Cephalotrocity

Detroit

Keeps going? I've been avoiding it for decades and I can see it from my porch.

Last time I visited the customs office emptied out into a literal ghetto. Like, an entire 4 blocks of ought-to-be-condemned housing with rusted out patchwork wrecks abandoned in yards and on the street (or worse following behind you). The corner gas station had more security features than most prisons in Canada, and every street sign had numerous bullet holes. That was their welcome mat 2 decades ago. F that shithole country.

The word that was created to represent something that exists: misandry

OP: 'nuh uhh'

Good:1 Evil: 76457211

Nah, her nose definitely moved. She does it twice in this clip and her nose moves both times. https://youtu.be/115T9BInGIc?t=198

Edit: To be clear I agree she's using her upper lip but it 'does' cause the nostrils to wobble side to side.

who never aim for the best

They aim for what is available. This is usually the weakest, but not necessarily. Particularly with pack hunters.

obviously doesn’t strengthen the herd

Obviously (eyerolls and gestures to all the prey animals clearly doing well due to their regulated hunting).

You need to really consider how significant the difference is between intention and action in this regard. A hunter 'intends' to get the best animal they encounter. In the wild, Prime animals will not give them the opportunity. Even getting the biggest animal they've ever heard of isn't necessarily the 'best' one out there. Being so large it is likely old, and past its prime. You're basically arguing against a definition. By being culled it is, by definition, not good enough.

This is first year ecology stuff. You are arguing with feelings instead of looking at the harsh realities involved. Audit a first year biology class if you want your concerns to be taken seriously.

Aiming for best, and actually getting it are 2 different things.

Unless they specifically hunt the weakest and sickest and oldest kangaroos

They do. IRL the animals that get culled are those that were too weak, slow, or careless to avoid getting got. Hunting in the wild (whether done by humans or animals) has this feature innately, like it or not.

Frankly OP's wall of text is deeply ignorant of the realities involved. The only argument that holds water without a simple 'citation needed' rebuttle is his first point regarding individual rights. Even then, we knowingly set aside that concern to prioritize the survival of the species.

Pics or it didn't happen.

It's important to remember the word 'ideal' that dictates the conditions needed. The gas cannot be mixing with an 'external' source, gaining or losing energy to it's surroundings beyond the changes being specifically examined, is not subject to any forces or conditions not considered, and so on...

You're literally asking 'at what point are perfect conditions, impossible to every truly achieve, implausible?'. The answer to that: as soon as any factor cannot be simply ignored for the sake of simplifying the math.

Sorry mate, but any first year biology student learns that the higher up the food chain the more concentrated the heavy metals are. Take Tuna. As free range as you can get but it is advised to minimize consumption, particularly when pregnant, due to the high mercury content.

While lifestyle does affect palatability of the meat (Bear near the dump always tastes 'off') it is more a question of 'what' is being bioaccumulated, not 'if'. In your example scavengers are bioaccumulating pesticides and preservatives, whereas the successful predator accumulates all the heavy metals its prey, and their prey, and their prey (repeat until the bottom of the tree) consumed.

You can't get around it. All high level predators have shitty meat, whether it tastes bad or not.