| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
|
EcoSpheres Inhumane?
I was wanting to get some opinions on the EcoSphere, initiated by NASA,
in which tiny creatures live confined in a glass ball with a little bit of water, oxygen and a dead plant with which to feed on. (They are definitely eye-catching.) http://www.eco-sphere.com/home.htm I don't know how many here remember the AquaBabies market, but many protested their existence, stating it was inhumane to confine the little fish to such a tiny living space. To me, the EcoSphere seems no different. Brine shrimp though they may be, surely they would like more space? Some might say it's akin to keeping a dog locked-up in a cage, while others might think it's a "cool" novelty. What is your opinion? -Stacey |
"Stacey Whaley" wrote in message oups.com... To me, the EcoSphere seems no different. Brine shrimp though they may be, surely they would like more space? Residents of downtown Tokyo would like more space too :) Nobody seems to feel that their living space is inhumane. |
Well think about it a bit before you decide whether this is inhumane or
not. How much space do these guys actually have? Well according to the link you provided the smallest available ecosphere is 3.25" now I don't know exactly how big the creatures inside are but for simplicity lets say they're 1/2 an inch long. Sound reasonable? Well then that means that the diameter of their world is 6.5 times longer than they are. Now lets think about a full grown Oscar in an aquarium. Lets assume this fish is a foot long - that's reasonable. Now, for it to have as much living space as these shrimp it will need a 6.5 foot diameter tank. How many full grown Oscar owners out there have a tank with a single 6.5 foot dimension - let alone a 6.5 foot diameter sphere's worth of living space? We keep fish in much smaller areas than these guys are being kept in, relatively speaking. It is probably much more humane than many of the things we do every day and think of as good practice. I think the spheres are a neat idea. -Daniel |
Are you a troll? You are comparing a brine shrimp to a dog? I think
you have the intelligence of a brine shrimp. In the same vein, I am making yogurt and I am concerned about the tiny plastic jar the all those bacteria have to live in. I am also worry about how barbaric that I am ingesting million of lives alive. And don't get me started on the countless yeast lives I am killing everytime I bake bread. *sob* |
"Stacey Whaley" wrote in message oups.com... I was wanting to get some opinions on the EcoSphere, initiated by NASA, in which tiny creatures live confined in a glass ball with a little bit of water, oxygen and a dead plant with which to feed on. (They are definitely eye-catching.) http://www.eco-sphere.com/home.htm I don't know how many here remember the AquaBabies market, but many protested their existence, stating it was inhumane to confine the little fish to such a tiny living space. To me, the EcoSphere seems no different. Brine shrimp though they may be, surely they would like more space? Some might say it's akin to keeping a dog locked-up in a cage, while others might think it's a "cool" novelty. What is your opinion? Well, this is similar to the sphere I was mentioning the other day in my post about BAT's at the LFS. I've read on various Oz web sites that say these things are illegal in this country, and that the reason is because they are bad to keep fish in; the sphere shape messes with the fishes latteral direction snesing lines and causes undue disorientation and stress. They mention that gold fish aren't allowed to be kept in them but I can recall seeing anything mentioned about tropicals or other things. Still, I am not sure personally whether they are good for fish or an object that simply looks good. They seem more designer, than practical to me ;) Oz -- My Aquatic web Blog is at http://members.optusnet.com.au/ivan.smith |
wrote in message oups.com... | Are you a troll? ....speaking of trolls...... billy |
"Ozdude" wrote in message
... "Stacey Whaley" wrote in message oups.com... I was wanting to get some opinions on the EcoSphere, initiated by NASA, in which tiny creatures live confined in a glass ball with a little bit of water, oxygen and a dead plant with which to feed on. (They are definitely eye-catching.) http://www.eco-sphere.com/home.htm I don't know how many here remember the AquaBabies market, but many protested their existence, stating it was inhumane to confine the little fish to such a tiny living space. To me, the EcoSphere seems no different. Brine shrimp though they may be, surely they would like more space? Some might say it's akin to keeping a dog locked-up in a cage, while others might think it's a "cool" novelty. What is your opinion? Well, this is similar to the sphere I was mentioning the other day in my post about BAT's at the LFS. I've read on various Oz web sites that say these things are illegal in this country, and that the reason is because they are bad to keep fish in; the sphere shape messes with the fishes latteral direction snesing lines and causes undue disorientation and stress. They mention that gold fish aren't allowed to be kept in them but I can recall seeing anything mentioned about tropicals or other things. Still, I am not sure personally whether they are good for fish or an object that simply looks good. They seem more designer, than practical to me ;) Oz So, what you're saying is that you didn't look at the link and don't know what we're talking about? Mar |
"MarAzul" wrote in message news:c6bVd.36909$Tt.3527@fed1read05... | | So, what you're saying is that you didn't look at the link and don't know | what we're talking about? | Dangit, Mar, you beat me to it. g |
Stacey Whaley wrote:
I was wanting to get some opinions on the EcoSphere, initiated by NASA, in which tiny creatures live confined in a glass ball with a little bit of water, oxygen and a dead plant with which to feed on. (They are definitely eye-catching.) I honestly don't think shrimp have enough of a nervous system to perceive confinement. The shrimp probably notice lack of oxygen or food, but those are apparantly not lacking or they wouldn't live for over a year. Did you see Sagan's writeup? It's a fun read. -- __ Elaine T __ __' http://eethomp.com/fish.html '__ |
wow. sounds like everyone is bashing Stacey for either not thinking
practically enough and being too humane. in my opinion the world needs more people to ask more questions like this, instead of more nasty analytical thinkers that discourage these questions. i dont have an opinion about these ecospheres because i dont know enough about them, but lets not discourage people like stacey from asking questions like this. |
In article ,
Elaine T wrote: Stacey Whaley wrote: I was wanting to get some opinions on the EcoSphere, initiated by NASA, in which tiny creatures live confined in a glass ball with a little bit of water, oxygen and a dead plant with which to feed on. (They are definitely eye-catching.) I honestly don't think shrimp have enough of a nervous system to perceive confinement. The shrimp probably notice lack of oxygen or food, but those are apparantly not lacking or they wouldn't live for over a year. I wonder if they notice nothing is trying to eat them? -- Need Mercedes parts ? - http://parts.mbz.org http://www.mbz.org | Mercedes Mailing lists: http://lists.mbz.org 633CSi 250SE/C 300SD | Killies, killi.net, Crypts, aquaria.net 1970 280SE, 72 280SE | Old wris****ches http://watches.list.mbz.org |
thewes wrote:
wow. sounds like everyone is bashing Stacey for either not thinking practically enough and being too humane. in my opinion the world needs more people to ask more questions like this, instead of more nasty analytical thinkers that discourage these questions. i dont have an opinion about these ecospheres because i dont know enough about them, but lets not discourage people like stacey from asking questions like this. Huh? I don't see any nasty responses or bashing on the alt.aquaria side of this thread. Of course, I have the local troll killfiled so maybe I missed something. I'm surprised you would call analytical thinkers in general nasty, though. I'd hazard a guess that you just insulted a pretty good number of people in both cross-posted newsgroups, me included. BTW, the website is http://www.eco-sphere.com/home.htm. -- __ Elaine T __ __' http://eethomp.com/fish.html '__ |
Richard Sexton wrote:
In article , Elaine T wrote: Stacey Whaley wrote: I was wanting to get some opinions on the EcoSphere, initiated by NASA, in which tiny creatures live confined in a glass ball with a little bit of water, oxygen and a dead plant with which to feed on. (They are definitely eye-catching.) I honestly don't think shrimp have enough of a nervous system to perceive confinement. The shrimp probably notice lack of oxygen or food, but those are apparantly not lacking or they wouldn't live for over a year. I wonder if they notice nothing is trying to eat them? If so, it's gotta be a plus for them. Of course, that assumes they have enough of a brain to even be capable of remembering from day to day that nobody tried to eat them the day before. ;-) -- __ Elaine T __ __' http://eethomp.com/fish.html '__ |
"Gfishery" wrote in message
... Residents of downtown Tokyo would like more space too :) Nobody seems to feel that their living space is inhumane. but they always have the option to leave if they want to, instead they CHOOSE to live there ;op -- Margolis http://web.archive.org/web/200302152...qs/AGQ2FAQ.htm http://www.unrealtower.org/faq |
interesting points ;o)
-- Margolis http://web.archive.org/web/200302152...qs/AGQ2FAQ.htm http://www.unrealtower.org/faq |
wrote in message
oups.com... Are you a troll? pot, kettle, black -- Margolis http://web.archive.org/web/200302152...qs/AGQ2FAQ.htm http://www.unrealtower.org/faq |
Only one person is bashing Stacey, thewes was sticking up for her.
Apparently the loudmouthed troll didn't appear in your reader. -- Margolis http://web.archive.org/web/200302152...qs/AGQ2FAQ.htm http://www.unrealtower.org/faq |
"MarAzul" wrote in message news:c6bVd.36909$Tt.3527@fed1read05... So, what you're saying is that you didn't look at the link and don't know what we're talking about? I followed the link and apart from the fact the orignal message appears to be troll, the EcoSphere my LFS sells is better than the heap I saw on the web page. Sorry, but I didn't see any type of filtration or lighting on the linked sphere. Doesn't matter any way whether I saw it or not, to be honest, all globe shaped vessels for fish are bad for them for the reasons I cite in my previous post. They are cruel IMO. Not much better than those stupid picture frame tanks that are all the vogue of late - now that's really cruel. Oz -- My Aquatic web Blog is at http://members.optusnet.com.au/ivan.smith |
"Stacey Whaley" wrote in message oups.com... Apologies Stacey. I seem to have the wrong end of a couple of sticks here. FWIW - those things look good, but that's all IMO. They look worse when they get dirty. If you're just putting shrimps in them then I guess they would be okay, but I wouldn't put fish in them - too cruel. I know you're not a troll, and I apologise. Don't bite me ;) Oz -- My Aquatic web Blog is at http://members.optusnet.com.au/ivan.smith |
Reality check: Artemia are small, planktonic, crustaceans, relations
of daphnia. They spend their entire existence swimming aimlessly in predator-free temporary waters, and are often found in enormous densities. They without doubt have computing power closer to that of an earthworm than a housefly, and certainly nowhere near that of a fish. |
Ozdude wrote:
"Stacey Whaley" wrote in message oups.com... Apologies Stacey. I seem to have the wrong end of a couple of sticks here. :) That's OK. Just to be sure I went and looked in the mirror. No warts or unsightly hairs where they shouldn't be. Also, didn't feel too much like moving from my house to beneath a bridge. FWIW - those things look good, but that's all IMO. They look worse when they get dirty. If you're just putting shrimps in them then I guess they would be okay, but I wouldn't put fish in them - too cruel. I first saw one in a Brookstone store in a local mall. At first I did a double-take because they are so clever-looking. I thought it would be nice to have one for my desk. It never occured to me that it might be inhumane until I started looking at the AquaBabies sites on the internet and finding protest pages about them. That's when the lightbulb flickered. (Aquababies actually have fish/frogs/crabs in them, quite different from the brine shrimp.) I know you're not a troll, and I apologise. Don't bite me ;) I think trolls have big teeth. Mine are a bit smaller and wouldn't hurt as much. ;) Oz -Stacey -- My Aquatic web Blog is at http://members.optusnet.com.au/ivan.smith |
"Margolis" wrote in message ... "Gfishery" wrote in message ... Residents of downtown Tokyo would like more space too :) Nobody seems to feel that their living space is inhumane. but they always have the option to leave if they want to, instead they CHOOSE to live there ;op I haven't run into any "Live Free Or Die" shrimp lately. If the brine shrimp could choose between becoming an ingredient of my goldfish food flakes or living in an ecosphere, I'm sure they would choose the latter :) But I must say the shrimp served at the last seafood restaurant I dined at were excellent! |
"Ozdude" wrote in message ... "Stacey Whaley" wrote in message oups.com... Apologies Stacey. I seem to have the wrong end of a couple of sticks here. FWIW - those things look good, but that's all IMO. They look worse when they get dirty. If you're just putting shrimps in them then I guess they would be okay, but I wouldn't put fish in them - too cruel. I know you're not a troll, and I apologise. Don't bite me ;) Oz -- My Aquatic web Blog is at http://members.optusnet.com.au/ivan.smith I'm totally with you here Oz....on both the question of trolls and these EcoSpheres - lol. Saw one when we first started out on this fish experience back in August trying to chose a tank for my son's birthday. Looked quite trendy but the poor goldfish they had trapped in there just looked so unhappy.... :-( Plus, I thought one of the arguements years ago against round goldfish bowls is that there was not sufficient surface area at the top....might be wrong though.... Didn't get one, wouldn't get one....Maybe the situation for the little shrimps encased in one would be better than their usual fate - maybe not (sitting on the fence)...but IMO not for fish.... Gill |
"Ozdude" wrote in message u... I followed the link and apart from the fact the orignal message appears to be troll, the EcoSphere my LFS sells is better than the heap I saw on the web page. Sorry, but I didn't see any type of filtration or lighting on the linked sphere. Doesn't matter any way whether I saw it or not, to be honest, all globe shaped vessels for fish are bad for them for the reasons I cite in my previous post. They are cruel IMO. Not much better than those stupid picture frame tanks that are all the vogue of late - now that's really cruel. Oz First of all, I'm not saying I agree with the practice.... But an Eco-Sphere isn't a fish bowl. It's a self contained ecosystem. The globe comes complete with plant, water and shrimp inside and it's sealed. You can't put fish in them unless you break the glass, in which case you've just ruined it. -- Mar |
Well, as far as I can tell (and I've read most of the website, plus info from related sites) it seems to be a fair setup. I don't know how much a shrimp can understand things, but I see food, oxgen, and a nice habitat. That is what we provide for our pets, and as long as you don't mistreat them (ie: shake the crap out of them) I see no problem.
But it is nice to see people are concerned over things like this. A bad example of something similar is the betta with a plant. Instructions are to not feed the betta because he eats the plant. Very limited ecosystem, as bettas are not herbavores. And the plant can cover the entire top of the water. Big no-no for bettas. I think the EcoSphere has at least been well thought out, unlike other things. ::cough... betta in a vase... cough:: |
Eco-sphere's don't have a brine shrimp they have a Hawaiian shrimp of some
sort. Brine shrimp only live a short timr, the eco-shrimp lives about a year or more apparantly. -- Need Mercedes parts ? - http://parts.mbz.org http://www.mbz.org | Mercedes Mailing lists: http://lists.mbz.org 633CSi 250SE/C 300SD | Killies, killi.net, Crypts, aquaria.net 1970 280SE, 72 280SE | Old wris****ches http://watches.list.mbz.org |
"Stacey Whaley" wrote in message oups.com... Ozdude wrote: "Stacey Whaley" wrote in message oups.com... Apologies Stacey. I seem to have the wrong end of a couple of sticks here. :) That's OK. Just to be sure I went and looked in the mirror. No warts or unsightly hairs where they shouldn't be. Also, didn't feel too much like moving from my house to beneath a bridge. LOL! Thanks for your sense of humour. I first saw one in a Brookstone store in a local mall. At first I did a double-take because they are so clever-looking. I thought it would be nice to have one for my desk. It never occured to me that it might be inhumane until I started looking at the AquaBabies sites on the internet and finding protest pages about them. That's when the lightbulb flickered. (Aquababies actually have fish/frogs/crabs in them, quite different from the brine shrimp.) I know you're not a troll, and I apologise. Don't bite me ;) I think trolls have big teeth. Mine are a bit smaller and wouldn't hurt as much. ;) LOL. I do think Sea Monkeys would look cool in the sphere though, but for the price they are I am starting to think they are nothing more than a glorified water filled lighting fixture ;) Oz -- My Aquatic web Blog is at http://members.optusnet.com.au/ivan.smith |
"MarAzul" wrote in message news:_zoVd.38260$Tt.19695@fed1read05... First of all, I'm not saying I agree with the practice.... But an Eco-Sphere isn't a fish bowl. It's a self contained ecosystem. The globe comes complete with plant, water and shrimp inside and it's sealed. You can't put fish in them unless you break the glass, in which case you've just ruined it. They aren't allowed to sell those things here in Australia - well I've never seen one for sale legally, put it that way. The LFS has a similar product called "Bio-Ball" which has a central air powered UGF tube with a small halogen light shining down the bubble column. It looks great lit up and bubbling and it does have the removable top, so I was basing Eco-Sphere on this. I wasn't aware it was a shrimp enclosure that was totally sealed ;( It seems to me that when the life cycle of the shrimp is through you can't clean these things - so does that mean they have built in obsolescence? Oz -- My Aquatic web Blog is at http://members.optusnet.com.au/ivan.smith |
"Richard Sexton" wrote in message ... Eco-sphere's don't have a brine shrimp they have a Hawaiian shrimp of some sort. Brine shrimp only live a short timr, the eco-shrimp lives about a year or more apparantly. What do you do when they eventually expire though? Can you recharge the ball somehow? Seems a waste to me. Oz -- My Aquatic web Blog is at http://members.optusnet.com.au/ivan.smith |
"Ozdude" wrote in message u... The LFS has a similar product called "Bio-Ball" which has a central air powered UGF tube with a small halogen light shining down the bubble column. It looks great lit up and bubbling and it does have the removable top, so I was basing Eco-Sphere on this. That sounds pretty, but I'd agree with you - doesn't seem practicle for *any* kind of fish. It seems to me that when the life cycle of the shrimp is through you can't clean these things - so does that mean they have built in obsolescence? Oz Well, you'll always have a $100(or more) paperweight.. Hehe.. Mar --------- Vet Tech student |
Stacey,
I'm going to answer your question in such a way that it can be applied to all such similar circumstances... What you 'feel' after that is up to you... From a moral viewpoint, the amount of 'sympathy' applied to any non-human is directly related to the amount of similarity to us humans. We all (I hope) have a strong sympathy towards newborn babies, since they are so much like us. We do not have as strong a sympathy toward fetus's (sp???), dogs, cats, snakes, dolphins, tuna, pigs, cows, etc, because they are all less "human." Their lack of "human-ness" allows us to kill, experiment, and eat some of them. With each of them we have varying levels of sympathy. for most of us a fetus is closest to human and a snake farthest, so hardly anyone minds killing and eating snakes, and almost all of us mind killing and eating a fetus. (Please don't get angry, this is just an ethical exersize...) How about rats? Aren't they more human-like than brine shrimp? Yet we trap, poison, and kill rats. The U.S. supreme had to rule many years ago about what to do with people who were no longer "human," like Terry Shiavo. Out of nine justices, here is how they ruled: 5 justices decided that the States had an interest in keeping people alive who were no longer human (defined briefly as actively living and appreciating life), but if a person who had once been human, had made it known with "clear and convincing evidence" that they would not want to be kept alive if no longer human, then the state could allow them to die. The reason for this ruling was that it was impossible to foresee what the future would hold as far as medical treatment and miracles of recovery were involved, and that since death was permanent, with no going back, the States could act in the non-human's best interest to preserve their life. 3 justices decided that the State was way out of line in setting such a high standard of proof. They said that only a preponderance of the evidence should be necessary, because the State had no right to overrule a person's wishes, even after they were no longer a person. This would mean that if a person had ever had a serious conversation and mentioned that they would not want to be kept alive, that preference should override the State's interest in keeping them alive. The last justice said that both the majority decision, and the group dissent did a great disservice to the concept of life. He pointed out that a person no longer human, had nothing left to live for, and if the parents/family wanted to end the life, they should be allowed to. Setting up burdon of proof arguments about what a person said while they were human made no difference since a non-human had nothing to live for. So I guess you have to make your own decision about morality and human-ness and life. Do the brine shrimp qualify as human? If so, then they should be treated morally and released into the environment so there life can be as brief or as lengthy as chance permits. If the brine shrimp are not human, then we must decide if they are close to human, and deserve fair consideration and protection from inhumane treatment such as we offer cats, dogs, a third trimester fetus, etc... Once you have made that decision, then you must decide if the containment is inhumane. Would their life be better if we released them to live, be eaten, and die in the wild? If the brine shrimp are not close to human, then they do not benefit from treatment based on our morals. At that point we only need to consider the effect of their treatment on ourselves. Does confining them to an 'eco-sphere' have an effect on our moral growth. Will owning an eco-sphere lead to other morally questionable activities and acts, such as you often see with children who torture animals and then grow up to be sociopaths? As usual, I have tried to be brief, but failed :) rolf p.s. My personal opinion is that brine shrimp are not human, and can be used in almost any manner. They may be used as entertainment and enjoyment (such as fish and other animals), therefore confined to a controlled environment. They may be used as educational teaching implements and experimental subjects, even up to purposely or accidentally killing them. I'd much rather spend my energy on real humans that need our concern, rather than brine shrimp that sound like a tasty chilled snack ;-) On 1 Mar 2005 12:19:38 -0800, "Stacey Whaley" wrote: I was wanting to get some opinions on the EcoSphere, initiated by NASA, in which tiny creatures live confined in a glass ball with a little bit of water, oxygen and a dead plant with which to feed on. (They are definitely eye-catching.) http://www.eco-sphere.com/home.htm I don't know how many here remember the AquaBabies market, but many protested their existence, stating it was inhumane to confine the little fish to such a tiny living space. To me, the EcoSphere seems no different. Brine shrimp though they may be, surely they would like more space? Some might say it's akin to keeping a dog locked-up in a cage, while others might think it's a "cool" novelty. What is your opinion? -Stacey |
"I'm a Liberal. I'm Democrat. I'm Buddhist."
Oh poop! All that brilliant writing and then I remember to google you (actually a9.com) so that I see who my audience is. I promise... next time I'll google first and write second. I am maybe considered liberal (I thought it was insane to go to Iraq, but now we are there I think we need 300,000 troops to contain the violence). I'm more libertarian than democrat (growing up in Alaska does that to you). But I am not a Buddhist, and that makes my entire morality argument invalid. Damn! So, most of the previous post doesn't apply to you, because Buddhists cannot use the human/non-human argument. What if my next life is as a brine shrimp, therefore I must treat the brine shrimp as if I would live it's life. The argument then is whether containment in an eco sphere is something that you would wish upon yourself. I think my answer is still the same, and that a brief existence protected from predators, "might" outweigh the loss of freedom. rolf p.s. try adding The Duhks to your music collection. |
In article ,
Eromsnid Flor wrote: Stacey, I'm going to answer your question in such a way that it can be applied to all such similar circumstances... What you 'feel' after that is up to you... From a moral viewpoint, the amount of 'sympathy' applied to any non-human is directly related to the amount of similarity to us humans. We all (I hope) have a strong sympathy towards newborn babies, since they are so much like us. We do not have as strong a sympathy toward fetus's (sp???), dogs, cats, snakes, dolphins, tuna, pigs, cows, etc, because they are all less "human." This is changing: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...502933,00.html And they're not brine shrimp which don't live that long, they're a small marine shrimp that lives about 3-5 years. -- Need Mercedes parts ? - http://parts.mbz.org http://www.mbz.org | Mercedes Mailing lists: http://lists.mbz.org 633CSi 250SE/C 300SD | Killies, killi.net, Crypts, aquaria.net 1970 280SE, 72 280SE | Old wris****ches http://watches.list.mbz.org |
"Richard Sexton" wrote in message ... http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...502933,00.html Anthropomorphisization. (sp?) The application of human characteristics to things which are not human. That is not to say that pigs and chickens do not feel, but to attempt to equate the workings of their minds to ours is, while natural and inevitable in our species, pointless and egotistical. |
Ozdude wrote:
"Richard Sexton" wrote in message ... Eco-sphere's don't have a brine shrimp they have a Hawaiian shrimp of some sort. Brine shrimp only live a short timr, the eco-shrimp lives about a year or more apparantly. What do you do when they eventually expire though? Can you recharge the ball somehow? Seems a waste to me. Oz Yep, and of course recharging costs money. :-) -- __ Elaine T __ __' http://eethomp.com/fish.html '__ |
Eromsnid Flor wrote:
If the brine shrimp are not close to human, then they do not benefit from treatment based on our morals. At that point we only need to consider the effect of their treatment on ourselves. Does confining them to an 'eco-sphere' have an effect on our moral growth. Will owning an eco-sphere lead to other morally questionable activities and acts, such as you often see with children who torture animals and then grow up to be sociopaths? Now THAT is the heart of the matter - well stated! I would add that owning an Eco-Sphere could bring positive moral growth. If the shrimp become pets and the keeper develops a sense of caring for something alive, that caring can extend to higher animals and even fellow humans. -- __ Elaine T __ __' http://eethomp.com/fish.html '__ |
In article ,
Elaine T wrote: Ozdude wrote: "Richard Sexton" wrote in message ... Eco-sphere's don't have a brine shrimp they have a Hawaiian shrimp of some sort. Brine shrimp only live a short timr, the eco-shrimp lives about a year or more apparantly. What do you do when they eventually expire though? Can you recharge the ball somehow? Seems a waste to me. Oz Yep, and of course recharging costs money. :-) Yup, and it aint cheap, but they're not cheap to buy in the first place either. I guess if you can afford them at all the "recharge" cost is of little concern. They last 2-5 years although 8 is the record. -- Need Mercedes parts ? - http://parts.mbz.org http://www.mbz.org | Mercedes Mailing lists: http://lists.mbz.org 633CSi 250SE/C 300SD | Killies, killi.net, Crypts, aquaria.net 1970 280SE, 72 280SE | Old wris****ches http://watches.list.mbz.org |
In article ,
Billy wrote: "Richard Sexton" wrote in message ... http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...502933,00.html Anthropomorphisization. (sp?) The application of human characteristics to things which are not human. That is not to say that pigs and chickens do not feel, but to attempt to equate the workings of their minds to ours is, while natural and inevitable in our species, pointless and egotistical. I hope the cows think better of us than we do of them. While anthropomorphism is an interesting theory, it may or may nor be fact. That is, it maybe right or it may be wrong i this case; the work done in the referenced URL gives support to the notion it does not apply in this instance. -- Need Mercedes parts ? - http://parts.mbz.org http://www.mbz.org | Mercedes Mailing lists: http://lists.mbz.org 633CSi 250SE/C 300SD | Killies, killi.net, Crypts, aquaria.net 1970 280SE, 72 280SE | Old wris****ches http://watches.list.mbz.org |
Elaine T wrote: Eromsnid Flor wrote: If the brine shrimp are not close to human, then they do not benefit from treatment based on our morals. At that point we only need to consider the effect of their treatment on ourselves. Does confining them to an 'eco-sphere' have an effect on our moral growth. Will owning an eco-sphere lead to other morally questionable activities and acts, such as you often see with children who torture animals and then grow up to be sociopaths? Now THAT is the heart of the matter - well stated! I would add that owning an Eco-Sphere could bring positive moral growth. If the shrimp become pets and the keeper develops a sense of caring for something alive, that caring can extend to higher animals and even fellow humans. Just go and buy a few shrimp, stick 'em in a jar and have done with it. Eco-Jar. Cheaper. Doh! Nikki |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:06 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FishKeepingBanter.com