Category: Birds

Alt Left: No Virginia, There Are No Gay Animals

For reference.

Any animals have a strap-on equivalent? I doubt there are fake dicks in nature. Lesbians are just low. They want to strap it on and be a man, but this is all imaginary. They are really only good for licking. All they can really do is lick pussy and ass, so those are the cards they play.

In nature, a strong man would penetrate the pussy. What male could the weaker female overpower? She’d take on a submissive role like all women, with the only trace of her lesbianism existing in her proficiency in licking a mans ass.

Of courses there are no aminals that strap it on or do anything equivalent. In fact, in most animals including mammals sex is for procreation, not for pleasure. Only chimps and bonobos have sex for pleasure.

There are no lesbian animals no matter what the Gay Agenda (Gay Identity Politics) tells you. There are few gay animals. There are cases of two female birds guarding an egg together, but that is because there was no male around. Likewise for male penguins guarding an egg. They don’t fuck in either case.

There are no gay reptiles, amphibians, insects or birds. Zero.

And only one species of mammal has gay males, sheep, and even they don’t fuck. They just try to mount each other, but nothing happens. Maybe they should send those sheep to Frisco to show ’em how it’s done.

Sometimes female mammals will try to mount a female animal that is in heat. I had a cat that was going into heat (their vaginas get wet, which is very interesting, like human females). This other female cat I had got this weird look on its face and tried to mount her. Not sure what’s going, but it ain’t lesbianism.

Gay IP says that stupidest stuff, like “10% of all animals in every species are gay!” The 10% of people are gay lie is one of the biggest lies of all told by Gay IP.

Alt Left: Repost: Why Are Some Animals Gay? Are There any That Do Not Reproduce Due to Being Gay? Wouldn’t That Be an Evolutionary Disadvantage? If It’s Just a Selected Few in a Group, How Do You Know That It’s Not an Anomaly?

Posted last year. Updated and reposted as it’s getting some comments lately.

Answered on Queera, I mean Quora.

The PC line is that homosexuality is widespread in the animal kingdom. “All animals are gay!” is how Gay Politics propaganda goes. Actually it’s not.

This line is taken to extremes recently, and it is not uncommon to hear PC types say that 10% of all types of birds and mammals are gay. That’s clearly nonsense.

Both claims are simply examples of the typical retarded lying that Gay Politics constantly engages in. It shares this with other forms of Identity Politics, all of which are forms of chauvinist propaganda for various groups based on massive retarded lying and victim worship for the identity group along with demonization and irrational, often bizarre and extremely dishonest propagandized hatred of out-group “oppressors” of the same group.

There are cases of two same sex birds incubating an egg, but apparently there was a shortage of the opposite sex that gave rise to this. Also they didn’t have sex with each other.

I had a cat once that went into heat. You can hear and even observe when a cat is in heat. I won’t go into details. You will have to figure it out for yourself. When this cat was in heat, one of my female cats tried to mount the female in heat!

If you drive mice crazy enough in the lab or subject them to very crowded conditions, male mice will attempt to mount each other. They don’t actually have sex. This is called lordosis. This pseudo-homosexuality is a side effect of the mice being driven crazy by overcrowding or whatever. This suggests that homosexuality may be a psychological or sociological behavioral disturbance in some cases.

Bonobo chimpanzees (at least the females) are apparently often bisexual, but I am not aware of any gay or lesbian bonobos, nor am I aware of male bonobos having sex with each other.

However, sheep are a good case for homosexuality in the animal kingdom. Approximately 6% of male sheep prefer to mount other male sheep. I am not sure what they accomplish when they do that, but that’s what they do. They don’t have sex with female sheep. That is quite an excellent analogy in the animal world to male homosexuality among humans. As far as why sheep are like this, I have no idea at all.

Bald Eagles In North America

Polar Bear: Just woke from a dream pondering why bald eagles favor North America? Well, they favor Alaska specifically. The last remnant of old untapped forests that was the early North American frontier.

Those birds favor colder areas for the most part, I believe. Anyway, they only evolved in North America. I believe there are other types of large eagles down in South America. There are definitely warm weather jungle eagles in the Philippines, but they are almost extinct.

Bald eagles are actually water birds that tend to be fish eaters, specifically favoring dead fish. They’re basically scavengers – not very dignified animals. It’s weird how we think of our national bird as this proud, dignified creature because they’re not. They simply look regal and impressive  – they don’t act that way.

They’re found around large bodies of water – lakes and large rivers. Alaska is wild, yes, but it’s also full of large rivers and lakes, especially in the southern part. They especially favor the large rivers which often have huge salmon runs. Large numbers of eagles congregate on these rivers to feed on the salmon.

We actually have bald eagles in the local area in the Sierra Nevada at a lake called Bass Lake. They’re been breeding there for years. I went one time to a bar on the shore of the lake and looked at a couple of bald eagles on a nest on a treetop. There’s been a pair breeding there for years.

They’re very rare down here in the Central Valley. I finally saw a bald eagle here locally after we had a huge amount of rain, and there were small lakes formed all over the local grazing land. I looked out at this huge flooded area and saw a huge animal. At first I thought it was a cow, except it wasn’t a cow. Next I thought it was a dog, except it was way too big to be a dog.

I pulled over, confused, and got out of my car. Sure enough, it was a bald eagle! The thing was absolutely huge, one of the most massive birds you will ever see. It took off when I pulled over, as other animals like coyotes usually do if you pull over and look at them. It was a damned impressive sight, man.

Stray Cats in the US

While there are few stray dogs in White areas, there are some stray cats in these places. We don’t really like them, but we tolerate them. Some people trap them and pay to have them neutered, which is the best policy. Also a lot of people feed them. I don’t really like it as those wild cats kill an awful lot of rodents, small reptiles like lizards, and especially birds.

Cats kill an incredible number of birds in the US every year. There’s a town called Antioch in Northern California where there are supposedly 26,000 cats and they are hammering the birds something awful. Sorry, you have to start killing them when it gets like that. The town are trying to kill a lot of those cats, but the cat-lovers are up in arms over it.

Animal control goes out, catches a dog or cat, and brings it to the “pound.” The dog or cat stays in the pound for a week or two, at which time anyone can adopt it assuming it’s not totally wild. Wild cats cannot be adopted at all, and if they have been wild even for a short time at the beginning of their lives, say 2-3 weeks, there is a wildness that gets imprinted on them that stays with them for the rest of their lives – could be 18 years.

If no one adopts the pet after a week or two, they take the animal and put it in a chamber that has some strong tranquilizing gas pumped into it. The pet more or less falls and asleep and dies soon after.

There are now no-kill shelters, which I think are irrational. My Mom loves them, as she is a cat-lover. These places somehow just house all these stray cats forever. There is one near here called Cathouse on the Kings. My Mom and sister have been there a few times. There are literally hundreds of cats on a small enclosure.

These cat-lovers don’t make sense. They’re irrational. They’re mostly women, so of course they’re irrational, right? They think we can solve the stray cat problem with catch and euthanize. It’s a great idea except it doesn’t work. We catch and euthanize lots of them, but the numbers still don’t go down, as the others are breeding, or the numbers of stray cats are always being replenished by new stray cats.

A lot of stray cats are former pets. I adopted one once. This is a part of White culture that is no good. It’s ignorant working class White culture. People move and when they move, they usually don’t take their cats. For one thing, cats don’t travel well at all.

A lot of Whites like this turn their cats loose in the wild instead of taking them to the pound and killing them as you are supposed to. They think it’s more humane to turn the animal loose in the woods somewhere than to take it to the pound and kill it.

Except it’s not, really. Most former pets turned loose die horrible deaths maybe a week or two after being abandoned. I have seen what appear to be former pet cats when I was out walking in the woods. One was emaciated and looked ill. But it wouldn’t let me near it. Most former pets don’t know how to hunt or survive in the wild very well.

Or these working class Whites refuse to fix their female, so it has kittens. $25 is just too much money. She has kittens a lot and they just take the kittens out and abandon them somewhere. I have no idea if other ethnicities do this. I know that middle class Whites think working class Whites are disgusting morons for throwing their cats out to the wild like that.

Boys Who Kill Animals: A Hierarchy of Animal Victims

Same here. But, I don’t ever recall hurting a kitten or pup. Even as a toddler, I always loved cats and dogs. What is it really about them that children love so much? Maybe that they’re mammals?

I think the children who abuse cats and dogs are violent psychopaths in the making. I’d have never ever imagined hurting these creatures.

First I would like to point out that animal-killing is something boys do, and it’s very common. Girls generally speaking simply do not kill any kind of animals, even insects. They’re too tender-hearted for that sort of thing.

Sure, there is a hierarchy to this sort of thing. Most all boys kill insects and that’s no big deal really.

Next is fish. Yes, some boys kill fish for kicks, especially boys who fish for sport, but a fish is a primitive organism. To me though, killing fish is more serious than killing insects. A fish is larger and you can really see it suffer if you kill it. Bugs just die right away and they are so small that it is hard to empathize with them if you kill them.

Next up are amphibians like frogs. For some reason this is a bit more serious than killing fish. Nonetheless, quite a few boys kill frogs and other amphibians. President George Bush did as a boy.

Next up would probably be reptiles. For some reason, I think this is a bit more serious than killing amphibians, mostly because I’ve rarely heard of boys killing reptiles.

It’s rare for boys to kill reptiles because they’re a bit dangerous. Also boys love to catch snakes and make pets out of them. My friends caught kingsnakes and made pets of them. You had to feed them live mice! Our friends cackled with glee watching their pet snakes eat a live mouse. I told you boys are evil. Lizards will also fight back and a lot of them bite, especially those nasty alligator lizards we have here in California.

Next up would be birds. Now we are getting serious because birds are warm-blooded. Killing cold-blooded creatures is not that big of a deal, as they are all extremely primitive creatures far removed from us. The closer the animal gets to a human, the more of a serious matter the animal killing is.

But humans are warm-blooded, so killing warm-blooded creatures is a big deal. The Mexican Indian man next door told me that as a boy in Mexico, they used to kill birds! I could not believe he did that, and he was a bit defensive about it. He came out fine though. There’s nothing wrong with him. But I like birds so I won’t look fondly on bird-killers.

I am just guessing, but I think bird-killers might be older than killers of cold-blooded creatures, who tend to be young boys. As boys become teenagers, most of them start to think that killing bugs, fish, amphibians, etc. is childish and stupid. If they still want to kill animals, I imagine that they graduate on to birds and mammals. But most boys who killed animals as boys simply stop killing creatures when they become teenagers. They simply mature out of it.

Next up of course is mammals. Mammals are warm-blooded, and humans are mammals. If you are hunting mammals for sport with a gun, that is one thing, especially if you are going to eat the animal you kill. But if you are just killing them for kicks (typically by torturing them to death), you’ve got problems, especially if you are killing dogs and cats, as we humans love these animals and make pets out of them.

Yes, many serial killers start out killing mammals as boys. It’s more or less practice for killing humans, which they will do later on. I have no idea if mammal-killing boys can turn out ok. Perhaps some of them can. But if you know of a child or adolescent who is killing mammals, some intervention is needed. As soon as possible. This is a serious matter not to be trifled with.

Also I would like to point out that mammal-killers tend to be older than the other animal-killers listed above. They are usually teenagers aged 14-16, and they can be both boys and girls, but they are mostly boys.

Even Ducks Don't Like Indians

You Indians better work on your personalities! You’re even starting to piss of the birds for Chrissake, and birds are pretty stupid. Where do you think birdbrain came from? And ducks are some of the dumbest birds of them all.
My high school biology teacher once told us that ducks were very stupid.
On her farm where she grew up, there was this path they walked down every day, and the path turned sharply into a low spot where a pond of water had collected in the trail.
The pond was easily avoided if you knew it was coming. The ducks would walk along the path and then turn the corner and land right in the water, upsetting and surprising them. They never learned anything from one day to the next, like a lot of humans I know. Every day they made the same damned mistake and fell into the pond squawking again. They simply could not recall that there was a bend in the trail and a hidden pond after it that they had fallen into the day before.
I guess these London swans* are not too stupid though! They seem have figured out like so many of us in the West that Indians are lousy people!
*If you are interested, there are three types of birds: ducks, swans and geese. They are all related as members of the larger Duck Family. Swans and geese are separate genera, something I was not aware of (I just learned that today!). Swans and geese are larger than ducks. They must be closely related though because swans and geese can interbreed to form hybrids (I just learned that today too!). Isn’t life cool? Here I am at 60 years old and I am still learning new things, even new basic facts about our world, almost every day! I don’t know about the rest of you, but I think that’s really neat. H who is not busy growing is busy dying.

I’m confused. Sure, humans have racist impulses; Ballets like Swan Lake are said to be ‘racist,’ but…UK Swans Hate Ethnic Minorities (right click to open in new window):
(Birds have more acute eyesight than human I check).

“Angry ‘Racist’ Swans are Terrorizing Students at Warwick University

The bullying birds have been spotted standing guard at a campus footbridge to stop humans from crossing. Students say they are being continually confronted on their way to lectures. And the birds – who are currently in their breeding season – are said to be particularly aggressive towards Indian students. One victim, a 24-year-old student who asked not to be named, said:
“I am from India, and they attack me especially – they focus straight on me. We have been warned that the swans will be a bit feisty at this time of year, but they go for me all year round. I think they don’t like too many Indians in England – maybe the swans here are a little bit racist.”
……………….
When the yanks pick an African ballerina to play Odette, the swan queen, they picked one with fairer skin and without peppercorn hair.

https://media.vanityfair.com/photos/55819a8c320a56cf4241308a/master/w_768,c_limit/tchaikovskys-new-queen-misty-copeland-01.jpg

Why Are Some Animals Gay? Are There any That Do Not Reproduce Due to Being Gay? Wouldn’t That Be an Evolutionary Disadvantage? If It’s Just a Selected Few in a Group, How Do You Know That It’s Not an Anomaly?

Answered on Queera, I mean Quora.

The PC line is that homosexuality is widespread in the animal kingdom. “All animals are gay!” is how Gay Politics propaganda goes. Actually it’s not.

This line is taken to extremes recently, and it is not uncommon to hear PC types say that 10% of all types of birds and mammals are gay. That’s clearly nonsense.

Both claims are simply examples of the typical retarded lying that Gay Politics constantly engages in. It shares this with other forms of Identity Politics, all of which are forms of chauvinist propaganda for various groups based on massive retarded lying and victim worship for the identity group along with demonization and irrational, often bizarre and extremely dishonest propagandized hatred of out-group “oppressors” of the same group.

There are cases of two same sex birds incubating an egg, but apparently there was a shortage of the opposite sex that gave rise to this. Also they didn’t have sex with each other.

I had a cat once that went into heat. You can hear and even observe when a cat is in heat. I won’t go into details. You will have to figure it out for yourself. When this cat was in heat, one of my female cats tried to mount the female in heat!

If you drive mice crazy enough in the lab or subject them to very crowded conditions, male mice will attempt to mount each other. They don’t actually have sex. This is called lordosis. This pseudo-homosexuality is a side effect of the mice being driven crazy by overcrowding or whatever. This suggests that homosexuality may be a psychological or sociological behavioral disturbance in some cases.

Bonobo chimpanzees (at least the females) are apparently often bisexual, but I am not aware of any gay or lesbian bonobos, nor am I aware of male bonobos having sex with each other.

However, sheep are a good case for homosexuality in the animal kingdom. Approximately 6% of male sheep prefer to mount other male sheep. I am not sure what they accomplish when they do that, but that’s what they do. They don’t have sex with female sheep. That is quite an excellent analogy in the animal world to male homosexuality among humans. As far as why sheep are like this, I have no idea at all.

Deep Ecology – An Overview

Repost from the old site.
One thing people ought to know about this blog is that one of
my philosophies is Deep Ecology. Click that link and you so you can try to figure out what it means. It was part of a debate in the environmentalist (especially radical environmental) movement that probably really got going in the 1990’s.
It had several rivals, including Social Ecology, promoted by a fellow named Murray Bookchin . Deep Ecology was promoted by a guy named Arne Naess. There’s also Ecofeminism, which I’m not really up on, because I can’t stand most kinds of feminism, although pro-porn feminists sounds like they are after my heart.
To me, Deep Ecology means something like, “Up with the animals, down with the people.” I’m not saying kill the people or anything like that, but I think in general, most species have a right to survive just like people. And no, White nationalists may not give me a debate in the comments section of this post about why their race is an endangered species.
Notable Deep Ecologists and influences include Edward Abbey of The Monkeywrench Gang fame, Dave Foreman, founder of Earth First! (many EF’ers are Deep Ecologists), Mike Roselle, also of EF!, Judi Bari (probably framed by the FBI), Rachel Carson, Aldo Leopold , Theodore Roszak, John Zerzan (anarchist intellectual from Oregon) and Gary Snyder (Buddhist beatnik poet).
An overview of the Social Ecology versus Deep Ecology dust-up is here. In general, Deep Ecologists were more anarchists and Social Ecologists were more traditional socialists. I recall a Social Ecologist saying that if an animal had to be driven extinct to keep poor humans from suffering, than so be it.
They also opposed the idea of protecting animals like tigers that kill humans. If a tiger protection plan deepened the poverty of already poor humans, they would oppose that. This is pretty much the mentality of socialist states in the past 100 years, which in general have cared a lot more about the needs of humans than animals.
Deep Ecologists had major roots in the Green Party and the worldwide Green Movement as a whole. They tend to support not just reduced population growth, but actual negative population growth and population declines within nations.
This puts Deep Ecology on an oppositional status with almost all nationalists, especially ethnic nationalists. Ethnic nationalists in particular have always championed high birth rates. White nationalists are extremely pro-natalist for Whites only, and they go nuts over articles about White women having 18 kids. That would keep me out of such a movement right off the bat.
Ominously, all fascists have also always been fiercely pro-natalist.
Capitalism also, dependent on ever-increasing population for the insanity of ever-increasing economic growth, is very much pro-natalist. Capitalist theory holds that population declines will destroy the capitalist economy. That’s a great reason to reject neoliberal capitalism, or possibly capitalism itself, right there.
One of Deep Ecology’s critiques of standard environmentalism is why we should preserve habitats and species.
The standard line is that we must do this because these things can or may provide great benefit for human beings. Wilderness areas are preserved so humans can run around in them, birds are preserved so humans can look at them with binoculars, and rainforests and species are preserved because science can study them and figure out new medical or technological applications to benefit humans.
Deep Ecologists say that this is anthropocentrism. Species and places should be preserved for their inherent value, regardless of whether or not humans can use them or exploit them for human benefit. That’s a major philosophical position that you might want to ponder.
We had a big to-do over the California spotted owl (CASPO) in this part of the Sierra Nevada about 15 years ago. Bottom line is some mills closed, people lost their jobs, homes went into foreclosure, etc. About 100% of the population up here was in favor of the loggers who were wrecking the forest and against the owls.
As it turns out, the restrictions that the Forest Service put in are not even working to preserve the CASPO, and it surely needs to be listed at least as federally threatened. The crooked Fish and Wildlife Service won’t do so because that would mean further logging restrictions.
At the time, I used to delight in infuriating people by saying that 1 spotted owl was worth about 20 humans. Hardly anyone seemed to go along with that.
The species accounts on this blog are in the spirit of Deep Ecology. I’m an animal lover. I wish I could love human animals just as much, but it seems like non-human animals are in general nicer and more reliable.
By the way, Dave Foreman’s Confessions of an Eco-Warrior (1991) is highly recommended as a primer in deep ecology.

Adventures in Owling

Repost from the old site.
For the last few weeks here in Coarsegold, California (elevation 2000′ in the Sierra Nevada Mountains), I have been hearing strange “Screech! Screech!” noises at night, often very late at night. I’m hearing them right now, as a matter of fact. I’m an experienced bird watcher, and I assumed they were birds, so I grabbed a strong flashlight (you need a strong flashlight to look at any night birds) and went outside.
Most birds are simply not active at nighttime. Day-active birds will usually just go up into a tree and sleep there at night. I had a rare bird on my property in 1990 in Southern California and I had bird-watchers coming every day to come see it.
It was a Brown Thrasher, common in the Eastern US but very rare in the West. The bird stayed on my property for about three days. At nighttime, I went out looking for it and found it in a bunch of trees on the side of the house. We think that they just go up into a tree and probably sleep up there. I guess they need to sleep too, like everything else.
The only birds active at nighttime are generally owls. There are also some birds like nightjars and whippoorwills that become active at dusk. I’m not sure if they stay active at night or not. So if you hear a bird at night, it’s an owl.
Well, I went outside and the strange screeches kept coming from a huge tree nearby. I shone my light up there and there were some good-sized owls up there. I couldn’t figure out what kind they were because it was night and they weren’t fitting into any known categories. One flew away and I noticed how huge it was in flight. I went back in and did some research on the Net.
At first I was thinking “Screech owl” because we do have Western Screech Owls here. But they are quite small and have a distinctive call. They make this call on hot summer nights, often very late at night, but it’s not a screech, in spite of the name. It’s more of a “bouncing ball” call. It’s hard to describe unless you have heard it.
On the Net I learned that baby Great Horned Owls do make a “Screech!” call. That fit in with my perceptions about the birds’ size. A horned owl is a very large bird. They are so large that they are known to prey on house cats. They are also very common in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada.
So these were baby Great Horned Owls. I guess they fledge here in July and August. What was interesting was there were around 5-10 of them in a small area, all calling to each other. The size also ruled out Screech Owls , because they are quite small.
You need to understand that “baby birds”, once fledged, are about the size of adult birds and are often indistinguishable from them. Some smaller birds have juvenile plumage, but among larger birds, it’s not common.
In Orange County in the late 1980’s, I saw two crows of about the same size, one feeding the other one with its beak. This is how birds feed each other. I did some research and learned that that is a baby crow. Baby crows are about the same size as adults. Adults will feed them for a while after they fledge and leave the nest, but then they need to take off.
I also had some acorn woodpeckers living in a huge oak tree on my property in the mountains. They live in communal units of multiple adults and even raise the young communally. They may raise more than one clutch in a good year. I noticed that after the young were fledged, they stuck around for a while, and the adults continued to feed them. Then I guess they took off.
This myth, so beloved by American parents with adult kids still at home long past the time to leave, about adult birds “throwing the young out of the nest” as soon as they fledge, is just not true.
First of all, baby birds can’t fly very well as soon as they fledge. Sometimes if you are lucky in Spring you can see baby birds scuttling along the ground trying to fly. I’ve seen this in House Sparrows in Fresno, California. I think they scuttle along the ground and half-fly for a few days or so, then they get it. They fly for a short distance, then they land. They must be extremely vulnerable to predation in this stage.
Keeping baby birds around after they fledge is a positive adaptation in evolutionary terms. Larger birds such as woodpeckers and surely crows are thought to be more evolved, so they seem to keep the young at home for a while after fledging. Tossing the babies out of the nest is evolutionarily stupid, since if they can’t fly well, they will be very vulnerable to predation.
Trust me, they are vulnerable enough in the nesting phase! I had an Ash-Throated Flycatcher nesting on my Oakhurst property one year. My cats figured out the story after a while, and kept trying to climb up to the nest. I’m sure predators like raccoons are even worse. I even understand that snakes can climb trees and raid nests.
I’ve never seen so many owls as I’ve seen up here in the mountains.
Twice I saw Northern Saw-Whet Owls on the road in Oakhurst, once at dusk and once at 9:30 PM on a sleety night in winter – this one had a mouse in its talons! Saw-Whet Owls descend to the Oakhurst area in winter.
Another time, also in Oakhurst at dusk, I saw small birds “mobbing” something just before dusk. When you see that, it’s generally a predatory bird like a hawk or an owl. It was dusk. I ran inside, got my binoculars, and went back. After a while, I saw that they were mobbing a Northern Pygmy-Owl .
It’s a pretty cool little bird, with fake eyes in the back of it’s head! Nice evolutionary trick to fool you into thinking it’s looking at you when it’s not. I think that this trick evolved to help this small owl avoid predators, because there I’m not sure there is an advantage for a predator to seem like it has eyes in the back of its head.
A couple of years ago, in Oakhurst near some apartments at dusk, I saw a huge bird swoop down on some bare ground in front of some apartments, grab something and take off back up to a Ponderosa Pine tree, where it was promptly mobbed by a bunch of small birds. I stopped and looked long enough to see that it was a Great Horned Owl with a mouse (probably a deer mouse) in its talons.
Mobbing is an interesting tactic. Small birds with fly in large numbers at a hawk or an owl. Often these hawks or owls are the same ones that kill and eat these same small birds. Accipter hawks such as Goshawks are mobbed, but I have never seen a Buteo such as a Red-tailed Hawk mobbed.
Buteos typically subsist solely on small mammals and reptiles and seldom if ever eat other birds. But accipters are bird hawks. They prey on other birds. I once saw a Goshawk being mobbed by small birds, fly out of some underbrush, and over to a post where it sat for a bit while the others continued to mob it.
The idea of mobbing is strength in numbers. Although they attack predators known to prey on them, if you have enough small birds, it will confuse and upset the predator enough to so it won’t attack them. It’s also an early warning system for any other small birds in the area that a predator is in the area. In addition, by mobbing, the small birds try to drive the predator away from them and off to somewhere else.

On Spotted Owls

Repost from the old site.
There are three subspecies of spotted owls in the US. The Northern Spotted Owl (NSO) ranged from Oregon and Washington down into the California coast ranges and over into the Siskiyous and Cascades.
The California Spotted Owl (CASPO) lives in the Sierra Nevada, down into the Tehachapis and and into the mountain ranges of Southern California.
The Southern California population is isolated in mountain ranges that are not connected and is projected to go extinct over at most 100-200 years. Before mass settlement of Southern California, CASPO may have moved from range to range via river corridors, but now that is not possible. The Techachapi CASPO is probably not sustainable either. CASPO also lives in the Coast Ranges south of San Fransisco.
The Mexican Spotted Owl lives in the Southwest, mostly in Arizona and New Mexico. It was listed as threatened recently and recently had a huge amount of critical habitat set aside. It seems to be threatened by cattle grazing, but I forget how. Serious overgrazing in the Southwest seems to be devastating the grass and forb understory of the old growth pine forests.
This overgrazing has promoted heavy stands of small trees that are susceptible to drought and fire. The truth is that the Southwest should not even be grazed in the first place; it’s too dry and cows just devastate arid regions.
Cows evolved in cold, moist England and they are not well suited to arid regions. During the hot, dry months, they congregate in riparian areas, which they utterly devastate. The Eastern US is much moister, and cattle grazing causes few problems there.
The NSO was declared a threatened species in 1990, setting off the timber wars in the Pacific Northwest. Clinton pushed through a crappy Northwest Forest Plan, which sold out way more to industry than was necessary. Logging in the region declined by 80%, but they had been horribly overcutting for decades.
As one might expect, the new regulations did not save the NSO, and it has continued to decline at 3.5% per year. The continuing decline of the NSO means that it may soon have to be uplisted from Threatened to Endangered.
In the far north, in northern Washington and British Colombia, the NSO is declining at about 7% per year. In southwestern B.C., there are only about 50 owls left and they are going to go extinct in the past few years unless something is done.
All spotted owls have selected for old growth forests. A new threat is the Barred Owl, which is a relative of the Spotted Owl, coming down from the north. The Barred Owl is much more tolerant of the open conditions created by massive clearcutting, and is displacing Spotted Owls in many places. In particular, it is interbreeding with them, creating a new hybrid type.
Loggers claim that the Barred Owl invasion is the true cause of the NSO decline, but they are lying as usual. The Barred Owl invasion is due to the more open conditions created by out of control clearcutting for decades in the Northwest.
The CASPO was petitioned twice for listing, in 2000 and 2004. I haven’t read the petitions, but I have read hundreds of pages of studies on the CASPO. The CASPO, last I heard, was declining at a greater rate than even the NSO. In 2006, the US Fish and Wildlife Service declined to list the CASPO as an endangered species.
That strikes me as a wrong decision, but Bush is listing species at a rate even 85% lower than his rightwing father, George Bush. Bring back George Bush Sr.! As we can see, with the years, the US Republican Party, and consequently the US Whites they represent, have gotten increasingly virulent in the attitude of hatred and destruction towards our precious environment.
Next to the immigrant hordes flooding our shores, our precious slice of American Gaia has no greater enemy than White Americans.
What is curious about this is that White nationalists insist that only Whites are altruistic enough to care enough to be environmentalists in any way. It’s an interesting argument, but it’s sure not true in the US, and almost everyone making this odd argument is voting for the party of Nuke Gaia. Go figure.

Dead Issues

Gang Bang Funeral

In some societies necrophilia was enacted owing to a belief that the soul of an unmarried woman would not find peace; among the Kachin of Myanmar, versions of a marriage ceremony were held to lay a dead virgin to rest, which would involve intercourse with the corpse. Similar practices existed in some pre-modern Central European societies when a woman who was engaged to be married died before the wedding.

Good God, how horrible!

Cool Sculptures

Acts of necrophilia are reportedly displayed on Moche artifacts of Peru.

Yuck.

Wisdom of the Ancients

Herodotus writes in The Histories that, to discourage intercourse with a corpse, ancient Egyptians left deceased beautiful women to decay for “three or four days” before giving them to the embalmers. This practice originated from the need to discourage the men performing the funerary customs from having sexual interest in their charges.

Indeed, the same famous work discusses one Pharaonic era undertaker whose particular kink was screaming for his “Mummy” while doing the deed.

Birds and the Bees, or Animals Do It Too

Necrophilia is known to occur in animals, with a number of confirmed observations.

Kees Moeliker allegedly made one of these observations while he was sitting in his office at the Natuurmuseum Rotterdam, when he heard the distinctive thud of a bird hitting the glass facade of the building. Upon inspection, he discovered a drake (male) mallard lying dead about two meters from the building. Next to the downed bird there was a second drake mallard standing close by.

As Moeliker observed the couple, the living drake picked at the corpse of the dead one for a few minutes and then mounted the corpse and began copulating with it. The act of necrophilia lasted for about 75 minutes, in which time, according to Moeliker, the living drake took two short breaks before resuming with copulating behavior.

Moeliker surmised that at the time of the collision with the window the two mallards were engaged in a common pattern in duck behavior which is called “rape flight.” “When one died the other one just went for it and didn’t get any negative feedback – well, didn’t get any feedback,” according to Moeliker. This is the first recorded case of necrophilia in the mallard duck- though not the only recorded case of homosexuality within the bird family.

The Cane Toads: an Unnatural History film shows a male toad copulating with a female toad who has been run over by a car. He goes on to do this for eight hours, although the entire eight-hour act is not depicted in the movie, thank God.

In the case of a praying mantis, necrophilia could be said to be part of their methods of reproduction. The larger female will sometimes decapitate or even eat her mate during copulation. However, this only happens in 5-31% of cases. However, given that the sexual activity of a male mantis is controlled by a brain-like ganglion in his abdomen it may not be appropriate to refer to him as a “corpse”, even when he is decapitated.

Dang man, a queer necrophiliac birdbrain odd duck, a ugly toad fucking a toadly chick for a full eight hours without even getting bored, worrying about genital warts or stopping to eat a fly, and male praying mantises with their brains in their dicks. I’ve heard of guys thinking with their dicks before, but that’s ridiculous.

Libertarianism – The Enemy of all Non-Human Life on Earth

As several posts on Occidental Dissent make clear, libertarianism (and its mainstream congener, neoliberalism) is utterly incompatible with the preservation of any non-human and non-domesticated or non-utilitarian life forms. Libertarians like to throw up weird scenarios whereby preserving wildlife, wild spaces and wild places would somehow be more economically viable than exterminating them, exploiting them, and devastating them.
The problem is that this never works out in praxis. Even when we environmentalists produce reports showing that preserving forests and meadows is worth way more than chopping them down or ruining them with cattle, 100% of libertarians always line up with exploiters. I’ve been reading them forever. Libertarian environmentalist is an oxymoron.
Since neoliberalism is just libertarianism, neoliberalism also can never support environmentalism. Market-driven environmental policies must be some kind of a cruel joke. They can never work. In strict economically rational terms, it is either never or almost never economically rational to save species, habitats or places. Destruction and extermination is where the money is, and in neoliberal theory, maximum return is the only variable we are allowed to consider.
Libertardarians now argue that humans (I guess maybe those of White European stock) now care enough about environmentalism that we can zero out government, privatize everything, and everything will still be hunky dory for the bighorns, the spotted owls and timber wolves. Yeah right.
In the first place, this would only work with White people, because only Whites can be environmentalists at the moment, and only more advanced Whites in North America and Europe need apply even here. That’s because Whites in Latin America and Russia have proven to be utterly capable of taking care of the environment. Native Americans and Siberians can probably preserve things too, but they don’t run any states.
Let’s test out the libertarian theory on most liberal-minded of the more progressive Whites on Earth, the ultra-liberals in California (though not a White state anymore, nevertheless, California is one of the most pro-environmental states in the nation).
The argument that humans now care enough about species to preserve them is proven wrong here in the West. Even here in ultra-liberal California, the glorious salmon are nearly extinct. The striped bass fishery in the Delta and Bay has also been ruined. The vast herds of Tule Elk that roamed all over the valleys and coastal areas of our state have been decimated and only exist on miniscule preserves that look like petting zoos. Fishers and spotted owls are being driven extinct by the timber industry as we speak.
A lot of CA endangered species are not real celebrities, but salmon would seem to have quite a bit of worth. Yet the salmon fishery in CA and up and down the West has been decimated. And even the ultra-liberal CA senators like Dianne Feinstein insist that we have not creamed the salmon enough, and need to take them out once and for all now. Feinstein’s mostly doing this for one of her rich Jewish buddies, Stewart Resnick of Beverly Hills. So much for liberal US Jews!
The notion that humans (Anywhere!) now value wildlife enough to be trusted with preserving them in a libertarian society is seriously wrong, and we can prove it right here in California.
In the 3rd World, humans are so bestial, venal, animalistic and backwards that they indeed are well on the way to extrerminating everything non-human, non-domesticated and non-utilitarian in sight.
An excellent argument in favor of White superiority (which I agree with) is, as I noted above, that Whites are really the only humans on Earth (who run states) that care about non-human life enough to preserve it.* Virtually every other race and ethnic group of man will gladly exterminate every single non-domesticated species and non-utilitarian species in its land at the drop of a hat.
Preserving species is something only Whites can do. And it’s something that only White governments can do, the White private sector haven proven endlessly to have failed at this endeavor.
*I honestly wish that non-European states were capable of not exterminating everything in sight, but I doubt it. The Middle East is an environmental catastrophe. The only environmentally decent place is Israel, but that’s populated by White people. The only environmentally progressive place in Latin America is Costa Rica, but once again, that’s a White country. It seems that all Arabs and mestizos can do is destroy.
Asians seem like a nightmare in environmental terms. They aren’t even capable of tender feelings towards cats and dogs, which they massacre for sport and food, so how can they possibly be trusted with non-domesticated things. The Japanese have been some of the worst scofflaws in international fishing and their bestial exploits in whaling have earned them the scorn of the planet.
True, in some ways, Koreans and Japanese seem to want to preserve what’s left on their lands, but environmentally, those places are pretty much human-nuked anyway, mostly by overpopulation. A preservationist impulse isn’t worth much if there is nothing left to preserve.
The hunter-gatherers of Southeast Asia never had the caretaker mindset of American Indians, instead opting for the more primitive mindset of “kill everything that moves.” The extinction process in SE Asia is very advanced and the state does very little to stop it. Environmental consciousness is extremely low.
Probably Vietnam is one of the more standout states. China is just now starting to develop an environmental ethic, but it doesn’t seem to be very advanced, and in a lot of ways, environmentally, China looks like America 1890.
I’m amazed that anything non-human and non-bovine is still walking around in India, where the extinction process is quite advanced, the state is extremely weak, and poachers are everywhere.
Russians have always been some of the most backwards and barbaric of the Whites, and environmentally, that’s still the case. Since the collapse of the USSR things have really fallen badly apart. Market hunters and poachers stalk the land. In Siberia, the poacher harvest of salmon is the same size as the legal harvest. The Amur Leopard and the Siberian Tiger are hanging on by their bare claws, and I expect them to go extinct soon.
Africa has to be one of the worst places on Earth to be a species of wildlife. Africans are primitive people, and primitives tend to kill anything that moves, usually for food. The only reason that there were still huge wildlife populations 50 years ago is due to White colonists, who forbade the Africans from wiping out the animals. With decolonization, Africans quickly set work slaughtering anything that moved.
That they had not done so in centuries past was due only to the crudity of their weapons. You can’t kill many animals with a spear. In 1965, Africans with firearms were a threat the animal population of the continent. The large megafauna were only saved when the former White colonists were called back in by concerned Africans to save the animals.
Many of the large animal populations still exist, but poachers and bush meat hunters take a devastating toll. I don’t see anything positive in the future. Africans don’t seem to be capable of not exterminating animals.
One argument is that non-Whites do these things because they are poor.
Equatorial Guinea now has a PCI of $21,000/year. Anyone seen any nice environmental initiatives coming out of there? Has the wealth of the Japanese prevented them from killing whales? Has Korean wealth prevented them from waging mass pogroms against dogs and cats? Has the relative wealth of Brazil and Argentina prevented environmental devastation in these places? The Gulf Arab countries are extremely wealthy, but my understanding is that they are environmental wrecks.
So much for the “they do it because they are poor” line.

T-Rex As Super Chicken, More on the Birdosaur Thing

If you follow paleontology, you are probably aware of a theory that says that dinosaurs turned into birds. So Tyrannosaurus Rex is sort of like that strutting, stuttering, John Wayne spouting Super Chicken Foghorn Leghorn in the cartoons (Remember him)? “I say…I say…I say…I say…BOY!”
Anyway, there’s a problem with the theory. That is, dinosaurs, the first, second and third digits develop and this is what the dino walks on. In birds, the second, third and fourth digits develop, and this is what birds walk on. You can do this with your own hand and put your hands on the ground to see what it would be like to have structures like that. The 1-2-3 dino digits do not correspond to the 2-3-4 bird digits. The theory moved into fail territory in the late 1990’s, where it’s been ever since.
However, in China, a new species has been discovered called Limusaurus inextricabilis. It is the only known ceratosaur to be found in Asia so far. Interestingly, L. inextricabilis is one of those things the Creationists say does not exist, that is, a Missing Link. In L. inextricabilis, the first digit of the dino 1-2-3 is very weakly developed, as if it is on its way out evolutionarily. Along with that, it has a dramatically enhanced fourth digit, clearly coming into its own. It looks like dinosaur was on its way to dinobird.
I used to be an inveterate birdwatcher, until most of the birds left. It was a lot of fun in the early 1990’s, but I swear there are so many fewer birds since then. Why is that? Anyway, birdwatching is not much fun unless there are lots of different cool birds around. Birds look a lot different through binocs.
One time I was watching with my brother and I looked at a Robin through the binocs. It was as if I was seeing it for the first time. I put down the binocs and looked over at my brother. “Damn that Robin is one ugly looking bird! That thing looks like a…lizard!” My brother is really smart, way too smart. “Yeah,” he nodded sagely, knowing what I was getting at. “It’s supposedly a really primitive bird.”
Lizard = reptile = dinosaur = birdosaur = bird. Life is full of little epiphanies, if you only take the time to glance up and think a bit.

error

Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)