Jump to content

Nsw To Ban Greyhound Racing From July 2017


Recommended Posts

This will never be addressed until all breeders stop being defensive and stop being victims and open their eyes to the problems they have created.

Only then can the needed changes happen.

The breeders who are trying to change are often villified for what they are doing by their peers.

The ankc is a competative system and until breeders stop this competition between themselves ar will win.

Precisely the sort of post I was referring to above.

What do you mean?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 962
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Again with the false equivalence garbage. Comparing a football player who cheats to a greyhound trainer who bludgeons dogs to death is absurd. The fact that you cannot see the immense difference betwe

Trouble is an industry or hobby is not like a religion, particularly one in which animals are used for largely entertainment purposes. The public has increasing expectations that whatever group you be

That is the way it's going. The "measures" being put in place in dressage are half assed and not even remotely effective, and not only that are not being seen to be effective. So yes my sport will suf

Posted Images

This will never be addressed until all breeders stop being defensive and stop being victims and open their eyes to the problems they have created.

Only then can the needed changes happen.

The breeders who are trying to change are often villified for what they are doing by their peers.

The ankc is a competative system and until breeders stop this competition between themselves ar will win.

What problems have sighthound breeders created? Right now its damn wise to be defensive. Their dogs are in the cross hairs of the RSPCA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What "inherent value" comes from crossbreeding sighthounds?

What would other breeds or crossbreeds bring to the Whippet?

I remain intrigued by the notion that society's attitude to dogs is driven by the breeding practices of a minority.

I think issues such as increasing disconnection from animals across the board play their part.

And major animal welfare organisations being steered by people who don't believe in companion animals is another factor. The recommendations in the Greyhound report that see LC owner prohibited from owning other pets come from the RSPCA. They wanted it to be unlawful for ALL sighthound owners to have cats.

And it is the RSPCA who've been handed the job of rehoming the Greys. How many do you think they are going to kill as "unsuitable" for pet homes. "Cat friendly greyhounds" don't exist in their universe.

I certainly know a greyhound who would never do anything to upset either her owners cat or the neighbors cats she was very respectful not only of her owners cat but the neighbors as well.. She not only raced but won every one of her races and was retired because her vet warned she tried so hard to win finished more exhausted each race, when athletes talk about the pain barrier she simply kept on, determined to win and did, it was decided she was too keen to win .

her most famous win the mechanical hare malfunctioned and stopped, the race couldn't be declared a rerun because only 3 dogs in the field stopped when the "hare" did, and they were at the tail of the field and out of contention, she and the rest of the field didn't even give it a glance as they raced to the finish line and their trainers waiting at the catching pen. which rather begs the question are the mechanical hares necessary if trained to simply run to their trainer as she was?

There was never any doubt she knew she was racing the other dogs as she threw her all at getting in front and staying there.

Edited by asal
Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is one of the many brachy dogs who has no problem at all breathing

OT, but I hardly think watching a 16 week old Peke pup run a little in Winter is proof it has no problems. The sheep, for instance, isn't puffing at all from that little run. The Peke is running by bunny hopping from hind legs to front, signs that it's back is too long for its leg length.

Stenotic nares and, in particular, elongated soft palate, are definitely progressive and likely to be worse in older dogs than in pups. Show me an adult Peke working in hot weather without curling its tongue out to clear its airway, and I'll be more convinced. The Crufts winner needed ice bricks after its little step out.

I'll point out (again) that the 'job' of the peke was sitting in someone's lap. It doesn't run around hills and herd sheep or catch vermin for a living. That is not its job. I have read its movement may have been deliberately bred in to stop it running off. If I was wearing a cost like that - a breed trait - and going around under those lights if probably need an ice pack, too, and so would you. I wish people would stop assuming every dog is supposed to be whizzing around a ring like a hyper springer spaniel because they're not.

well sadly I doubt that will be enough to give a tick to those who breed them. Im pretty sure that what they were intended for and how that impacts on their health might be part of the case they try to make against them - but apart from that when you look at a champ back when showing dogs began and you could argue the type was designed to sit on a lap etc one now Im not sure thats a good defence. Feb 2016 vets in sweden have called for them to be banned as well.

source

post-199-0-51210700-1468657005_thumb.jpg

perfect example of why the show scene has become a danger to the breeds, they cant seem to help them selves from "improving" a breed until its originators wouldn't have a snowflakes chance in hell of recognising the now "improved" morphed version.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This will never be addressed until all breeders stop being defensive and stop being victims and open their eyes to the problems they have created.

Only then can the needed changes happen.

The breeders who are trying to change are often villified for what they are doing by their peers.

The ankc is a competative system and until breeders stop this competition between themselves ar will win.

What problems have sighthound breeders created? Right now its damn wise to be defensive. Their dogs are in the cross hairs .

everything is in the crosshairs, all your left to argue is in which order are they lined up for target.

had a dream last night, quite odd but maybe time will see it to be true, regardless of the order all domesticated species are marked for elimination, people are just a bit slow to realise that, the name today should be Royal Society for the Elimination of Domesticated Breeds. or RSEDB or?

Perhaps, Royal Society for the Elimination of Domesticated Species may be more appropriate, does RSEDS have a better, more realistic ring to it?

Edited by asal
Link to post
Share on other sites

There was never any doubt she knew she was racing the other dogs as she threw her all at getting in front and staying there.

Sighthounds are very varied in their responses to running with other dogs, running after a lure and running after live game.

There are an infinitely variable combination of attributes and approaches. I think we need to be wary of claiming anecdata about particular dogs and extrapolating that to the breed. The bottom line is that with appropriate management and training, a sighthound can make a perfectly good home companion. Just like any other dog.

I was reading something overnight from a very experienced OFC and LC judge. She said that the authors of the greyhound report should spend 10 years getting their hands dirty out in the field because it would take that long to really understand. Unfortunately laws are now being made and recommended by people who don't have even a shallow understanding of the breeds and their purpose - and no inclination to challenge their assumptions either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This will never be addressed until all breeders stop being defensive and stop being victims and open their eyes to the problems they have created.

Only then can the needed changes happen.

The breeders who are trying to change are often villified for what they are doing by their peers.

The ankc is a competative system and until breeders stop this competition between themselves ar will win.

What problems have sighthound breeders created? Right now its damn wise to be defensive. Their dogs are in the cross hairs of the RSPCA.

I didnt say all breeders of all breeds. We all know the problem brreeds and we all need to acknowledge the problems.

Nothing can be fixed is the problems are not acknowledged.

Eta the public see defensiveness as if there is something being hidden from them . there is a high degree of distrust that they have

Edited by dog_fan
Link to post
Share on other sites

Academic weasel wording ....

Yes.

- buggered if I understand most of what is said or meant once this stuff starts up.

Sheridan's is an accurate precis.

FFS I'm trying to save your sorry 'victim' butts, poor you and poor my my breed.

Guess you are on your own.

Suggest you start by explaining how you are saving poor us in language we can comprehend.

With you there. I find it incredibly difficult to read mm's posts. I can comprehend basically everyone else's posts, even the longer ones, but there is another language in mm's posts which just don't seem to sink in. I've even read a so-called explanation and it made no sense.

I don't really have much to add to this conversation but I would suggest the reason the owners of Greyhounds are suggesting they'll have to put their dogs down is because the money they were getting in prize money etc. was going toward feeding their dogs.

Maybe I'm just a farmer's daughter but if I don't have a use for an animal (including enjoying their company), it has to go. With the tide of Greyhounds being out of a job, there will most likely be many needing homes & not enough homes - would it be better if people end up on the street just so they can feed their dogs?? Or perhaps it's a sensible choice to put the dogs to sleep rather than risk it ending up in a bad position due to a rushed rehoming process.

If it were me and they really do take it to a ban I would simply put them all to sleep if the only other option was the RSPCA.

Think they have overlooked the fact that having a vet kill your dogs is still perfectly legal and just because the bleeding hearts will feel better if there are RSPCA "helping" doesn't mean the owners are going to let them take the bow for taking them on.

Agreed.

I saw somewhere that the RSPCA has put down the same number of dogs as the greyhound industry in NSW. It works out to about 5000 dogs per year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Academic weasel wording ....

Yes.

- buggered if I understand most of what is said or meant once this stuff starts up.

Sheridan's is an accurate precis.

FFS I'm trying to save your sorry 'victim' butts, poor you and poor my my breed.

Guess you are on your own.

Suggest you start by explaining how you are saving poor us in language we can comprehend.

With you there. I find it incredibly difficult to read mm's posts. I can comprehend basically everyone else's posts, even the longer ones, but there is another language in mm's posts which just don't seem to sink in. I've even read a so-called explanation and it made no sense.

I don't really have much to add to this conversation but I would suggest the reason the owners of Greyhounds are suggesting they'll have to put their dogs down is because the money they were getting in prize money etc. was going toward feeding their dogs.

Maybe I'm just a farmer's daughter but if I don't have a use for an animal (including enjoying their company), it has to go. With the tide of Greyhounds being out of a job, there will most likely be many needing homes & not enough homes - would it be better if people end up on the street just so they can feed their dogs?? Or perhaps it's a sensible choice to put the dogs to sleep rather than risk it ending up in a bad position due to a rushed rehoming process.

If it were me and they really do take it to a ban I would simply put them all to sleep if the only other option was the RSPCA.

Think they have overlooked the fact that having a vet kill your dogs is still perfectly legal and just because the bleeding hearts will feel better if there are RSPCA "helping" doesn't mean the owners are going to let them take the bow for taking them on.

Agreed.

I saw somewhere that the RSPCA has put down the same number of dogs as the greyhound industry in NSW. It works out to about 5000 dogs per year.

Yeah but they get money for doing it.

Does anyone really believe they are in there with their hand up and collecting dogs which they have already said are so very hard to find homes for and they are doing it for free?

If my dogs were going to go to God Im going to be the one holding their hand

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is Moosmum just trying to say all dogs have value to someone no matter their origin?

That too. Unless you keep telling them different.

You couldn't have just said so?

I have. In many different ways.

If you can't be bothered to understand the science for yourself, I guess it can't touch you. Only 'A.R' can.

So 'round and 'round we go. Nah, Its covered. I''m not doing this again.

Edited by moosmum
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have. In many different ways.

If you can't be bothered to understand the science for yourself, I guess it can't touch you. Only 'A.R' can.

So 'round and 'round we go. Nah, Its covered. I''m not doing this again.

If you can't be bothered to explain your point in language people understand then we have a problem don't we.

It isn't the science that's the problem but your inability or unwillingness to explain it without the gibberish.

Most concepts can be explained in lay men's terms. How is this different?

AR don't give a toss about the science. They care about the outcome that the science may be supporting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Academic weasel wording ....

Yes.

- buggered if I understand most of what is said or meant once this stuff starts up.

Sheridan's is an accurate precis.

FFS I'm trying to save your sorry 'victim' butts, poor you and poor my my breed.

Guess you are on your own.

Suggest you start by explaining how you are saving poor us in language we can comprehend.

With you there. I find it incredibly difficult to read mm's posts. I can comprehend basically everyone else's posts, even the longer ones, but there is another language in mm's posts which just don't seem to sink in. I've even read a so-called explanation and it made no sense.

I don't really have much to add to this conversation but I would suggest the reason the owners of Greyhounds are suggesting they'll have to put their dogs down is because the money they were getting in prize money etc. was going toward feeding their dogs.

Maybe I'm just a farmer's daughter but if I don't have a use for an animal (including enjoying their company), it has to go. With the tide of Greyhounds being out of a job, there will most likely be many needing homes & not enough homes - would it be better if people end up on the street just so they can feed their dogs?? Or perhaps it's a sensible choice to put the dogs to sleep rather than risk it ending up in a bad position due to a rushed rehoming process.

If it were me and they really do take it to a ban I would simply put them all to sleep if the only other option was the RSPCA.

Think they have overlooked the fact that having a vet kill your dogs is still perfectly legal and just because the bleeding hearts will feel better if there are RSPCA "helping" doesn't mean the owners are going to let them take the bow for taking them on.

Agreed.

I saw somewhere that the RSPCA has put down the same number of dogs as the greyhound industry in NSW. It works out to about 5000 dogs per year.

So you noticed it too eh?

dont think you are supposed too though

Edited by asal
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well - here is how I see it.

Right now there are a whole heap of people who are breeding dogs which have conformational features that give them a lesser quality of life - that's a fact.

Whilst some people who breed such dogs do so within the pedigree system far, far more of them do so outside of the pedigree system where they have a choice without third party accountability to chuck in a different breed here or there or to use papered or non papered dogs.

If the breeding of some dogs with particular conformational features are banned then it will be EVERYONE not just the pedigree breeders who will be stopped from breeding them.

If the reason for producing dogs with conformational issues is blamed on the show ring then its no longer a far stretch to see it may be possible to do to dog showing what has been done to greyhound racing.If showing dogs as well as or separate to banning some physical features is banned then obviously the pedigree breeders who show their dogs who have such features would be thrown to the wolves.

Then the ratbags can say - well they have had years to do something about it - this has been on the table at least since pedigreed dogs exposed.Their dogs still have exaggerated features and some health issues they still suffer due to the way they are selected . Blame the fact that a handful show them so they are selected for the showring and completely over look the fact that there are a bigger bunch of registered breeders who breed them and dont show and there is a massive bunch who breed them ,have greater choices and still select them with the same features.

If there cannot be shown what is being done and how it is making a difference which will clearly demonstrate that it will take us through to dogs not being born with such health problems then its a case of I told you so

Take a good look at the response last time to critics of brachy head dogs put out by the Ccs and search through their mandatory protocols for registration for such breeds and tell me you are confident that if the time comes that there is an ANKC defence because Im not liking the odds.

Within the pedigree system there is the ability to use dogs which are not pedigreed or of a different breed. There are new breeds being developed all the time .The pedigree system does not dictate community standards and a clear demonstration of that is the fact that the CCs have taken on things pushed on them by animal rights and the loud radicals who have never bred a dog which bear no resemblance to what is best for the dogs or the science of the species . Everything they do is to placate the nutters including all of the crazy new regs and policies and they still cant see that if it comes it wont be about numbers or poo on the ground it will be about how the whole industry selects dogs for breeding which produce dogs which will need special care etc their whole lives. because they just dont get that the whole rest of the world sees cruelty when they see a champion!

Heres how I see it then. In laymans terms. You are staking every thing on a reality that exists only in the K.Cs. You won't recognize any other possible reality.

Its got to be Pedgirees all the way. You will risk every thing, for every one on your belief the pedigree system alone has a future.

Pedigree dogs, Or no dogs.

If your faith is so great you better pray.

I'll be looking for a more favorable response to DOGS else where. Theres no time for this.

Looks like this is the best response I can hope for here ("Academic weasel words")

I tried. Dog help you.

Edited by moosmum
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well - here is how I see it.

Right now there are a whole heap of people who are breeding dogs which have conformational features that give them a lesser quality of life - that's a fact.

Whilst some people who breed such dogs do so within the pedigree system far, far more of them do so outside of the pedigree system where they have a choice without third party accountability to chuck in a different breed here or there or to use papered or non papered dogs.

If the breeding of some dogs with particular conformational features are banned then it will be EVERYONE not just the pedigree breeders who will be stopped from breeding them.

If the reason for producing dogs with conformational issues is blamed on the show ring then its no longer a far stretch to see it may be possible to do to dog showing what has been done to greyhound racing.If showing dogs as well as or separate to banning some physical features is banned then obviously the pedigree breeders who show their dogs who have such features would be thrown to the wolves.

Then the ratbags can say - well they have had years to do something about it - this has been on the table at least since pedigreed dogs exposed.Their dogs still have exaggerated features and some health issues they still suffer due to the way they are selected . Blame the fact that a handful show them so they are selected for the showring and completely over look the fact that there are a bigger bunch of registered breeders who breed them and dont show and there is a massive bunch who breed them ,have greater choices and still select them with the same features.

If there cannot be shown what is being done and how it is making a difference which will clearly demonstrate that it will take us through to dogs not being born with such health problems then its a case of I told you so

Take a good look at the response last time to critics of brachy head dogs put out by the Ccs and search through their mandatory protocols for registration for such breeds and tell me you are confident that if the time comes that there is an ANKC defence because Im not liking the odds.

Within the pedigree system there is the ability to use dogs which are not pedigreed or of a different breed. There are new breeds being developed all the time .The pedigree system does not dictate community standards and a clear demonstration of that is the fact that the CCs have taken on things pushed on them by animal rights and the loud radicals who have never bred a dog which bear no resemblance to what is best for the dogs or the science of the species . Everything they do is to placate the nutters including all of the crazy new regs and policies and they still cant see that if it comes it wont be about numbers or poo on the ground it will be about how the whole industry selects dogs for breeding which produce dogs which will need special care etc their whole lives. because they just dont get that the whole rest of the world sees cruelty when they see a champion!

Heres how I see it then. You are stakling every thing on a reality that exists only in the K.Cs. You won't recognize any other possible reality.

Its got to be Pedgirees all the way. You will risk every thing, for every one on your belief the pedigree system alone has a future.

Pedigree dogs, Or no dogs.

If your faith is so great you better pray.

I'll be looking for a more favorable response to DOGS else where. Theres no time for this.

Looks like this is the best response I can hope for here ("Academic weasel words")

I tried. Dog help you.

this doesnt bode well either, interesting it notes the rise of manufactured dog food may be a contributing factor as well

http://healthypets.mercola.com/sites/healthypets/archive/2016/07/13/pedigree-dog-lifespan.aspx?utm_source=petsnl&utm_medium=email&utm_content=art1&utm_campaign=20160713Z3&et_cid=DM110747&et_rid=1569357715

Edited by asal
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well - here is how I see it.

Right now there are a whole heap of people who are breeding dogs which have conformational features that give them a lesser quality of life - that's a fact.

Whilst some people who breed such dogs do so within the pedigree system far, far more of them do so outside of the pedigree system where they have a choice without third party accountability to chuck in a different breed here or there or to use papered or non papered dogs.

If the breeding of some dogs with particular conformational features are banned then it will be EVERYONE not just the pedigree breeders who will be stopped from breeding them.

If the reason for producing dogs with conformational issues is blamed on the show ring then its no longer a far stretch to see it may be possible to do to dog showing what has been done to greyhound racing.If showing dogs as well as or separate to banning some physical features is banned then obviously the pedigree breeders who show their dogs who have such features would be thrown to the wolves.

Then the ratbags can say - well they have had years to do something about it - this has been on the table at least since pedigreed dogs exposed.Their dogs still have exaggerated features and some health issues they still suffer due to the way they are selected . Blame the fact that a handful show them so they are selected for the showring and completely over look the fact that there are a bigger bunch of registered breeders who breed them and dont show and there is a massive bunch who breed them ,have greater choices and still select them with the same features.

If there cannot be shown what is being done and how it is making a difference which will clearly demonstrate that it will take us through to dogs not being born with such health problems then its a case of I told you so

Take a good look at the response last time to critics of brachy head dogs put out by the Ccs and search through their mandatory protocols for registration for such breeds and tell me you are confident that if the time comes that there is an ANKC defence because Im not liking the odds.

Within the pedigree system there is the ability to use dogs which are not pedigreed or of a different breed. There are new breeds being developed all the time .The pedigree system does not dictate community standards and a clear demonstration of that is the fact that the CCs have taken on things pushed on them by animal rights and the loud radicals who have never bred a dog which bear no resemblance to what is best for the dogs or the science of the species . Everything they do is to placate the nutters including all of the crazy new regs and policies and they still cant see that if it comes it wont be about numbers or poo on the ground it will be about how the whole industry selects dogs for breeding which produce dogs which will need special care etc their whole lives. because they just dont get that the whole rest of the world sees cruelty when they see a champion!

Heres how I see it then. In laymans terms. You are staking every thing on a reality that exists only in the K.Cs. You won't recognize any other possible reality.

Its got to be Pedgirees all the way. You will risk every thing, for every one on your belief the pedigree system alone has a future.

Pedigree dogs, Or no dogs.

If your faith is so great you better pray.

I'll be looking for a more favorable response to DOGS else where. Theres no time for this.

Looks like this is the best response I can hope for here ("Academic weasel words")

I tried. Dog help you.

Dont be ridiculous - how you got that from what I said is way beyond me and for the record I am working outside of the recognised KCs with other realities.

My faith in what ? The current ANKC pedigree system? That's zero and why I am in a group that is moving independently.

If you have tried then exactly what is it that you are telling us YOU think we should do? I see loads of comments you make about environment and science and the situation as you see it often with lack of informed facts into the base system but whether you like it or not I really honestly dont have a real clue about what you are saying

I understand that this is something you have taken personally and I have had no desire to be offensive or rude but getting mad at us because we dont understand you takes us nowhere

Im more than happy for you to be critical of the ANKC system but your criticisms must be factual and sometimes they dont read that way. Im not defending them Im explaining them.

I think you are suggesting opening the stud books but then you say you are not other times I thinK I get it and then I dont and clearly you dont always get what Im saying either or these comments wouldnt have been made. So please if you have something that you want to say that you think will help us tell us what you think solutions are

Link to post
Share on other sites

This will never be addressed until all breeders stop being defensive and stop being victims and open their eyes to the problems they have created.

Only then can the needed changes happen.

The breeders who are trying to change are often villified for what they are doing by their peers.

The ankc is a competative system and until breeders stop this competition between themselves ar will win.

What problems have sighthound breeders created? Right now its damn wise to be defensive. Their dogs are in the cross hairs .

everything is in the crosshairs, all your left to argue is in which order are they lined up for target.

had a dream last night, quite odd but maybe time will see it to be true, regardless of the order all domesticated species are marked for elimination, people are just a bit slow to realise that, the name today should be Royal Society for the Elimination of Domesticated Breeds. or RSEDB or?

Perhaps, Royal Society for the Elimination of Domesticated Species may be more appropriate, does RSEDS have a better, more realistic ring to it?

Of course, breeders, such as those who sold litters to McDougall for that pet shop in Hawaii wouldn't have had anything to do with the bad PR problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well - here is how I see it.

Right now there are a whole heap of people who are breeding dogs which have conformational features that give them a lesser quality of life - that's a fact.

Whilst some people who breed such dogs do so within the pedigree system far, far more of them do so outside of the pedigree system where they have a choice without third party accountability to chuck in a different breed here or there or to use papered or non papered dogs.

If the breeding of some dogs with particular conformational features are banned then it will be EVERYONE not just the pedigree breeders who will be stopped from breeding them.

If the reason for producing dogs with conformational issues is blamed on the show ring then its no longer a far stretch to see it may be possible to do to dog showing what has been done to greyhound racing.If showing dogs as well as or separate to banning some physical features is banned then obviously the pedigree breeders who show their dogs who have such features would be thrown to the wolves.

Then the ratbags can say - well they have had years to do something about it - this has been on the table at least since pedigreed dogs exposed.Their dogs still have exaggerated features and some health issues they still suffer due to the way they are selected . Blame the fact that a handful show them so they are selected for the showring and completely over look the fact that there are a bigger bunch of registered breeders who breed them and dont show and there is a massive bunch who breed them ,have greater choices and still select them with the same features.

If there cannot be shown what is being done and how it is making a difference which will clearly demonstrate that it will take us through to dogs not being born with such health problems then its a case of I told you so

Take a good look at the response last time to critics of brachy head dogs put out by the Ccs and search through their mandatory protocols for registration for such breeds and tell me you are confident that if the time comes that there is an ANKC defence because Im not liking the odds.

Within the pedigree system there is the ability to use dogs which are not pedigreed or of a different breed. There are new breeds being developed all the time .The pedigree system does not dictate community standards and a clear demonstration of that is the fact that the CCs have taken on things pushed on them by animal rights and the loud radicals who have never bred a dog which bear no resemblance to what is best for the dogs or the science of the species . Everything they do is to placate the nutters including all of the crazy new regs and policies and they still cant see that if it comes it wont be about numbers or poo on the ground it will be about how the whole industry selects dogs for breeding which produce dogs which will need special care etc their whole lives. because they just dont get that the whole rest of the world sees cruelty when they see a champion!

Heres how I see it then. In laymans terms. You are staking every thing on a reality that exists only in the K.Cs. You won't recognize any other possible reality.

Its got to be Pedgirees all the way. You will risk every thing, for every one on your belief the pedigree system alone has a future.

Pedigree dogs, Or no dogs.

If your faith is so great you better pray.

I'll be looking for a more favorable response to DOGS else where. Theres no time for this.

Looks like this is the best response I can hope for here ("Academic weasel words")

I tried. Dog help you.

Because you write that way, which isn't remotely helpful to anyone who wants to understand. And besides, blathering about 'reality' aside, what help are you practically providing?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have. In many different ways.

If you can't be bothered to understand the science for yourself, I guess it can't touch you. Only 'A.R' can.

So 'round and 'round we go. Nah, Its covered. I''m not doing this again.

If you can't be bothered to explain your point in language people understand then we have a problem don't we.

It isn't the science that's the problem but your inability or unwillingness to explain it without the gibberish.

Most concepts can be explained in lay men's terms. How is this different?

AR don't give a toss about the science. They care about the outcome that the science may be supporting.

They care about their anti-dog agenda. They don't care if science supports it or not. They only care if they get their way.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is Moosmum just trying to say all dogs have value to someone no matter their origin?

That too. Unless you keep telling them different.

You couldn't have just said so?

I have. In many different ways.

If you can't be bothered to understand the science for yourself, I guess it can't touch you. Only 'A.R' can.

So 'round and 'round we go. Nah, Its covered. I''m not doing this again.

I'm fine with the science. It's someone who claims they're 'helping' by drivelling on about my reality and their reality that I have an issue with. If you wrote, 'Here are practical strategies that will help you and here's a nice dot point list,' I'd not have an issue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...