Re: HARLEQUIN LADYBIRD.

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 09:37:43 +0100, Malcolm
<Malcolm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


In article <oc6e2311bntrodnkr1071fsspvlmll8vba@xxxxxxx>,
amacmil304@xxxxxxx writes
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 07:18:29 +0100, Malcolm
<Malcolm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


In article <3o4d239j45vcd17tovc1oemj7jd996ifo3@xxxxxxx>,
amacmil304@xxxxxxx writes
On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 20:49:30 +0100, Malcolm
<Malcolm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <pqkc239tlttep0qpnodnceim8gokettqdc@xxxxxxx>,
amacmil304@xxxxxxx writes
On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 17:01:17 +0100, Malcolm
<Malcolm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <ivcc23t73tfbvrbsrcb1n3h9c3vqguarb9@xxxxxxx>,
amacmil304@xxxxxxx writes
On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 15:23:29 +0100, Malcolm
<Malcolm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <l06c23hnsk01fj46kd7uu575mm8ors7795@xxxxxxx>,
amacmil304@xxxxxxx writes
On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 13:37:21 +0100, Malcolm
<Malcolm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <t22c23h3aa94pltqnma8etdbfoni8mqcko@xxxxxxx>,
amacmil304@xxxxxxx writes

I have made it abundantly clear that I oppose the killing of one
individual to protect another. Whatever you want to classify


Of course you have, Angus, countless times.

Pity you can't understand it.

Oh, I do, but it doesn't answer my question, does it?

Of course it does.

My feelings are for the individual.

So you feel for the individual UK ladybird that is being eaten by the
alien invading harlequin ladybird?


That's predation.

By an alien invader on an indigenous species, so the worst possible kind
of uncontrolled predation, just like hedgehogs on wader nests, rats on
puffins, etc., etc. And you can't summon up a single feeling about it
:-(


Predators have to live.

Of course they do, but introduced ones which have not evolved with their
prey are capable to causing such damage that they can bring about the
extinction of that prey.

So what?

Hitler thought that about Jews and Aryans in economic and genetic
terms. Supermarkets do the same to high streets. Charity shops do it
to small businesses. You are introduced to Islay and taking up a
property that could be used by local inhabitants.

It happens all the time and is a part of life. But that doesn't mean
we should kill the introduced.

Back to your obsession with the Nazis, I see :-(((


It's the same principle. Killing one to benefit another.




Good. Glad we've established that.

No you haven't. Another assumption from a sloppy scientist.

So do you feel for the pheasant chick that's been eaten by and
introduced raptor?

A singularly poor example, though typical of your lack of knowledge.
Pheasants aren't indigenous and there aren't any "introduced" raptors.

Of course they are introduced. RSPB have done it.

No, they haven't done any such thing. You're confused.


Not at all. An introduction can be at any time. The idea that they
are re-introductions is a flawed concept. Absence of one species for
a long time means the habitat of others alters and re-introductions
upset that. Indeed, you lot are engaged in this sort of change by
discouraging sheep grazing to benefit the habitats of others. So
you're fakes , Malcolm. You shift sides when it suits you.

What a load of silly nonsense you spout. And I see you are back to
discussing "species" despite denying their existence :-)


Where have I denied the existence of "species"? I have said is it a
term in a concocted classification system. That's all it is. And I
use it to help you to try to understand.


The hedgehog on the Uists was introduced. There had not been any there
before.

But the hedgehog is "native to Britain" as you harp on about. So you
were killing a native species.

The hedgehog was not native to the Uists, as you very well know.


It's as native to Britain as the polar bear is native to parts of
America other than Alaska. You can't have it both ways, Malcolm.


The harlequin ladybird was introduced. There had been none in
Britain before.

So you use "Britain" when it suits you.

If you still, after all this time, can't get your head round the
appalling damage done by predators introduced to islands by man and the
need to get rid of them, then there's obviously little point in
continuing to batter at the brick wall.


But it's perfectly natural for man to introduce them. Everything we
do affects nature.

The grey squirrel was introduced. There had been none in
Britain before.

So are the reds.

You have never produced the slightest proof for that claim. When are you
going to?


It's not me who claims they're native without any firm evidence. And
the current population here are reproductions from elsewhere.


See, also, brown rats on Ailsa Craig and Canna,
rhododendron, Japanese knotweed, signal crayfish, etc., etc.

Sure, but all entirely natural acts by man unless you take man out of
nature. Everything we do is a product of our evolution including
introducing other species.

And when the opportunity and means are there to reverse particularly
damaging acts by man, you would presumably sit on your hands and let the
damage continue. Fortunately, your views are ignored.


Why are they any more damaging than our other activities. If you
think that way you should be campaigning to halt the use of motor cars
and close down the M1 and M6 and all motorways. That does a lot more
damage than a few rats on an island.



The white-tailed eagle and red kite have been *re*-introduced. They were
both here before, were brought to extinction by man and now populations
are being re-established.


And by some accounts causing havoc.

Please produce these "accounts" and give some details of the "havoc".


Look it up yourself.




You advocate the killing of hedgehogs, grey squirrels, and
wild birds.

Your leap from "advocate" to "callously indifferent" is
typical of your
powers of distortion.


Well, it is callously indifferent to advocate the killing of
hedgehogs, grey squirrels and wild birds.

Not at all.

Of course it is.

It is trying to prevent the extinction of species which are
indigenous caused by alien invaders. I'm certainly neither callous nor
indifferent. Unlike you, I have feelings for wildlife.


Mo Malcolm. You're the one that advocates killing them - not me.

"Mo"?


Meant NO. If you can't get your head round a typo you've little
chance of understanding much else.

Just thought I'd give you the chance to correct your sloppy typing.

Which is something you don't do about your science.

Your opinion on the matter is immaterial.


More like your sloppy science is of no material value.

See my remark immediately preceding.



I have and it's as immaterial as all your others.




Yes. Outside healthcare such as delivering papers to patients

So do you believe in volunteers delivering papers to patients is OK or
not?

Provided they don't have CEOs and Executives earning fat salaries.

Don't all NHS Trusts have those?

But delivering papers to patients is a direct service.

So? Isn't it usually carried out by volunteers?


Not for the NHS.

Are you saying that the papers aren't being taken round NHS hospitals by
volunteers working for the hospital?

No. Read what I wrote.

Good. I'm glad you're not saying that.

I already have.

I'm glad you accept the undoubted fact that papers are taken round NHS
hospitals by volunteers working for the hospitals.


But they're not working for the hospitals.




It is an organisation that pays high salaries to its
executives and hundreds of millions a year on outside consultants.

I agree.

Good. Yet the NHS has plenty of volunteers.

In what capacity?

Many.

Like what?

Like delivering newspapers, bringing round library books, manning the
information desk and many others. Some large hospitals have hundreds of
volunteers. Don't you approve?


I don't approve of volunteering for large organisations the pay their
executives fat salaries. I have said so in the past. The NHS should
pay for manning their information desks.

You really don't even try to understand the volunteer ethos, do you?
Let's hope that if you or a member of your family is in hospital you
appreciate their efforts. I doubt you'd be brave enough to tell them you
disapprove of what they are doing :-)


I think it's you who doesn't understand the ethos. Do you only
believe in SNH's work because you screw £271 a day out of the
taxpayer. Why don't you forfeit the money ad volunteer your services?

It's all about money to you, Malcolm, isn't it?

Filthy lucre in your grubby little hands.

LOL!! What absolute nonsense you talk.

You don't use money then, Angus?

You don't accept rent from your buildings, perhaps?


Sure, and you accept money for your books. That's business.

But it's you who says people should volunteer for what they believe
in. So if you believe in your brand of conservation you should offer
your services for free.

I very often do and not just in conservation matters.

So why not volunteer your services to SNH?

In what way do you
offer your services as a volunteer?



I don't.




Well?

Yes, very well, thank you. I just didn't think the above tripe

an answer.


Well, how about answering the questions?

The last piece of tripe destroyed any hope you had of answers.


Touched a raw nerve :-))


Have you confirmation that your advice has saved many bird species
from decline?

I thought the RSPB had given up on you.

Well, as usual when it comes to your guesses about me, you are wrong. I
have retired from their Scottish Advisory Committee after a longer than
average stint, but that doesn't mean all links have been severed.


Did you give them the same duff advice as you seem to give SNH about
hedgehogs?

Silly remark, not worthy of an answer.


Especially when you're stuck for one :-))

Your question was equivalent to me asking you if you've stopped beating
your wife.


Or if you were sniffing about a lady farmer?

You invented this pathetically silly idea about me way back and keep
returning to it. Have you got a fetish about lady farmers, Angus? Is
that your problem?

I think that might have been your problem :-))





Do you not know which ones are in decline?

You obviously don't otherwise you'd be able to name one.

Are you saying there's none?

I'm asking you for an example.

Look up the red list.

Please give me an example.

Look it up yourself.

I don't believe you know.

I don't believe you know how to look up the red list.

I have a copy here. Obviously you don't, otherwise you would have named
a species.

Look it up.

Name a species.

Look it up.

Don't need to.

Well, just remain ignorant.


Angus Macmillan
www.roots-of-blood.org.uk
www.killhunting.org
www.con-servation.org.uk

All truth passes through three stages:
First, it is ridiculed;
Second, it is violently opposed; and
Third, it is accepted as self-evident.
-- Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: HARLEQUIN LADYBIRD.
    ... By an alien invader on an indigenous species, ... You advocate the killing of hedgehogs, grey squirrels, and wild birds. ... Don't all NHS Trusts have those? ... Isn't it usually carried out by volunteers? ...
    (uk.environment.conservation)
  • Re: Much ado about a Lady bird.
    ... So how will that lead to the survival the indigenous species? ... It's being done by volunteers, ... ladybirds are killed off by the alien invader. ...
    (uk.environment.conservation)
  • Re: Much ado about a Lady bird.
    ... So how will that lead to the survival the indigenous species? ... It's being done by volunteers, ... ladybirds are killed off by the alien invader. ...
    (uk.environment.conservation)
  • Re: Much ado about a Lady bird.
    ... So how will that lead to the survival the indigenous species? ... It's being done by volunteers, ... ladybirds are killed off by the alien invader. ...
    (uk.environment.conservation)