200p Posted August 24, 2010 Share Posted August 24, 2010 The cat says, As suitable punishment, Mary should receive 50 slashings from the Cat o' Nine tails. Ah but only if we can bring back catipal punishment to these fiends! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
200p Posted August 24, 2010 Share Posted August 24, 2010 Send the witch to Alcatraz, I say FOR LIFE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
200p Posted August 24, 2010 Share Posted August 24, 2010 It's all Mary's fault, the cat swallowed a ball of wool down there, she's going to have mittens! All this talk of getting old (Mary) It’s getting me down my love Like a cat in a bin, waiting to drown This time I’m comin’ down The drugs don't work..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
200p Posted August 24, 2010 Share Posted August 24, 2010 The RSPCA say the bad treatment of cats is a sign of society being FURBAR. F***ed Up, Really, Beyond, All, Recognition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
200p Posted August 24, 2010 Share Posted August 24, 2010 Special CCTV will be used at the house now, called Cateyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
200p Posted August 24, 2010 Share Posted August 24, 2010 The woman did have mental problems, she was catatonic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingsgate Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 Apparently the police have had to disperse an angry crowd from outside her house. I wonder how long she will keep her job for at RBS? If she deals with the public, imagine people making comments, asking the manager not to be served by "the lady who is cruel to cats" etc! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Byron Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 Apparently the police have had to disperse an angry crowd from outside her house. If this is true, it's a comment on how odd our society has become. Just why are people becoming so steamed up about a cat that was not really harmed, when so many far worse crimes are committed daily? Reminds me of the hysteria over Diana and also Louise Woodward, the idolising of Raoul Moat and all the other unbalanced things that go on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tuberider Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 I'm not an animal lover by any stretch of the imagination, but I don't hate animals either. She must be a bit nasty to do something like that. As an aside though, I can't stand these people who go all gushy over their cats/dogs as if they were children, and pamper them like mad, and then go and chop their balls off or rip their uterus out to keep them docile. That to me is the ultimate cruelty, and makes me very suspicious of these so-called animal lovers. I think they are not animal lovers at all. I think they want the animal to love THEM, because nobody else does, or because they themselves are incapable of loving other people, or being loved by other people. Cats are wild animals. Dogs are also by nature wild, although easily domesticated. They are supposed to run free, scavenge, have sex, fight and generally do all the things wild animals do. If there is an imbalance in nature and too many of them, then nature will correct that imbalance through natural selection. The fittest and strongest will survive, the rest will be run over by cars, starve, etc etc. It's pretty brutal but that's nature. Cats, and Dogs for that matter, are not meant to be sterilized. And it's only a problem for the 'animal lover' if they are not. They want to make a wild animal a pet, then they wonder why it will not conform to their notions of cleanliness and order. They spray urine, they fight, they mate. The animal lover wants to stop that and have their 'pet' live an artificial existence because they are (usually) too fcuked up to go out and connect with other human beings. So instead the 'animal lover' projects all their insecurities and wants onto the poor creature who asked for none of it. And when they don't behave as the 'animal lover' wishes, they go and chop their balls of or rip their uterus out so they will not feel their natural instincts. Brutal stuff, IMHO. Animal lovers? B0llocks I say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cogs Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 They are supposed to run free, scavenge, have sex, fight and generally do all the things wild animals do. If there is an imbalance in nature and too many of them, then nature will correct that imbalance through natural selection. The fittest and strongest will survive, the rest will be run over by cars, starve, etc etc. It's pretty brutal but that's nature. That isn't how natural selection works. An example of natural selection would be just the things you are complaining about actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tuberider Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 That isn't how natural selection works. An example of natural selection would be just the things you are complaining about actually. not sure i understand your point here enlighten me, please Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Byron Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 I'm not an animal lover by any stretch of the imagination, but I don't hate animals either. She must be a bit nasty to do something like that. As an aside though, I can't stand these people who go all gushy over their cats/dogs as if they were children, and pamper them like mad, and then go and chop their balls off or rip their uterus out to keep them docile. That to me is the ultimate cruelty, and makes me very suspicious of these so-called animal lovers. I think they are not animal lovers at all. I think they want the animal to love THEM, because nobody else does, or because they themselves are incapable of loving other people, or being loved by other people. Cats are wild animals. Dogs are also by nature wild, although easily domesticated. They are supposed to run free, scavenge, have sex, fight and generally do all the things wild animals do. If there is an imbalance in nature and too many of them, then nature will correct that imbalance through natural selection. The fittest and strongest will survive, the rest will be run over by cars, starve, etc etc. It's pretty brutal but that's nature. Cats, and Dogs for that matter, are not meant to be sterilized. And it's only a problem for the 'animal lover' if they are not. They want to make a wild animal a pet, then they wonder why it will not conform to their notions of cleanliness and order. They spray urine, they fight, they mate. The animal lover wants to stop that and have their 'pet' live an artificial existence because they are (usually) too fcuked up to go out and connect with other human beings. So instead the 'animal lover' projects all their insecurities and wants onto the poor creature who asked for none of it. And when they don't behave as the 'animal lover' wishes, they go and chop their balls of or rip their uterus out so they will not feel their natural instincts. Brutal stuff, IMHO. Animal lovers? B0llocks I say. +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cogs Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 not sure i understand your point here enlighten me, please Natural selection is not the same as the Lotka-Volterra type process you are talking about. The former is concerned with evolution, the latter with population dynamics (usually thought of via first order non-linear differential equations; if there are too many rabbits, more wolves survive, until there are too many wolves and not enough rabbits, so the wolf numbers fall and the rabbit numbers rise etc etc). Natural selection doesn't care about imbalances in nature; our own existence proves that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IWantItNow Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 I'm not an animal lover by any stretch of the imagination, but I don't hate animals either. She must be a bit nasty to do something like that. As an aside though, I can't stand these people who go all gushy over their cats/dogs as if they were children, and pamper them like mad, and then go and chop their balls off or rip their uterus out to keep them docile. That to me is the ultimate cruelty, and makes me very suspicious of these so-called animal lovers. I think they are not animal lovers at all. I think they want the animal to love THEM, because nobody else does, or because they themselves are incapable of loving other people, or being loved by other people. Cats are wild animals. Dogs are also by nature wild, although easily domesticated. They are supposed to run free, scavenge, have sex, fight and generally do all the things wild animals do. If there is an imbalance in nature and too many of them, then nature will correct that imbalance through natural selection. The fittest and strongest will survive, the rest will be run over by cars, starve, etc etc. It's pretty brutal but that's nature. Cats, and Dogs for that matter, are not meant to be sterilized. And it's only a problem for the 'animal lover' if they are not. They want to make a wild animal a pet, then they wonder why it will not conform to their notions of cleanliness and order. They spray urine, they fight, they mate. The animal lover wants to stop that and have their 'pet' live an artificial existence because they are (usually) too fcuked up to go out and connect with other human beings. So instead the 'animal lover' projects all their insecurities and wants onto the poor creature who asked for none of it. And when they don't behave as the 'animal lover' wishes, they go and chop their balls of or rip their uterus out so they will not feel their natural instincts. Brutal stuff, IMHO. Animal lovers? B0llocks I say. +1 -1 I'd rather chop a cats nads off than have its off spring tortured by barbarians for sh|tting in their gardens. On a slight tangent where the hell did this idea that you follow your cat around watching where it takes a dump? We share this planet with animals, that precious patch of soil you keep is not yours...deal with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tuberider Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 Natural selection is not the same as the Lotka-Volterra type process you are talking about. The former is concerned with evolution, the latter with population dynamics (usually thought of via first order non-linear differential equations; if there are too many rabbits, more wolves survive, until there are too many wolves and not enough rabbits, so the wolf numbers fall and the rabbit numbers rise etc etc). Natural selection doesn't care about imbalances in nature; our own existence proves that. Point taken. A bit pedantic and scientific for this place, but i'm sure you're right and I got it mixed up. And I can't really be arsed to google Lotka-Volterra right now. In any case I do not see how it really affects my central argument. Which is, that many animal lovers are not animal lovers at all. They brutalize animals in horrific ways, to get them to conform to unnatural standards of behaviour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tuberider Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 Another thing that winds me up, is when they 'put down' animals because it is supposed to be humane. What's humane about killing an animal ? It's INHUMANE if you ask me. If the animal isn't dangerous, then turn the facker loose ! Give it a fighting chance to survive in the wild, don't just blow it's brains out because it keeps sh1tting on the carpet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cogs Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 Point taken. A bit pedantic and scientific for this place, but i'm sure you're right and I got it mixed up. And I can't really be arsed to google Lotka-Volterra right now. In any case I do not see how it really affects my central argument. Which is, that many animal lovers are not animal lovers at all. They brutalize animals in horrific ways, to get them to conform to unnatural standards of behaviour. Well it does because we'd have hundreds of feral dogs charging around the place giving people rabies, like in parts of Greece and Italy. A car isn't really a predator as regards cats and dogs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tuberider Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 Well it does because we'd have hundreds of feral dogs charging around the place giving people rabies, like in parts of Greece and Italy. A car isn't really a predator as regards cats and dogs. That's terrible. Maybe one day someone will discover a rabies vaccine they can give to dogs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cogs Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 That's terrible. Maybe one day someone will discover a rabies vaccine they can give to dogs. Maybe dogs could ring the doctors and ask for an appointment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battenberg Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 I don't like what she did but I'm not comfortable with the way this has played out. I think the owners who posted the video should be ashamed of themselves. They should have contacted RSPCA or the Police instead of posting this video in order to whip up what's turned into a circus and quite possibly ruined this women's life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IWantItNow Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 I don't like what she did but I'm not comfortable with the way this has played out. I think the owners who posted the video should be ashamed of themselves. They should have contacted RSPCA or the Police instead of posting this video in order to whip up what's turned into a circus and quite possibly ruined this women's life. I was angry when I first saw it, but I agree with you here. The public cannot be trusted to act rationally at the end of the day, when they react with violence and intimidation then they are no better than the woman IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happy_renting Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 Natural selection is not the same as the Lotka-Volterra type process you are talking about. The former is concerned with evolution, the latter with population dynamics (usually thought of via first order non-linear differential equations; if there are too many rabbits, more wolves survive, until there are too many wolves and not enough rabbits, so the wolf numbers fall and the rabbit numbers rise etc etc). Natural selection doesn't care about imbalances in nature; our own existence proves that. I thought some animal populations were shown to be mathematically chaotic, with attractors to some stable levels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrashedOutAndBurned Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/celebrity/cat-bin-lady-signed-by-cowell-201008253035/ FREAK wrangler Simon Cowell has signed a 50-year-old woman after footage of her slamdunking a cat became an internet sensation.There are fears the outcry will lead to children not trying to put cats in bins Charity shop model Mary Bale will record a range of feline-related covers for her debut CD, including The Cure's Love Cats, Cool for Cats by Squeeze and Paula Abdul's Opposites Attract featuring MC Skat Kat. Wayne Hayes, one of Cowell's flying monkeys, said: "When Simon started watching the video, he rolled his eyes and assumed it was just another middle-aged woman stroking a cat but when he saw her treat a trusting innocent with such withering contempt he knew he'd found a kindred spirit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
200p Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 Mary in a press conference has issued a statement: "I am ashamed of what I done. I had a bad day at work, although it is no excuse. I ask people to have it in their hearts to forgive me. On reflection this incident has changed my life. I shall quote from Shakespeare: Tabby or not Tabby, that is the question." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrashedOutAndBurned Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 Mary in a press conference has issued a statement: "I am ashamed of what I done. I had a bad day at work, although it is no excuse. I ask people to have it in their hearts to forgive me. On reflection this incident has changed my life. I shall quote from Shakespeare: Tabby or not Tabby, that is the question." Yes, she seems very contrite... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fa9-6gs1OUE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.