Which side of the fence

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

I have seen morons in the Banff and Jasper National Parks parked along the roads and out of their cars by the hundreds... walking far out into a meadow to get great closeup pictures of a HUGE bull moose..

One of the best postcards they sell in Banff is a picture of man on one side of a tree and a large elk on the other side.

Quote

OR the idiots following the very photogenic grizzly bear about 40 ft away.

No doubt, they're wearing those little dinner bells everyone sells.

Quote

FAR too many people bring up their children with a skewed view of the natrual world of cute little Bambi's... and teddy bears. If you do not have proper respect for WILD ANIMALS.... you may find yourself getting a rather RUDE lesson from one.... who is just doing what he does.

It does add a little chlorine to the gene pool, though.

[freeflybella 0]

Quote

Because two dimensional pixelated images is the same as experiencing things in person?

Either way - you're still just looking. Watching.

And as in the case of all of the world's zoos, circuses and animal shows - you're not even seeing/watching the natural animal. You're seeing/watching the animal out of its environment and behaving out of character.

Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

[billvon 2,990]

>Because two dimensional pixelated images is the same as experiencing things in person?

A two dimensional pixelated image of a polar bear is not significantly worse than a picture of a polar bear sitting on a concrete slab on the other side of a glass wall. If anything, good underwater/land photography of polar bears tells you a lot more about them (how they live, how they move, what they do) than watching one sit on his concrete "iceberg" at a zoo.

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

>Because two dimensional pixelated images is the same as experiencing things in person?

A two dimensional pixelated image of a polar bear is not significantly worse than a picture of a polar bear sitting on a concrete slab on the other side of a glass wall. If anything, good underwater/land photography of polar bears tells you a lot more about them (how they live, how they move, what they do) than watching one sit on his concrete "iceberg" at a zoo.

Maybe so. When I saw Polar Bears at the zoo (about 10 years ago), they were in a large enclosure, with a big swimming tank, which had an underwater viewing area. Those bears were having a big time, diving into the water, fighting over the different water "toys". They were much more dynamic than just sit on a concrete slab. It was pretty cool. So was watching the antelope run around and the young giraffes do what might be decribed as neck jousting. Entering a tropical aviary was pretty kick ass, too. So was viewing gorillas (just a few feet away) through glass.

They say a picture is worth a thousand words. Perhaps the same comparison could be made for seeing something in person versus seeing a picture.

[billvon 2,990]

>They say a picture is worth a thousand words. Perhaps the same
> comparison could be made for seeing something in person versus seeing
>a picture.

A glass window is just a high fidelity TV screen. Interaction with animals is fun and can be instructive, but a) that tells you what domesticated animals are like, not wild animals, and b) most zoo environments do not allow interaction. Indeed, part of the acclimation for the animals in most zoos is learning to ignore the humans on the other side of the glass.

[Richards 0]

Quote

How are they outdated? What makes them less relevant than in previous generations?

[Richards 0]

Quote

and where was the supervision of this child.