WV Current Events Forum

Oh and Sammy you are doing a very good job this morning of proving just how right my friend is and what a kick he'll get out of these posts. Why I don't have to do any work this am. You're convincing enough without any help from me.

lindaredtail wrote:Just came off of a crossbow website. "A crossbow will definately shoot over 40 yards, though it will begin to lose energy at 40 yards." Tidy little distance I would say. Polar bears however have to get within a few feet. Argument isn't looking so sound is it Sammy Boy?

GEEEZE, Linda, iffen they are using crossbows ....... then they sure gotta be super duper expert marksmen, ...... right on "the button" ya might say.

I mean like when those seal pelts are made into coats for all those rich women to wear, ....... the "holes" in the pelt made by that crossbow bolt ........ would/could be used as "buttonholes", ...... right.

Linda, won'tcha check your coat and see iffen you can figger out which buttonholes were "shot" with a bolt.

.

One hole wouldn't destroy a coat number one. And as usual Sammy when you can't make an argument on a post you change the subject. You realize of course that is what you accuse women of doing, right?
It is not a valid argument to even compare people with bears. Or either's hunting habits.

lindaredtail wrote:Hi Terry RC How are you? Didn't know if you'd noticed my post. Appears that there is a crossbow in that picture.

HA, and I just betcha that when you look up at the sky at night ......... it appears to you that there really is a "man in the moon".

.

And I just know that all that supposed knowledge, maturity, wisdom, understanding, comprehnsion and the ability to think 6 thoughts at once is all a major figment of your own imagination. That's what delusions of grandeur usually are.

Time for work. Would love to continue this but duty calls. Later.

YUP, .... and the Polar Bear population ...... INCREASED 52% .... during the last 40 years of those 60.

More seals concentrated on smaller ice floes.

And when the ice is almost gone?

At least you didn't (or couldn't) counter my other arguments about that seal hunt being on ice (you didn't mean to imply that was a beach, did you) or the fact that seals may be closer to the water (and escape) on a beach or the fact that the seal populations will probably drop because there won't be enough birthing space with the ice gone.

So far, Sam, this Masters in Science (even if it is bugs and not bears) is running circles around you.

Melting ice will likely cause problems for seals and their predators. You haven't come up with a single valid argument to counter that assertion.

Instead you slide off topic and make personal attacks.

Good debating, there, Lou.

lindaredtail wrote:But if Terry looks closer he will see that it is a crossbow not a club. He may have thought it was a club because much of the time that is what is used to kill BABY SEALS. I do also take note of your arguments shifting like the ice floes we are debating. First in was in all those other foolish ridiculous absurd postings of yours that are meritless that the polar bears could stay on shore and the seals would come to them.

Linda, I sure hope it is not very many more months before you finally learn and/or realize that ........ seals DO NOT live and reproduce in the water, ...... they feed in the water. They are air breathing mammals.

lindaredtail wrote:Now its how close can PEOPLE get to the seals which is not even a valid comparison. It is the usual behavior of someone like you. The argument shifts as the point isn't supportable. (And it is not) No validity whatsoever. Just your typical garbage. Another point he was right about. RIGIDITY OF THOUGHT IN NEVER ADMITTING WRONGNESS. You just shift the argument.

HA, now you are repeating back to me what I accused you of several pages back.

Typical psychological "babble" you learned in Psych 101.

Druther take poison, ......... wouldn't ya.

.

Oh, Terry, ..... forgot to tell ya, ...... the above was very good, ....... very good. Very Happy

Oh oh, ps, that 1st one up there, ....... that distance kinda depends on how thick the ice is, ............ doesn't it? But if you say a mommy seal can effectively use a 10 meter plus "breathing hole", ........ works for me. cheers

And I also wanted to tell you that if you think real hard on the subject for the next 24 - 48 hours you should be able to come up with several more "Kids Facts" like the above that you could mention the next time you conduct a "Show n' Tell" at an Elementary School. Such "nature facts" always impresses the kids now days because they seldom get the chance to hear about such things.

Be sure to tell them how deep the water is underneath the ice.

And that the water is really salty ....... but the ice is not.

Oh yeah, and I suggest that you don't use the word "flee" to describe those seal pups a galloping across the ice when a Polar Bear gets after them.

The word "flee" really doesn't do justice in describing the pup's "escape velocity".

Your arguments are losing coherency.

In short, you are beginning to rave.

As far as your picture, I looked at the terrain, not the hunter. Clubbing was how the Inuits usually hunted tiregluit.

Also, the bears only get to feed on the pups for a short time. How do they get by for the rest of the year?

Stick with drinking beer and making women miserable. You really aren't fit for much else.

lindaredtail wrote:One hole wouldn't destroy a coat number one. And as usual Sammy when you can't make an argument on a post you change the subject. You realize of course that is what you accuse women of doing, right?
It is not a valid argument to even compare people with bears. Or either's hunting habits.

Linda, you are only proving that you know ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about the harvesting and selling of pelts for the fur trade.

One such crossbow "bolt" hole in a pelt could decrease its sale value by 50% +-.

So, if you are stupid enough to shoot "holes" in pelts and try to sell them as "prime pelts" ........yo go for it baby, ..... yo go get er dun.

.

lindaredtail wrote:And I just know that all that supposed knowledge, maturity, wisdom, understanding, comprehnsion and the ability to think 6 thoughts at once is all a major figment of your own imagination.

Like I dun tolt ya Linda, ..... if you are incapable of more than 1 thought at a time ......... then it is no wonder that another's claim would bedazzle you.

lindaredtail wrote:That's what delusions of grandeur usually are.

Well now Linda Lulu, ...... when one's salary reflects those "delusions of grandeur" ..... it is really hard for anyone to discredit their existance.

.

TerryRC wrote: YUP, .... and the Polar Bear population ...... INCREASED 52% .... during the last 40 years of those 60.

More seals concentrated on smaller ice floes.

TRC, you weren't implying the seals were impregnating the Polar bears, ..... were you?

NAH, so finish your explanation, ..... put it in writing, .... chickenshidt, .... spit it out.

TerryRC wrote:And when the ice is almost gone?

You tell me TRC, where will the seals be concentrating?

Finish your explanation, ..... put it in writing, .... chickenshidt, .... spit it out.

I know what the answer is but Linda Lulu don't, ...... so be a man and testify, confess the truth.

TerryRC wrote:At least you didn't (or couldn't) counter my other arguments about that seal hunt being on ice (you didn't mean to imply that was a beach, did you) ......

DUH, YOU REALLY ARE STUPID or what? I post a picture of a "seal hunt on ice flow" .... and you attempt to claim credit for it. Are you really that frigging nuts ....... or just totally dishonest and corrupt?

TerryRC wrote:...... or the fact that seals may be closer to the water (and escape) on a beach

DUH, dumbass, ..... those Arctic seals are always "close to the water".

TerryRC wrote:.... or the fact that the seal populations will probably drop because there won't be enough birthing space with the ice gone.

Or the fact that the seal populations will probably drop because they will have to come on-shore to find enough birthing space ..... and the Polar Bears will be eating the hell out them.

TerryRC wrote:So far, Sam, this Masters in Science (even if it is bugs and not bears) is running circles around you.

HA, me thinks you got too close to too many Bombardier Beetles and they knocked your silly block off and rendered you senseless.

TerryRC wrote:Melting ice will likely cause problems for seals and their predators. You haven't come up with a single valid argument to counter that assertion.

Terry, are you saying that the Polar Bear's population INCREASE of 52% is a problem for them or a problem for the seals?

TerryRC wrote:Instead you slide off topic and make personal attacks.

Well TRC, consider yourself lucky, ....... if you were a child instead of just acting like a child, ........ you would probably get your arse beat severely for such unethical, reprehensible conduct.

.

TerryRC wrote:Oh, Terry, ..... forgot to tell ya, ...... the above was very good, ....... very good. Very Happy

Oh oh, ps, that 1st one up there, ....... that distance kinda depends on how thick the ice is, ............ doesn't it? But if you say a mommy seal can effectively use a 10 meter plus "breathing hole", ........ works for me. cheers

And I also wanted to tell you that if you think real hard on the subject for the next 24 - 48 hours you should be able to come up with several more "Kids Facts" like the above that you could mention the next time you conduct a "Show n' Tell" at an Elementary School. Such "nature facts" always impresses the kids now days because they seldom get the chance to hear about such things.

Be sure to tell them how deep the water is underneath the ice.

And that the water is really salty ....... but the ice is not.

Oh yeah, and I suggest that you don't use the word "flee" to describe those seal pups a galloping across the ice when a Polar Bear gets after them.

The word "flee" really doesn't do justice in describing the pup's "escape velocity".

Your arguments are losing coherency.

In short, you are beginning to rave.

HA, that means you are taking the day off ....... and are already heavy into "your weed" ....... being that the kids will be at School all day.

.

lindaredtail wrote:The corporation was the one that engaged in the actual theft. Do you not believe that they are the primary perpetrator responsible ultimately for what they have done? If one agency (Utah Dept. of Consumer Protection) the primary agency reported to for some time doesn't turn a case over how do you expect prosecutors to prosecute it. Once they knew they certainly were at fault. But that in no way excuses the company. That you think the government more responsible I find interesting. And there are many more than one corporation that engages in wrongdoing. Go on RipOffReport and see for yourself. Thousands of them. You can defend big business if you want. But there are many more corporations involved in wrongdoing than there are government agencies to deal with them 10 x over.

That's the standard party line Linda!!!

lindaredtail wrote:And Aaron one more thing. I hear a lot and not just here liberals or lefties defined as sheep or kool aid drinkers. Yet I have heard people here defend corporate America without question. Defend the belief that global warming is not real in spite or reams of evidence. Anyone that follows without question no matter who or what it is that you do not question, well a sheep is a sheep whatever way you look at it. And it might be a different flavor koolaid but you're drinking it just the same.

Have you looked at and studied the science from those who do not believe in GW or have you simply dismissed it and accepted GW science as gospel?

Comrade.