Today, I was cleaning out my spam comments filter when I came across the hysterical rantings of someone I banned– mainly for being a Grade A moron and, therefore, too stupid to comment on this blog. (Here’s the link to the original post from which the following tidbits came. The stupidity is in the comments section.)
This woman called Jess and me ignorant. So I fucking banned her ass, because she was an ignorant fool who couldn’t read a peer-reviewed paper, even when it was spoon-fed to her.
Here are some highlights:
Jess told her that she should pay attention to what pet people are actually saying about the whole Crufts debacle, but of course, she didn’t listen– so she condescended to Jess:
Jess,Jess, Jess – whoever you are – I do listen to the pet people. After all, they are the segment of the pet owning population who have taken the time to do their homework and are willing to give a purebred rescue from a questionable breeder at best – i.e. no health checks, no nothing -a forever home. Please do let me know what you think I am missing?
Then she condescended to me:
Only thing I can say to your last post – and no disrespect intended to people that Blog with you – is that you must have some really really misinformed people on your blog. Kind of like the stovepipe – everyone circulates and recirculates the same stuff – correct or not it doesn’t matter because you don’t allow for outside opinion. How nice to live in a bubble !!! Makes life simple!!!
I’m misinformed, eh? I’m misinformed because I can read scientific papers that say inbreeding and closed registries are destroying our dogs?
Well, let’s see where this little bird’s fount of all information comes from:
Sorry you feel the way you do about purebred dogs. Although not a breeder myself, I question your stated two problems. Have you ever read Dr. Carmen Batagalia’s work regarding pure bred dog breeding? If you have not, I strongly suggest that you do. Web site is http://www.breedingbetterdogs.com
It is truly amazing what you can learn.
Carmen Battaglia’s website is actually quite full of misinformation. Battaglia has no degree in genetics. His doctorate is in criminology.
His nonsense has been destroyed in two posts at BorderWars:
1. Bio-Censor is Bad Science: Quackery
2. Brackett’s Formula: Nothing Special (based upon Battaglia’s promotion of inbreeding through what is called Brackett’s formula).
This woman was so stupid that I just had to drop some nice little f-bombs on her.
Some people are just so ignorant that they don’t know they are ignorant. These people are beyond help. I’m sorry that they find this particular blog a little less coddling of ignorance than much of the rest of the dog blogosphere.
Unlike Jess or Chris, this woman has never bred a litter, and that’s a pretty good thing.
Her dogs would be so crappy that hamsters would outlive them.
And they’d be lucky to have eyes.
Buying whatever the latest doggy televangelist snake-oil salesman is offering is one of the things that is destroying dogs.
From Lloyd Brackett to Carmen Battaglia, people have been misinformed about the real dangers of inbreeding, popular sire effect, and the closed registry system.
But the stupid people just won’t listen.
And they think I’m going to be nice to them when they spout this bullshit on my blog.
I’m sorry, folks, that’s not what I do.
Nowhere on this blog do I say that I’ll suffer fools gladly.
If you’re going to be an idiot, this is the wrong place to spout idiocy.
Oh, I’ve had some rantings from idiots as well, believe me – which is why I don’t allow ANY comments on my blog anymore, because there’s a particular idiot that will go so far as to change emails, names, etc… just so he can be an idiot on my blog. I got tired of his rantings so I shut my comments off altogether. Though I believe he’s still trying, because even though I’ve banned every email he’s ever used to post, my spam count grows daily (it is now up to 48 or 49, and it would not surprise me in the least if all of them came from this guy. Anyway, this is a great post – it’s funny that the less people know, the more they rant to get you to change your mind to their way of thinking – instead of educating themselves.
This blog has over 24,000 comments on it.
I have banned maybe 12 or 15 people. I banned two in the past two months. Before that, I didn’t ban anyone for about six or seven months.
This person was banned for being totally unreasonable in her stupidity. The other ban happened because I was dealing with an authoritarian prick who wanted to impose conservative Christianity and creationism on the country. You know how much respect I have for that position!
People like to believe cock-and-bull stories. People also like to make stupid things seem rational to justify their narrow worldviews.
Quoting some of these websites is about like quoting Answers in Genesis. Websites aren’t always full of facts.
The facts and stats can all be rectally derived, and people won’t know the difference– or care!
As a rule, I don’t care what the other person believes, as long as he doesn’t insist that I too believe it (or live/behave under its strictures.) I follow certain moral and ethical principles because they make sense within a societal framework. Having been raised in an Evangelical home, I’ve been thoroughly inoculated against “isms” of any stripe. If there is a supreme being (and I prefer to think there is–no logical reason) then I refuse to believe that any one individual or organization can begin to understand the nature of same. Such a being would be far beyond our experiential horizons or imagination.
I do hope Miss Christine is paying close attention to the pet people, as she says she is. Because today, the Pug CC winners chose to boycott the BOB competition, because they would be subjected to a vet check. I’m sure they think they’re being quite the revolutionaries.
But I know exactly what the pet owning public is going to think. And it has nothing to do with taking a stand. The pet people are going to think that those Pug owners have no confidence in their ‘healthy, health tested’ dogs passing that vet check.
Good job!
That actually looks pretty bad on them, seeing as how the Crufts Pug passed the test. So it’s like they’re admitting their dog is unsound.
I was exhibiting at the show, (not Pugs but Papillons) and I think the Pugs were running scared, not making a defiant gesture.
Notably,the Peke passed the vet (one bred by Easdon, who judged Crufts) and was placed in the group.
Maybe I am asking for it, but I wouldn’t mind a few people to argue with on my blog! Maybe when I have a tenth of your comments, I’ll change my mind. I have 120 or so and waiting for the search engines to catch up to my move to wordpress.
Thanks for listing it!!!!
Hahah! Love your straight forward posts! Every day I get your 3-6 posts in my email box and think: damn it, so much to read again. And then I get curious because so far I loved them all. This one made me laugh (once again) and I wanted to tell you how much I support your blog and opinion about dog breeding and I honestly thank you for all the information you share every day!
Francy (from Germany, I’m actually in Germany now, not Australia)
At the risk of being sharply criticized, I’d remind readers that Lloyd Brackett’s writings were done some 50 years (or more) ago, long before anyone knew anything useful in practice about DNA, the MHC, genomes, and so on. He was, basically, founding his statements on practices that were then widely accepted as truth, and had been for many years previously. So, one should put him in context.
I don’t think anyone judges him in the context of his age. Everyone knows that people back then had no clue about modern genetics.
The problem is that ignorance has been enshrined in the dog fancy ever since, up to this very day. -That- is the inexcusable part.
The issue isn’t that he was wrong long ago. It’s that his ideas have been falsified and are quite questionable now. Yet there are breeders who still promote it as some kind of magic technique for establishing prepotent lines.
When discussing the possible genetic health concerns of purebred dogs as opposed to mixed-breeds, I think it’s important to make a distinction between “crossbred” dogs, i.e., the result of a cross between two purebred individuals of different breeds, and “random-bred” dogs, whose ancestors were probably mixed breeds for several previous generations (or, in the case of landrace types, possibly never had “purebreds” involved).
Crossing two unrelated breeds lessens the possibility of deleterious recessives doubling and causing health issues in their crossbred offspring. (Well, I guess “unrelated” is a relative term, since all dogs are, after all, dogs, and therefore at least distantly related.) If you breed two unhealthy purebreds together, especially if those breeds might share some of those recessive traits, you’re apt to get a litter of unhealthy crossbreds.
But the healthiest litter I ever saw was a litter of crossbreds. It was from accidental mating of my female (old-style, with the nice level back) GSD and a male Doberman that I was boarding. Except for two that were killed in some accidental way, six of that litter of eight lived past 15 years of age – one to age 18, and they were healthy to the end of their lives, until age-related conditions took their inevitable toll. They weren’t the best-looking dogs in the world; they resembled Beaucerons, but with ears that ran the gamut from drop to flop to one of each. But they were all very intelligent, sound, good-natured dogs.