Now on ScienceBlogs: Q: How do you sex a Smilodon? (A: Very carefully)

Seed Media Group

Search

Profile

profilepic9-09a.jpg

My scientific specialty is chronobiology (circadian rhythms and photoperiodism), with additional interests in comparative physiology, animal behavior and evolution. I am not an MD so I cannot diagnose and treat your sleep problems. As well as writing this blog, I am also the Online Discussion Expert for PLoS. This is a personal blog and opinions within it in no way reflect the policies of PLoS. You can contact me at: Coturnix@gmail.com


Buy the 2008 Science Blogging Anthology:

The Open Laboratory

Buy the 2007 Science Blogging Anthology:

The Open Laboratory

Buy the 2006 Science Blogging Anthology:

The Open Laboratory

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Blogroll

Find me on...


Homepage

FriendFeed

Twitter

Facebook

Nature Network

YouTube

Flickr

Dopplr

Stumbleupon

LinkedIn

Make Me Happy

Add this blog to my Technorati Favorites!

Add Scienceblogs to your Technorati Favorites!

Make Me Solvent

Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay Learn More

A Blog Around The Clock swag store

I Support

Carrboro Coworking

Project Exploration

Project Exploration

Bloggie Stuff

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License.

« How could I resist.... | Main | My picks from ScienceDaily »

What a Difference a Century Makes

Category: Animal Rights
Posted on: September 27, 2007 9:29 PM, by Coturnix

From a reasonable concern for Animal Welfare by Lewis Carroll to the mean and stupid Animal Rightists of today.

Share this: Stumbleupon Reddit Email + More

TrackBacks

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/51706

Comments

1

Could you maybe tack a qualifier like 'extremists' onto that weird 'Animal Rightists of today' term you've invented. Just so we that we're clear you're not over-generalising out of prejudice.

Posted by: Matty Smith | September 28, 2007 5:49 AM

3

1. Reasonable Lewis Caroll might have recognized we mistreat animals more today (factory farming, cosmetics testing) and on a larger scale than ever before.
2. It is rather easy to critique a movement by lumping everyone in it together, lambasting the worst, and decreeing that they represent everyone. It is also somewhat cheap.

Posted by: D | September 29, 2007 9:47 AM

4

It is the AR that intentionally lump themselves with the AW, in order to dupe people for their nasty cause. Check the link in my previous comment and read the articles in there and links within links as well.

Posted by: coturnix | September 29, 2007 10:08 AM

5

I'm sure in that in distinguishing so harshly between AR and AW you're creating a false sense of two distinct, non-overlapping groups.

Posted by: Matty Smith | September 30, 2007 2:50 AM

6

The blurring of the line between the two is the main tactic of the AR movement and it is sad to see how many people are duped by this. AR and AW are actually moral opposites, not variants of the same thing. Explore the links within the links (especially the links at the bottom of this post) again for more detailed explanations, and here is the first stab as a shortcut before you explore the rest.

Posted by: coturnix | September 30, 2007 12:32 PM

Post a Comment

(Email is required for authentication purposes only. On some blogs, comments are moderated for spam, so your comment may not appear immediately.)





ScienceBlogs

Search ScienceBlogs:

Go to:

Advertisement
Follow ScienceBlogs on Twitter
Visit the Collective Imagination blog
Advertisement

© 2006-2009 Seed Media Group LLC. ScienceBlogs is a registered trademark of Seed Media Group. All rights reserved.

Sites by Seed Media Group: Seed Media Group | ScienceBlogs | SEEDMAGAZINE.COM