[ SECRET POST #2728 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2728 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 069 secrets from Secret Submission Post #390.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 - posted twice ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

Thereby driving them to extinction? That's the real world responsible thing to do? That's nuts.

[(Anonymous)]

Yes?

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2013/07/an-extinction-to-celebrate.html

Or are you telling these African men, women and children that they should die to feed the worm?

[(Anonymous)]

no, a better comparison would be to kill pitbulls because one attacked a kid

[kallanda_lee]

But she's not killing them. She's containing them. The comparison would be more like if you were keeping lions, one of them ate a kid, and you realized lions were not housecats and put them on a chain.

[(Anonymous)]

i was responding to the op, who said dany should kill the dragons and compared them to a parasitic worm

[kallanda_lee]

Sorry, my bad :(

[(Anonymous)]

I'd certainly hope that someone with a bunch of pitbulls doing nothing to socialize them or keep them from attacking people would not be allowed to have pitbulls.

[(Anonymous)]

You do realize that pitbulls don't need to be "kept from attacking people" any more than any other dog, right? Less than many, in fact. Pit bulls are originally bred to be animal-aggressive and human-passive. They aren't guarding dogs. Dogs bred to be guards - shepherds, asian breeds like Chow and Akita - have been bred for human aggression. Not pit bulls.

90% of the dogs identified as "pit bulls" in the media are no such thing. http://www.pickthepit.com/

[mimi-sardinia.livejournal.com]

I went through that gallery, the one I picked was the Bull Terrier. Maybe American Pit Bulls are just not common in Australia, because a lot of "dangerous dog" portrayals are more bull terriers.

[(Anonymous)]

This. other, smaller breeds I've witnessed are much more human aggressive. if our yard wasn't so small (and we had more time) we would have a Pitt. Properly trained Pitts are excellent with children.

[(Anonymous)]

Because 3 dragons are totally doing to revive an entire species! One murderous and two potentially murderous dragons. Yes. Two male and one female dragons who are possibly related. The dragon species HAS BEEN SAVED!

[(Anonymous)]

who are possibly related

That hasn't stopped the Targaryens before.

[mekkio]

Or the Lannisters

[ariakas]

Biology aside - inbreeding doesn't affect some species as direly as it does humans. It's possible that sibling dragons could kick start the species with few ill effects, provided they breed rapidly and don't, say, lay one or two eggs once every couple of generations.

[(Anonymous)]

Inbreeding every now and again doesn't affect them. But when you do nothing but inbreed you end up with what many purebred dogs are becoming today, feature exaggerated, disorder prone creatures who sometimes can't walk without being in pain.

[ariakas]

The main problem with inbreeding is not just the limited gene pool, it's selecting for the same exaggerated traits that are often not beneficial to the organism in question (but are pleasing to the owner). These would never be maintained if they were allowed to breed naturally, even if it was between siblings.

[darkmanifest]

Modern-day cheetahs are the result of a very tiny group of inbreeding ancestors who survived the last ice age, and as a result they have, according to Wikipedia "unusually low genetic variability" that is "accompanied by a very low sperm count, motility, and deformed flagella". Despite those issues, though, they have managed to survive and somewhat thrive as a species since the ice age, which is arguably better than not existing at all.

[(Anonymous)]

I'm so glad someone brought up cheetahs. Thank you!

[greenvelvetcake]

I wouldn't say they're thriving. Cheetahs are in a bottleneck due to all the inbreeding, not to mention it's difficult for them to reproduce in the first place.

[darkmanifest]

"Somewhat thriving", in the sense that despite so many difficulties, they're still here millennia later (even if their future isn't too bright). Not too shabby for a species inbred all to hell.

[(Anonymous)]

The white-tailed deer population in Finland was introduced from four females and one male deer that were flown from US year 1930, and then released into the wild.

Now the population is thriving and the genetics of the deer population are varied. (It was expected to be pretty bad but the study made by the Helsinki university together with the local hunters revealed that it was basically as varied as the original population in US.)

[(Anonymous)]

True and not.

It's possible to start breeding from a very small population. For example the white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), its whole population in Finland was bred from five deers that were brought from US. Four females and one male. And when you study the population now, it's genetically nearly as varied and diverse as the one in US.

Mutations happen in genetics and they are not always bad.

[(Anonymous)]

"potentially murderous"

Okay, Alexander Pierce.