| It is bikeshedding. My comment about the box was in general a sentiment and an illustrative and qualitative example, not something that can be directly compared enough to calculate some exact number and certainly not something where some ideal number affects the sentiment. For example, the average American walks 1.5-2 miles a day, so that's a factor of over x20 for the average travel distance of orcas (which by the way is average linear distance, i.e., starting point to ending point, and not total travel which is much higher). Humans don't dive and live very horizontal lives, while orcas dive 100-500 feet multiple times every day. Their tanks at SeaWorld are only approximately 30 feet deep, lesser at other places. So your "factor of about 370" doesn't make any sense, because it myopically only takes into account relative size and a false comparison of human height versus orca length. And by the way, I said a box with the lid off, so your mention of a 3'x3'x3' is incorrect. It's hard to believe how my off-the-cuff suggestion of 3'x3' versus your "calculated" 13'x13' discredits my point in any way. And I left something off, because the orcas experience strong chemicals in the water, so the human box would need a gas of some sort constantly irritating the skin and eyes. So yes, it is bikeshedding, because here we are. > Mixing up Miami Seaquarium in a discussion about SeaWorld is confused. The two environments are totally incomparable. I'm not confused about anything or mixing anything up. I genuinely have no idea what you're referring to or even getting at. Also, you do know that SeaWorld loans and sells orcas to places that often have far worse conditions than SeaWorld's already deplorable conditions, right? I don't know what you're getting at in your last comment at all. Orcas weigh several tons. And an orca intentionally stranding isn't trying to commit suicide by suffocation. I didn't even say so. Orcas die from stranding due to their immense weight affecting their internal organs. I have no idea how one can do any research into the lives orcas live in captivity and feel anything remotely close to okay with it. |
> like putting a human in a small 3'x3' box
Good thing you provided a number then? If you want to make a qualitative example, say "it would be like if a human lived in a heated swimming pool for the rest of its life" which is more accurate. Instead, you (and I think it's obvious you know what you're doing) throw out a number, then when you're demonstrated wrong, backpedal and say it was supposed to be qualitative.
> the orcas experience strong chemicals in the water
Do you think there aren't strong chemicals in the ocean? Salt is pretty corrosive. The ocean isn't exactly a homogeneous solution. There are a ton of pathogens as well, in fact most of them on earth live in the ocean.
> you do know that SeaWorld loans and sells orcas to places that often have far worse conditions than SeaWorld's
Yes, and that's a ringing endorsement for SeaWorld in my book. It means they are a leader in the care of these mammals. They actually have to participate in loan programs in order to be AZA accredited, which they are.
> I have no idea how one can do any research into the lives orcas live in captivity and feel anything remotely close to okay with it.
This is common among people who just haven't done much research on it. Marine mammal captivity is an important activity humans do in order to promote education, not to mention conservation (for species reintroduction or rehab in case of a catastrophe). It's a little unintuitive the same way that hunting (killing animals) supports wildlife preserves is unintuitive, but nevertheless there are good reasons we have these institutions and getting rid of them would be a huge mistake.