Human Logic
- Thread starter Zymf
- Start date
- Aug 19, 2012
- 868
- 166
- Thread starter
- #3
We might think the bird houses, once renewed, look better, but I'm sure the birds don't...
You can't tell me that you've seen more birds living in a Wooden Man-made Bird House, than in a Bird House/nest made by themselves.
If they thought that their own little bird nests were better than a sheltered house, clearly they wouldn't bother using our bird houses. But the thing is, they do. As for more birds using natural nests, as oppose to our bird houses, well duh! The number of birds clearly out weighs the amount of bird houses that we have. But when we do put one up, more likely than not it will be populated by a bird. Why? Because a bird house not only offers shelter from tough weather conditions, but it also offers security for birds laying eggs.
- Aug 19, 2012
- 868
- 166
- Thread starter
- #5
It still doesn't add up.
I'm sure many bird much prefer their own personal houses rather than ones made by humans. The leaves above usually supply shelter also.
No, birds will generally find the easiest place to settle down, whether be on a phone poll, in the crack of a building or a bird house. How can you argue that a nest on a branch is more preferable to a bird than a bird house? Birds actually do think about their well being, and the well being of their offspring, believe it or not. This means that not only does ease of getting a place to live factor into the equation, but so does shelter and security.
Also, since when do leaves blockade water and wind (not to mention predators)? At this point you're just talking out of your ass.
- Aug 19, 2012
- 868
- 166
- Thread starter
- #7
The leaves and sticks, etc. above them could divert the water into another direction, and could potentially hide them from predators. I'm not speaking out of my ass at all, I'm being realistic.
Lots of animals "live" in trees (or can easily scale one), therefore it offers no real security advantage over a typical bird house that is held in the air by a narrow pole, or even one that is in someone's backyard that has a small entrance for the birds, where as other animals can't fit through the opening.
As for a tree blocking water, have you ever stood under one during a storm? Yes it does stop some rain, but you're still going to get wet, especially the higher you go up, due to less coverage. Most birds don't have the luxury of being at the very bottom for their own security reasons, this means that even more wind and water will reach them. This is not only an annoyance to them, but could also potentially damage their nest, whereas a bird house is built with this in mind.
- Aug 19, 2012
- 868
- 166
- Thread starter
- #12
Well it's not.This isn't a matter of belief, this is a matter of common sense and fact.
I disagree with what you've said in many senses.
I believe that birds should be able to live in their own homes without it being destroyed. They don't even have a choice.
- Aug 19, 2012
- 868
- 166
- Thread starter
- #15
They could potentially want to stay in the same area zone, but the house they were originally has been destroyed.Cutting down trees doesn't make them live in bird houses. If they didn't want to live in one they'd simply find a new tree to build a nest in. they live in bird houses because they want to
Just like DcSelby, fuck off, you're a pair of wannabe hackers.
Plenty more trees in the forest
+ I don't hack y0
- Aug 19, 2012
- 868
- 166
- Thread starter
- #18
Precisely, you just think you can, by copy and pasting defacement pages.Plenty more trees in the forest
Mmm.. I'm upset; thinking about crying myself to sleep. You fucking muppet.
I'm not even going to continue, save myself the infraction. If you want to, then enjoy it, I hope it lasts.
