Someone banned?
1 Like
Now I’ve got a horse to ride. Keep spamming with AI …. I’ll check in later to see if you’re so powerful @Range_Rover. Lol
1 Like
No. Just absent.
2 Likes
I stated my observation about your legal abilities just for fun whereas my statement aimed to be a funny joke and never meant to distort your professional background. Since you have not declared yourself to be a practicing lawyer I lack justification to alter your comments into claims you have not made. The basis of your allegations combined with your lack of supporting evidence demonstrates that you abandon reasoned discussion.
This forum addresses the urgent problem of untrained people conducting unlawful dissection campaigns while distributing false information throughout the public domain. The practice creates substantial dangers for animal welfare status and weakens public confidence in authentic expert professionals as well as authorised institutions. You should concentrate on the main subject matter by showing evidence which proves your statements. Continue your participation only if you can provide solid evidence to support your statements since your extra allegations create distractions in this vital topic.
Anyone got the PSA on how to block/mute/ignore another poster? I’m bored.
I’ve been here through some wild rides, but I can’t be bothered to actually read what someone can’t be bothered to actually write 
8 Likes
The pie enthusiast who alleges AI involvement should present their proof directly within this written text. Present factual evidence before moving on to your next pie. I request evidence-based resolution instead of speculative approaches to this 
issue.
18 Likes
Help me feel your sense of urgency.
What proportion of registered horses (choose your favorite registry) have been dissected, by any person? Of those, what proportion have been dissected unlawfully?
Which nations have legislation or regulations certifying horse dissection?
15 Likes
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
Please quote my “allegations” that show “a lack of supporting evidence” in the discussion of Becks Nairn.
2 Likes
Records indicate that a number of registered horses have been dissected, whether lawfully or unlawfully. There are not records While it is not inherently illegal to examine a deceased horse, the issue arises when unqualified individuals conduct dissections without holding appropriate credentials or producing peer-reviewed work. This becomes a significant concern when such individuals disseminate their findings online or offline, particularly when these findings lack verification, are largely inaccurate, and mislead the public. The absence of evidence-based support for their claims renders their conclusions unreliable. These practices pose a tangible risk to the equine community by perpetuating misinformation and undermining the integrity of qualified professionals in the field. Regulatory oversight and enforcement are important to addressing this threat and safeguarding equine welfare
Is this intended to be an apology or simple justification of nastiness?
4 Likes
This
does not align with this
To whom? Why? I would like to see data from a representative sample of equine practitioners ranking this issue among their primary welfare concerns.
Which nation(s) has found this significantly concerning to introduce legislation to outlaw
the practice?
9 Likes
You can just mute the thread from the menu at the bottom. Under “tracking”.
1 Like
Thanks!
What records? Please cite your sources.
Wait…but you just said…
Then what’s the issue?
I need more information about why this is an issue.
So this Becks Nairn dissects horses and publishes her findings from these dissections online and you’re of the opinion that her findings are inaccurate and misleading.
I must say, I don’t know what you expect from people on this forum. I mean…okay. Becks Nairn shouldn’t do that. There should be more regulatory oversight and enforcement to prevent unqualified people from doing this.
Happy now? It doesn’t seem like a truly pressing issue, but whatever.
9 Likes
You’ve repeated this many times on this thread. We know you are upset about it and that you want “regulatory oversight”.
Talk about beating a dead horse…
8 Likes
Can we talk about pie? Since I’m a “pie enthusiast” 
. Personally. I’m more of a salty girl. Don’t much like sweets. But I would eat the hell out of a Frito pie Nom nom
8 Likes
The current discussion does not focus on you as an individual. This thread provides specifically for discussion about the trustworthiness of Becks Nairn and similar unqualified individuals along with the public perception regarding their work because they lack verified credibility and peer-reviewed evidence to support their claims. Making a decision to endorse Ms. Nairn exists as your sole choice.
Your strategy throughout this discussion which relies on unsupported allegations and lacks adequate evidence has destroyed the solid reputation you should have in this field. The thread specifically investigates unlicensed dissectionists who distribute false information through digital and offline spaces while highlighting the obvious inaccuracies of their claims.
The declaration that Ms. Nairn tells nothing but ‘a story of horses’ contains no valid foundation which could be considered fact. The manipulation presents itself as a profitable tactic to use deceased horses. By continuing to alter the factual account I request you gain a constructive mindset or leave this discussion. Your desire to challenge these points requires proof instead of hypothetical claims.Stop playing the victim or naff off
