wrenched

I asked the same thing under the gravity post. Somebody said they were using another account, but didn't say which.

The site is presenting an argument using the video. We can argue with the argument without pretending the clip has vanished.

A small animal is easy to overlook. With a giraffe you have to accept a conspicuous amount of animal. That is the purpose being alleged: the scale is part of the persuasion.

It doesn't say what the power is for at all.

Then why write two different reasons?

Every reply says a normal camera would be easier. A normal camera also looks like a camera.

That would make the rights campaign useful even to somebody who did not care about the animal. It supplies a thing the opponent can be seen attacking.

Fine, but that still does not explain the animal in the pictures.

Off the surface. It says that in the paragraph.

Yes. The whole thing. I am not just comparing necks.