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.
No comments:
Post a Comment