Posted on 12/21/2008 10:02:49 AM PST by SunkenCiv
I just wanted to make sure everyone had herd that news. The lasso thing I’d want is for anyone to miss it.
Aurochs is singular.
I prefer “rustler”.
Do we really say that a species went extinct in a certain place as small as the Netherlands when they’re still alive in other places not that far away?
I can understand saying that a species went extinct in the Old World, even though they were still surviving in the New, for example, or to say that they went extinct in South America even though some continued to exist in Australia... but to say they went “extinct” in the Netherlands when they still lived elsewhere in Europe... seems to me that’s using the word “extinct” pretty loosely.
When my cat dies, do we say cats have “gone extinct in my home”?
The word “extinct” means “no longer existing” and really, in my opinion, shouldn’t be used if there are any surviving members anywhere. True? Not true? If I’m wrong, I’m willing to learn the error of my ways. But as BOR says, “tell me where I’m wrong”.
Kinda harsh about your cat. ;’) I take your point, but didn’t write the article either. :’)
I know. I’m not arguing with you. I’m just sort of ranting on this subject. You were kind enough to make clear what the author was too inept to do. And I thanks you for that. Ignore my rant. I’ll get over it. :)
The author probably should have made it clear that the range of the auroch got reduced over those centuries, or that, at the very least, little evidence remains. I think one reason for that (besides the rarity of finding leftover parts of dead critters from long ago, except in the case of large death assemblages) in the case of the auroch, is that it was basically a kept animal for lots of generation, and during its last 1500-2000 years in Europe, probably wasn’t just wandering around wild, or at least, not for long. :’)
No wonder we killed them off.
You seem quite well-versed in all this. Are you an archaeological researcher?
Grew up on a farm. ;’)
What did you expect: Ewes Can't Rollerskate in an Aurochs Herd?
Grumble! Stick in a stinking tag, and lose all the other formatting...GRUMP!
A big bantang is nice but, all in all, I’d rather have a little poontang.
I saw this bull at a livestock show in Louisville back in '80 or '81. I'm 5'11" tall, and this bull was as tall at the shoulder as I am. It was a big, big animal...
They are big, but not spry — bred for meat.
If you look at an auroch (or African cattle or long horns) -— you see relatively long legs of an animal that is both big and fast.
Back-breeding is, IMHO, possible, but not with the euro-centric approach of the the Heck brothers (who were doing it for Nazi propaganda — big Aryan cattle).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.