The White Tiger Fraud

vrikasatma · Post by **vrikasatma** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 8:14 pm

I knew that white tigers <i>had</i> to be inbred because they came from a single sire, Mohan. I didn't see any evidence of inbreeding and I thought that strange. Now I've seen it and am aware. Thanks, Z.

Inbreeding — of anything — is one of my hot buttons. Through the actions of a greed-motivated, unscrupulous individual, a whole species' genetic integrity is compromised and in some cases even ruined.

We're seeing it in the horse world. I'm talking mainly about two of the Big Three horse breeds, Quarter Horses and Arabians. There's inbreeding (euphemistically, "line breeding") all the time in those two breeds. In the Arabians...I don't know the rationale, but in the QHs it's because AQHA breeders are in part breeding for the horse slaughter industry (which is on its deathbed here).

They breed QHs for slaughter because QHs are: a) Docile, b) Have lots of muscle and little fat, and c) Are compact enough to fit more horses into the trucks, which by law can't have more than two decks. They get inbred for a couple reasons: that of the above, and to accentuate "desirable" traits (like the white tiger). We have the Poco Bueno and Impressive lines to thank for HERDA and HYPP, because their breeders went off the deep end and turned 'em loose on anything with prominent mammaries, including their (equine) daughters.

HERDA is a genetic disease where the skin along the horse's back stretches tight, <i>splits open</i> and heals raggedly if at all. It renders the horse unrideable and they either have to be destroyed (by either euthanasia — or maybe just sold to Cavel and shipped off to the slaughterhouse) or given permanent pasture ornament status. You certainly can't breed them and an untrained, semi-feral horse is dangerous to have around family situations. Horse-crazy kids can't tell the difference between nice, well-trained Eclipse and ol' Dobbin his paddock buddy, who has HERDA and wasn't trained.

HYPP, endemic to the Impressive line, is basically equine Marfan's Syndrome. The horse is fine for the first few years of his life, and then one day drops over dead from heart failure.

Friesians...yeah, there's inbreeding. My guy's dad's paternal grandparents were half-siblings. But in the main, it wasn't on account of greed (yet). It was on account of there only being three sires and twenty mares in the modern breed's foundation. Friesians are inbred for the same reason cheetahs are, there was a bottleneck.

Thanks for getting the word out, Z. Sorry in advance for the rant...

Edit afterthought: Just breed tigers. You'll get more tigers and pull them back from the brink of extinction. If the deck gets shuffled often enough and you get a white one — that's gravy, and no bad news anywhere.

JoshuaMadoc · Post by **JoshuaMadoc** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 8:59 pm

Oh, so THAT'S where that tiger image macro came from...

Yeah, that's some bad face, Roy.

MoonKit · Post by **MoonKit** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 9:14 pm

I dont understand why everyone needs WHITE tigers. The plain old orange and black ones are just as beautiful!

vrikasatma · Post by **vrikasatma** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 9:46 pm

Because White = Good? [/irony]

Let's start a panther conservation program! Oh noes, wait...Black = Eebul. [/irony, Pt. II]

Many years back, when I went to Vegas, I picked up a Sitarra plush. Yeah, I was caught up in the "save the White Tigers!" mania and I thought a pure white stripeless tiger was cool. The plush looks like an oversized Persian cat without the fluffy tail, right down to the punched-in bulldog muzzle. The biological Sitarra doesn't look that pug-ugly but she doesn't exactly look right, either.

I'm pretty sure Roy Horn is sincere in wanting to save tigers — all tigers — from extinction, though. However, I have to wonder if extinction isn't preferable to a future filled with nothing but captive inbreeding ending in a drawer in a Chinese apothecary.

Set · Post by **Set** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 9:50 pm

I've known this for years. It's far from being anything new, or rare.

vrikasatma · Post by **vrikasatma** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 10:17 pm

The truly sad and idiotic thing is that there are nitwits who'd look at those bulldog-faced and cross-eyed white tigers and squeal, "Oh, they're CUTE!!! They look like toys! Let's inbreed 'em some more so they get smaller! And even cuter!"

Seriously, the breeders who do that to them...ought to be grabbed by the fronts of their shirts and repeatedly and vigourously smacked back and forth across the jaws until their dental ice fall out.

PariahPoet · Post by **PariahPoet** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 11:25 pm

*hugs Kenny* Poor sweetheart. Yet another reason why I bloody HATE humans!

Kalira · Post by **Kalira** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 12:15 am

Truly sad. Just look at domestic white cats with blue eyes, they are typically deaf, wouldn't that tell you right there not to mess with nature, and leave well enough alone.

ravaged_warrior · Post by **ravaged_warrior** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 12:55 am

Ah, this is sad... Some people are messed up.

PariahPoet wrote:*hugs Kenny* Poor sweetheart. Yet another reason why I bloody HATE humans!

*headdesk*

Silent Hunter · Post by **Silent Hunter** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 2:13 am

*hugs Kenny* Poor sweetheart. Yet another reason why I bloody HATE humans!

......

DON'T HATE ALL HUMANS OVER THE ACTION OF SOME!

PariahPoet · Post by **PariahPoet** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 7:40 am

Hmm...Bold humongous font, that obviously makes you right.

RW and SH- if you do not like my opinion, that's your problem, because I'm going to have one whether you like it or not.

PariahPoet · Post by **PariahPoet** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 7:59 am

Tell me one good thing that the species has accomplished. Just ONE thing humans have done to better the natural world or aid another species. (last-ditch efforts to correct stuff they have already FUBAR'ed do not count)

JoshuaMadoc · Post by **JoshuaMadoc** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 8:14 am

PariahPoet wrote:Tell me one good thing that the species has accomplished. Just ONE thing humans have done to better the natural world or aid another species. (last-ditch efforts to correct stuff they have already FUBAR'ed do not count)

Basically none. But that doesn't mean we have the absolute, rightful position to say that we're ultimately f***, or collectively stupid and ignorant. That's something only Archangel Gabriel can say.

Humans can f*** up as many times as they like, provided they don't have a bitchfit over the consequences -- whatever s*** you do, YOU PAY FOR IT.

And on the other hand, we can make up for those mistakes just as infinitely. There's no moral requirement, no "oh, but you need to be as clean as a tile to be able to save us poor humans!" bullshit. There's no such thing as "humans can't make up for so-and-so problem, because they're just too deep in their own filth, past, present, and future!".

In fact, you don't need to be a human to make up for the "errors of man". If some living thing is able bodied and able minded, what that thing can do to benefit for everyone in this s*** little rock is determined entirely by its actions.

So, long story short -- Yeah, we're real dumbasses, but telling ourselves that we're doomed? That's all in your head.

PariahPoet · Post by **PariahPoet** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 8:19 am

I never said humans were doomed, just that I hate the species. Nor do I judge individuals by the whole species. (There is a precious handful of people I respect on an individual basis.)

Unfortunately humans are not the ones who deal with the consequences of most of their screw ups- for example, they drive another kind into extinction and what harm does it do them? "Oh well, I guess we won't see any more of those." The other species pays with its very existence.

Maybe in the very distant future human will bear the brunt of their screw-ups, but for the time being, the other lives that share the planet are the ones paying the price.

Silent Hunter · Post by **Silent Hunter** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 10:37 am

Hmm...Bold humongous font, that obviously makes you right.

No, it emphasises something i want to say.

PP wrote:Tell me one good thing that the species has accomplished. Just ONE thing humans have done in my overly narrow challenge that no one has a chance of ansewering.(last-ditch efforts to correct stuff they have already FUBAR'ed do not count beacuse its still not helping the natural world)

Well you win. But how do you define good? Depending on the definition of it here we could be hot cakes or dirt on a paw? Define it? Oh and you can't compare animals to us when defining good. Animals are nowhere near the postion that we are. I know we still are animals but trying to compare a wolf to a human when trying to work out we are asses or not is flawed at best. I mean, what if Wolves were given our tech, intellegence and self awareness? Would they be eco angels? Who says they would not run this planet into the ground faster then we are. Don't think wolves would be all rosy and noble like RP's and animal books portray.

Maybe in the very distant future human will bear the brunt of their screw-ups

Hopefully by then we'll be off this dirt rock. If pating the brunt means mass pain and death for us then **** nature.
Oh and the fact that you are hating our actions is a sign that we arnt such a bad race.

ravaged_warrior · Post by **ravaged_warrior** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 1:17 pm

PariahPoet wrote:RW and SH- if you do not like my opinion, that's your problem, because I'm going to have one whether you like it or not.

You're stereotyping an entire species as evil, greedy, self-indulgent, murderous assholes, is what you're doing. THAT is why I don't like your opinion, and I have as much right to have my own opinion as you do to have your's. Since I consider myself human, I have to say I don't like to be hated for the doings of other people. I find it offensive.

PariahPoet · Post by **PariahPoet** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 2:35 pm

ravaged_warrior wrote:
PariahPoet wrote:RW and SH- if you do not like my opinion, that's your problem, because I'm going to have one whether you like it or not.
You're stereotyping an entire species as evil, greedy, self-indulgent, murderous assholes, is what you're doing. THAT is why I don't like your opinion, and I have as much right to have my own opinion as you do to have your's. Since I consider myself human, I have to say I don't like to be hated for the doings of other people. I find it offensive.

Then again, that's your problem, not mine. You are just as free to be offended as I am to hate humans.

ravaged_warrior · Post by **ravaged_warrior** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 2:49 pm

Well, if you ask me, it isn't my problem, it's your's. I'm offended, but I'm least I'm not extremely pessimistic on the issue. I'm quite glad I'm not stuck with a stereotypical viewpoint, whether it be hating humans for the indiscretions of what is probably the minority, or hating wolves for their perceived indiscretions.

That's all I have to say on the matter.

Aki · Post by **Aki** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 6:44 pm

Oh, wow. I thought they were an actual species.

They're all inbred "mutants". Crikey. That's f*** up.

PariahPoet wrote:Tell me one good thing that the species has accomplished. Just ONE thing humans have done to better the natural world or aid another species. (last-ditch efforts to correct stuff they have already FUBAR'ed do not count)

Only if you tell me what the other species have done first.

We're all just trying to survive. Humanity's actions are just more noticeable and have a higher impact do to our considerable numbers and the power granted by technology. But, like us, or perhaps unlike us, the other species only care for themselves and their species. We at least have individuals and groups that go "hey, what about everything else on this crazy planet?"

Those "last-ditch effort made to currect stuff" that we "have already FUBAR'ed" happen because the natural world and other species don't need aid unless we FUBAR something up. What help does a deer need? A wolf? A tree? Not much. Not unless some external force (such as us) f*** them up, then they need us to fix that.

Ain't broke don't fix it.

PariahPoet · Post by **PariahPoet** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 7:00 pm

RW- Then I guess there is no problem at all. I don't give a flip whether you or anyone else is offended by me or anything I do/say. You can be offended to your heart's content so long as you don't expect it to have any effect on the way I feel. Because you will be sorely disappointed.

Aki- IMHO, just surviving without causing massive global problems seems sufficient in my book. (please don't read any animosity into my response, just stating what I see. You and Z posed reasonable questions)

vrikasatma · Post by **vrikasatma** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 8:17 pm

PariahPoet wrote:Tell me one good thing that the species has accomplished. Just ONE thing humans have done to better the natural world or aid another species.

Well, we've secured the survival of a number of attendant species — I'm talking about dogs, cats, parrots, chickens, pigs, goats, llamas, horses, deer, cattle, bees and rats. That's just in the animalia kingdom. Too many plants to go into here.

From the humanosphere...I think art could definitely be considered. Art harms none, whatever fundamentalists say. I think if God exists anywhere, He exists in the magical physical phenomenon of Art.

I'll stop before I wax rhapsodic...

PariahPoet · Post by **PariahPoet** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 10:41 pm

Z and Vrik- I suppose that art would probably be the one concession I would make on that issue. It's certainly not a skill unique to humans, but I guess I never said it had to be a human-only trait.

But as far as companion animals and livestock, that would come down to the argument which is better? Guaruanteed survival of the species for the span of the symbiotic relationship, at the price of individual freedom? Or the risk of letting nature decide the fate of the species with full freedom to every individual.

Everyone will feel differently about it, but for myself, I would much rather take my chances and fail than let anyone else take care of me, but ultimately control my fate.

On a side note- I find it amusing that I and many others on the board on multiple occasions have expressed hatred for humanity, and only now does some newbie charge in and take it as a personal insult. Why not go back over past threads? Are you going to flame every single member who has ever held my same feeling?

ravaged_warrior · Post by **ravaged_warrior** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 10:53 pm

I've mentioned my dislike of it before. I fail to see why forming an opinion based on stereotyping should be okay.

PariahPoet · Post by **PariahPoet** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 11:03 pm

Because you are free to dislike what I feel just as I am free to feel what I do.

Perhaps you failed to read in my post that I hate the species, not all of the individuals(just the vast majority of them).
Personally, I think it is more wrong to try and control what someone feels than it is to choose not to like a group based on negative past experience.

ravaged_warrior · Post by **ravaged_warrior** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 11:19 pm

Personally, I think it is more wrong to try and control what someone feels than it is to choose not to like a group based on negative past experience.

I'm not, I'm just against stereotyping. This, for instance:

Perhaps you failed to read in my post that I hate the species, not all of the individuals(just the vast majority of them).

You're suggesting that the vast majority is for this sort of behavior, or doesn't care. You do not know this. I don't see how it's any better than saying you hate a certain race because of stereotypes associated with it, or because of negative past experience.

Whatever, I'm out of this conversation. You clearly aren't trying to understand what I have to say, and I don't care enough to keep repeating myself to someone who doesn't bother to listen.

As for art? It is a skill unique to humans, as far as I'm aware. I've yet to hear of any animal species knowingly create art.