|
|
Posted by Blinky the Shark on 11/25/07 06:40
Bone Ur wrote:
> Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Sat, 24 Nov 2007 23:51:54
> GMT Blinky the Shark scribed:
>
>>>>> Nah, though it is fairly true that all fish look alike to me.
>>>>
>>>> Speciesist! ;)
>>>
>>><grin>
>>>
>>> Like that word. 'Never been called that before and I've been called
>>> a lot of things. But the fact is that fish just don't have any civil
>>> rights. They also smell and swim with their own poop so is it any
>>> wonder that people generally consider them repulsive except in a
>>> frying pan? I personally don't have anything against fish per se,
>>> but most of them are still wet behind the ears and being so basically
>>> worthless doesn't particularly lead the higher life forms to generate
>>> much thought about the subject one way or the other. Fish themselves
>>> probably look at it as a sort of prolonged version of "War of the
>>> Worlds" and realize their inadequacies are just part of their
>>> miserable daily existence.
>>
>> Worthless? Worthless?! If it weren't for us, the world (well the
>> oceans) would be crawling with groupers...and you know how bad that
>> would be from seeing the Google variety all over usenet.
>
> Well, I was grouping groupers into the same category; they are fish, too.
> However, for _you_ to denigrate groupers is intra-phylum-discrimination.
And that's not prohibited. Especially here, high on the food chain. :)
> Furthermore, I don't think all fish are equally worthless. Those cute
> little colorful ones which reside in home aquariums can be relaxing in a
> hypnotic way to the duller mind. But the big ones that eat people and
But it takes 500 of them just to make a snack.
> other fish I may want to eat serve little purpose to a progressive,
> advanced society.
We've been evolving longer than you have. And we're not making holes in
the ozone layer. ;)
--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project - http://improve-usenet.org
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|