Comments by "Tespri" (@Tespri) on "Terrible Woman All Smiles After Killing Lion" video.

DENO X Wrong, with that logic female lions wouldn't be hunting. There is a reason why female lions do the hunting while males just sleep and fuck. Lion deserves no more respect than any other sociopath cat(and yes cats are proven to be sociopaths). I agree that this woman has issues, however I don't agree with this over reaction. Also humans are part of nature don't go to that bullshit talk that nature has some sort of transcendent meaning. Don't get me wrong, I'm not supporting people messing around with environment, however I see no point to "respect" nature, which is Disney crap anyway.
2
This is what happens when idiots believe what disney movies show to us. There is nothing majestic in lions. King of animals? Bullshit, bear could beat living shit out of lions (and they have). Not to mention she shot a male lion, which are lazy as fucks and almost never even hunt (unless he doesn't have a pack). But yeah what she did was pointless and really wasn't a test of courage with modern guns. This news isn't even worthy of being reported. It seems that TyT still has low standards for what kind of news they should report.
1
DENO X And how is that different from humans killing just to practice for their hunts? You have double stantards here. It's known that cats play with their prays and simply kills for fun. Heck ,I don't see dogs killing things simply for heck of it. Not to mention I were talking about bird species, not a fucking rats. " The cats don't even need to know why they are doing it" Neither psychopaths, they just do it. "The reason I know your wrong is because sciences involving the mind are mostly theory at this point." Argument from ignorance. "If X doesn't know it, then I must be right" is your argument in nutshell. However science actually knows how minds work pretty well, and in fact we can now days even use technology to find out who is psychopath and who is not.
1
stupaod Interesting line of thinking you have. Someone who is only pointing out that nature isn't anything magical and is crueler in reality than disney shows, is fucked up human being for that reason? Are you really that pathetic that you aren't even able to study about this subject itself? Are you really that pathetic that you need to result to insults instead of actually proving me wrong?. In fact the only reason you see cats as non psycopathics is because they just happen to happen to look cute. Your talk about dogs is irrelevant to the point that cats kill for fun.
1
stupaod "So what do you purpose we do about it? Do you want to eradicate all species of cat" How the fuck do you even jump into conclusions like that? How do you even end up from someone saying that cats are psychos to that same person would want to exterminate them all? WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU!? Someone pointing out flaws in something seems to be huge issue for you. You really need to contact a shrink.
1
stupaod Struck on a nerve? Have you even read anything you have said? You have been literally raging over someone saying that cat's have some faults. It seems that I did struck on your nerve the moment I called cats as psychos. I'm sorry but I'm not even angry at you. In fact I find you hillarious and bit stupid. And the fact that you respond during this time of day, suggests me that you probably live in America, so I start even feel sorry for you and understand your stupidity.
1
DENO X Not everyone can go there, and some might try to want to prepare if anything might happen which might cause fall of civilization. Or if they happen to end up to wild because plain crash or boat sinks middle of nowhere. Only one who is idiots is you for not ever even considering these options. "Birds can spread disease as well, you don't know why birds are targeted. " So are you saying that cats are our divine protectors who's lifes meaning is hunt everything which might cause disease? Common get real... if anything that is deluded opinion. Not to mention opinion which isn't even based on any fact. " So explain to me how if we know so much about the mind, we cant determine if behaviors are learned or inherited." Again argument from ignorance, and funny part is that we can actually determine which behaviors are learned or inherited. In matter of fact it's both. Genes + enviroment = behavior. Genes affect on our potential, and enviroment decides how much we end up using our potential. This same applies to other animals too. " None of what your saying has been proven." Cats killing many birds to extinction has been proven times ago. http://theoatmeal.com/comics/cats_actually_kill http://www.scilogs.com/allotrope/domestic-cats-are-mass-killers/ You can find sources for those studies in scilogs. " That is like saying that because someone can make fire that they understand it. I didn't say I must be right, I said you must be wrong" Irrelevant, your argument was still based on argument from ignorance. Aka, if you don't happen to know exactly how something works then, I can't know neither. You made logical fallacy and you still keep defending it. "Theories in science are constantly changing" Theories might be but not facts. this is something that original person who really haven't even bothered to even check what science actually is thinks. Theories are based on facts. Theories are only used to explain how these facts works or why they work. If we see cats killing other species in huge numbers and just letting them to rot, we can easily determine that reason is more likely that they are fucked up than some sort of divine guardians, especially if we scan their brains. " But we do not understand genetics and cognition. " Actually we have pretty good understanding on genetics. In fact we could already genetically modify people if it wouldn't be considered as a taboo. And what comes to cognition we already know more than enough to know that it isn't a freaking mystery. It's clear to me that you don't actually follow any news on science front. Since you keep saying that we don't know something which we actually already know about.
1
stupaod It's already proven by science. WE already have way to predict what you will choose 5 seconds before you will actually do it. We already have technology to make people feel scared or feel happy just by playing with magnetic fields in their brain (search godhelmet). Free will is nothing more than illusion, assuming that anyone would have free will would be same as assuming that laws of universe doesn't affect our brain chemistry. But now I understand why you are what you are. You are probably religious. Which might also explain you irrational belief that nature is sacred somehow and humans wouldn't be part of it.
1
DENO X Sure since empirically tested facts are half truths because you can't see the difference between empirical science and old age philosophy. " I will ask you now, how does this justify her killing the lion?" For practice. Since you clearly are hypocrite since for you can't see her killing a lion as practice, but you can see house cats killing bird species to extinction as practice I start to wonder do you even have any intelligence at all. My point wasn't to defend her actions, my point was to show how hypocrite you are but you apparently were too stupid to figure it out by yourself. "Are there more lions roaming any region, making them the primary source of food over other animals? " Self-defence against predator or simply getting one for source food. As you said lions are viewed as majestically and king of predators which is why it would be good training target for a uneducated person since they don't know any better. " Yet that justifies you accusing me of giving them a spiritual status? I think not." You really are slow one aren't you? I was making a nasty joke about your behavior toward cats and how you justify their psychotic killing sprees. I never really did think that you think them as real divine beings. " You jump to the conclusion that you KNOW something (psychopath cats) based on a THEORY " In science THEORY means different than in normal life. Word that you would use as theory is used as hypothesis in science. Now repeat with me slowly H-y-p-o-t-h-e-s-i-s. "Your right. Modern science didn't exist at that time. But like scientist today, religious leaders and philosophers were thought to KNOW things." Scientists aren't authorities in modern science. This is again something that average joe might think. Science is about testing and repeating those tests to see is it really true. If test can't be repeated then it holds no credibility. In other words it doesn't matter who commits the tests, only thing that matters is what are the results and can those same results be get if test is repeated. It isn't about coming up with a strange idea, it's about doing the test first and then draw conclusions out of it. "No. Everything becomes outdated at one point." This is a fallacy. With that line of thinking even humans would suddenly be considered cats and cats would be considered dogs. OR that electricity wouldn't actually exists but it would be actually a fairy dust. Or 1+1 is suddenly 4 Our world and it's rules won't change, only our understanding of it. You seem to firmly believe that everything will become outdated and that there is no facts in this world. " You claim to KNOW a lot. Based on theories developed by experts in different fields. You are trying to use authority and justify through the means of publications and educational literature. Those experts, brand most of their findings as THEORIES. That is why your whole stance of knowing anything is flawed. " This is so wrong in many levels. First of all, I'm not using authorities to justify it. I never did, in matter of fact you were the one who brought WORD "LEADING SCIENTIST OF THE WORLD". I just contradicted you, and showed you to articles which has link to the studies itself which proved you wrong. I showed you that your previous claims was bullshit and shouldn't even be used because it's fallacy. "In no way have I reference fairy magic. Irrelevant response. " Again your stupidity shines, since you obviously couldn't figure out sarcasm even though I pointed out that it was sarcasm. Response was made in order to make fun of your belief that science doesn't work. "You would also be considered retarded based on your apparent lack of English skills" This makes no sense even with context. Why? Simply because not everyone are born in country where people talk english as native language. You go ahead and learn different languages and speak them all perfectly. Also it's not problem of knowledge that were talking about especially since we live in day and age where we have free information and it's pretty common knowledge in places of earth where we use computers that it's all thanks to science. Which makes your whole comment pretty retarded if I may add. "Again. Just because you can utilize something does not mean you understand it. Just because you can create an emotion in the brain doesn't mean you understand the brain. It means your desired effect occurred in a situation. I cant harness fire without seeing that it give of light or feeling its heat. That does not mean I understand the chemical process." Again but we do, and we do understand the chemical progress of the fire in same way. Chemistry in human brain isn't that much different from any other fields of chemistry. "If you need to read a book to understand the role a male lion plays in a pride or why I would call it majestic than you should not lecture anyone." Wrong I can easily understand why you view them as majestic, however I'm only here pointing out that they really aren't so majestic when compared to other creatures of the nature. You can understand other people without actually agreeing with them. Usually one who understand, but doesn't agree is the one who is right, because he knows why someone sees things like that but that other one can't see why this guy doesn't view same way. Usually.
1
DENO X I miss points? I have answered everything you made not to mention add even more to conversation. But the fact that you come here to say that we make mistakes and have biases on science proves how bullshit you really are. Why it proves? Do you know difference of pseudoscience and science? If you do then you should realize that what you are now talking about is called as pseudoscience and it's rarely taken seriously by any critical thinker. Usually people like you who sees nature some what more special than it really is are one of those who fall into victims of pseudoscience. What you have been doing here is simply nothing more than refusing to listen facts. You are no different from creationist christian. You ignore the facts which contradicts you and go and say that they are not valid because you don't believe that science can be ever perfect. you haven't even presented me any data which contradicts studies which I showed you. Instead you say "no they can't be real because scientist can do errors". You're not interested in truth, and your behavior has already proven it.
1
DENO X I have responsed, and there was some point where the answer would've been. but good job on ignoring literally every point I said. You are like creationist. You just can't handle any scientific data which contradicts you.
1
DENO X everything is an opinion. However my opinion is based on facts unlike yours. Yours is based on goody feelings with no intellectual base on them. Just like creationist. You can't handle facts when confronted by them. Heck you don't even question your own belief that lions should be called majestic or that cats are totally sane and good creatures. Even though facts already tell that they are more terrible than humans by their nature. Only reason why we have higher death toll is simply because we have the technology.
1
People really are overreacting over this. Yes it was a pointless killing, but it really doesn't deserve outrage of this huge.
1