Quote:
Originally Posted by rabbit
Activists will almost always go with the larger number because it grabs bigger headlines and thereby bring more attention to the issue they're trying to awareness of.
Making a claim that the number is much less based on absolutely nothing but a bias against activists is not a way to get anyone on your side. The number could actually be higher than what is claimed by activists. It could be lower. It could be right on.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/ear...k-finning.html
I will give credit to stopsharkfinning for not using the 100M figure as other shark activists do, but I have a problem when it also states that those tens of millions get killed because of fining. In other words, they're saying that every fin was from a live shark that got brutally fiinned at sea, and then discarding the still live shark into the water. But, the Ramsay footage showed all those sharks that were not finned so you can't claim that every fin comes from a finned shark.
Part of the problem is that the shark activists have mis-used the accepted definition of fining to include all these non-finned sharks in order to inflate the number of sharks they can claim were finned. |
Making a claim that the number is much less based on absolutely nothing but a bias against activists is not a way to get anyone on your side. The number could actually be higher than what is claimed by activists. It could be lower. It could be right on.
As for activists misusing the definition of finned sharks to include non-finned, do you actually have any evidence of this? A study made? Or are you basing this off of a Gordon Ramsey episode too? It's still possible tens of millions of sharks are killed from finning, while others are killed for different reasons and their fins taken. One doesn't preclude the other.