You know what would make a good scientific study? A study about how large segments of the human population have gone certifiably insane because of “science.”
You can see them, pretty clearly even if they can’t see it themselves.
The hard-core global warming crowd is an obvious one. Folks who think they are the opposite gender (or a different age, or species) are less obvious, but goaded on by what passes for psychology, they too might qualify for study.
Then there are people like those exemplified by a recent Huffington Post article titled “Science Shows Fish Feel Pain, So Let’s Get Over It and Do Something to Help These Sentient Beings.”
Yes, he said “sentient beings” in reference to fish, and the whole article discusses the allegedly rich debate about fish feelings and how immoral it is that we despicable humans use fish for food.
“The discussion about fish pain in a free online discussion is priceless,” writes the author, professor emeritus of ecology and evolutionary biology Marc Beckoff. “Given the costs of academic books nowadays, I could well imagine that such a rich and deep discussion would price itself out of many people’s pocket book.”
A crate full of rubber chickens would also price itself out of many people’s reach, but that doesn’t mean it’s a great idea to indulge should a free box full of them become available.
Beckoff lists a considerable number of credentialed people apparently studying whether fish can feel pain. He then goes on to assert that they can and are therefore sentient and therefore we must stop eating them.
“We need to do something about this now,” Beckoff writes (it’s always an emergency with these people), “because billions of fish are killed globally for food as if they don’t care about what happens to them.”
For support, Beckoff quotes Robert Jones of the Department of Philosophy at the prestigious Cal State Chico. I wouldn’t even try to summarize Jones’ words. Here they are:
“First, according to a study by the U.K. fish welfare organization Fishcount.org, about 970 to 2,700 billion fishes are caught from the wild annually. If fish are sentient (and there is good evidence that they are), then the number of sentient beings in the form of fish that are slaughtered for food annually equals at least twelve times that of the current human population (Mood & Brooke 2010). If the idea of such a moral atrocity weren’t enough, current world fishing trends point to a global eradication of all taxa currently fished, causing a total collapse of the fishing industry by the year 2048 (Worm et al. 2006). Surely, by any moral calculus, applying the precautionary principle regarding fish welfare is reasonable and prudential, if not obligatory.”
Sentient beings in the form of fish. Moral atrocity. Fish welfare.
(I’ll bet every single one of these enlightened fish-rights champions is also a defender of abortion.)
Clearly, a substantial portion of the human population has jumped the rails. This is what happens when generations are taught that humans are nothing special, that they are just animals that accidentally came about because of blind evolution.
Fish lives matter.