Does Anyone Read Or Care About This Topic?

[Steve]

Its a rule that demands the K.Cs be the only refuge of values and purpose for dogs.

In demanding that, It creates a hostile environment for the species.

If you still don't understand, start at the beginning and THINK about the mechanics. I've shown as many ways they manifest as I can, in as many different contexts. And so far any arguments have only supported this.

Hendric Gomers Thesis says the K.Cs have ruled against their environment> The end result will be its destruction or The K.Cs, with much damage in the meantime.

I believe I have shown some of the many ways that IS happening, tried to illustrate the mechanics in action, and confirmed his thesies to be in effect on the K.Cs and the environment supporting domestic dogs.

I have no doubt many other organizations are affected by similar rulings that are very damaging to society and our abilities to adapt.

Certainly we are becoming a much more intolerant society, disguised in righteousness.

Its not a rule that demands the KCS be the only refuge of values and purpose for dogs.In fact in the year 2016 that's simply crazy. The KCS represent a minority group who breed a vast minority of dogs. Take a good look at state legislations , RSPCA AWL, AAPDB, the MDBA, working dog groups etc

Hanging out here on this forum it may be easy to believe that they are pushing the values and purpose for dogs but best you get a better look around at the current environment. Last year in NSW there was a committee into the welfare of breeding dogs in NSW and Dogs NSW was one voice out of over 300 and as far as I can see NOTHING they wanted as values or purpose got anywhere.

[moosmum]

The rule demands a recognition that the K.cs are the only environment suitable for breeding dogs- any thing else is unacceptable to the K.Cs.

That rule claims any who can speak with reputable authority must be members.

But that ideology REPLACES purpose and value. The pedigree system becomes a replacement for both.

This is similar to a biological directive to eliminate dogs out side of that system. Its a subtle message that is acted on individualy by many, over years. Those individual interpretations form a direction taken by the whole. It has a marked affect on the culture that supports the species and it has been in operation for over 150 years now.

Purpose and value need to be PROMOTED for recognition and emulation. That has been occurring less and less- Unless you have already subscribed to the ideology.

In which case you have a limited ability to promote breeds and predictability.

( not purpose and value, though people will try to cling to those, they aren't what gains recognition for a breeder or their dogs under that rule. ) Your peers have their own direction independent of the species and the environment beyond the K.Cs.

The values they recognize and promote lie in the pedigrees, not the species.

As the only ideology allowed validity by the bodies claiming to 'house' the experts, It affects the culture beyond The K.Cs markedly.

Edited March 4, 2016 by moosmum

[Willem]

...a little much of 'tenets of organic physics'...and a little bit much of a pseudo scientific approach for my taste by attempting to 'paint a big picture that only reflects - IMO - a very distant, theoretical and single opinion'...guess that's also a way to kill a thread :) ...

without going too much into details, just stating that this 'apocalyptic regime of the KCs' goes on for over 150 years is neglecting - and therefore misleading - all the development in research / science over the last years.

E.g. medical findings like DNA checks etc. just weren't available in the past, not for BYBs, nor for KCs or other breeding programs....I'm pretty sure that this and future findings will affect all kind of breeding programs (not only canines) in positive (and knowing mankind also negative) ways. In other words: blaming an organisation for health and /or other issues evolved from lack of knowledge at the time doesn't help much...

...of course, you could also write a study with 200 pages about Christopher Columbus responsibility for Donald Trump becoming a serious candidate for the next US president...

[Steve]

The rule demands a recognition that the K.cs are the only environment suitable for breeding dogs- any thing else is unacceptable to the K.Cs.

That rule claims any who can speak with reputable authority must be members.

Thats ridiculous - within that group this is how its seen but its not the case that because the KC has that ideology that the whole rest of the world agrees with them and no one else can be seen to be an authority or reputable.

Its not the KC rules which have made them be seen as an authority its their marketing and desire to represent their membership and do what they feel is needed to protect their own interests.

But that ideology REPLACES purpose and value. The pedigree system becomes a replacement for both.

The KC's dont have a monopoly on keeping or writing and handing out pedigrees and their ideology does not replace purpose and value it simply demonstrates what a small group of people have agreed is is their purpose and value in breeding dogs.

This is similar to a biological directive to eliminate dogs out side of that system. Its a subtle message that is acted on individualy by many, over years. Those individual interpretations form a direction taken by the whole. It has a marked affect on the culture that supports the species and it has been in operation for over 150 years now.

Its not taken by the whole its taken by those who agree and want to be a member of their organisation and their directive is based on their business profile - they make money out of registration and showing = of course they want to promote why they want to have people who agree with them become members. Of course they want to control what can be done or not done with the dogs which are registered by them by people who have joined them. But there are thousands of people just in this country who breed dogs according to what they believe is best for the dogs and the breeds who have opted not to be members. There are hundreds if not thousands of people who speak as if they are reputable authority who are against the KCs philosophy and activities. In this country the ANKC membership breeds approx 9% of all puppies bred per annum.they dont have trademark on the breed names and they cant stop anyone else form breeding dogs differently to how they direct them to.

Purpose and value need to be PROMOTED for recognition and emulation. That has been occurring less and less- Unless you have already subscribed to the ideology.

In which case you have a limited ability to promote breeds and predictability.

( not purpose and value, though people will try to cling to those, they aren't what gains recognition for a breeder or their dogs under that rule. ) Your peers have their own direction independent of the species and the environment beyond the K.Cs.

The values they recognize and promote lie in the pedigrees, not the species.

This is simply not true. The pedigree is used as a tool as a record, and the values they recognise are predictability. It is why they test the dogs at shows and events and why they keep the pedigrees.

As the only ideology allowed validity by the bodies claiming to 'house' the experts, It affects the culture beyond The K.Cs markedly.

Just because they claim to house the experts doesn't mean any one other than those within that body see them as such. Step outside of this forum for a while and look at the real world. If the culture is affected its got little to do with who does or does not see some one or some group as an expert .

Its about politics and the games they are capable of playing based on their finances and ability to turn what they want into media attention and votes. Take a good look at how many from the KC are given a voice on welfare committees and advisory boards.The token one or two to keep the crowd happy and then they proceed to do what they want outside of what the KCs want anyway.

[moosmum]

...a little much of 'tenets of organic physics'...and a little bit much of a pseudo scientific approach for my taste by attempting to 'paint a big picture that only reflects - IMO - a very distant, theoretical and single opinion'...guess that's also a way to kill a thread :) ...

without going too much into details, just stating that this 'apocalyptic regime of the KCs' goes on for over 150 years is neglecting - and therefore misleading - all the development in research / science over the last years.

E.g. medical findings like DNA checks etc. just weren't available in the past, not for BYBs, nor for KCs or other breeding programs....I'm pretty sure that this and future findings will affect all kind of breeding programs (not only canines) in positive (and knowing mankind also negative) ways. In other words: blaming an organisation for health and /or other issues evolved from lack of knowledge at the time doesn't help much...

...of course, you could also write a study with 200 pages about Christopher Columbus responsibility for Donald Trump becoming a serious candidate for the next US president...

Way to kill a thread? I don't think so. Not just because you happen to disagree, ignoring any points beyond dispute and the fact that the theories are being taken seriously enough to influence authorities to re- write constitutions around the world.

The science that was not available has little bearing. Nor the fact that it is now, if its willfully ignored because people choose to believe physics has no place in organic science.

Reminds me Man has a god complex.

Steve, I hope to address your points asap. Some major sh*t to deal with here 1st.

[Willem]

...The science that was not available has little bearing. Nor the fact that it is now, if its willfully ignored because people choose to believe physics has no place in organic science...

...and that's why we all still believe the earth is a disk...we bloody stupid mortals ....

[Steve]

BSL is stupid and everytime this comes up there is the same old crap that never goes anywhere. Fighting for one dog or one breed or threatening people that if they don't take up the good fight that they or their dogs or breed will be next is pointless.

Im not sure how long the same old thing can be carried on without result before the message sinks in.

Its about politics and votes. Its nothing to do with the KCs or their rules and restriction other than they would kick and yell louder than anyone else does now if it were one of their breeds. For every bad thing said about one of their breeds there is easily found counter argument about how great that breed is and lots of voters own them.

The public get outraged when some dog gets out and turns up in a neighbour's lounge room and kills a child. They get ticked off when they cant take their own family or dogs for a walk without some crazy dog attacking them or threatening them

they want to go to parks and push their kids on a swing and run around an oval without fear of being attacked by a dog. Governments want to find what looks like they are looking after their community and keeping it safe and the statistics and propaganda supports them in being seen to be doing something without fear of losing too many votes.

If you want to fight BSL you have to fight it at a political level with a strategic plan to get it to a place where those who make the laws see a benefit for them in reconsidering. Rather than chasing possible supporters off and beating your hands on the table and allowing emotion to interfer with a long term goal it is going to take someone to shut up and look at it differently so it can be fought differently in co operation with identified stake holders.

All of this nonsense about the environment , exclusion, "you and yours is next" and the like and the "does anyone care" and a wait and react to any opportunity that comes up to state your case strategy - stand back and reconsider where you have been and where you want to go.

How about considering making it a pro campaign rather than an anti campaign?

[moosmum]

stand back and reconsider where you have been and where you want to go.

How about considering making it a pro campaign rather than an anti campaign?

Umm, Thats what I have been saying? Promote values , not fault?

This isn't about apportioning blame. Its about trying to find answers and where things went wrong.

You have remarked yourself that a constitution only does what is written into it.

Steven Hawkings touched on this subject in his series. We are talking cultural evolution and the 'programing' of a culture to find fault in what lies out side its own jurisdiction. Having to constantly redefine what that jurisdiction does include, in pursuit of being 'Other'.

Making it very difficult to fight differently in co-operation with all stake holders.

Edited March 5, 2016 by moosmum

[Steve]

stand back and reconsider where you have been and where you want to go.

How about considering making it a pro campaign rather than an anti campaign?

Umm, Thats what I have been saying? Promote values , not fault?

This isn't about apportioning blame. Its about trying to find answers and where things went wrong.

You have remarked yourself that a constitution only does what is written into it.

Steven Hawkings touched on this subject in his series. We are talking cultural evolution and the 'programing' of a culture to find fault in what lies out side its own jurisdiction. Having to constantly redefine what that jurisdiction does include, in pursuit of being 'Other'.

Making it very difficult to fight differently in co-operation with all stake holders.

If that's what you have been saying you sure have chosen a very unique way of saying it and if you cant do it without carry on about the bad KCs then don't expect to keep your audience.

Where things went wrong and is wrong is about a political system which takes on a what if concept and makes laws which are designed to gather votes the cheapest and easiest way possible for them over all else Including science and commonsense.

One person allows their dogs to be a danger to the community so laws are introduced in case others do.

Its is about giving more credibility to nutters and radicals that push everyone to have to defend their own position and show they are not the bad guys.

Yes we are talking about cultural evolution and the need and desire for those within a culture to have to defend themselves and demonstrate that they are not part of what is being used to to have the will of the minority promoted, but this is driven by the media, the ease in which information is now disseminated,the political system and the lack of desire of the community to take up a stance against things that don't directly affect them, protest and of course the ability for warriors to gather their armies which drive the actions taken and have the community exposed to their propoganda.

Reality is that the world is being changed by a bunch of bullies who know how to play the game and have greater motivation and resources to gather support and shout the loudest.

To suggest that this is about the KCs ruling where dogs which are not registered by them are excluded from their gene pools is rubbish. To suggest that this group of people will continue to help fight BSL when part of the strategy to date is to demonstrate that the breed [pitbull] is the same as one of their breeds except the paperwork and to denounce the KCs is craziness and demonstrates the need for those fighting it to get a grip of how they have chased their allies off.

Edited March 5, 2016 by Steve

[moosmum]

stand back and reconsider where you have been and where you want to go.

How about considering making it a pro campaign rather than an anti campaign?

Umm, Thats what I have been saying? Promote values , not fault?

This isn't about apportioning blame. Its about trying to find answers and where things went wrong.

You have remarked yourself that a constitution only does what is written into it.

Steven Hawkings touched on this subject in his series. We are talking cultural evolution and the 'programing' of a culture to find fault in what lies out side its own jurisdiction. Having to constantly redefine what that jurisdiction does include, in pursuit of being 'Other'.

Making it very difficult to fight differently in co-operation with all stake holders.

If that's what you have been saying you sure have chosen a very unique way of saying it and if you cant do it without carry on about the bad KCs then don't expect to keep your audience.

Where things went wrong and is wrong is about a political system which takes on a what if concept and makes laws which are designed to gather votes the cheapest and easiest way possible for them over all else Including science and commonsense.

One person allows their dogs to be a danger to the community so laws are introduced in case others do.

Its is about giving more credibility to nutters and radicals that push everyone to have to defend their own position and show they are not the bad guys.

Yes we are talking about cultural revolution and the need and desire for those within a culture to have to defend themselves and demonstrate that they are not part of what is being used to to have the will of the minority promoted but this is driven by the media, the ease in which information is now disseminated,the political system and the lack of desire of the community to take up a stance against things that don't directly affect them and protest and of course the ability for warriors to gather their armies which drive the actions taken and have the community exposed to their propoganda.

reality is that the world is being changed by a bunch of bullies who know how to play the game and have greater motivation and resources to gather support and shout the loudest.

Oh for Dog sake, MY breed is in serious trouble. Along with many others. It depends on the K.Cs getting this right and I want to see that happen.

If discussing the problems these breeds are facing and how a rule change could impact on that, favorably, is seen as an attack doesn't that help show how this rule is affecting the culture? That our SHARED values aren't being recognized ?

I have gone out of my way to say the system itself is a brilliant innovation that should be working better than it is. I would far rather see an existing and established body become as successful as it can be, Than start promoting yet another divisive ideal.

Edited March 5, 2016 by moosmum

[Steve]

stand back and reconsider where you have been and where you want to go.

How about considering making it a pro campaign rather than an anti campaign?

Umm, Thats what I have been saying? Promote values , not fault?

This isn't about apportioning blame. Its about trying to find answers and where things went wrong.

You have remarked yourself that a constitution only does what is written into it.

Steven Hawkings touched on this subject in his series. We are talking cultural evolution and the 'programing' of a culture to find fault in what lies out side its own jurisdiction. Having to constantly redefine what that jurisdiction does include, in pursuit of being 'Other'.

Making it very difficult to fight differently in co-operation with all stake holders.

If that's what you have been saying you sure have chosen a very unique way of saying it and if you cant do it without carry on about the bad KCs then don't expect to keep your audience.

Where things went wrong and is wrong is about a political system which takes on a what if concept and makes laws which are designed to gather votes the cheapest and easiest way possible for them over all else Including science and commonsense.

One person allows their dogs to be a danger to the community so laws are introduced in case others do.

Its is about giving more credibility to nutters and radicals that push everyone to have to defend their own position and show they are not the bad guys.

Yes we are talking about cultural revolution and the need and desire for those within a culture to have to defend themselves and demonstrate that they are not part of what is being used to to have the will of the minority promoted but this is driven by the media, the ease in which information is now disseminated,the political system and the lack of desire of the community to take up a stance against things that don't directly affect them and protest and of course the ability for warriors to gather their armies which drive the actions taken and have the community exposed to their propoganda.

reality is that the world is being changed by a bunch of bullies who know how to play the game and have greater motivation and resources to gather support and shout the loudest.

Oh for Dog sake, MY breed is in serious trouble. Along with many others. It depends on the K.Cs getting this right and I want to see that happen.

If discussing the problems these breeds are facing and how a rule change could impact on that, favorably, is seen as an attack doesn't that help show how this rule is affecting the culture? That our SHARED values aren't being recognized ?

I have gone out of my way to say the system itself is a brilliant innovation that should be working better than it is. I would far rather see an existing and established body become as successful as it can be, Than start promoting yet another divisive ideal.

O.K. If tomorrow the KCS simply changed what you think are their rules which you believe impact on this how do you see that helping YOUR breed. Can you tell me in ordinary dog owner/ dog breeder speak how you think it all depends on the KCS getting it right?

Success is measured subjectively - any group or body measures its success according to how they are achieving their goals - why would the KCs want to use their resources and measure their success by other ideals?

As you can see by this thread alone people who are members of their states KC are happy with the fact that so far the KCs have been able to protect them and their breeds and for them the KCs are getting it right .Your ideas may have some credence - though Im still struggling to get a grasp of exactly what you see but surely you can see that constantly debating this point is not going to take you or anyone else anywhere and even if they did fall in with what you want dogs of a certain type will still be legislated against because its about politics and dog owner responsibility.

[moosmum]

stand back and reconsider where you have been and where you want to go.

How about considering making it a pro campaign rather than an anti campaign?

Umm, Thats what I have been saying? Promote values , not fault?

This isn't about apportioning blame. Its about trying to find answers and where things went wrong.

You have remarked yourself that a constitution only does what is written into it.

Steven Hawkings touched on this subject in his series. We are talking cultural evolution and the 'programing' of a culture to find fault in what lies out side its own jurisdiction. Having to constantly redefine what that jurisdiction does include, in pursuit of being 'Other'.

Making it very difficult to fight differently in co-operation with all stake holders.

If that's what you have been saying you sure have chosen a very unique way of saying it and if you cant do it without carry on about the bad KCs then don't expect to keep your audience.

Where things went wrong and is wrong is about a political system which takes on a what if concept and makes laws which are designed to gather votes the cheapest and easiest way possible for them over all else Including science and commonsense.

One person allows their dogs to be a danger to the community so laws are introduced in case others do.

Its is about giving more credibility to nutters and radicals that push everyone to have to defend their own position and show they are not the bad guys.

Yes we are talking about cultural revolution and the need and desire for those within a culture to have to defend themselves and demonstrate that they are not part of what is being used to to have the will of the minority promoted but this is driven by the media, the ease in which information is now disseminated,the political system and the lack of desire of the community to take up a stance against things that don't directly affect them and protest and of course the ability for warriors to gather their armies which drive the actions taken and have the community exposed to their propoganda.

reality is that the world is being changed by a bunch of bullies who know how to play the game and have greater motivation and resources to gather support and shout the loudest.

Oh for Dog sake, MY breed is in serious trouble. Along with many others. It depends on the K.Cs getting this right and I want to see that happen.

If discussing the problems these breeds are facing and how a rule change could impact on that, favorably, is seen as an attack doesn't that help show how this rule is affecting the culture? That our SHARED values aren't being recognized ?

I have gone out of my way to say the system itself is a brilliant innovation that should be working better than it is. I would far rather see an existing and established body become as successful as it can be, Than start promoting yet another divisive ideal.

O.K. If tomorrow the KCS simply changed what you think are their rules which you believe impact on this how do you see that helping YOUR breed. Can you tell me in ordinary dog owner/ dog breeder speak how you think it all depends on the KCS getting it right?

Success is measured subjectively - any group or body measures its success according to how they are achieving their goals - why would the KCs want to use their resources and measure their success by other ideals?

As you can see by this thread alone people who are members of their states KC are happy with the fact that so far the KCs have been able to protect them and their breeds and for them the KCs are getting it right .Your ideas may have some credence - though Im still struggling to get a grasp of exactly what you see but surely you can see that constantly debating this point is not going to take you or anyone else anywhere and even if they did fall in with what you want dogs of a certain type will still be legislated against because its about politics and dog owner responsibility.

Should be able to do that. Just not for a week at least. Just managing to steal moments for myself as is ATM. Might work better for for the delay anyway, to try finding more normal/ understandable language.

[moosmum]

I will say though that people seem to have a very warped idea of how removal of that rule would affect the K.Cs.

It does not take away any protections for the breeds at all. They would not measure success by any other ideal. Or reduce resources. It does not ask any one to do anything they don't agree with, or even demand out crossing in pedigree dogs. Though it WOULD make that easier to achieve when its deemed appropriate by breed clubs. It does not remove autonomy from breed clubs.

The K.Cs would still operate under the rules and values they hold. All it would do is allow those members who choose to do so, to act independently of the K.Cs and enable values to be better promoted to ALL stake holders. Including and especialy K.C values.

Removal of that rule makes no additional demands of the K.Cs at all. Its simply allows for the demands of the environment, or the world the K.Cs exists IN.

That rule does not add anything to the K.Cs in the 1st place, or protect the breeds. It only restricts by demanding the K.Cs take nothing from and give nothing to the species out side the registry systems. All for the sake of being 'other'.

The pedigrees themselves already distinguish the breeds from non papered dogs.

They don't need to be seen as a different species entirely. They are not.

Insisting on being 'other' you will BE seen as other, and judged on those differences. By what/any values they bring to the community.

Edited March 8, 2016 by moosmum

[Steve]

I will say though that people seem to have a very warped idea of how removal of that rule would affect the K.Cs.

It does not take away any protections for the breeds at all. They would not measure success by any other ideal. Or reduce resources. It does not ask any one to do anything they don't agree with, or even demand out crossing in pedigree dogs. Though it WOULD make that easier to achieve when its deemed appropriate by breed clubs. It does not remove autonomy from breed clubs.

The K.Cs would still operate under the rules and values they hold. All it would do is allow those members who choose to do so, to act independently of the K.Cs and enable values to be better promoted to ALL stake holders. Including and especialy K.C values.

Removal of that rule makes no additional demands of the K.Cs at all. Its simply allows for the demands of the environment, or the world the K.Cs exists IN.

That rule does not add anything to the K.Cs in the 1st place, or protect the breeds. It only restricts by demanding the K.Cs take nothing from and give nothing to the species out side the registry systems. All for the sake of being 'other'.

The pedigrees themselves already distinguish the breeds from non papered dogs.

They don't need to be seen as a different species entirely. They are not.

Insisting on being 'other' you will BE seen as other, and judged on those differences. By what/any values they bring to the community.

Exactly What rule is it that you are talking about ?

[moosmum]

stand back and reconsider where you have been and where you want to go.

How about considering making it a pro campaign rather than an anti campaign?

Umm, Thats what I have been saying? Promote values , not fault?

This isn't about apportioning blame. Its about trying to find answers and where things went wrong.

You have remarked yourself that a constitution only does what is written into it.

Steven Hawkings touched on this subject in his series. We are talking cultural evolution and the 'programing' of a culture to find fault in what lies out side its own jurisdiction. Having to constantly redefine what that jurisdiction does include, in pursuit of being 'Other'.

Making it very difficult to fight differently in co-operation with all stake holders.

Yes we are talking about cultural evolution and the need and desire for those within a culture to have to defend themselves and demonstrate that they are not part of what is being used to to have the will of the minority promoted,....

************* They don't have to defend themselves. They have to show they have too much value for the common man to relinquish.

They ARE part of what is being used to to have the will of the minority promoted. Because those issues are all a part of the environment the canine species lives in. As long as there are domestic dogs those same issues will affect them. To some degree or another. The K.Cs has no hope of ever saying that environment does not affect ITS members also to some degree.

Added to my comments above....This 'not part of ' whats being used to have the will of the minority promoted is the problem. BE part of it, and maybe it won't BE the will of that particular minority any more. It will be less a minority for a start, and the K.Cs will have more influence on what values that larger group holds. It won't be that same minority anymore.

To hold a K.C forever apart from its environment CAN NOT work!!

Edited March 17, 2016 by moosmum

[Steve]

Hi all,

To me, breed specific legislation that unfairly targets pet dogs due to their breed or appearance is an important topic. Dogs get targeted and killed by governments and councils because they may be pit bulls, or Dogos , or Filas, or what ever the flavour of the month is for "bad dogs". I am a little saddened that this "BSL" forum gets so little traffic.

I suspect that a lot of owners of pedigree pure bred dogs think that this is not a problem that concerns them, but it should. It can happen to any breed, and it happened in Australia to the German shepherd dog. At the moment the main dog breed targeted by Breed Specific Legislation in Australia is the American Pit Bull Terrier. The APBT is the same dog as the American Staffordshire Terrier, and the AST is at risk also. But AST owners and breeders think that this BSL thing won't get applied to their dogs. Well, why not? If the APBT is such a dangerous dog, surely the AST is as well, as it is the same dog. The only dogs ever used to breed AST's were APBTs, and so the AST is a pure bred APBT. There is no pure bred AST in the world that is not descended from pure bred APBTs.

Anyone who tries to deny this is deluded. So, if all APBTS should be banned, then therefore all American Staffordshire Terriers should also be banned. Anyone out there who'd care to dispute my logic?

ricey

So the answer is - this forum is too hard for me. Im out

[moosmum]

O.K.

The answers to your questions are in this thread anyway. Not much point repeating it all again if you haven't read whats there.

[Steve]

O.K.

The answers to your questions are in this thread anyway. Not much point repeating it all again if you haven't read whats there.

Ive read it MM I just dont get it and think its pointless to get involved in public conversation with people who are too smart for me to understand.

[moosmum]

O.K.

The answers to your questions are in this thread anyway. Not much point repeating it all again if you haven't read whats there.

Ive read it MM I just dont get it and think its pointless to get involved in public conversation with people who are too smart for me to understand.

Sorry Steve. I realy wish I knew how to explain better. You are so close.

For myself, The stakes are too high. I have to keep trying to find what is missing in my explanations.

The point that will allow this to click into place for others as completely as it has for me, or even some one who can show how me its wrong.

It might be the concept of environment?

Only environment can ultimately 'decide' the success or failure of a species.

By favoring the values that species demonstrates to it.

The species can't demand favor. It just doesn't work that way. Environment always controls selection.

But a species CAN demonstrate the values it brings to make its environment more suitable and able to support the species. Those are the only values an environment CAN recognize. Or the lack of them.

Kind of like your liver demonstrating its purpose to your body by keeping it healthy enough to support a liver.

The concept of environment does not change just because its made up of humanity instead of geography. Its any medium things live in.

A ruling against breeding outside of the pedigree system attempts to replace any form of natural selection with a representation of demands instead.

A bit like your liver saying it works because its a liver, ( not for the purpose it serves, or its value to the body) If its ONLY a liver, it will work better. So it might stop releasing enzymes or filtering etc because those things interfere with its integrity as something 'other' and distinct from its environment in the body. It will still place demands on the body for its survival. It just won't give anything in return, or listen to messages from the body that tell it whats required. In the end the body dies and nothing is left to support the liver.

Edited March 12, 2016 by moosmum

[moosmum]

Its a rule that demands the K.Cs be the only refuge of values and purpose for dogs.

In demanding that, It creates a hostile environment for the species.

If you still don't understand, start at the beginning and THINK about the mechanics. I've shown as many ways they manifest as I can, in as many different contexts. And so far any arguments have only supported this.

Hendric Gomers Thesis says the K.Cs have ruled against their environment> The end result will be its destruction or The K.Cs, with much damage in the meantime.

I believe I have shown some of the many ways that IS happening, tried to illustrate the mechanics in action, and confirmed his thesies to be in effect on the K.Cs and the environment supporting domestic dogs.

I have no doubt many other organizations are affected by similar rulings that are very damaging to society and our abilities to adapt.

Certainly we are becoming a much more intolerant society, disguised in righteousness.

Its not a rule that demands the KCS be the only refuge of values and purpose for dogs.In fact in the year 2016 that's simply crazy. The KCS represent a minority group who breed a vast minority of dogs. Take a good look at state legislations , RSPCA AWL, AAPDB, the MDBA, working dog groups etc

Hanging out here on this forum it may be easy to believe that they are pushing the values and purpose for dogs but best you get a better look around at the current environment. Last year in NSW there was a committee into the welfare of breeding dogs in NSW and Dogs NSW was one voice out of over 300 and as far as I can see NOTHING they wanted as values or purpose got anywhere.

Perhaps because they keep insisting they are not a part of the environment they exist in- and hold completely different values?

Either you are part of it, or you are not. If you are not, you will be excluded.

If you are, you will be expected to promote the values you bring to be recognized as such. Promote those values SO OTHERS CAN RECOGNIZE THEM!

If those aren't seen to have any value to the community(or the committees looking into these issues)You will NOT get recognition at these events. What the K.Cs ask for must be demonstrated to have purpose OUTSIDE of the K.Cs. if their input is to be to be valued outside them.

You want to be part of the decision making, yet have people recognize you are not part of the problem? You are just outsiders giving advise?

It is a paradoxical division that exists only in the rules of the K.Cs. Not in the reality of a single species and its adaptation/evolution with modern Man and his communities..

You must demonstrably contribute to the health of your environment to have a say in its health. Not hold it all to yourselves as a demonstration of superiority and demand favor on the basis of that. That does not meet environmental demands. Only K.C demands that must be in conflict with those.

Influence your environment favorably to GET favor.

The uproar over the GSD winning BOB at Crufts this year is a perfect example. WHY would people listen to organizations so clearly in conflict with the demands of the environment it exists in?! Who are the dogs being protected from apart from a broader base of breeders and selection?

What does this system offer to the rest of US? The division is not of our making. It has been ruled by these organizations. There is a simple solution that rests on recognition of a single environment for a single species. It does not affect the pedigree system, or its values, purpose or any other such thing.

ALL it does is recognize that all dog owners and breeders share responsibility for direction of the species by their own individual actions. Be they pedigree breeders or other. We have equal responsibility to the SPECIES. You can't accept responsibility to pedigrees but not accept that affects the species as a whole.

Edited March 23, 2016 by moosmum