After watching the movie, it hurts to look at your image.
Why did HE do it?
you seriously are wondering why the evil villain did evil things
Because he could
Worse things happen to animals in real life they just cannot speak. They are being used for medical experiments (which is somewhat necessary) and are being eaten daily by people.
I only care because they're sapient. Don't give a shit about what happens to actual animals. Well, I might feel a twinge of sadness for cute things suffering, but that's just me being dumb and projecting human feelings onto a creature that does not have them
Rabbits often eat their own babies alive
They do not have sapience and do not have categorizable memory or consciousness. Only instinct. Finding moral equivalence in causing their suffering and causing a human to suffer is irrational. As has been reflected by laws and taboos for millennia. Only recently have people been so soft and coddled and removed from slaughterhouses that they've started to be terrified of animal suffering. Not a fear that often extends to insects and microorganisms for some reason.
Meanwhile, hurting pets is fucked up because we understand what feelings fellow humans project onto those animals after many centuries of breeding them for companionship. So it's best avoided, but for the sake of the humans rather than because the animals are equal to humans
Animals can feel fear and pain, they raise their young and miss them if you take their young from them. You only eat them because muh ancestors ate them. You could literally not eat them and be healthy still or even healthier.
>Meanwhile, hurting pets is fucked up because we understand what feelings fellow humans project onto those animals after many centuries of breeding them for companionship. So it's best avoided, but for the sake of the humans rather than because the animals are equal to humans
This is something only you think. Yes pet owners would beat ass if you hurt their pet, but other people do not hurt them because they are able to feel compassion for animals.
I just find it interesting that people feel sorry for these animated non real animals, but don't give a shit about real ones.
6 months ago
Anonymous
I'm sorry anon, but medicines and various substances need to be tested on something before they can be given to humans. If you want to see what happens when no tests are done, google 'thalidomide' and experience the wonders of unchecked pharmaceuticals.
What would the alternative be? Testing on humans? Don't get me wrong, I'm all for putting prison populations to work, but that'd be a tough sell to congress.
6 months ago
Anonymous
>but medicines and various substances need to be tested on something before they can be given to humans.
Well I wrote that animals testing is necessary sadly.
>If you want to see what happens when no tests are done, google 'thalidomide' and experience the wonders of unchecked pharmaceuticals.
Those were tested on animals. It happened because medical science was unaware that chirality of molecules matter. So the animal testing could not save those people sadly.
6 months ago
Anonymous
> they raise their young and miss them if you take their young from them
And sometimes bite their heads off, which you ignored because it's inconvenient for you lol >You could literally not eat them and be healthy still or even healthier
But there's no reason to do that since there's nothing morally wrong with butchering them for meat, which is enjoyable and nutritious. I don't need vitamin supplements with a balanced diet >I just find it interesting that people feel sorry for these animated non real animals, but don't give a shit about real ones.
But we've made it very clear why. The fictional animals have sapience and real ones do not. >other people do not hurt them because they are able to feel compassion for animals
I disagree and think that's quite a widely-held opinion. If they are simply feeling compassion for pets as if they were human beings yet much on hamburgers they're hypocritical. Which some may well be, and which is convenient for you to hold in your mind as a concept for why you're morally superior, but it's just not as widespread as you'd like to smugly believe. Many people have stopped to think about why they still eat meat but love puppies, and still conclude they're gonna continue because animals just don't have the same faculties humans do, so killing them is okay.
6 months ago
Anonymous
>And sometimes bite their heads off, which you ignored because it's inconvenient for you lol
With not enough resources they eat/kill them yes. Not for fun like you seem to think. >I don't need vitamin supplements with a balanced diet
True for vegetarians also. >But we've made it very clear why. The fictional animals have sapience and real ones do not.
The fictional ones aren't real. You feel sorry for pixels with human voices lol. >I disagree and think that's quite a widely-held opinion. If they are simply feeling compassion for pets as if they were human beings yet much on hamburgers they're hypocritical. Which some may well be, and which is convenient for you to hold in your mind as a concept for why you're morally superior, but it's just not as widespread as you'd like to smugly believe. Many people have stopped to think about why they still eat meat but love puppies, and still conclude they're gonna continue because animals just don't have the same faculties humans do, so killing them is okay.
I never said I am morally superior. Most people dislike chinks for eating dogs the said dogs were bred to be eaten. Your logic makes no sense the way you think seems kind of autistic and or like you don't talk to real people ever.
I have to add that it seems like that you argue just for fun. If you feel sorry for the pixel animals then you also feel sorry for the real ones you just don't want to admit it, because it hurts you it is called cognitive dissonance by psychology.
6 months ago
Anonymous
>Not for fun like you seem to think.
Never said that. Very dishonest of you. It's not as cut and dry as that either. It also happens because of territory, or just because the mother rabbit is in fear response mode after its first pregnancy. Also pretty much no human mother would kill and eat their child because of resources. >True for vegetarians also.
Where do you get your B12? >You feel sorry for pixels with human voices lol.
Exactly. I don't know why you'd write lol as though it's absurd. That's the point of stories. Empathizing with something not real >Your logic makes no sense the way you think seems kind of autistic
I think the exact same about you. Funny how you talk about not being able to understand others' minds yet use this weak appeal to being normal / like a real person. I just think you have abnormally shallow levels of thinking >cognitive dissonance
There is no cognitive dissonance because fictional and sapient / real and merely sentient are a very clear distinction
>Animals do not have categorizable memory or sapience
You are wrong about this and you do not base this on anything scientific. I also don't even know what you mean by sapience.
It is extensively studied. Here's a good primer from Stanford https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/consciousness-animal/#ConsBina >I also don't even know what you mean by sapience
Sentience is being able to sense and respond to stimuli. Sapience is having consciousness, comprehending the world and the existence of your own mind, and being able to learn and categorize your memories
6 months ago
Anonymous
>Also pretty much no human mother would kill and eat their child because of resources.
Sadly you are very wrong about the kill part. >It also happens because of territory, or just because the mother rabbit is in fear response mode after its first pregnancy.
A mother rabbit won't kill it's newborn for territory also after birth she won't kill it because of hormones she does the opposite of killing because of hormones. >Where do you get your B12?
For example eggs >I think the exact same about you. Funny how you talk about not being able to understand others' minds yet use this weak appeal to being normal / like a real person. I just think you have abnormally shallow levels of thinking
It is you who has that lol. >cognitive dissonance
There is heavy cognitive dissonance in you. >Sapience
There are different levels of learning abilities in animals obviously not all animals are equally as intelligent and every animals is far less intelligent than humans.
It is too complex to explain it to you here.
Maybe start at highschool biology level and go from there.
https://www.khanacademy.org/science/ap-biology/ecology-ap/responses-to-the-environment/a/learned-behaviors#:~:text=Habituation%2C%20imprinting%2C%20classical%20conditioning%2C,operant%20conditioning%2C%20and%20cognitive%20learning.
But regardless animals feel fear, pain, and care about eachother they obviously do not do it like humans do I never said that.
Also it is funny that you try to talk scientific then link something that a philosopy major/prof wrote. That is not science.
6 months ago
Anonymous
Lylla's cute, why'd she have to die? Does she get any attenion in the comics?
Psychology is such quackery, doubly so for a different species. We're just looking at the results; the behavior, not the cause or process. That's so useless! We can't even understand the human brain and we are all humans brains, how're we going to understand animals? Just pretend they're humans? Because they're not.
6 months ago
Anonymous
I hate psychology I am more of medicine/biology/science guy tbh. I was only talking about biology there. Ethology or behaviour of animals is part of biology there is an overlap with cognitive science/psychology though.
They aren't humans obviously ethologists also know that.
6 months ago
Anonymous
>Sadly you are very wrong about the kill part
That's why there was another part afterwards. Also immeasurably rarer by percentage of births than in rabbits, and rabbits are just one example of merciless killers in the animal kingdom >A mother rabbit won't kill it's newborn for territory also after birth she won't kill it because of hormones she does the opposite of killing because of hormones.
You are wrong. Endless results to a google search would tell you that, including but not limited to this random one https://www.atshq.org/do-rabbits-eat-their-babies/#Why_Do_Rabbits_Eat_Their_Babies
Your point about eggs is a good one. True that you can eat animal products to get B12.
The rest is all "no u" and ignorance. And ffs the reason for linking a primer is because the bibliography links to the science. That's what a primer is for.
>More misinformation. Look up surplus killing
That is not hunting for sport retard it is literally not called that and happens for a different reason not for sport...
Surplus killing is often done for sport. You didn't look it up.
6 months ago
Anonymous
Why do you keep talking about rabbits eating their babies? Yes they eat it if there are no resources available to raise them no doubt.
Read what you linked about rabbits and google surpluss killing it is not done for sport killing for sport is something different.
I hope you are just a kid because you cannot even comprehend what I write if you think I have just no u-d you.
In case you are not a kid but a full grown adult then read on.
>And ffs the reason for linking a primer is because the bibliography links to the science. That's what a primer is for.
Oh so you link a philosopy paper and I am supposed to look at the bibliography are you fucking retarded dude?????? I am supposed to find a counter argument in the bibliography what the actual fuck? XD
I know more about biology than you ever will fucktard. The argument might have been fun if you actually read the shit I wrote to you, you autist piece of shit.
Bye!
6 months ago
Anonymous
> Yes they eat it if there are no resources available to raise them no doubt.
Sigh...that's not the only reason, like I said twice and provided evidence for >Read what you linked about rabbits
Sigh, yes, I did but you didn't because it contradicts what you just wrote > google surpluss killing it is not done for sport killing for sport is something different
Sigh...please do that yourself because sport killing is one kind of surplus killing > you link a philosopy paper and I am supposed to look at the bibliography
Sigh...yes, because that's what primers are for, and it's hilarious that you think you can look down on Stanford philosophy professors
Wow you are very very stupid, I hope a lot of people in your life call you out for that
Honestly people like you aren't normally on Cinemaphile because you are gonna experience a fuckton of bullying as your natural stupidity shows
Also you're obviously a teenage girl so post your tits of gtfo
KEK >Bye! >Not a teen girl
Pick one
Actually you probably phrased it that way specifically because you're not a teen any more
6 months ago
Anonymous
Wow you are very very stupid, I hope a lot of people in your life call you out for that
Honestly people like you aren't normally on Cinemaphile because you are gonna experience a fuckton of bullying as your natural stupidity shows
Also you're obviously a teenage girl so post your tits of gtfo
You seem to be making a lot of inferences based solely upon your experiences as a human. It's impossible for us to perceive the minds of others, all we can do is assume and test, and when you do more of one than the other then that's how we get dumb posts like yours. Next time, just don't reply. You don't look smart, you look ridiculous.
6 months ago
Anonymous
It's extensively tested and conclusions remain the same. Animals do not have categorizable memory or sapience. But please go on with your emotional outburst haha
6 months ago
Anonymous
>Animals do not have categorizable memory or sapience
You are wrong about this and you do not base this on anything scientific. I also don't even know what you mean by sapience.
>Not a fear that often extends to insects and microorganisms for some reason.
Yeah why is this? It's easy for me to feel for insects when I find them in my garden and they act afraid or to feel I did something good when I save a fly from a spider.
When you think about it if think of animal suffering as equivalent to human suffering we should be putting predators on trial. Especially the ones that kill for sport not for hunger, which happens a lot (cats I'm looking at you)
6 months ago
Anonymous
>Especially the ones that kill for sport not for hunger, which happens a lot (cats I'm looking at you)
Only house cats and humans do that and yeah it's shit for the enviroment.
Wild animals risk injury everytime they hunt so they do not do it for fun, but to eat. They also keep.the herbivore population in check. So it's ok.
6 months ago
Anonymous
More misinformation. Look up surplus killing
6 months ago
Anonymous
>More misinformation. Look up surplus killing
That is not hunting for sport retard it is literally not called that and happens for a different reason not for sport...
6 months ago
Anonymous
>Look up surplus killing
"Nonetheless, researchers say animals surplus-kill whenever they can, in order to procure food for offspring and others, to gain valuable killing experience, and to create the opportunity to eat the carcass later when they are hungry again."
6 months ago
Anonymous
Killing for experience is killing for sport anon
Also the anon brought up surplus killing just to disprove the dumbass point that humans and cats are the ones that kill for sport. The wikipedia page you pasted this from lists a whole bunch of other animals doing it
That's why I don't eat lobsters, squids or octopuses.
Because eating animals is fine as long as they die painlessly? I think that yes, that's where a lot of people draw the line, actually.
6 months ago
Anonymous
>They also keep.the herbivore population in check.
You heartless psychopath
No complex life can exist without some suffering. It is inescapable.
Vegan products kill millions of rodents and the monocultures required decimate ecosystems.
Pescatarians ironically help contribute to the ecological damage that threatens probably the non-primate species most arguably capable of being sapient life forms.
Lab-grown meat has something like 20x the energy requirements of eating livestock.
Unless you are a vegan forager (you aren't, don't even start typing that bullshit response) you kill animals. And even if you are a vegan forager, you probably kill insects. Nobody argues about unicellular life being sapient though.
>projecting human feelings onto a creature that does not have them
Mammals feel emotions, they just can't rationalize them as well as us. We're pretty similar, structurally.
Are you retarded or you just think emotions and feelings are the same thing?
6 months ago
Anonymous
My post didn't say that at all. Your feelings make you think animals have emotions. Nothing else backs it up. That doesn't in any way mean I think your feeling are the same as your emotions. So maybe ask yourself that question
>You just made that shit up based on your feelings
Feeling pain or fear isn't that complicated. I'm not saying they can identify those feelings and name them, they just feel a certain way and act accordingly. Like how dogs freak the fuck out when there's a storm because of an ingrained instinctual response. They're scared, however that feels for a dog, and they want to hunker down. They run around and bark because they want you to go with them, because they're pack animals and they do better if they keep together. You aren't special because you feel fear, you're special because you're posting about feelings on Cinemaphile like a homosexual. You have that capacity.
6 months ago
Anonymous
Survival instincts are driving adrenaline through it. That's it. And you've really gotta work on smooth segues to calling someone homosexual, homosexual.
6 months ago
Anonymous
>Survival instincts are driving adrenaline through it. That's it.
That's what feelings are, you meat automaton. They have the same basic brain chemistry, albeit with less processing power. They wouldn't have tested anti-depressants on animals if they weren't similar on some level. If you believe in the soul just say so, otherwise I question why we're still talking past eachother, homosexual.
6 months ago
Anonymous
No all feelings are not survival instinct and adrenaline you vapid fucking cunt
6 months ago
Anonymous
Um ... Anon, they don't test antidepressants on animals and measure whether they get less depressed or not. They just test them to see if there are adverse physical side effects. It's just a safety step. Not sure if that's what you meant but it really sounded like it. Similar brain chemistry is not really relevant and some mammals like bats have very different brains
let's just experiment on monkeys and leave all other animals out of it. >animals get... le eaten
yeah, no, fuck off with that. I don't care, I've worked in a slaughter house and it's a very efficient process. We don't kill people that quickly on death row.
>yeah, no, fuck off with that. I don't care, I've worked in a slaughter house and it's a very efficient process. We don't kill people that quickly on death row.
Nah stop lying to yourself. It is ok if you do not give a shit about animals just be honest.
If I didn't give a shit about animals, the shit the chinks do to their food before they eat it wouldn't bother me. I believe that eating meat is ethical so long as the animal is not subjected to egregious cruelty and pain. If you look at how animals get killed and eaten in the wild, a captive bolt between the eyes is a mercy.
Shit, a captive bolt between the eyes is a kinder fate than 99% of humans are ultimately going to wind up with. >verification not required
>let's just experiment on monkeys and leave all other animals out of it
Don't get what you mean by this yeah monkeys are also being experimented on even if in most places they are not eaten.
I mean that when I was in Cambodia a monkey ran up to me, took my car keys and then bit part of a toddler's ear off.
We can experiment on monkeys all we like, just leave the infinitely superior non-monkey animals out of it >verification not required
Humans, at least in the West, are more humane towards eating animals than animals when eating other animals in the same genus
We'll at least kill them first beforehand, can't say the same for China
You're actually supposed to dispatch lobsters before boiling, a lot of people just don't because lobsters are le icky and they would rather yeet it into a pot and forget it.
Are the baby raccoons genetically enhanced to be more intelligent than a standard raccoon? Wondering if they might be Cosmo-level sapient, or more like pets.
Apparently the supplementary material says Cosmo is a Labrador retriever. But she's obviously some kind of Spaniel thing, right?
But in factory farming, the lives of the animals are worse than in the wild or in traditional animal husbandry.
Hunting and fishing are certainly better deaths than the prey would've met otherwise. But constantly crowded and stressed and surrounded with the fumes of their waste is a terrible way to spend their lives. I don't waste any animal products that end up on my plate, but I try my best not to support factory farming.
This thread seems mostly reasonable, so it goes without saying that we shouldn't be ashamed of being anthropocentric. But being reasonably good and kind to lower animals, is good and kind for us. And many people in developed countries consume more meat than is healthy anyway.
Yeah, this was my impression too. I've seen it pointed out that they said in GotG1 that he was genetically modified, which strictly speaking should mean his genes were altered at birth. That would mean likely the other raccoons were modified the same way.
But I also think (A) the same screen also said Lylla was his associate so they probably hadn't thought things through that well and (B) they might not follow that strict distinction
6 months ago
Anonymous
something something epigenetics
Where's my No-Prize?
I wasn't expecting the damage to be that severe. Totally deserved though. I also love that his OP gravity tech he was using to shit on characters all movie was beaten by some basic boots Rocket was working on at the start of the movie.
>I like how Rocket is the only one who isn't noticeably mutilated
He probably has the most horrid internal modifications to make him truly bipedal. They'd have had to break all the bones in his arms and legs and mega-fucked his spine to get him to walk like that. I bet it hurts all the time, like full body arthritis.
Everything about Rocket past was depressed as fuck. I was glad when young Rocket ripped off HE face.
Worse things happen to animals in real life they just cannot speak. They are being used for medical experiments (which is somewhat necessary) and are being eaten daily by people.
Or just as bad
So be vegetarian or pescetarian bros that's it. Now is the time!
nah
I only care because they're sapient. Don't give a shit about what happens to actual animals. Well, I might feel a twinge of sadness for cute things suffering, but that's just me being dumb and projecting human feelings onto a creature that does not have them
>t. psychopath
That's the default for the entire world
But the animals you eat are also sentiet they even care for their young offspring. They can also experience fear pain and suffering.
Rabbits often eat their own babies alive
They do not have sapience and do not have categorizable memory or consciousness. Only instinct. Finding moral equivalence in causing their suffering and causing a human to suffer is irrational. As has been reflected by laws and taboos for millennia. Only recently have people been so soft and coddled and removed from slaughterhouses that they've started to be terrified of animal suffering. Not a fear that often extends to insects and microorganisms for some reason.
Meanwhile, hurting pets is fucked up because we understand what feelings fellow humans project onto those animals after many centuries of breeding them for companionship. So it's best avoided, but for the sake of the humans rather than because the animals are equal to humans
I never said that animals are equal to humans.
Animals can feel fear and pain, they raise their young and miss them if you take their young from them. You only eat them because muh ancestors ate them. You could literally not eat them and be healthy still or even healthier.
>Meanwhile, hurting pets is fucked up because we understand what feelings fellow humans project onto those animals after many centuries of breeding them for companionship. So it's best avoided, but for the sake of the humans rather than because the animals are equal to humans
This is something only you think. Yes pet owners would beat ass if you hurt their pet, but other people do not hurt them because they are able to feel compassion for animals.
I just find it interesting that people feel sorry for these animated non real animals, but don't give a shit about real ones.
I'm sorry anon, but medicines and various substances need to be tested on something before they can be given to humans. If you want to see what happens when no tests are done, google 'thalidomide' and experience the wonders of unchecked pharmaceuticals.
What would the alternative be? Testing on humans? Don't get me wrong, I'm all for putting prison populations to work, but that'd be a tough sell to congress.
>but medicines and various substances need to be tested on something before they can be given to humans.
Well I wrote that animals testing is necessary sadly.
>If you want to see what happens when no tests are done, google 'thalidomide' and experience the wonders of unchecked pharmaceuticals.
Those were tested on animals. It happened because medical science was unaware that chirality of molecules matter. So the animal testing could not save those people sadly.
> they raise their young and miss them if you take their young from them
And sometimes bite their heads off, which you ignored because it's inconvenient for you lol
>You could literally not eat them and be healthy still or even healthier
But there's no reason to do that since there's nothing morally wrong with butchering them for meat, which is enjoyable and nutritious. I don't need vitamin supplements with a balanced diet
>I just find it interesting that people feel sorry for these animated non real animals, but don't give a shit about real ones.
But we've made it very clear why. The fictional animals have sapience and real ones do not.
>other people do not hurt them because they are able to feel compassion for animals
I disagree and think that's quite a widely-held opinion. If they are simply feeling compassion for pets as if they were human beings yet much on hamburgers they're hypocritical. Which some may well be, and which is convenient for you to hold in your mind as a concept for why you're morally superior, but it's just not as widespread as you'd like to smugly believe. Many people have stopped to think about why they still eat meat but love puppies, and still conclude they're gonna continue because animals just don't have the same faculties humans do, so killing them is okay.
>And sometimes bite their heads off, which you ignored because it's inconvenient for you lol
With not enough resources they eat/kill them yes. Not for fun like you seem to think.
>I don't need vitamin supplements with a balanced diet
True for vegetarians also.
>But we've made it very clear why. The fictional animals have sapience and real ones do not.
The fictional ones aren't real. You feel sorry for pixels with human voices lol.
>I disagree and think that's quite a widely-held opinion. If they are simply feeling compassion for pets as if they were human beings yet much on hamburgers they're hypocritical. Which some may well be, and which is convenient for you to hold in your mind as a concept for why you're morally superior, but it's just not as widespread as you'd like to smugly believe. Many people have stopped to think about why they still eat meat but love puppies, and still conclude they're gonna continue because animals just don't have the same faculties humans do, so killing them is okay.
I never said I am morally superior. Most people dislike chinks for eating dogs the said dogs were bred to be eaten. Your logic makes no sense the way you think seems kind of autistic and or like you don't talk to real people ever.
I have to add that it seems like that you argue just for fun. If you feel sorry for the pixel animals then you also feel sorry for the real ones you just don't want to admit it, because it hurts you it is called cognitive dissonance by psychology.
>Not for fun like you seem to think.
Never said that. Very dishonest of you. It's not as cut and dry as that either. It also happens because of territory, or just because the mother rabbit is in fear response mode after its first pregnancy. Also pretty much no human mother would kill and eat their child because of resources.
>True for vegetarians also.
Where do you get your B12?
>You feel sorry for pixels with human voices lol.
Exactly. I don't know why you'd write lol as though it's absurd. That's the point of stories. Empathizing with something not real
>Your logic makes no sense the way you think seems kind of autistic
I think the exact same about you. Funny how you talk about not being able to understand others' minds yet use this weak appeal to being normal / like a real person. I just think you have abnormally shallow levels of thinking
>cognitive dissonance
There is no cognitive dissonance because fictional and sapient / real and merely sentient are a very clear distinction
It is extensively studied. Here's a good primer from Stanford https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/consciousness-animal/#ConsBina
>I also don't even know what you mean by sapience
Sentience is being able to sense and respond to stimuli. Sapience is having consciousness, comprehending the world and the existence of your own mind, and being able to learn and categorize your memories
>Also pretty much no human mother would kill and eat their child because of resources.
Sadly you are very wrong about the kill part.
>It also happens because of territory, or just because the mother rabbit is in fear response mode after its first pregnancy.
A mother rabbit won't kill it's newborn for territory also after birth she won't kill it because of hormones she does the opposite of killing because of hormones.
>Where do you get your B12?
For example eggs
>I think the exact same about you. Funny how you talk about not being able to understand others' minds yet use this weak appeal to being normal / like a real person. I just think you have abnormally shallow levels of thinking
It is you who has that lol.
>cognitive dissonance
There is heavy cognitive dissonance in you.
>Sapience
There are different levels of learning abilities in animals obviously not all animals are equally as intelligent and every animals is far less intelligent than humans.
It is too complex to explain it to you here.
Maybe start at highschool biology level and go from there.
https://www.khanacademy.org/science/ap-biology/ecology-ap/responses-to-the-environment/a/learned-behaviors#:~:text=Habituation%2C%20imprinting%2C%20classical%20conditioning%2C,operant%20conditioning%2C%20and%20cognitive%20learning.
But regardless animals feel fear, pain, and care about eachother they obviously do not do it like humans do I never said that.
Also it is funny that you try to talk scientific then link something that a philosopy major/prof wrote. That is not science.
Lylla's cute, why'd she have to die? Does she get any attenion in the comics?
Psychology is such quackery, doubly so for a different species. We're just looking at the results; the behavior, not the cause or process. That's so useless! We can't even understand the human brain and we are all humans brains, how're we going to understand animals? Just pretend they're humans? Because they're not.
I hate psychology I am more of medicine/biology/science guy tbh. I was only talking about biology there. Ethology or behaviour of animals is part of biology there is an overlap with cognitive science/psychology though.
They aren't humans obviously ethologists also know that.
>Sadly you are very wrong about the kill part
That's why there was another part afterwards. Also immeasurably rarer by percentage of births than in rabbits, and rabbits are just one example of merciless killers in the animal kingdom
>A mother rabbit won't kill it's newborn for territory also after birth she won't kill it because of hormones she does the opposite of killing because of hormones.
You are wrong. Endless results to a google search would tell you that, including but not limited to this random one https://www.atshq.org/do-rabbits-eat-their-babies/#Why_Do_Rabbits_Eat_Their_Babies
Your point about eggs is a good one. True that you can eat animal products to get B12.
The rest is all "no u" and ignorance. And ffs the reason for linking a primer is because the bibliography links to the science. That's what a primer is for.
Surplus killing is often done for sport. You didn't look it up.
Why do you keep talking about rabbits eating their babies? Yes they eat it if there are no resources available to raise them no doubt.
Read what you linked about rabbits and google surpluss killing it is not done for sport killing for sport is something different.
I hope you are just a kid because you cannot even comprehend what I write if you think I have just no u-d you.
In case you are not a kid but a full grown adult then read on.
>And ffs the reason for linking a primer is because the bibliography links to the science. That's what a primer is for.
Oh so you link a philosopy paper and I am supposed to look at the bibliography are you fucking retarded dude?????? I am supposed to find a counter argument in the bibliography what the actual fuck? XD
I know more about biology than you ever will fucktard. The argument might have been fun if you actually read the shit I wrote to you, you autist piece of shit.
Bye!
> Yes they eat it if there are no resources available to raise them no doubt.
Sigh...that's not the only reason, like I said twice and provided evidence for
>Read what you linked about rabbits
Sigh, yes, I did but you didn't because it contradicts what you just wrote
> google surpluss killing it is not done for sport killing for sport is something different
Sigh...please do that yourself because sport killing is one kind of surplus killing
> you link a philosopy paper and I am supposed to look at the bibliography
Sigh...yes, because that's what primers are for, and it's hilarious that you think you can look down on Stanford philosophy professors
KEK
>Bye!
>Not a teen girl
Pick one
Actually you probably phrased it that way specifically because you're not a teen any more
Wow you are very very stupid, I hope a lot of people in your life call you out for that
Honestly people like you aren't normally on Cinemaphile because you are gonna experience a fuckton of bullying as your natural stupidity shows
Also you're obviously a teenage girl so post your tits of gtfo
Not a teen girl autist homosexual.
Not new to Cinemaphile either sadly.
You seem to be making a lot of inferences based solely upon your experiences as a human. It's impossible for us to perceive the minds of others, all we can do is assume and test, and when you do more of one than the other then that's how we get dumb posts like yours. Next time, just don't reply. You don't look smart, you look ridiculous.
It's extensively tested and conclusions remain the same. Animals do not have categorizable memory or sapience. But please go on with your emotional outburst haha
>Animals do not have categorizable memory or sapience
You are wrong about this and you do not base this on anything scientific. I also don't even know what you mean by sapience.
>Not a fear that often extends to insects and microorganisms for some reason.
Yeah why is this? It's easy for me to feel for insects when I find them in my garden and they act afraid or to feel I did something good when I save a fly from a spider.
When you think about it if think of animal suffering as equivalent to human suffering we should be putting predators on trial. Especially the ones that kill for sport not for hunger, which happens a lot (cats I'm looking at you)
>Especially the ones that kill for sport not for hunger, which happens a lot (cats I'm looking at you)
Only house cats and humans do that and yeah it's shit for the enviroment.
Wild animals risk injury everytime they hunt so they do not do it for fun, but to eat. They also keep.the herbivore population in check. So it's ok.
More misinformation. Look up surplus killing
>More misinformation. Look up surplus killing
That is not hunting for sport retard it is literally not called that and happens for a different reason not for sport...
>Look up surplus killing
"Nonetheless, researchers say animals surplus-kill whenever they can, in order to procure food for offspring and others, to gain valuable killing experience, and to create the opportunity to eat the carcass later when they are hungry again."
Killing for experience is killing for sport anon
Also the anon brought up surplus killing just to disprove the dumbass point that humans and cats are the ones that kill for sport. The wikipedia page you pasted this from lists a whole bunch of other animals doing it
Because eating animals is fine as long as they die painlessly? I think that yes, that's where a lot of people draw the line, actually.
>They also keep.the herbivore population in check.
You heartless psychopath
sentient=/=sapient
Ok misread
No complex life can exist without some suffering. It is inescapable.
Vegan products kill millions of rodents and the monocultures required decimate ecosystems.
Pescatarians ironically help contribute to the ecological damage that threatens probably the non-primate species most arguably capable of being sapient life forms.
Lab-grown meat has something like 20x the energy requirements of eating livestock.
Unless you are a vegan forager (you aren't, don't even start typing that bullshit response) you kill animals. And even if you are a vegan forager, you probably kill insects. Nobody argues about unicellular life being sapient though.
>projecting human feelings onto a creature that does not have them
Mammals feel emotions, they just can't rationalize them as well as us. We're pretty similar, structurally.
>Mammals feel emotions
You just made that shit up based on your feelings
Are you retarded or you just think emotions and feelings are the same thing?
My post didn't say that at all. Your feelings make you think animals have emotions. Nothing else backs it up. That doesn't in any way mean I think your feeling are the same as your emotions. So maybe ask yourself that question
>You just made that shit up based on your feelings
Feeling pain or fear isn't that complicated. I'm not saying they can identify those feelings and name them, they just feel a certain way and act accordingly. Like how dogs freak the fuck out when there's a storm because of an ingrained instinctual response. They're scared, however that feels for a dog, and they want to hunker down. They run around and bark because they want you to go with them, because they're pack animals and they do better if they keep together. You aren't special because you feel fear, you're special because you're posting about feelings on Cinemaphile like a homosexual. You have that capacity.
Survival instincts are driving adrenaline through it. That's it. And you've really gotta work on smooth segues to calling someone homosexual, homosexual.
>Survival instincts are driving adrenaline through it. That's it.
That's what feelings are, you meat automaton. They have the same basic brain chemistry, albeit with less processing power. They wouldn't have tested anti-depressants on animals if they weren't similar on some level. If you believe in the soul just say so, otherwise I question why we're still talking past eachother, homosexual.
No all feelings are not survival instinct and adrenaline you vapid fucking cunt
Um ... Anon, they don't test antidepressants on animals and measure whether they get less depressed or not. They just test them to see if there are adverse physical side effects. It's just a safety step. Not sure if that's what you meant but it really sounded like it. Similar brain chemistry is not really relevant and some mammals like bats have very different brains
Giving an animal sapience and letting it understand what's being done to it is worse than just killing it
let's just experiment on monkeys and leave all other animals out of it.
>animals get... le eaten
yeah, no, fuck off with that. I don't care, I've worked in a slaughter house and it's a very efficient process. We don't kill people that quickly on death row.
>yeah, no, fuck off with that. I don't care, I've worked in a slaughter house and it's a very efficient process. We don't kill people that quickly on death row.
Nah stop lying to yourself. It is ok if you do not give a shit about animals just be honest.
If I didn't give a shit about animals, the shit the chinks do to their food before they eat it wouldn't bother me. I believe that eating meat is ethical so long as the animal is not subjected to egregious cruelty and pain. If you look at how animals get killed and eaten in the wild, a captive bolt between the eyes is a mercy.
Shit, a captive bolt between the eyes is a kinder fate than 99% of humans are ultimately going to wind up with.
>verification not required
Hunting and killing wild animals in least painful methods and killing them in the wild is based, but animal farming is cruel.
So I agree with you on this even though I don't eat meat and find it disgusting.
>let's just experiment on monkeys and leave all other animals out of it
Don't get what you mean by this yeah monkeys are also being experimented on even if in most places they are not eaten.
I mean that when I was in Cambodia a monkey ran up to me, took my car keys and then bit part of a toddler's ear off.
We can experiment on monkeys all we like, just leave the infinitely superior non-monkey animals out of it
>verification not required
lol
Just because a monkey bit someone it doesn't mean that all should be tortured.
Humans, at least in the West, are more humane towards eating animals than animals when eating other animals in the same genus
We'll at least kill them first beforehand, can't say the same for China
Except lobsters. Boil those suckas alive
Or are they not cute and fluffy enough to care about?
That's why I don't eat lobsters, squids or octopuses.
You're actually supposed to dispatch lobsters before boiling, a lot of people just don't because lobsters are le icky and they would rather yeet it into a pot and forget it.
Are the baby raccoons genetically enhanced to be more intelligent than a standard raccoon? Wondering if they might be Cosmo-level sapient, or more like pets.
Apparently the supplementary material says Cosmo is a Labrador retriever. But she's obviously some kind of Spaniel thing, right?
But in factory farming, the lives of the animals are worse than in the wild or in traditional animal husbandry.
Hunting and fishing are certainly better deaths than the prey would've met otherwise. But constantly crowded and stressed and surrounded with the fumes of their waste is a terrible way to spend their lives. I don't waste any animal products that end up on my plate, but I try my best not to support factory farming.
This thread seems mostly reasonable, so it goes without saying that we shouldn't be ashamed of being anthropocentric. But being reasonably good and kind to lower animals, is good and kind for us. And many people in developed countries consume more meat than is healthy anyway.
I don't think any of the animals are notable. Rocket only became sentient because they cut open his head and gave him a different brain
Yeah, this was my impression too. I've seen it pointed out that they said in GotG1 that he was genetically modified, which strictly speaking should mean his genes were altered at birth. That would mean likely the other raccoons were modified the same way.
But I also think (A) the same screen also said Lylla was his associate so they probably hadn't thought things through that well and (B) they might not follow that strict distinction
something something epigenetics
Where's my No-Prize?
Yeah it
hurts.
I wasn't expecting the damage to be that severe. Totally deserved though. I also love that his OP gravity tech he was using to shit on characters all movie was beaten by some basic boots Rocket was working on at the start of the movie.
Made for friendship and cuddles.
After watching the movie, it hurts to look at your image.
be glad your heart still works
Why did HE do it?
you seriously are wondering why the evil villain did evil things
There are degrees to how evil a villain can be
Because he could
pain and tears aside this is a really nice picture, like how Teefs and Lylla are drawn here a lot.
they sure do a good job of glossing over the body horror
Would
I want to hug Floor
Floor was a good bun bun
What a bunch of freaks. I like how Rocket is the only one who isn't noticeably mutilated.
>I like how Rocket is the only one who isn't noticeably mutilated
He probably has the most horrid internal modifications to make him truly bipedal. They'd have had to break all the bones in his arms and legs and mega-fucked his spine to get him to walk like that. I bet it hurts all the time, like full body arthritis.
Exterminate them all with no mercy