Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
Thought we were talking about behavior (specifically homosexuality)?
Force feeding mice an inappropriate diet proves nothing, we know humans don't act naturally or rationally sometimes. And for the record most animal testing is for the good and no I wouldn't want them to stop.
So let's get this right then. Some one proposes that one activity is prevalent in the animal kingdom and that justifies a humans actions. To prove it they keep going down the food chain until they find corresponding activity in an animal?
Apart form the fact that any proper scientific research would ever go down that road as their are no identifiable scientific outcomes worth the effort. The only people to benefit from this kind of talk are the lobby groups.
Humans don't eat all other species whether they are mammals or not, plus we still use animal models in medical experiments e.g. mice and labradors in obesity experiments. Or you rather they didn't bother?
You are inferring a lot more than is being said. Which says more about you than me
No attempt to justify anything is being made. I am just presenting an interesting fact.
Let us try again. Tell me what you infer from the statement below:
Well, you may be a sheep, but otherwise I don't see the relevance. I mean, female spiders try to eat their mates after copulation. Does that justify cannibalism?
You are inferring a lot more than is being said. Which says more about you than me
No attempt to justify anything is being made. I am just presenting an interesting fact.
When researchers try and understand human behaviour they look at the nearest mammals to us first and if they are completely different, they then look at other mammals.
So let's get this right then. Some one proposes that one activity is prevalent in the animal kingdom and that justifies a humans actions. To prove it they keep going down the food chain until they find corresponding activity in an animal?
Apart form the fact that any proper scientific research would ever go down that road as their are no identifiable scientific outcomes worth the effort. The only people to benefit from this kind of talk are the lobby groups.
I let that one ride. Might have been a welsh person after all. I always think about special needs during projects - brail, speaking services, welsh language etc.. I'm dead thoughful, me
A real man of integrity within the contractor community
I usually find that a lot of people on a particular project would qualify as special needs in any case, even if there was no visible sign
someone used the word 'sheeps' for the plural of 'sheep'!
I let that one ride. Might have been a welsh person after all. I always think about special needs during projects - brail, speaking services, welsh language etc.. I'm dead thoughful, me
Leave a comment: