Slashdot Mirror


Featherless Chickens

Everyone and their brother wrote in about the featherless chicken. Besides the humor value, interesting in that we're creating another species with qualities that suit humans but unsuitable for life on its own.

7 of 84 comments (clear)

  1. Google: "Animal 54" KFC by crow · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There are three hits at google. It looks like a typical urban legend.

    They changed the name to KFC because fried foods became associated with being unhealthy.

  2. Tip of the Iceburg by Zelet · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Humans have changed every domesticated plant and animal for millions of years. Selective breeding, although slow, is still "genetic engineering."

    Look at: cows, horses, dogs, chickens, wheat, corn, potatoes, goats, hell... look at donkeys... we completely f**ked mother nature in that deal.

    This method of changing things in our benefit has just gotten more efficient.

    --
    ...And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me." - Martin Niemoeller (1892-1984)
  3. Re:Breeding new species by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Why? Humans have been breeding animals for food since when civilization oficially began.

  4. Re:Humour value by battjt · · Score: 3, Insightful

    don't use those breeds...by nature's own design

    Which is it? Us breeding these buggers or nature? We created those breeds, just like the new naked breed. Naked chickens aren't any more unatural than any of our other breeds.

    Again, where do these wild boiler chickens come from? [HINT: The same place wild dairy cows and wild chihuahuas come from.]

    Joe

    --
    Joe Batt Solid Design
  5. This is nothing new by desolation+angel · · Score: 2, Insightful
    If we were creating a new species then prehaps I could get worked up about this.

    But all he did was breed (not genetically engineer) two existing types of chicken to produce another breed without feathers.
    This is no different to breeding dwarf wheat or pit-bulls.

    --
    This time I could be arsed.
  6. Re:Breeding new species by Debillitatus · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I agree. Breeding animals to suit human whim is totally wrong.

    Aside from this link, then, you would characterize the existence of any breed of dog as "totally wrong"? Or cows, or even horses?

    Kneejerk reaction aside, almost every animal we interact with on a daily basis has been changed to suit our needs. To be honest, we've also changed a bit to suit their needs, too. It's a bit overkill to dismiss all of the last 5-10000 years of animal husbandry as "completely wrong", wouldn't you say?

    --

    Come on, give it up, that's

  7. Re:Nothing new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Cows couldn't survive?!? Have you ever heard of bullfights or "the running of the bulls"? They're not exactly helpless to predators. They're just helpless against heartless, animal-abusing factory farmers and the billions of consumers who contribute to the needless suffering every day. (that is, anyone who is not a vegan)

    Breeding chickens without feathers for convenient slaughter reminds me of the old practice of "selective breeding" used on slaves in the United States to produce the strongest workers. There seems to be no limit to the suffering people are willing to be blind towards when it benefits