Guest OntarioSquatch Posted January 25, 2016 Posted January 25, 2016 I'm not aware of any part of known science that contradicts the idea of portals or psychic abilities, but at the same time I don't think Sasquatch possess any of those qualities or any quality that would be considered paranormal. Do the paranormal aspects really need to be accepted as true for them to exist and remain "undiscovered" in this day and age?
Incorrigible1 Posted January 25, 2016 Posted January 25, 2016 Yeah, well, I'm well versed with dogs and cats possessing portals and mindspeak. Jeebus, pathetic.
MIB Posted January 25, 2016 Moderator Posted January 25, 2016 Yeah? How 'bout giant mythical birds? MIB
Incorrigible1 Posted January 25, 2016 Posted January 25, 2016 (edited) Really? I put as much into them as do you. Sad the lengths to which folks resort. You've become DWA. Congrats. Disappointed. Moves on from Tommy Lee Jones. Grinds him into the past. Won't look back. ::shakes head at pathetic caca:: Edit: For those of you wondering, I once reported a thunder-bird sighting, from my youth. I mentioned how I cannot explain what I saw, nor do I expect anyone to believe in the creature on the strength of my report. Evidently that has become the gist for ridicule. Maybe you expected, as did I, better from the previous poster. Edited January 25, 2016 by Incorrigible1
BigTreeWalker Posted January 25, 2016 Author Posted January 25, 2016 Folks I don't know what that was all about. But the OP wasn't about paranormal or suspending science. The point I was trying to make is that with the government's track record on most environmental issues, how could it possibly manage bigfoot if it is ever proven. Either nothing is accomplished as with the elk hoof disease or they make a mess of it as with salmon management or the wolf issue. As another example. In the Columbia River sea lions are becoming a problem and could be actually harming some of the endangered salmon runs. Runs which the government has taken steps to protect and effects everyone when it comes to water usage and fish quotas. Yet no effective means to control the sea lions can be arrived at because they are also a protected species. Talk about a can of worms. The typical government knee-jerk reaction usually makes the whole situation worse for us who have to live with it.
Faenor Posted January 25, 2016 Posted January 25, 2016 The government and its employees do a hell of a job regulating the country and its resources. I say the more regulation the better.
Incorrigible1 Posted January 25, 2016 Posted January 25, 2016 The government and its employees do a hell of a job regulating the country and its resources. I say the more regulation the better. Drink a big glass of Flint water, and get back with us.
MIB Posted January 25, 2016 Moderator Posted January 25, 2016 (edited) Really? I put as much into them as do you. Sad the lengths to which folks resort. You've become DWA. Congrats. I'm exchanging ridicule for ridicule, snark for snark. It mirrors your "contributions." Sad but true. Can I suggest something truly novel? Make a positive contribution to a discussion. Instead of passing judgement on people, ridiculing ideas, throwing out 3 second sound bite type snark and insults, put some thought into a response. Add something of value. I'm not saying drink the koolaid. If you think an idea is wrong, suggest a way for the person to test it and figure it out for themselves. It's going to go a lot farther in changing their minds than insults. In other words, there are ways to disagree and change minds while being part of the solution, you don't always have to be part of the problem ... it's a choice you're making. MIB PS: So far as giant birds ... I'm not sure. There *is* a bit of evidence for them. No adequate accounting or alternate explanation has been offered yet. Edited January 25, 2016 by MIB 3
hiflier Posted January 25, 2016 Posted January 25, 2016 Hello All, I will say this, which is all that can be said: Whether a 7 foot tall bird exists or not one thing is certain....a 30 second round with the beak would not be fun.
norseman Posted January 25, 2016 Admin Posted January 25, 2016 Good example of government shortsightedness and single-mindedness. It all comes down to the P word we cannot discuss here....but pressure was exerted and the USFW folded.
ShadowBorn Posted January 25, 2016 Moderator Posted January 25, 2016 Folks I don't know what that was all about. But the OP wasn't about paranormal or suspending science. The point I was trying to make is that with the government's track record on most environmental issues, how could it possibly manage bigfoot if it is ever proven. Either nothing is accomplished as with the elk hoof disease or they make a mess of it as with salmon management or the wolf issue. As another example. In the Columbia River sea lions are becoming a problem and could be actually harming some of the endangered salmon runs. Runs which the government has taken steps to protect and effects everyone when it comes to water usage and fish quotas. Yet no effective means to control the sea lions can be arrived at because they are also a protected species. Talk about a can of worms. The typical government knee-jerk reaction usually makes the whole situation worse for us who have to live with it. Yes, but there is a sequence of events that have led up to this. Where the sea lions are to a point that they are making runs on salmon as where before they were not. So in ways the Gov does do a good job at keeping track. But a citizen response is a best resolve since they are present. IMO Regulatory rules does help control aspects of our wilderness and keeps us from doing it harm.
Cotter Posted January 25, 2016 Posted January 25, 2016 Well, Shadow, if you mean 'us' in the general population you are right. But those regulations often get 'tweaked' so that certain industry 'pals' get to reap the spoils.
BigTreeWalker Posted January 26, 2016 Author Posted January 26, 2016 Yes, Norse I was trying to stay away from that. ShadowBorn, Yes with government regulation and oversight they are good at getting the ball rolling but not so good after the fact. They throw a lot of money at it originally but when it comes to actually managing the result they run out of steam. Hatcheries are another example. It was found they actually hurt the native fish populations. Now after building so many they are shutting down and consolidating. That hurt the fish and eventually the people who relied on them for a living. As far as wilderness areas go, I am glad they have been set aside. But one reason they came about is that the terrain where they are located in the PNW is hard to log so for a few trades and a large infux of cash the timber industry decided to let them go. Those same regulations also limit our access as private citizens as well as provide perks to the very industries which do the most harm to the environment.
Cotter Posted January 26, 2016 Posted January 26, 2016 Pretty interesting what's going on in Theodore Roosevelt Nat'l Park these days.
BigTreeWalker Posted January 26, 2016 Author Posted January 26, 2016 I haven't been following that, could you elaborate? It wouldn't have anything to do with oil would it seeing as how it's in ND?
Recommended Posts