On 8/1/2015 3:31 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 8/1/2015 1:17 PM, Muggles wrote:
On 8/1/2015 11:43 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 8/1/2015 12:36 PM, Muggles wrote:


So, they'll study another lion, and then another one. I'm sure that's
not the only lion people are studying. At least I think the scientists
would be foolish to only be studying one lion.


Sure, you can study the aging process by getting a new specimen every
year or so. I sure hope you are just acting dumb.

geeesh If I were dumb I certainly couldn't counter some of the silly
arguments people pose that justify destroying a mans livelihood.

Disagreement doesn't equal dumb. If it did every lawyer on the face of
the earth would be out of a job.

OTOH, if you believe in something, you should be able to argue your
point of view without attacking other people by calling them dumb just
because you disagree.


To say "they'll study another lion, and then another one" is a dumb
statement. Research does not always work like that.I don't know if you
are dumb or not, but what you said was.

Come on, now. Any researcher worth their weight is going to be studying
multiple subjects at the same time, in addition to, they'll be studying
the effect of losing that particular lion in the pride. They haven't
lost their study at all. They'll simply expand the study to include
what happens in groups like this with the behavior of the remaining
family members. Some of that information has already been passed on.

What I think is dumb is believing that other lions won't replace the
lost lion in the study. The purpose of such studies is to gather real
information regardless of the circumstances and use the data to
understand how those subjects respond to various circumstances.

The study will continue probably without a hop, skip, or a jump, and the
resulting information will be deemed as extremely valuable when it comes
to analyzing how other prides respond to similar family losses.

--
Maggie