egapal, you said "I don't know any other way to say this. Just because something happens in the wild does not mean its good for the snake. You have to prove that its good for the snake. I won't drink milk past the sell by date. It won't make me sick I just have enough money to not bother risking it. I can also afford fresh rodents."

I didn't say i couldn't afford fresh rodents. I said that fresh vs f/t seems to be a problem for people due to cost. I also said i found it cheaper *shrug*

I think eating is good for the snake. I do disagree with your argumentation method.

I don't know why you wouldn't drink milk past the SELL date, if it is still good. If it's expired, it's not necessarily bad. If it GOES bad throw it it...humans also do not have the ability to fight off bacteria from "bad" food...where as ball pythons can eat food that has been dead for a long time, not refrigerated, and by our standards, spoiled. That is just a fact.


You wrote "Ok so in this last post of yours you are arguing with someone who is being trained in animal biology toward becoming a vet. Do you have any training, education, or research into what domestication is? Simply reading the wiki definition is not going to cut it here. You don't appear to have the background biology studies to be making the kind of arguments you are making. The point you keep missing is that it doesn't matter how many generations of animal are bread in captivity. The relevant issue is whether or not there has been a selective breeding in order to make them easier to keep in captivity that has resulted in a change in the animal from its wild counterparts. This is not the case with BPs. We have selected the ball pythons that get to breed based on colors and there has been little to no change in the captive animals behavior vs the wild. This is further proven by the constant influx of wild BPs to the trade. Even if there has been some change it doesn't prove your point. The changes have to be fairly drastic, bordering on or flat out leading to speciation."

You have no idea if i have studied biology extensively and have 14 degrees, or if i'm a 13 year old kid posing as...whatever *lol* You don't know that about the person i was responding to, either.
And, i was specifically discussing the definition of the word domesticated, and it's application.

And it DOES matter how many generations of animal are bred in captivity...uhm...that is kind of the point. how many does it take to become domesticated...to show signs of domestication, etc. You and satomi are saying it takes too many, to have shown up already..AND that bps are NOT being selected for personality traits, that they are ONLY being selected for color. I am saying that i can PROVE otherwise, since I have two snakes from a breeder who has bred normals for 20 years, and i have two normals who are each from that breeder, who has stated that they were selected for their easy going personality and easy acceptance to captivity. I don't see how this is an argument at all *lol* I am clearly stating a fact. You can of course, choose to disagree, but since you cannot prove it, you cannot disprove it. You can concede to calling it a theory, that there are some bps out there that were selected for their "domesticated traits".
I really think if you take a second to read, and reread this last paragraph...you will see what i am saying, and understand it.

Anyone who has studied science, not even biology specifically cannot disagree with this statement. There are questions/problems just like it on the SATs.
I will concede that I have perhaps not been as clear in my previous statements, to help you understand exactly what i'm saying. I think we agree on some things, but are not seeing it that way due to the nature of our discussion...ie: on a text forum.

For instance...

You said my point about watching the snakes during a live feed was taken. Great! But then you go on to say

" I understand why you posted the pics. My point is that we have all seen these pics. We don't feed live because we just never thought about it. Its dishonest of you to put a picture of a BP nearly gutted by a rabbit in a thread where you are trying to make the point that feeding F/T is safer. It's simply not relevant in that it was hurt by a rabbit. Nearly no one would consider feeding a rabbit to their BP and if they did it would be a baby not capable of the damage you showed. By posing that picture you are saying that we are putting our snakes at that kind of risk without actually saying the words. That's just dishonest. The picture of the dehydrated starved snake is equally not relevant. Its an emotional plea. "


So, you say you understand. Then you for some reason go on to claim I am being dishonest in some way. That's simply not true. I closed the talk about why to feed live, quite a few posts ago. I said i had gathered reasons why people do it.
Then I posted, yes, an emotional plea, that if people are going to feed live, to watch their snakes. I don't see how this is dishonest. Please explain to me in detail how it is.
It is 100% honest. It is also, you are right, 100% emotional. BTW this thread is NOT about trying to get people to feed f/t over live. I have made that clear many times. lol

I simply asked why people do it...i wanted factual reasons.
I learned the reasons.
After learning the reasons, I simply stated that I disagree with the many statements that people feed, and then walk away from their animals.

Blah, we are going around and around here. It's not really a healthy debate when we start repeating ourselves over and over.