstuff said:

Only if you subscribe to the notion that humans are "natural." It's a reasonable assumption, but is it strictly true?

-Adam

Click to expand...

My point is that I think the panda would be going extinct with or without human intervention. Unfortunately humans in all our grand idiocy, sped it up by probably a couple thousand years.
I'm not saying we shouldn't accept responsibility for what we HAVE done either, but what I am saying is it might be a better use of our time and efforts to help out an animal with some better odds.

And, I also want to say that this is strictly the logical side of my brain speaking. As I said, my opinion on the issue is torn between two sides. As it is impossible to know what would have (Should have?) happened without human deforestation, pollution and hunting, its just as easy to argue that we need to make every last effort to make up for every bit of the damage we've done.

Panda's. WTF?

Panda's. WTF?

checkeredhat said:

An animal that has everything required to eat meat, yet all but ignores meat as a dietary option, relying instead on a plant that gives almost no energy in its consumption, is not an efficient animal.

Click to expand...

Are you arguing that a creature which has body features it does not use is inefficient? Then in that case there are few organisms on this planet that meet your high bar for efficiency.

Ok, compare the panda's efficiency to human efficiency. How much energy do we consume vs work that we output? I bet you'll find it's a tad higher than a pandas.

But it's a moot point. Unless you and I agree on the same definition of efficient, then we'll never come to agreement on whether pandas meet the requirements or not.

checkeredhat said:

And do you honestly think nature is done selecting and that this is the end, that what we have on earth now is the final product?

Click to expand...

No, not at all. But I am suggesting that after so much natural selection on that one line (ie, there are no "close" relatives) and the fact that they were quite populous prior to their habitat being destroyed, then, by definition, nature has selected for them. My point was that they are being destroyed now not by natural selection, but by human invasion.

checkeredhat said:

My point is that I think the panda would be going extinct with or without human intervention.

Click to expand...

Oh? What evidence is there of this? Who are their predators? Who was going to deprive them of their food source or habitat, if not humans? They are carnivorous, and will eat most animals that bother them, and other animals that might attack are, more often than not, beaten by the panda.

So I'm interested to understand the natural selection pressures they were facing aside from humans.

checkeredhat said:

its just as easy to argue that we need to make every last effort to make up for every bit of the damage we've done.

Click to expand...

No, I think that's a much harder argument to make. Who is to say that we are responsible to the plant we deprive of sunlight when we cast a shadow on it? I suspect a middle-of-the-road approach is best in the long run. We shouldn't fell guilty for using resources to move ourselves forward. However, we should act in moderation, and in fact should consider ourselves stewards of the resources here. Either extreme is bad.

In this particular case we can't do anything anyway. Their natural habitat is nearly 100% contained in a country that has a great need to improve its economy. Every nation goes through the stage where they strip the land of every easily available resource in order to move themselves ahead quickly. Most often it's far too late by the time people realize that they've gone too far.

Still, there are buffalo herds in the USA, despite near extinction. I suspect that the Chinese are trying to allay fears of extinction by keeping some in captivity so they can still log the land - they are trying to have their cake and eat it too. The effort they are going to in order to increase the breeding rate is just an extension of this. If they fail then more pressure will be put on them to leave huge tracts of profitable land alone for the sake of some black and white bears.

But I have a hard time believing they were already only a few thousand years away from extinction...

-Adam

Panda's. WTF?

Wow, poll results now show who voted for what.

Panda's. WTF?

"First Lady Puffinstuff said:

checkeredhat said:

And do you honestly think nature is done selecting and that this is the end, that what we have on earth now is the final product?

Click to expand...

No, not at all. But I am suggesting that after so much natural selection on that one line (ie, there are no "close" relatives) and the fact that they were quite populous prior to their habitat being destroyed, then, by definition, nature has selected for them. My point was that they are being destroyed now not by natural selection, but by human invasion.

Click to expand...

I think you could look at their no close relatives from the other angle though. With no prospective mates outside its subspecies to further its evolution and branch off, it will hit an evolutionary dead end and be forced to inbreed. This is all just me thinking outloud here, so I will say that with the panda population where it was before humans effed it up, this would likely not have taken any longer than with any other animal species, but other animals usually have other subspecies they can mate with successfully, like how polar bears have been known to mate with grizzlies, which has become increasingly common as numbers of both are dwindling and polar bears are coming further south because of the melting ice caps.

First Lady Puffinstuff said:

checkeredhat said:

My point is that I think the panda would be going extinct with or without human intervention.

Click to expand...

Oh? What evidence is there of this? Who are their predators? Who was going to deprive them of their food source or habitat, if not humans? They are carnivorous, and will eat most animals that bother them, and other animals that might attack are, more often than not, beaten by the panda.

Click to expand...

Extinction can happen in more than one way. It is pure speculation on my part, and again I freely admit that. But it has always seemed to me that a reproductive rate like the panda's, with so many failed attempts, is not a good sign from an evolutionary standpoint. Obviously its to keep the population in check, but any kind of natural disaster or disease could cause havok that would not be able to be corrected.
They are not carnivorous, they are omnivorous, but they eat almost no meat at all. They are built to be hunters, and yet they don't hunt. Which is what I meant about their "inefficiency"

First Lady Puffinstuff said:

checkeredhat said:

its just as easy to argue that we need to make every last effort to make up for every bit of the damage we've done.

Click to expand...

No, I think that's a much harder argument to make. Who is to say that we are responsible to the plant we deprive of sunlight when we cast a shadow on it? I suspect a middle-of-the-road approach is best in the long run. We shouldn't fell guilty for using resources to move ourselves forward. However, we should act in moderation, and in fact should consider ourselves stewards of the resources here. Either extreme is bad.

Click to expand...

As I stated, I was expressing the two extreme ways I view the issue, and I sit somwhere in the middle, unsure of either side.
I think I'm just not expressing myself well tonight and that you and I actually see the matter in more or less the same way, although you clearly are much more educated on the subject.

First Lady Puffinstuff said:

But I have a hard time believing they were already only a few thousand years away from extinction...

Click to expand...

Yeah, you're probably right.

Panda's. WTF?

Koalas and Pandas are very angry animals

I would elaborate but I'm kinda drunk. Look it up in youtube, though, they're dickholes.

Panda's. WTF?

figmentPez said:

Wow, poll results now show who voted for what.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I selected that option. Drunken curiosity, and all that.

Panda's. WTF?

CynicismKills said:

Koalas and Pandas are very angry animals

I would elaborate but I'm kinda drunk. Look it up in youtube, though, they're dickholes.

Click to expand...

Kill the pandas!



Before they kill you!

Panda's. WTF?

First Lady Puffinstuff said:

Are you arguing that a creature which has body features it does not use is inefficient? Then in that case there are few organisms on this planet that meet your high bar for efficiency.

Ok, compare the panda's efficiency to human efficiency. How much energy do we consume vs work that we output? I bet you'll find it's a tad higher than a pandas.

But it's a moot point. Unless you and I agree on the same definition of efficient, then we'll never come to agreement on whether pandas meet the requirements or not.

Click to expand...

Actually he's saying that by biology Pandas should be eating meat. They don't eat meat because of a tastebud mutation. So instead they eat bamboo, an absolute ton of bamboo that their body isn't designed to digest but instead rely on the bacteria in their digestive track to get any energy from.

Then of course they don't live in places with little bamboo instead of lower on the mountains where there is tons of bamboo.

They are inefficient creatures. Ones that I don't think should be allowed to go extinct but inefficient creatures none the less.

No, not at all. But I am suggesting that after so much natural selection on that one line (ie, there are no "close" relatives) and the fact that they were quite populous prior to their habitat being destroyed, then, by definition, nature has selected for them. My point was that they are being destroyed now not by natural selection, but by human invasion.

Click to expand...

Also there is no real "end state" to evolution. Everything continues to mutate and advance.

Manpanda?

Pandas are far more awesome than Krisken's beard.

He could get up that step if he was trained by Dustin Hoffman!

What we learn trying to save pandas might have other useful applications. Just saying "fuck 'em, let the morons die" does nothing.

Null said:

What we learn trying to save pandas might have other useful applications. Just saying "fuck 'em, let the morons die" does nothing.

Click to expand...

While I agree that futility is an important lesson, I think we could watch Congress for that.

Krisken said:

Ok, this animal is retarded. I put for the the proposition that any animal too retarded to breed (I'm looking at you too, koala's) should be allowed to stupid themselves out of existence.


Edit: Damn it. In the poll it should say "animals" before the word "too".

Click to expand...

Koalas like to have sex (they're one of the most promiscuous animals around), they have insanely high amounts of syphilis that plague their fertility numbers.

---------- Post added at 09:13 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:05 AM ----------

First Lady Puffinstuff said:

The ones in the wild are going extinct due to hunting, poaching, and the destruction of their habitat. That nice bamboo flooring you've been dreaming about? There's a cost to that.

Pretty sure it's only the panda's in captivity that are having a problem. I can't say I'd be terribly interested procreation if I was in captivity and knew my kids would be too.

-Adam

Click to expand...

Nope. Pandas also rarely breed in the wild.

Look, I'm all for protecting animals and the environment, but it's stupid and naive to think that no animal (especially the cute fuzzy ones) is going to be unscathed from the mass expansion of humanity, or not realize that species go extinct all the time. We're currently in the sixth largest extinction period that has ever existed. There is some evidence that this is caused by humans, and there is other evidence that points to a cyclical purging of extremely specialized and dependent species. Let's face facts here, if a species has evolutionarily adapted to eating one specific food source and rarely copulates, it's a great mix for an extinct species. This is why rainforest species are going extinct at the highest rates out of any species on the planet.

I do believe that if you get caught hunting panda in China, they throw you into one of their infamous bottomless pits.

---------- Post added at 09:20 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:13 AM ----------

Null said:

What we learn trying to save pandas might have other useful applications. Just saying "fuck 'em, let the morons die" does nothing.

Click to expand...

The ONLY reason anyone gives a shit about Pandas is because they're cute and fuzzy. There is nothing really being learned other than techniques on how to get Pandas to fuck. The reason why there's so much panda propaganda is this:



Pandas bring in TONS of funding to the WWF. I suppose that money goes into other projects as well. That's the only reason to keep pandas around.

These guys are endangered:



They're a species of ants that live in Maryland. How many fundraiser drives have you seen for them? I'd go so far as to say ants are a much more useful species for the environment than fat-ass Pandas.




Soooooo....


An example of animals that is going extinct directly and solely due to hunting and poaching: elephants and gorillas. I believe efforts that are focused towards pandas should be redirected and aimed squarely at protecting animals that are undeniably endangered because of direct human activity.

I can totally go for a panda steak right now.

LordRavage said:

I can totally go for a panda steak right now.

Click to expand...

Medium rare.

Cajungal;430291][QUOTE=LordRavage said:

I can totally go for a panda steak right now.

Click to expand...

Medium rare. [/QUOTE]

Black on the outside, still white in the middle?

---------- Post added at 06:50 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:49 PM ----------

Oh, and for the record: I do think Chaz has actually made me reconsider. I guess there's a first for everything, even someone being convinced by an on line argument :-P

He does raise some good points.

I support my bear and bear-shaped brethren.

But some food for thought though. Is it possible that some species are evolving to require human intervention? Sort of a form of symbiosis with man.



Also we should totally hop up some koalas and pandas on crystal meth and LSD and let them pitfight for our amusement.

FnordBear said:

I support my bear and bear-shaped brethren.

But some food for thought though. Is it possible that some species are evolving to require human intervention? Sort of a form of symbiosis with man.

Also we should totally hop up some koalas and pandas on crystal meth and LSD and let them pitfight for our amusement.

Click to expand...

Yeah, they're called rats, pigeons, dogs, cats, cattle, etc...

Wow, I admit that sympathy for pandas on Halforums is greater than I anticipated.

Pandas >

Amorous Eyes;430550]g[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Amorous Eyes;430550]t[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Amorous Eyes;430550]h[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Amorous Eyes;430550]A[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Amorous Eyes;430550]n[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Amorous Eyes;430550]c[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Amorous Eyes said:

s

Click to expand...

.

How can you not fucking love Pandas? They are cute and cuddly and amazing. Fuck yeah I don't care if we have to make them breed, they are friggin awesome.

HoboNinja said:

How can you not fucking love Pandas? They are cute and cuddly and amazing. Fuck yeah I don't care if we have to make them breed, they are friggin awesome.

Click to expand...

You would like pandas.

We should try to make domestic animals out of pandas.

That's my solution to every animal problem, though. Just make pets out of them and have rich fat ladies buy them little pet sweaters for the winter.

Silver Jelly said:

We should try to make domestic animals out of pandas.

That's my solution to every animal problem, though. Just make pets out of them and have rich fat ladies buy them little pet sweaters for the winter.

Click to expand...

They are much more likely to survive if we make them into a food source than into a pet.

No one worries that cows, pigs, or chickens will become extinct.

-Adam

First Lady Puffinstuff;430681][QUOTE=Silver Jelly said:

We should try to make domestic animals out of pandas.

That's my solution to every animal problem, though. Just make pets out of them and have rich fat ladies buy them little pet sweaters for the winter.

Click to expand...

They are much more likely to survive if we make them into a food source than into a pet.

No one worries that cows, pigs, or chickens will become extinct.

-Adam[/QUOTE]

But chickens don't wear sweaters!

I stand corrected. Let's eat some pandas!

You're signature fits your post. I therefore award you with this mushroom!

-Adam

---------- Post added at 09:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:27 PM ----------

Wait, gifts don't show up under people's avatars anymore? Aw.

-Adam

First Lady Puffinstuff said:

You're signature fits your post. I therefore award you with this mushroom!

-Adam

---------- Post added at 09:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:27 PM ----------

Wait, gifts don't show up under people's avatars anymore? Aw.

-Adam

Click to expand...

They do, sorta. Click the [Gifts] tab under his avatar and you'll see the mushroom you gifted.