Polar bear kills young British adventurer in Norway.

steddyeddy · 05-08-2011 07:30PM

yimrsg wrote: »

Humans have through evolution moved into these areas so to say they don't belong there is tripe. Humans aren't an alien species that was introduced by mistake, we've produced adaptations to a particular environment much like the bear.

Where did I say humans didnt live in the area. Thats why I said bears always ascoiated humans with food contradicting your point

Had it escaped it, the polar bear it would associate humans as a new source of prey so it would become more dangerous. I think there is a similar policy in certain parts of the states where if a bear kills a person it is destroyed.

It is a man eater it has been as long as humans were in the area. The rules for dealing with a polar bear are

Carry a firearm to scare it of or avoid the area. They did neither. The last few people who enountered polar bears used the following to scare them off:

A trapper shooed a bear from his porch—attracted by the smell of fish stew—by banging pie plates together.
A tiny woman chased a bear from her porch with a whack on its rear from a broom. The bear fled, never to return.

The bear should have been scared off!

You're original point was lambasting the people who shot a bear in an act of self preservation and protection of kin.

An act of self preservation would be avoiding an area were polar bears are known to frequent these men were clearly out of their depth.

Chuck Stone · 05-08-2011 07:31PM

It wasn't me! wrote: »

You still have to take the quickest route to solving the problem, which is typically killing the dangerous animal.

I'm not sure how practical it would be to kill 6 billion+ people! :pac:

mconigol · 05-08-2011 07:31PM

What's all this ****e about it being the bears environment? Humans not allowed to have an environment ourselves? Why would it automatically belong to the bear?

steddyeddy · 05-08-2011 07:32PM

Norwayviking wrote: »

If you follow and respect the rules,nothing will happen.
Its quite simple

http://www.sysselmannen.no/hovedEnkel.aspx?m=45658

http://www.sysselmannen.no/hovedEnkel.aspx?m=45659

Exactly its common sense they didnt even try and use flares to try and ward it off. I wonder who they consulted before making the trip.

Norwayviking · 05-08-2011 07:34PM

mconigol wrote: »

What's all this ****e about it being the bears environment? Humans not allowed to have an environment ourselves? Why would it automatically belong to the bear?

Well if you want to move to the Artic and live with them,be my guest:D

steddyeddy · 05-08-2011 07:34PM

mconigol wrote: »

What's all this ****e about it being the bears environment? Humans not allowed to have an environment ourselves? Why would it automatically belong to the bear?

Its about self preservation. Its not a political statement of it being the bears land. If any dangerous animal has a territory its not clever to walk through it for the puposes of a hike.

yimrsg · 05-08-2011 07:46PM

@steddyeddy

To be brutally honest most of what you've said in this thread has been poorly constructed and I've no inclination to decipher what the majority of your posts have been so I won't be continuing a discussion with you seeing as you're constantly changing your position.

You're first post was to mention the following

I dont buy the asociate humans with food thing either polar bears are man hunters

Then you posted this:

these polar bears probraly already asociate man with food they will usually attack on sight anyway

You've saved me some bother and double up here:

Exactly when an anmial escapes from a zoo for instance and kills its not to blame, its only doing whats natural. It didnt choose to be in the situation

So when an animal escapes, it didn't chose to escape?

I'm not going to pick apart your posts further as I can see you're passionate but I think you need to step back and reassess what you're stance is as you've become completely messed up and contradicted yourself several times already.

Mickeroo · 05-08-2011 07:49PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

Its about self preservation. Its not a political statement of it being the bears land. If any dangerous animal has a territory its not clever to walk through it for the puposes of a hike.

If people didn't do things because they're dangerous then they wouldn't do much at all, these are the risks we take in the outdoors, A lot of people would enter these areas specifically to see the wildlife though. The thing here is the party were obviously for the most part inexperienced.

From reading the news story it sounds like they were unaware of the bears approach and didn't really know what was going on until it had already attacked and possibly killed the lad? If they saw it before it had ripped into the tent then they should have scared it off before it got anywhere near the tent but if it was proceeding to maul their loved ones then I really don't think they had much of a choice thats just the way nature works.

It's not exactly a situation where one could easily remain calm and think logically about the situation without human emotions coming into play.

which would be the most likely thing running through peoples heads?:

1 - "Well its not the bears fault that its trying to eat my friends so I should probably just fire a few shots in the air and scare it, especially since it's endangered."

2 - "OH SH1T THERES A FCUKING POLAR BEAR TRYING TO EAT MY FRIENDS! WHERS THE GUN! WHERES THE GUN! OH JESUS I THINK HORATIO IS DEAD! FCUK FCUK FCUK! GET AWAY FROM MY FRIENDS!! FCUK!"

Norwayviking wrote: »

Well if you want to move to the Artic and live with them,be my guest:D

Isn't Tromso in the arctic? People have lived in the artic circle for a very long time I think.

steddyeddy · 05-08-2011 07:50PM

yimrsg wrote: »

@steddyeddy

To be brutally honest most of what you've said in this thread has been poorly constructed and I've no inclination to decipher what the majority of your posts have been so I won't be continuing a discussion with you seeing as you're constantly changing your position.

You're first post was to mention the following
Then you posted this:
You've saved me some bother and double up here:
So when an animal escapes, it didn't chose to escape?

I'm not going to pick apart your posts further as I can see you're passionate but I think you need to step back and reassess what you're stance is as you've become completely messed up and contradicted yourself several times already.

Ill deal with the first point quickly as Im going out but Ill be back to help you understand what I meant. After the attack the polar bear wouldnt have begun to asociate the men with food as it always asociated man with food this aatack didnt change that. The bear didnt get a taste for blood and is no more likely to attack humans as a result. Understand?

steddyeddy · 05-08-2011 07:52PM

yimrsg wrote: »

@steddyeddy

To be brutally honest most of what you've said in this thread has been poorly constructed and I've no inclination to decipher what the majority of your posts have been so I won't be continuing a discussion with you seeing as you're constantly changing your position.

You're first post was to mention the following
Then you posted this:
You've saved me some bother and double up here:
So when an animal escapes, it didn't chose to escape?

I'm not going to pick apart your posts further as I can see you're passionate but I think you need to step back and reassess what you're stance is as you've become completely messed up and contradicted yourself several times already.

On the second point the animal never choosed to be in the zoo. Understand?

sollar · 05-08-2011 08:09PM

The Irish public sector must somehow be responsible for this.

admiralofthefleet · 05-08-2011 08:16PM

Before you all go making sick jokes, just paws for thought

sheesh · 05-08-2011 08:21PM

flas wrote: »

dont think they were right to kill the bear, it was its environment and terroritery and was doing what was natural to it

W.Shakes-Beer wrote: »

Read this earlier.

Cruel fúckers for killing the bear. They were after all rambling into the bear's environment.

I assume if they didn't the bear would have continued killing them

booboo88 · 05-08-2011 08:33PM

Skunkle wrote: »

Because if they knew they were dangerous they wouldnt have been sleeping at 7.30am ? They didnt walk up to play with the fukin thing it tore through the tent while they were asleep.

And I agree if the the bear is still a threat you kill it. I dont like seeing animals getting killed when they are just doing what they do and looking for a bit of grub but after killin one kid you dont try shoo it away, you put a bullet in its head.

or heres a better idea, dont hve kids in harms way?
seriously? are they retarded? the polar bear was just following their instincts?
this isn't hollywood where they can be trained to interact with humans, it was their territory

Manic Moran · 05-08-2011 08:33PM

dont think they were right to kill the bear, it was its environment and terroritery and was doing what was natural to it

Killing things which are attacking your group is also quite natural for humans.

The bear has evolved large pointy teeth, claws, and big muscles to do its job. Humans have evolved trigger fingers for the same purpose. How the group ended up in the situation where the bear was attacking it is irrelevant. The firearm is there to deal with the attack, be it because they failed to take proper precautions, or because the precautions didn't work. Yeah, banging pie plates together might scare the bear off. Or it may just do nothing because he's really bloody hungry and will deal with a bit of bangning en route.

Bottom line: If you go somewhere where the native animals are better equipped for close combat than you are, carry a gun big enough to deal with the problem. If it's a bear, bring a rather big gun.

NTM

sheesh · 05-08-2011 08:44PM

but but the poor polar bear! won't anybody think of the polar bear!!!! :pac:

Norwayviking · 05-08-2011 09:12PM

Mickeroo wrote: »

Isn't Tromso in the arctic? People have lived in the artic circle for a very long time I think.

Las time i was there i cant remember seeing any polarbears though:D
Allthough some of the locals was trying to act like one;)

Mickeroo · 05-08-2011 09:27PM

Norwayviking wrote: »

Las time i was there i cant remember seeing any polarbears though:D
Allthough some of the locals was trying to act like one;)

Haha, I don't doubt it.

It does happen in smaller towns though afaik, certainly heard about it happening in Canada, I'm sure it must happen in smaller Norwegian and Russian northern towns from time to time though.

brummytom · 05-08-2011 09:29PM

Why do people care so much about the polar bear?! This 'adventurer' was 17 years old ffs!

Norwayviking · 05-08-2011 09:54PM

brummytom wrote: »

Why do people care so much about the polar bear?! This 'adventurer' was 17 years old ffs!

Do you think a Polarbear cares about you:rolleyes:

joseph brand · 05-08-2011 09:54PM

The only words that stand out from that article are:

Horatio
Eton

I'm trying to imagine his family, years down the line being asked if they have any sons, brothers etc. To which the reply will be something like, "Well I HAD a brother/ son, Horatio, and he died young. A polar bear ate him". And it wasn't anywhere near a zoo.

That is strange.

BTW, If they were looking for a magical and musical land like that in 'Happy Feet', they were at the wrong end of this planet, penguins live at the bottom end.

stupidusername · 05-08-2011 09:55PM

sheesh wrote: »

I assume if they didn't the bear would have continued killing them

natural selection.

Norwayviking · 05-08-2011 09:57PM

Mickeroo wrote: »

Haha, I don't doubt it.

It does happen in smaller towns though afaik, certainly heard about it happening in Canada, I'm sure it must happen in smaller Norwegian and Russian northern towns from time to time though.

It does happen,espesially in small,isolated areas like the North of Norway,near the polar circle.:)

EnglishPollop · 05-08-2011 10:00PM

CorkMan wrote: »

Rightfully so they killed the bear. Are people saying it is OK for something to kill a human-being and get away with it?

QUOTE]

What a ridiculous comment. Ok, If I was sitting in my living room and a polar bear strolled in and I felt threatened (which I clearly would) then I would kill it, to protect myself.

These morons were invading the polar bears space, it probably didn't know what the f * ck was going on and felt threatened, so it attacked.

The peoples had no right to kill the bear. Ok, they were protecting themselves but it's still ethically wrong. They shouldn't have been there, end of.

Mickeroo · 05-08-2011 10:13PM

EnglishPollop wrote: »

These morons were invading the polar bears space, it probably didn't know what the f * ck was going on and felt threatened, so it attacked.

The peoples had no right to kill the bear. Ok, they were protecting themselves but it's still ethically wrong. They shouldn't have been there, end of.

Polar bears are not territorial so the have no "space". Considering the time of year it was probably very hungry as they prefer to hunt on the sea ice, they generally only attack humans unprovoked when they're hungry and desperate. THey are also stealth hunters so it's highly unlikely the bear was seen before the attack commenced. The now dead child was in their tent which the bear tore them out of, I doubt the bear felt a threat until after it attacked, if it was threatened it probably wouldn't have entered the camp.

CorkMan · 05-08-2011 10:17PM

EnglishPollop wrote: »

What a ridiculous comment. Ok, If I was sitting in my living room and a polar bear strolled in and I felt threatened (which I clearly would) then I would kill it, to protect myself.

These morons were invading the polar bears space, it probably didn't know what the f * ck was going on and felt threatened, so it attacked.

The peoples had no right to kill the bear. Ok, they were protecting themselves but it's still ethically wrong. They shouldn't have been there, end of.

Well the people were in a tent and the polar bear came to them, they didn't go to the polar bear. He attacked through the tent. Plus with all the ice melting away who knows where the polar bears would be, especially in August.

Looking at your last sentence, I think they cleared DID have a right to kill the bear, he killed a human and injured (I might add moderate/severely to that) 5 others. Why did you say in your 1st sentence you would kill it to protect urself so?

EnglishPollop · 05-08-2011 10:20PM

Invading the polars bears space is a figure of speech. No one in this world owns any 'space', animal or human being. Although human beings like to think they do.

All I'm saying is go near a place where polar bears are known to dwell/roam/reside/live and you need to know there is a certain amount of danger.

It always amazes me when something like this is front page news - a polar bear killed a human - woah! never! how did that happen? jesus, what a shocker!

Whereas animals are killed needlessly and cruelly by humans every day just to satisfy their greed, and no one bats an eyelid.

EnglishPollop · 05-08-2011 10:29PM

CorkMan wrote: »

Well the people were in a tent and the polar bear came to them, they didn't go to the polar bear. He attacked through the tent. Plus with all the ice melting away who knows where the polar bears would be, especially in August.

Looking at your last sentence, I think they cleared DID have a right to kill the bear, he killed a human and injured (I might add moderate/severely to that) 5 others. Why did you say in your 1st sentence you would kill it to protect urself so?

I said I would kill it to protect myself if it came into my living room.
If I looked out my window and there was a bear in my garden, I would feel threatened. Even if it was sitting in a tent. And especially if there were 5 of them in the tent.

I stand by what I said, the humans had no right to kill the bear.

The bear was hungry and/or threatened, it killed with it's teeth and claws - what nature gave him. The people killed him with a man made machine. If you're not natuarally equipped to deal with the elements of a certain environment, then surely that's nature's way of telling you that you don't belong there?

I do symapthise that a young man lost his life, but I'm also saddened that the polar bear did too. When it done absolutely nothing wrong.

CorkMan · 05-08-2011 10:31PM

EnglishPollop wrote: »

Invading the polars bears space is a figure of speech. No one in this world owns any 'space', animal or human being. Although human beings like to think they do.

All I'm saying is go near a place where polar bears are known to dwell/roam/reside/live and you need to know there is a certain amount of danger.

It always amazes me when something like this is front page news - a polar bear killed a human - woah! never! how did that happen? jesus, what a shocker!

Whereas animals are killed needlessly and cruelly by humans every day just to satisfy their greed, and no one bats an eyelid.

I wouldn't say no one bats an eyelid, they are animal rights organisations out there. If you seriously beat up a dog in Ireland you would be up before the court.

I think regards humans too, humans are teaching each other more humanly that a couple of hundred years ago. ie in the USA Blacks were 2nd class citizens and were lynched in the deep south with nothing said, even Judges when faced with overwhelming evidence of a lynching said "the ni**ers better not commit a crime against this state anymore". That is not the case today.

CorkMan · 05-08-2011 10:33PM

EnglishPollop wrote: »

I said I would kill it to protect myself if it came into my living room.
If I looked out my window and there was a bear in my garden, I would feel threatened. Even if it was sitting in a tent. And especially if there were 5 of them in the tent.

I stand by what I said, the humans had no right to kill the bear.

The bear was hungry and/or threatened, it killed with it's teeth and claws - what nature gave him. The people killed him with a man made machine. If you're not natuarally equipped to deal with the elements of a certain environment, then surely that's nature's way of telling you that you don't belong there?

I do symapthise that a young man lost his life, but I'm also saddened that the polar bear did too. When it done absolutely nothing wrong.

Well even though a rifle is man made, it is still a product of the human brain, and thus of nature IMO. Humans have the advantage in the nature game today because of the brain.

Polar bear kills young British adventurer in Norway.

Comments