I almost signed this petition
 
 

       The Horse Forum > Life Beyond Horses > General Off Topic Discussion

I almost signed this petition

This is a discussion on I almost signed this petition within the General Off Topic Discussion forums, part of the Life Beyond Horses category
  • Hoax, navy to deafen 15,900 whales and dolphins and kill 1,800 more
  • Navy petition whales hoax

Like Tree27Likes

 
LinkBack Thread Tools
    07-07-2012, 03:10 AM
  #1
Trained
I almost signed this petition

I saw this petition on facebook:

SignOn.org - Navy to deafen 15,900 whales and dolphins and kill 1,800 more

It states "Navy to deafen 15,900 whales and dolphins and kill 1,800 more"

It such a horrible thing that my immediate response was emotional - and I was ready to join the fight!!! I decided I would rather find and read the EIS before I submit my comments, which I planned on doing directly through the EIS. So, I searched for the EIS, I could not find it.

The "petition" fails to include a link to the EIS in question, fails to give the EIS's title, doesn't name the command, activity, range, nothing...zilch. It doesn't provide what, exactly, it is that will kill these fellow creatures (e.g., name of device(s)), which would immediately return the right EIS during a search...if such an EIS exists.

All EIS's include a link for public comment, and they almost all allow 90 days for comments. So, why float a separate petition for public comments? If this is bogus...it is disgusting to accuse the Navy of something this heinous. If it is not bogus....there needs to be an investigation of epic proportions.

Thoughts???
     
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
    07-07-2012, 03:21 AM
  #2
Showing
The only thing I can find is

U.S. Navy Sound System Kills Whales and Dolphins. Act Now to Stop the Killing! | Passport Magazine News

But that's not a credible source..... will keep digging.

EDIT: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO120...afen-15900.htm

But not credible still..

EDIT:
http://www.globalanimal.org/2012/07/...etition/77777/

VERY biased source.. but a little more credible.

~~~~~~~

The only thing I'm turning up is very biased and NO credible websites (in my search anyway) and google scholar has nothing about it either.

I'd be leery as they ask for personal information.
     
    07-07-2012, 03:25 AM
  #3
Trained
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skyseternalangel    
The only thing I can find is

U.S. Navy Sound System Kills Whales and Dolphins. Act Now to Stop the Killing! | Passport Magazine News

But that's not a credible source..... will keep digging.

EDIT: Navy to kill 1,800 whales and dolphins? And deafen 15,900 | Scoop News

But not credible still..
Yeah, that is all I could find, too...articles referencing the petition's claims. It just isn't something one should "fib" about....its beyond "crossing the line".
     
    07-07-2012, 03:31 AM
  #4
Showing
Yeah nothing from the government, it says the author of the petition but nothing about the sources or the research or the EIS as you already said...

Huh :/ I wouldn't trust it.
     
    07-07-2012, 03:38 AM
  #5
Super Moderator
Well, the enhanced sonar has been shown to cause problems with cetaceans. While I wouldn't expect you to put much credibility in a "green" organization, maybe National Geographic may give you pause....

U.S. Navy Sonar May Harm Killer Whales, Expert Says

As a scuba diver and a person greatly concerned with marine environments, I am very concerned with this issue.
     
    07-07-2012, 03:40 AM
  #6
Showing
Quote:
Originally Posted by Allison Finch    
Well, the enhanced sonar has been shown to cause problems with cetaceans. While I wouldn't expect you to put much credibility in a "green" organization, maybe National Geographic may give you pause....

U.S. Navy Sonar May Harm Killer Whales, Expert Says

As a scuba diver and a person greatly concerned with marine environments, I am very concerned with this issue.
Thanks Allison! That's a very credible source :)
     
    07-07-2012, 09:47 AM
  #7
Banned
Quote:
Originally Posted by Allison Finch    
Well, the enhanced sonar has been shown to cause problems with cetaceans. While I wouldn't expect you to put much credibility in a "green" organization, maybe National Geographic may give you pause....

U.S. Navy Sonar May Harm Killer Whales, Expert Says

As a scuba diver and a person greatly concerned with marine environments, I am very concerned with this issue.
While I respect National Geographic for many things they do and have done, National Geographic has been involved in some quite shady politics - particularly in the area of anti-Semitism, and certainly have a liberal bias. While they may have a more savory reputation than your typical .org groups, they are hardly unbiased, and have liberal leanings when it comes to wildlife. I am not condemning that - just saying they are no more credible than the other sources listed due to their bias...

..............................................
As to the subject matter, thanks for bringing it up - this is the first I have heard of this issue - I don't follow treehugger news very much, but need to look into this, as I certainly would oppose the operations if the environmental impact were as negative as presented. I'm not a "save the whales" wacko, but am a concerned rational environmentalist...
     
    07-07-2012, 11:37 AM
  #8
Weanling
It's a SCAM. My MIL sent me a link about it from one of the petition sites and I've had about three more emails autogenerated about my "immediate need to sign this petition now!"

It's a pishing scam.
     
    07-07-2012, 11:37 AM
  #9
Super Moderator
Quote:
Originally Posted by Faceman    
While I respect National Geographic for many things they do and have done, National Geographic has been involved in some quite shady politics - particularly in the area of anti-Semitism, and certainly have a liberal bias. While they may have a more savory reputation than your typical .org groups, they are hardly unbiased, and have liberal leanings when it comes to wildlife. I am not condemning that - just saying they are no more credible than the other sources listed due to their bias...

..............................................
As to the subject matter, thanks for bringing it up - this is the first I have heard of this issue - I don't follow treehugger news very much, but need to look into this, as I certainly would oppose the operations if the environmental impact were as negative as presented. I'm not a "save the whales" wacko, but am a concerned rational environmentalist...
This seems a rather condescending response, especially the second part.
(Not saying you purposely meant it that way, but that is how it reads.)

The need to comment on your opinion of the credibility of NG is at least vaguely related, but the wacko part and being a “rational environmentalist” (direct quote) just seems so out of left field.

Would your response have been the same if a new member, or say someone known to be a strong conservative chose to respond about being a scuba diver and had concerns about whales?
Just saying….
Allison Finch likes this.
     
    07-07-2012, 11:57 AM
  #10
Banned
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lockwood    
This seems a rather condescending response, especially the second part.
(Not saying you purposely meant it that way, but that is how it reads.)

The need to comment on your opinion of the credibility of NG is at least vaguely related, but the wacko part and being a “rational environmentalist” (direct quote) just seems so out of left field.

Would your response have been the same if a new member, or say someone known to be a strong conservative chose to respond about being a scuba diver and had concerns about whales?
Just saying….
Not condescending at all - I would make the same post regardless of who I was replying to. The post I quoted intimated that National Geographic was a credible, non-biased organization. That is not true...they are credible, but they are also biased. Whether the statement was made by a conservative or liberal is irrelevant. If you don't believe me, ask the OP, who is a conservative with whom I agree most of the time, but with whom I have also disagreed with on occasion.

As to the second part, I am not sure what you are pointing out. I have been an environmentalist all my life, but make a distinction between being a rational environmentalist and being a wacko irrational one. There is a major difference between the two...one is science based and the other is irrational emotion based, and I would not want to be grouped with the latter. If you have a problem with that, so be it...there is nothing wrong or codescending about saying thanks for posting the alert, I am interested in such things, and will check it out...
     

Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Signed up for a pen pal! MisssMarie General Off Topic Discussion 7 03-08-2012 05:56 PM
we signed ownership papers, is she actually in my name? beverleyy Horse Law 31 11-10-2011 09:56 PM
Hello, Have you signed the petition? Tanky Meet the Community 3 01-26-2009 03:12 PM
Howdy! New guy signed up! rodeoclown Meet the Community 12 11-12-2008 01:43 PM
Anyone signed up for Trackit? NorthernMama Horse Breeds 3 06-10-2008 08:03 AM



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:28 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0