26 March 2014 (Wednesday) - Zoos, Music
Being so tired from the recent lack of sleep it's only really fair that I should have had a good night's sleep; I say "good" - I was awake for about half an hour around 3am, and got up shortly after 5am.
Having burned my morning toast I fed most of it to my dog. He didn't seem fussed that it was burned; he just seemed to like having it because it's mine.
I checked out social media over brekkie. I know I shouldn't let it wind me up, but it annoys me how people are still being taken in by the untruths and deliberate misquotings being generated about Copenhagen Zoo. There was an article on the radio about this so-called scandal some time ago. Far from being heartless murderers, the zoologists at Copenhagen are doing the best they can under less than ideal circumstances. Species that are only being kept from extinction by zoos are obviously very low in numbers. therefore it is vital to maintain genetic diversity so as to prevent the problems of in-breeding. Such as is happening in certain breeds of dog such as pugs and dalmations.
Furthermore when animals breed they often don't just have one baby; they have several. And being commercial institutions (often ones which run at a loss) zoos don't have the facilities to keep loads of any given animal. So consequently they have to cull from time to time. They need to have the greatest genetic mix available in their breeding popuations. It might be a heartbreaking fact, but there is little alternative.
All the stories circulating on social media about there being zoos willing to take on excess zoo animals have been comprehensively debunked by many respected zoologists. The implication was that the so-called zoos wanting to take on excess animals are little more than people who fancy having a tiger in their back garden.
And despite all the hype and nastiness aimed at Copenhagen zoo, what they are doing would seem to be happening in all zoos actively involved in conservation.
After all one needs to conserve a viable species; not force it to extinction by uncontrolled in-breeding. Does anyone seriously beleive that a major zoological institution is killing off animals for fun?
Why do people beleive these scare stories when they have shown not too be true? I'm reminded of the stories circulating on-line a month or so ago about KFC getting their chicken meat from genetically modifed birds with four legs and ten wings apiece.
How is it that reasonable people beleive patent nonsense by its simply by being published on the Internet ?
Having watched the morning fix of Family Guy I set off to work. It lost count of cyclists on the pavements as I went; most of whom had i-headphones preventing them from hearing anything. Few were looking where they were going, and one had a haircut reminiscent of Cousin It (from the Addams Family) with face completely obscured by chin length hair.
I've ranted about idiot cyclists before. How is it none of them ever get mowed down?
And so to work. I did my bit, and again had a little sax practice at lunch time. There's no denying I need the practice. I set myself up at the far end of the car park and squawk away, and shall do until I receive a formal complaint.
Today during a bit of a scale I surprised myself by recognising what I'd just tootled. I tootled it again. It sounded just like the introduction to "Paint it Black"; which I have subsequenetly learned is a song by the Rolling Stones and not the Stranglers.
From my rather limited musical ability the song seems to start with an "E" note and then goes on with F - G - A - G - F - E - E (again) - D# (whatever the # is?) - E - F. I shall work on this during tomorrow's sax practice and see how it sounds.
Bearing in mind it has no "C" notes I am hoping for the best.