fear factor cruelty

[T-Bite]

Okay, I'm not seeing how it affecting it emotionally means that their pain isn't real. We had a dog that we would have to literally smack the crap out of when he did something wrong and it should have caused him a great deal of pain, but it never seemed to cause him any "distress" at all. He would just get back up and do the same bad stuff over and over. Does this mean he's incapable of feeling emotion? And you guys keep saying "when tarantulas lose a leg they can continue on fine" which is a bad example since many lifeforms including vertebrates can continue on with out limbs fine. I had a mouse that was literally a qradraplegic (spelling?) after a attempted escape and kept feeding none the less. Come on guys surely you can give us better examples than this?

And I have seen tarantulas that turn into hair kicking refusing to eat messes when I get them home from buying them in pet stores and slowly seem to come out of it like they do gte stressed much like a vertebrate can. They even seem to exhibit more personality than a lot of my snakes and lizards.

And you guys can keep quoting what your biology teachers know or *think* they know all day. Scientists have been found to be wrong before. Scientists are still baffled about a species of jumping spiders learning capabilites. And I guarantee they have never done this research on tarantulas since research on these animals are almost non-existent, while they do have the largest brains of any bug out there.

 

[8SEXYLEGS]

I started reading this entire fear factor thing yesterday. I don't agree with any animal cruelty, weather it be on taranula's or elephants or kittens. I did not see this episode that is in question but I think people view taranula's as icky insects and not fascinating pets like we do. If fear factor were to do some stunt that put cute little puppies in harm, you would have "Peta" and every other agreesive animal rights group throwing a hissy fit, but people don't think of T's as "pets"
As for the pain thing-I don't think T's can feel emotions. My T's do not know that I am their "mommy'" and don't have a special bond with me because I feed them and make sure they are taken care of.
My opion is this, if you don't agree on how Fear factor treats T's and scorpions then simply don't watch the show, just like I don't buy CD's from Wal-Mart because of their censorship on all music.

 

[Professor T]

Code Monkey,

I'm sorry you're having a bad day. I'm going to try to cheer you up.

In response to me saying we don't really know if a T feels pain, you responded:

Actually we do: it "feels" nothing as even that is indicative of more anthropomorphosising. The nervous system of most inverts is non-centralized, non-complex. They are no more aware that they have lost a limb than you are another hair fell out.

In reality, actually we don't know if they do or they don't. You could not site one scientific piece of evidence that supports they feel nothing. Ts do have a central nerves system. So, you were wrong twice in the above quote. My point is you stated they can't feel pain as if that were fact, and its far from it, its a myth you believe.

The only thing that is subject to interpertation is your statement that their nervous system is non-complex. Its very complex compared to sponges, cnidarians, and flatworms. Its not complex compared to cephalopods or mammals. Whether or not its non-complex is semantics and has no meaning unless you define complex, so I won't say you are flat out wrong on that issue, just too vague to have meaning.

So, you were dead wrong twice, and vague once.

Now comes the part to cheer you up. After over 3,000 posts, the chances of you being right 100% of the time is a probability close to zero. You do kick nads, however not this time.

This is a golden opportunity to say the words..."Professor T was right and I was wrong, nobody has a freaking clue if Ts can feel pain".

If you admit this it will liberate you from thinking you have to be perfect 100% of the time. One mistake in 3,000 ain't bad!

 

[Professor T]

LMAO, Chip....LM<edit>AO.

stimulus.....response
stimulus...........response
stimulus..................response

The inability of the human mind to step, even transiently, outside of its instinctive tendency toward anthropomorphism is unfortunate. Yessir....

Rourke,

The inability of most humans to grasp real science from rhetoric is unfortunate. Here's the logic Chip was using: The T can't function in a box designed for a rat, therefore the T is so primative it can't feel pain. See anything funny about that jump to a false conclusion?

Here's his latest arguement: Nobody has ever proven a T can feel pain, so its a fact it can't! See anything wrong with that logic?

Let me spell it out for you, its the same logic that can lead to this conclusion:

Nobody has ever proven there is life outside of our biosophere, so its a fact there is no other life in the Universe. See anything wrong with that logic?

Just because humans are limited in what they can prove, doesn't mean the antithesis is true.

ROTFLMAO :worship:

 

[Code Monkey]

ROTFLMAO :worship:

Yes, that's pretty much where I am with my opinion of you. Professor indeed, come down to the University sometime and try your logic with the same smarmy cockiness on some of the neurobiologists. They'll do the equivalent of intellectually bitch slapping you black and blue before they send you packing. What you're doing is arguing (badly) existentialist philosophy regarding sense using tautalogical arguments, it's no more scientific to do what you have done than pray for rain.

Also, try learning a little more than the terminology itself before you try and sound all smart the next time. You clearly don't know what a truly centralised nervous system is - a mouse has a centralised nervous system, the T does not (note, I never said they didn't have a brain, something your predeliction for misguided semantic nitpicking led you to read). Most inverts, Ts included have *centers* of concentrated processing, but it's still distributed. Once again you hide behind a wall of semantic nitpicking instead of realising that you are a mental midget hoping for a pair of platform shoes for Christmas. Since you've seen fit to do nothing but blather like spider monkey in a bear trap such that I'm still not sure what your case was, you might as well go hang with the creationists since you seem incapable of accepting that the scientific method does not require us to absolutely prove every single specific before we can make claims about it:

Decades of research going back over half a century with thousands upon thousands of published papers, not *one* of which suggests that your platform is a remote possibility, but you still hold that it's unscientific to conclude that Ts are incapable of *feeling* pain

Basically, welcome to my virtual ignore list.

 

[Professor T]

Disclaimer:

While I'm having some fun with Code Monkey, please understand he is hands down the MVP on this board. He makes coming here intellectually simulating and few have the expertise and mind this guy has. As stated, he's on the money almost all of the time...he's scary. I love that guy, and I'm not even gay.

Not to slight other amazing contributors like Immortal Sin (best/hottest avitar), KellyGirl (too cute for words), Joy (her name says it all), and JMorningstar (the too modest millipede expert), but Code Monkey is in a category by himself. Nobody entertains me more than him... or stirs up a thread like he can. :worship:

 

[Mendnwngs]

Wow..

Keeping my personal opinions out of it, this is a very interesting, and informative thread.

I gotta come through this forum more often.



-Jason

 

[Salmissra]

Okay, so if we change the phrase "feels pain" to "responds to negative stimulus" will that clear the air?
Sounds like some are interpreting the word "feel" emotively where in fact you do not have to. I can "feel" the floor beneath my feet, I'm not getting all choked up about it though!
Sounds like much ado about nothing but semantics.

BTW: I love watching you all, especially Prof. T and CM dust off and shake your intellects at each other! I have learned more reading your interactions than I would have from a book. This has been an interesting thread.

 

[Professor T]

Hi Salmissra,

ProfessorT,

If you want to prove it wrong, it is up to you to find the evidence to disprove it, not the other way round. I'm not saying that there is no possibility of you being right, but i find it highly unlikely.

Cheers,

Thank you Salmissra, that was exactly my point when Code Monkey made the statement Ts can't feel pain. Its commonly believed they can't, which I also believe, but I recognize its not fact, just a common belief.

Some people might find it highly unlikely there is life in the Universe outside Earth's biosphere, but that doesn't make it fact.

 

[Professor T]

Yes, that's pretty much where I am with my opinion of you. Professor indeed, come down to the University sometime and try your logic with the same smarmy cockiness on some of the neurobiologists. They'll do the equivalent of intellectually bitch slapping you black and blue before they send you packing. What you're doing is arguing (badly) existentialist philosophy regarding sense using tautalogical arguments, it's no more scientific to do what you have done than pray for rain.

Junior, I got my degree in zoology before you were born. If you listen instead of always trying to be right at all costs, you'd see I'm right.

Also, try learning a little more than the terminology itself before you try and sound all smart the next time. You clearly don't know what a truly centralised nervous system is - a mouse has a centralised nervous system, the T does not (note, I never said they didn't have a brain, something your predeliction for misguided semantic nitpicking led you to read).

I read, The Biology of Spiders by Rainer F. Foelix, thats where I got the information they have a central nervous system.

Basically, welcome to my virtual ignore list.

Your choice, but many Americans put Kerry on their ignore list. :wall:

 

[danread]

that was exactly my point when Code Monkey made the statement Ts can't feel pain. Its commonly believed they can't, which I also believe, but I recognize its not fact, just a common belief.

Some people might find it highly unlikely there is life in the Universe outside Earth's biosphere, but that doesn't make it fact.

How on earth do you keep twisting this argument to suit your needs? If you re read my post i was saying that you are in the wrong for trying to call out Code to prove his statement, as what you are claiming goes against all conventional understanding of invertebrate nervous systems. It's up to you to find proof of inverts feeling pain, not the other way round. Whilst there is not single paper or article proving inverts don't feel pain, there is a host of evidence if you want to go and look for it in the study of insect nervous systems.

Try looking at this article. The point about an insect walking with a crushed tarsus (lower leg) will continue applying it to the ground with undiminished force seems particuarly valid and is good evidence for me. Right, your turn....

 

[Code Monkey]

How on earth do you keep twisting this argument to suit your needs?

Apparently he got a bug in his butt to see me publicly admit that my posts to these boards are not suitable for publication in the scientific journals because I use terms too loosely.

 

[T-Bite]

"Although it is impossible to know the subjective experience of another animal with certainty, the balance of the evidence suggests that most invertebrates do not feel pain."

Proof that this really is just a hypothesis and not FACT. Keep trying to write it off as such.

And all this "research" is inconclusive. They try and characterize how an invertebrate should react to "stimulus" based on what the know in vertebrates. Sorry, apples and oranges here. I've personally witnessed a deer whose leg was broken, but still kept trying to put it's full weight on it as it would keep collapsing. Yet ANOTHER bad example. And in ONE instance they say the roach continued to eat while it was eaten. Amazing how different my roaches react to being eaten by my tarantulas. They sure don't seem to be enjoying it much.

 

[Code Monkey]

And all this "research" is inconclusive. They try and characterize how an invertebrate should react to "stimulus" based on what the know in vertebrates. Sorry, apples and oranges here.

No, it's not, and to continue to kid yourselves that it is is just saddening. You *want* to believe in your anthropomorphosisms so much that you are willing to go through all manner of mental gymnastics to hold out that one little glimmer of hope. If you must pat yourself on the back that it's ultimately just a theory of neurobiology that inverts are not conscious and intelligent, keep at it, it won't make you sound any smarter or any more correct.

Further, truth be told, a very large amount of what we know about vertebrate neurophysiology is from studying inverts, in detail, at length. It's largely because you can decapitate a roach, remove all of it's internal organs, and the nervous system continues to function perfectly, unlike, say, our tightly intergrated and centralised nervous system that would have shut down from massive shock if you tried such a thing. It's also valid because a nerve is just a nerve; a nerve that is activated by ACh in a human is no different in its basic functioning than one from a cockroach.

Even today, much of the fundamental neurophysiology work is done with invertebrates because no one is going to seriously suggest that there is any ethical violation occuring with all manner of evisceration and probing of inverts, but if you want to do the same thing with even a white mouse you have prove a lot more about the necessity of the animal model because it is considered to be an ethical issue for good reason.

-----------------

Once more the board is overrun with emo-cases, only this set wants to toss around just enough science to sound like they have an argument, sigh...

Perhaps from now on I'll just leave my counterargument to the emoheads at the level of Tom's rebuttal back on the first couple of pages. It says the same thing without leaving room for all this grasping at straws to make a case

 

[Professor T]

"Although it is impossible to know the subjective experience of another animal with certainty, the balance of the evidence suggests that most invertebrates do not feel pain."

Proof that this really is just a hypothesis and not FACT. Keep trying to write it off as such.

No matter how much logic you use you won't convince them that their belief is a hypothesis, not a fact. They learned it in school as fact, like Columbus discovering America. Let them wallow... :wall:

 

[Professor T]

ProfessorT,

I'm not saying that there is no possibility of you being right, but i find it highly unlikely.

Cheers,

Dan the man,

This was your quote, I just used it to prove my point, I turned NOTHING around. If you admit there is a possibility of me being right although in your opinion highly unlikely...you just pointed out the FACT that your "fact" isn't "fact" just a nice hypothesis. Unless anything you personally find highly unlikely becomes fact?

You have no further points that can be valid to claim your opinion is fact. By your own statement you won this debate for me...thanks.

 

[Rourke]

You have no further points that can be valid to claim your opinion is fact. By you own statement your won this debate for me...thanks.

Gee Mr Perfessor....how many peer-reviewed publications do YOU have in the life sciences? Are you a PhD? Or just a Master of Convolution? Or a BS?

I'd kick your nads myself, but basically, there's nothing left to be kicked. The King has spoken, and you are hanging nadless for all to see. I'm not sure why Code Monkey is still hopping up and down on them......

Rourke

 

[Professor T]

Gee Mr Perfessor....how many peer-reviewed publications do YOU have in the life sciences? Are you a PhD? Or just a Master of Convolution? Or a BS?

I'd kick your nads myself, but basically, there's nothing left to be kicked. The King has spoken, and you are hanging nadless for all to see. I'm not sure why Code Monkey is still hopping up and down on them......

Rourke

Rourke,

There was no substance in your post. Do you have an opinion on this topic or are you only capable of blowing hot air?

You obviously haven't followed anything that was said; or you tried to follow it but it went over your head. I've already taken the nadkickers title on this one and he has admitted that I'm correct, and then he used the rationalization I was too technical for the purpose of this board, something he is guilty of all the time. It was a graceful way of saying he got his nads kicked in. I'm sorry your hero fell fan boy, but if you read the entire exchange and had code monkey explain it to you slow...you might sort of get it.

As for you kicking anyones nads...stick to the baby pool where you're safe.

If you have anything intelligent to say on this topic, I'd LOVE to hear it.

The New And Improved King Nadkicker,
Professor T

 

[Xanzo]

It is my opinion that this topic is getting to the point of being repetitive. Would be nice if this thread were to settle to the bottom and eventually disappear into the archives.

 

[Scott C.]

Being right, for any purpose other than being right, is something that might justify quiet celebration. Even if you're right, childish behavior clouds that fact.... hypothesis....