September 14, 2004

• I'll put my hand up for same - once you know an animal, and get to know its personality, it's impossible to ignore that it's an independent unique creature.
• I also vote for same.
• same deck.
• Let 'em burn
• Perhaps you've been brainwashed by Bob
• Same deck, depending on the particular creature. For example, I'd try to save any human being, but if it was very dangerous, not a random, unknown animal. Self-preservation's gotta kick in at some point. I've actually spent time wondering before what the heck I would do if there was a real fire in my building, as the alarm freaks my cat out, and then she hides under the bed, and getting her in her carrier or even in my arms to go outside would be impossible. And I love my cat to bits and would be devastated if I couldn't get her out.
• My dog barks some. Mentally you picture my dog, but I have not told you the type of dog which I have. Perhaps you even picture Toto, from "The Wizard of Oz." But I warn you, my dog is always with me. WOOF!
• And, um, same deck here.
• I always think of that Bob as Mr. Appleton - from a National Lampoon strip by BK Taylor.
• I think of him as Ted Johnson.
• I'd have to run in after Mrs Skrik, who would have run in after the animal, so the question is really hypothetical. I'd be in the building, anyway, dogdammit.
• Same deck. "Seventy percent of people asked to choose between their spouse and their dog will choose the dog."
• I agree, same deck. My pets are people to me.
• For me they all go in the same file. Especially my own cats, but any animal that I've been around enough to know well probably would fall into that category as well. My pets are part of my family, and I take their well-being as seriously as my own. Especially since they can't always take care of themselves.
• Your spouse, presumably, can take care of him- or herself. An animal or child will have no clue what to do or where to go. It's been a while since I had pets, but my cat Carmen was definitely in the same deck when she lived with me, and my parents' dog was when I lived at home. Now, obviously, my son would be first and foremost, and every now and then I lie awake at night imaging horrible scenarios in which I can't rescue him in a fire. Parenting sucks ass.
• Different deck. I would still save a pet from a burning building, but not because it's "like a person", so to speak, in some essential way.
• Yes, I regard animals as individuals when I encounter them -- believe I tend to do the same with people. Not so guarded in approaching strange animals as I may be in approaching new people. Going into burning buildings after either people or animals is something one cannot know about oneself until such a circumstance arises, which thus far in my life it has not -- a situation I hope continues. Thinking about the burning building -- I do make distinctions: would not go into a burning building to save a hornets' nest, I think. Nor to save other non-pet fauna. Not sure where I'd draw the line between reasonably rescuable and most probably not rescuable -- I would, I think, have to have some confidence the rescuee would be at least minimally co-operative with a rescue attempt or that I was capable of accomplishing it -- would try to get a horse out of a burning barn, because I am confident in handling horses, but I am not so sure I'd try to rescue a black bear in the same desperate fix. Hard to say. Appalling how much I don't know.
• Same with me (clockzero's comment). I would try to save the animal, not because I anthropomorphized it into a person but because I want to save the animal.
• I would make little or no effort to save an unknown pet, some effort to save my pet, more effort to save a human, and sacrifice my life to save my kids. So is that different deck, or same deck/different cards?
• The last pets I had as a kid (dogs, a couple turtles) didn't instill in me enough of an emotional attachment. I loved them, and got to know their foibles, and I recall myself crying at the stiff corpse of the first turtle I had, but none were more than sentient companionships. My mother has a cat, and she loves to lay on my feet when I visit. She's a lazy, old one, and should I sit around her, she rises, puts her paws on my leg and stares directly at my eyes. If I don't pay attention to her, she sinks her nails until I do. I've stared at her green-blue eyes for minutes at a time, wondering just what's she trying to communicate.
• What Squidranch said - I would rescue the individual important to me, person or animal. This is great guys! I was beginning to feel like a bit of a whackjob - but evidently a lot of people have their animal cards and people cards in the same deck. Then there's this question - if you had to choose to either live in a world with only people, but no animals, or a world of only animals and no people, which would you pick?
• Same deck, fer sure. Presently petless, when I visit friends who have animals, I look forward to seeing both, with similar affection. It's great fun when a big, goofy mutt recognizes you and starts wagging his tail. If people had tails the world would be a better place. Beeswacky- A hornet's nest no, but what about a beehive full of honey?
• Then there's this question - if you had to choose to either live in a world with only people, but no animals, or a world of only animals and no people, which would you pick? Definitely a world of people with no animals. People are infinitely better companions (especially those of the opposite gender) for all but asocial misfits.
• Well, my cat is good people to me so she's in my "people" deck. Oh, and her name is Bob, by the way.
• Save the honey and 2 queens, you'll be fine. Let the others burn
• I will not be categorized based on my shortage or abundance of 'Bobness' -Robert
• People are infinitely better companions (especially those of the opposite gender) for all but asocial misfits. I don't know, I don't think that most people are better companions at all than animals, and sometimes... oh. Oh. I see. I guess you have me accounted for. Carry on then. (Animals and people = same deck. Animals you can touch, anyway. As in, not fish, or the finches I have now.)
• If people had tails the world would be a better place. At least, much funnier. I could eat icecream while riding a bicycle! (I'm assuming it would be a very prehensile one...) And a whole new fashion industry would flourish. My on/off pessimist opinion on humanity's worst 'achievements' would lead me to say 'no humans, just animals'; however, I know i'd go crazy in a month.
• if you had to choose to either live in a world with only people, but no animals, or a world of only animals and no people, which would you pick? so we'd have to choose between being vegan, or being socially isolated? I'd have to pick the first one, I guess.
• Imagine our world suddenly without a single animal anywhere. It would be very strange - references to animals are everywhere; in artwork, as decorative motifs, in company logos, descriptive elements in speech, in stories and fables that support social mores, as cartoon characters...being around animals in some form must be a pretty important part of being human. Maybe that's what alienates the hell out of me about futuristic movies - they very seldom seem to have anything but humans; often animals are presented as an anomaly. Does this mean that 'progression' means leaving animals behind? I hope not.
• Save the honey and two queens... Queens can lay eggs. But only if they have mated with a drone. Queens will not tend the eggs nor the larvae. Bees are a colony creature -- the workers are absolutely essential to survival of the hive. Hives can exist for a short period without queens and without drones, but not without worker bees.
• Beeswacky, aren't queens able to lay eggs containing drones before they've mated? Then after they've mated with the drones they can lay eggs for workers and queens. I think.
• My guess is, I'd go back into the burning building to get my cats, singe off all my hair, scorch my lungs, come out in despair at my failure and find the little fiends curled up just out of the fire's reach, basking in the warm glow. I think cats are, on the whole, some of the best survivors on the planet.
• In the Lucasarts game 'Monkey Island 3', our hero, Guybrush Threepwood meets a talking, floating head on the high seas. Sez he: 'Can I call you Bob?'
• If I had to choose between a person and an animal, I'd try to save the person. On the other hand, I've spent the last five years trying to keep my beloved cat from cacking during asthma attacks, so giving up on trying to save him would be difficult.
• I was just thinkin'. What if the person was George W.? does that make a difference?
• so we'd have to choose between being vegan, or being socially isolated? Nobody said you couldn't eat the people.
• PatB: Bush has a lot of handlers to save him, In that case, I'd go for my cat. (BTW,I sent you a couple of emails. Did you get them?)
• path: Nothing since the tenth.
• Cali, not honeybees, no. Queen bees, worker bees, and drones are all highly specialized. No mating, no fertile eggs. Honeybees are not parthogenetic; all their young result from a conventional pairing of male and female. The young queen bee will take one longish flight in her life, in the course of which she mates with a number of drones -- a dozen or more, it is thought. The semen she acquires from this single flight serves to fertilize all the eggs she subsequently lays. The worker bees (which are infertile females) exert serious control over the eggs -- they decide if a new queen is needed, and feed the select larvae on royal jelly, enabling them to become fertile females. Worker bees decide which female eggs will be infertile, which fertile -- this is not a function of the queen bee. The vast majority of bees are workers; there's usually only one queen to a hive, and only one bee in a few thousand is a drone.
• Does anybody but me remember the Roald Dahl short story about the parents that fed their infant daughter Royal Jelly? I think it was called 'Royal Jelly' but I can't be sure. brrrrrr Still gives me the creeps. beeswacky I once had the pleasure of seeing a hive of wild honeybees split off...the extra queen took a header out of the hive, about a jillion followed her in a swarm...presumably to a new hive-site. I didn't follow. I kept my distance. the privacy of bees should be respected.
• Nickdanger: That's what *I* thought. Such a great scene!
• As a kid, I once goggled at the neighbour's bees when they'd checked out of Hotel Hive and decided to live in a little pine tree in a the middle of a small stand of pine. It was awesome to walk towards the wiggling mass of bees piled on the trunk of the little tree, with a gazillion bees bouncing off me - I was totally amazed at how they utterly ignored me in order to do their important bee thing.
• Then there's this question - if you had to choose to either live in a world with only people, but no animals, or a world of only animals and no people, which would you pick? Well, one of the reasons that I like animals is that they tend to be more "honest". Emotions and motivations seem to be right up front with them and there is little or no falsehood. That I would miss... But I am a sexual being and am not really hepped up by the idea of masterbation for the rest of my life or sex with animals. Besides, I'd have to train monkeys to make my martinis at Musso and Franks. So I guess I would go with a world of humans.
• Non-human animals and humans are in the same deck for me, no question. And, I'd much rather live in a world without humans than without non-human animals. Other than the great peace which would be enjoyable (though I'd miss playing scrabble against an opponent), no life could possibly exist for any length of time without the non-humans.
• I just don't know what would I do in any situation. Maybe I would save the animal's life (human or non-human) risking my own. Maybe I won't. And whatever decision I take. I know sometimes I will regret it and sometimes I won't. But the fact is that it's not a decision I can take with premeditation. I know there's a blurry line somewhere. I just don't know where nor would I like to find out. Would I prefer to live with humans without animals or viceversa? Being human I know I would hate equally living in any of those two situations but still I could handle both fine and learn to live with it.
• Would I prefer to live with humans without animals or viceversa? I was being a pussy. I rather live with only humans. At least I know we are capable of much more than any other current animal will ever be.
• I was being a pussy. Zemat, you say that like its a bad thing!
• I want to grab one of those big ugly vinyl suitcases people are always dumping in the alley, tie a big rope to it, and stow it in the closet. If, God forbid, there was ever a fire, I'm stuffin' those sonsabitch cats in it, tying the rope to the radiator and lowering them out the window. Then grab the budgie cage and out the door. But. If it's getting hairy in the hall, I'm climbing down the rope after them, and sorry budgie, I'm going to need both hands for that - I'll open your cage, and you gotta find the window, Bud. Not hard though - my apartment is very small. Hopefully I won't bleed out from cat scratches before the emergency vehicles arrive. Damn cats...
• if you had to choose to either live in a world with only people, but no animals, or a world of only animals and no people, which would you pick? Animals, because of the variety. I mean, a world of only people would pretty much mean canibalism, wouldn't it? Yeah, yeah, veganism, but wouldn't removing a HUGE component of the eco-cycle disrupt flora-as-we-know-it to the point that all we'd have left would be various shades of algae? And I'm guessing you could only suck wet rocks for so long before you start looking askance at aged-uncle-bob-who-no-one-much-liked-anyway. No, give me the garden of Eden any day and I'd have me some BBQ like you wouldn't believe! Just me and my saved-from-burning-buildings-animal-friends. GrizAdams Creepiest Lynch film ever.
• Three art students who videoed themselves killing a cat... now showing at the Toronto Film Festival
• the honey bee is sad and cross and wicked as a weasel and when she perches on you boss she leaves a little measle. --Don Marquis
• On the other hand, bees, there was some discussion, way back when, about Monkeys who petted bees and found that they seemed to like that. Haven't found it yet. But, maybe they just need love?
• Here, path -- 'twas 's wife. Yes, I still love with this wonderful lady.
• = cut the 'with'