Thursday, June 07, 2007

We Must Destroy The Whales

Points of Argument:

* They take up too much space in the ocean
* They are intelligent and have a language. Could be plotting against us.
* Related point: have proportionately tiny eyes. Not trustworthy.
* Will provide valuable whale oil, ambergris, baleen, whalebone, etc. (until we run out).
* May inspire people to read Moby Dick, which is considered a classic work of literature.
* Would provide jobs in whale-killing, harpoon-manufacturing, flensing industries
* Would leave more fish for us
* Their absence would leave ecological niches available, thus spurring the evolution of new animals, which would potentially be more interesting than whales (and which might not possess sufficient intelligence and language to be dangerous)

Subargument: What About Dolphins?

* Are technically whales, and it would therefore be dishonest and contrary to our original purpose to spare them
* Are intelligent, have language, etc., could also be plotting against us
* They engage in "free love," which could set a bad example.

* Contain less blubber
* Don't take up as much space in the ocean
* Have been known to save drowning humans
* Dolphin-swimming a lucrative tourist industry
* Can do that thing with their tail where they rise up out of the water and swim backwards and forwards
* "Flipper" a cultural icon
* They engage in "free love," which could set a good example.

No comments: