Climate change threatens Thailand’s tiger conservation efforts, reveals study

[ozimoron]

3 minutes ago, bignok said:

More humans = more crops = less forests + poaching = less wild animals.

 

Pretty easy to see the problem.

 

How do you cull the humans to save the animals? That's the main issue.

 

more humans = more burning fossil fuels = more carbon dioxide = hotter climate.

[stoner]

43 minutes ago, kwilco said:

Shows how poorly informed much of the general public are about the issues around all aspects of tiger conservation.

Conservationists don't just have to struggle with front line issues but also have to contend with public ignorance on a gigantic scale...which hinders their work even further.

i would like to know about the rumor/myth/truth behind this. do tigers get drugged up to have tourists take pics with them ? 

 

 

[bignok]

2 minutes ago, stoner said:

i would like to know about the rumor/myth/truth behind this. do tigers get drugged up to have tourists take pics with them ? 

 

 

I went to the Tiger Temple. Were they drugged? No idea. They said they were well fed and its done in middle if day hot. Tigers are nocturnal. They are sleepy during the day. Plus on chains. 

 

 

[bignok]

25 minutes ago, rocketboy2 said:

This guy knows a few things and also has previous experience with the dooms day 

boys and girls.

worth a watch. 

 

 

Yes well the cc folks don't care.

[kwilco]

26 minutes ago, stoner said:

i would like to know about the rumor/myth/truth behind this. do tigers get drugged up to have tourists take pics with them ? 

 

 

You are barking up the wrong tree - the drugging of tigers is a side issue - it was never proven. However on that particular issue, it has been common practice for decades for owners of animals in the public gaze to be drugged to make them easier to handle. one could argue "so what" they shouldn't have been there in the first place.

THere were far more important issues involved in the tiger temple than whether they were drugged or not - the establishment shouldn't have been there under any circumstances.

It was eventually shut down.

Those involved now run tiger attractions in places like Pattaya.

THe holding of tigers in captivity and their mistreatment is just the tip of the iceberg of animal welfare and conservation in Thailand - there are very few laws concerning animal welfare and those are sparsely enforced.

 

Tigers are apex predators and their existence in the wild is an indication of how eco-systems are functioning - keeping in captivity does nothing for this, in fact it actually deters from real solutions to Thailand's ecological problems

 

[kwilco]

47 minutes ago, bignok said:

More humans = more crops = less forests + poaching = less wild animals.

 

Pretty easy to see the problem.

 

How do you cull the humans to save the animals? That's the main issue.

 

Except this is an inaccurate view.

Encroachment and poaching are 2 of the most serious problems facing tigers and wildlife in Thailand 

However the simplistic view of "more Humans" is misleading - in reality there is potentially space for a population of 2000 tigers in Thailand (as opposed to the current 200) this is not simply down to people numbers, it is down to management of the available wildlife space - something that successive Thai governments have failed to address.

There is a general malaise in Thailand that affects both government and public understanding of all issues to do with wildlife animals welffare and conservation.

[Willy Wombat]

Politicians think they can alter the climate.

LOL 

[bokningar]

7 hours ago, bignok said:

https://www.alltopeverything.com/deadliest-wildfires/

Now you are bringing in facts. They stopped using facts long ago. 

[bokningar]

8 hours ago, Lacessit said:

Here we go again, the usual chorus of deniers. Scientifically illiterate. Can't be bothered, goodbye.

Here is some science for you. Temperature change over 8 000 years. Jørgen Peder Steffensen is a professor in ice core related research at the Niels Bohr Institute. Is that good enough for you?

 

[stoner]

48 minutes ago, kwilco said:

You are barking up the wrong tree - the drugging of tigers is a side issue - it was never proven. However on that particular issue, it has been common practice for decades for owners of animals in the public gaze to be drugged to make them easier to handle. one could argue "so what" they shouldn't have been there in the first place.

THere were far more important issues involved in the tiger temple than whether they were drugged or not - the establishment shouldn't have been there under any circumstances.

It was eventually shut down.

Those involved now run tiger attractions in places like Pattaya.

THe holding of tigers in captivity and their mistreatment is just the tip of the iceberg of animal welfare and conservation in Thailand - there are very few laws concerning animal welfare and those are sparsely enforced.

 

Tigers are apex predators and their existence in the wild is an indication of how eco-systems are functioning - keeping in captivity does nothing for this, in fact it actually deters from real solutions to Thailand's ecological problems

 

you don't have to tell me. i find most zoos/ways we keep animals appalling. 

[Lacessit]

4 minutes ago, bokningar said:

Here is some science for you. Temperature change over 8 000 years. Jørgen Peder Steffensen is a professor in ice core related research at the Niels Bohr Institute. Is that good enough for you?

 

 

6 minutes ago, bokningar said:

Here is some science for you. Temperature change over 8 000 years. Jørgen Peder Steffensen is a professor in ice core related research at the Niels Bohr Institute. Is that good enough for you?

 

Not even close. 95% of scientists accept the reality of global warming and climate change.

It does not even need a scientist to see the trends in average air temperature, average ocean temperature, and carbon dioxide levels since the Industrial revolution. Another attempt at whataboutism.

[VocalNeal]

5 hours ago, ozimoron said:

When you start calling science a "cult" you know you're out on a limb.

 

Tell us what proportion of carbon dioxide in the air is caused by fires vs burning fossil fuel in vehicles and to generate electricity and heat.

You forgot underground coal fires, that no one can stop. 

 

As for the tigers. Not enough money raised. So try the climate change angle.???? 

[bokningar]

10 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

 

Not even close. 95% of scientists accept the reality of global warming and climate change.

It does not even need a scientist to see the trends in average air temperature, average ocean temperature, and carbon dioxide levels since the Industrial revolution. Another attempt at whataboutism.

No one contest the fact that it is warmer now than 1870 something.

But why comparing with the coldest period over 8000 years. When people where starving and the crops died in the cold weather?  Is that what we want again? Stating some facts isn't OK I guess. Doesn't fit the narrative of today.

[Lacessit]

1 hour ago, bokningar said:

No one contest the fact that it is warmer now than 1870 something.

But why comparing with the coldest period over 8000 years. When people where starving and the crops died in the cold weather?  Is that what we want again? Stating some facts isn't OK I guess. Doesn't fit the narrative of today.

One can state as many facts as they want, it's whether those facts are relevant to the current situation that's in question.

[digger70]

10 hours ago, Lacessit said:

Here we go again, the usual chorus of deniers. Scientifically illiterate. Can't be bothered, goodbye.

If you can't be Bothered Why in Satans Name have you to Post that? 

[Lacessit]

51 minutes ago, digger70 said:

If you can't be Bothered Why in Satans Name have you to Post that? 

The literacy of your post tells me all I need to know.

[bignok]

1 hour ago, digger70 said:

If you can't be Bothered Why in Satans Name have you to Post that? 

Because he's a member of the cc group. They cherry pick stuff.

[bignok]

2 hours ago, bokningar said:

No one contest the fact that it is warmer now than 1870 something.

But why comparing with the coldest period over 8000 years. When people where starving and the crops died in the cold weather?  Is that what we want again? Stating some facts isn't OK I guess. Doesn't fit the narrative of today.

Well it is funny how they ignore real facts like poaching and land clearing eliminating tigers and just bang on about co2 which basically does nothing to tigers.

[bokningar]

1 hour ago, Lacessit said:

One can state as many facts as they want, it's whether those facts are relevant to the current situation that's in question.

So you mean that the period one use when comparing temperature from the past with the temperature today isn’t relevant? 

[Lacessit]

2 minutes ago, bokningar said:

So you mean that the period one use when comparing temperature from the past with the temperature today isn’t relevant? 

It is irrelevant to compare 8000 years ago, when there were next to zero anthropomorphic emissions, with today, when there are about 8 billion humans generating them.

[Lacessit]

10 minutes ago, bignok said:

Because he's a member of the cc group. They cherry pick stuff.

AFAIK it is climate deniers that do all the cherry picking.

[swerve]

This our daily news dose of we're all going to die tomorrow!  Soon we'll be getting two or more daily doses of climate catastrophe.  BBC, for one, can't get enough of it.

 

 

[bokningar]

21 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

It is irrelevant to compare 8000 years ago, when there were next to zero anthropomorphic emissions, with today, when there are about 8 billion humans generating them.

Soo someone decide to use a point in time. Not far back and the coldest point in 8 000 years and that’s then the only relevant way to measure this. Talk about cherry-picking.
Nature and the universe have quite long cycles of change. And there is a lot we don’t know and understand about it. If we ever will have a chance to understand more about something as complex as this I think people have to stop treating this like a religion and look at all facts with open minds.
 

[bignok]

27 minutes ago, bokningar said:

Soo someone decide to use a point in time. Not far back and the coldest point in 8 000 years and that’s then the only relevant way to measure this. Talk about cherry-picking.
Nature and the universe have quite long cycles of change. And there is a lot we don’t know and understand about it. If we ever will have a chance to understand more about something as complex as this I think people have to stop treating this like a religion and look at all facts with open minds.
 

We don't know what we don't know.

[Bday Prang]

12 hours ago, Tropposurfer said:

As the years and decades pass, and the planet warms there will be increasingly no places on the planet that will be 'safe'.

Nowhere free of mega-fires, no amount of money that will insulate people, torrential rains, flooding, deforestation through whole tree species dying out due to increased summer temperatures and their inability to adapt to these fast enough, mass human migrations that make whats happening now look like weekend increases by tourists, crop failures et large.

Whole areas of the earths food producing areas laid waste.

Wars over potable water.

Nice legacy to leave our kids, theirs, and theirs after them (if you are inclined to believe that man has markedly contributed to the earths warming).

 

Enjoy your day.

 

jesus, you seem like a glass half empty type of guy,  have you considered writing speeches for doom goblin in chief Greta Thunberg?   or is that where you sourced your detailed prediction

 

[Bday Prang]

6 hours ago, kwilco said:

Shows how poorly informed much of the general public are about the issues around all aspects of tiger conservation.

Conservationists don't just have to struggle with front line issues but also have to contend with public ignorance on a gigantic scale...which hinders their work even further.

I can remember a certain infamous tiger sanctuary close to Kanchanaburi coming under intense scrutiny not that long ago and it did not come out of it looking very good at all. Was that a case of public ignorance ?  No it wasn't. The only struggle those "conservationists" faced was staying out of prison

[Bday Prang]

5 hours ago, Willy Wombat said:

Politicians think they can alter the climate.

LOL 

No they don't, but they can of course see the opportunity to exploit the hysteria they create in some people regarding this subject to their advantage.  Some of the worst offenders are not even politicians in the accepted sense of the word  Think WEF for starters

[kwilco]

6 hours ago, Bday Prang said:

I can remember a certain infamous tiger sanctuary close to Kanchanaburi coming under intense scrutiny not that long ago and it did not come out of it looking very good at all. Was that a case of public ignorance ?  No it wasn't. The only struggle those "conservationists" faced was staying out of prison

Yes the only reason it existed was because of public ignorance- people flocked to the place unaware of the animal abuse. But they are also unaware that ANY captive tiger place is exploitative and abusive - they can't make money if the public don't cme.

THe place was closed by the DNP -after 10 years of bad publicity from animal campaigners embarrassed the authorities into action.

the fact is that the laws in Thailand are useless to prevent these sort of places operating so there were very few ways to close it down.

THe abbott had friends in high places and several attempts to close it fell foul of the courts.

the closing of the place was also a complete mess.

[kwilco]

If you don't understand MMCC then you are a fool

[kwilco]

11 hours ago, Willy Wombat said:

Politicians think they can alter the climate.

LOL 

RElly? How? Humans can but politicians on their own seem y=to be unable to stop the process.