reply to post by razorman
The key thing that makes an animal mutilation interesting in the way you suggest, is when there are wounds and marks upon the cadaver, which would
indicate that methodology unfamiliar to medical science, has been used to cause them. For instance, when an organ appears to have been removed with a
certain degree of precision, or in such a way as to leave no clue HOW an organ has been removed, that would be cause for investigation.
Also, in the most interesting and inexplicable cases of cattle mutilaton, not only is the cause of the wounds often a mystery, but the site upon which
the body is found, has very often, no evidence of a mortal struggle that one might associate with the death throes of a many hundred of pound animal,
thrashing out its last moments in agony. Often there is not even blood evidence left at the scene, or disturbed brush or grass on the scene. These
killings cannot be confirmed as being acts of man, and can be confirmed in the most interesting cases not to be the work of beasts either.
However, it is clear to me, that since GSWs are part of the recorded list of crimes committed against these dolphins, there is no interest for
someone who might wish to research these things, in connection to the mutilation of livestock in rural places. Gunshot wounds being included in the
list of horrors inflicted upon them, pretty much displays that, for what ever reason, dolphins are being murdered by man for some reason. Who is doing
it, and why they are doing it, are as yet unknown, but from the sounds of the reportage, these are the only mysteries surrounding the issue. The
wounds inflicted have not been reported as being in any way inexplicable in clinical terms.
Its an inexplicable ACT, but the methodology appears known, clearly seperating the murder of these dolphins, from the utterly unexplainable events
befalling livestock and thier owners on farms all over the western world.
edit on 19-11-2012 by TrueBrit because: Added a word, for grammar