manny53
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 5,257
n so propaganda begins
- Thread starter manny53
- Start date
BrowningRage
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 4,562
LAST EDITED ON Aug-31-11 AT 10:23AM (MST)[p] Funniest bunch of BS science... As if humans don't count as predators... Or should be eliminated as predators...
I love that they use animations of mule deer and call them elk... How much can you possibly know about nature if you can't even distinguish that..???
My favorite line from teh video is when he talks about restoring "important song birds"... LOL
"Therefore, wo be unto him that is at ease in Zion!" 2 Ne. 28: 24
I love that they use animations of mule deer and call them elk... How much can you possibly know about nature if you can't even distinguish that..???
My favorite line from teh video is when he talks about restoring "important song birds"... LOL
"Therefore, wo be unto him that is at ease in Zion!" 2 Ne. 28: 24
Roy
Moderator
- Messages
- 7,447
LAST EDITED ON Aug-31-11 AT 10:15AM (MST)[p]Well, the science in the video is actually pretty sound, the data and evidence back it up, but to say the least it is an over-simplification of a complex process and it focuses in on only one factor and only investigates one conclusion. You really can't expect too much more from a short 2 minute video.
And that is the problem - instead of seeing a comprehensive study that looks at numerous factors and deals with the issues of human/wolf interactions and just pretends that humans aren't supposed to be a part of the ecosystem, we are left with a short snippet of propagandistic information that pushes a specific agenda that otherwise would be considered an ecological connumdrum.
I agree with the science, the presence of apex predators does regulate populations of ungulates which in turn benefits the whole eco-system. However, studies that don't consider human beings to be apex predators really perplex me.
HOOK 'EM!
And that is the problem - instead of seeing a comprehensive study that looks at numerous factors and deals with the issues of human/wolf interactions and just pretends that humans aren't supposed to be a part of the ecosystem, we are left with a short snippet of propagandistic information that pushes a specific agenda that otherwise would be considered an ecological connumdrum.
I agree with the science, the presence of apex predators does regulate populations of ungulates which in turn benefits the whole eco-system. However, studies that don't consider human beings to be apex predators really perplex me.
HOOK 'EM!
H
huntin100
Guest
I have a good idea to help the rabbit population. Kill at least half of the wolf population we would have more deer, elk, and Moose. Poison, trap, and hunt coyotes and take out 50-70% of their population. There will be alot more rabbits for Lynx to eat. Let's try a 100 year study and see what happens.
HorseCreek
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 2,243
A lot of ass-umptions in the article! Coyotes killing a Lynx? lol
Traditional >>>------->
Traditional >>>------->
NECALI
Active Member
- Messages
- 717
I think the coyote population exploded when they outlawed poisoning and an effective means of trapping them. The sheep ranchers in the west kept them under control for years, but here in Northern Ca. the sheep ranchers have almost disappeared. Between that and no effective legal trapping or poison eradication efforts by the ones that are left, they have definitely exploded. I don't think that bringing wolves back into the picture is the answer at all. They just won't acknowledge the disaster it has caused and keep trying to paint a rosy picture of a train wreck. We need to be able to control all the animal predators.
2lumpy
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 8,508
People with creative minds can start with a theory, regardless of how ridiculous the theory might be, such as: three polar bears are found dead, floating in the ocean, some chucklehead theorizes they died from starvation, then further theorizes they starved from receding ice which prevented them from hunting seals on said ice, then further theorizes the ice was receding from global warming, then theorizes global warming is caused by increased CO2, then theorizes that CO2 was created from human use of petro-carbon, then theorizes if we stopped using petro-carbon the earth would cool, the ocean would cool, it would freeze, the polar bears could walk on the ice and hunt seals and never and be found floating dead in the ocean again.
The fake science crowd are skilled at using terms like: might, may, could, very possible, (words that express possibilities but not facts) which are much different than terms like: will, will not, did, did not, was, was not, which are terms that honest science uses when they are stating facts.
If the media, scientists, or MM use the terms: might, may, could, very possible, be careful because you're "most likely" (there i just did it) getting an opinion with little factual support.
IMO
DC
The fake science crowd are skilled at using terms like: might, may, could, very possible, (words that express possibilities but not facts) which are much different than terms like: will, will not, did, did not, was, was not, which are terms that honest science uses when they are stating facts.
If the media, scientists, or MM use the terms: might, may, could, very possible, be careful because you're "most likely" (there i just did it) getting an opinion with little factual support.
IMO
DC
