Fly_Guy

Easy girls!

Haha! I'm thinking RR or Bennett. Probably RR- it's supposed to be snowing, but I need a fly fix. Not all of us can skip on down to Belize I'm going to get home Fri night wishing that the U.S. was warming instead of trending flat!

There is quite a bit of paranoia on these threads, that's fer sure! Anyone been fishing? I'm looking for a place to go this Friday (thinking Taney - but perhaps RR?)

Reading these threads, I am fully persuaded of one thing. Fishing must be slooooow.

@ Steve_IA - It'd never fly in America, but it would at the same time reduce child abuse rates. Living around this area, I am for anything that results in less children/single mom who lives off the government and occational support from methhead father(s). I dare you to try to get your congressman to sponsor that bill though China passed it because the people have no say in China. We could be like China, but do the costs outweigh the benefits? I would submit yes.

"Compared with vehicles fueled with conventional diesel and gasoline, propane (also known as liquefied petroleum gas or LPG) vehicles can produce significantly lower amounts of some harmful emissions and the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide." - U.S. Depart. of Energy Other sources indicate that it costs less, and needs less space to store. hmm. Interesting.

Post of the year!

Oh - and I think we all owe Cricket an apology - he wanted to have the last word - quick - someone say something contentious and let Cricket respond before Lilley shuts us down!!

That looks bad indeed! Thank goodness none of those fires are in the U.S.!

Bingo. We could argue about global warming/cooling/warming forever, and use valid pieces of data to support our positions. I am 100% for clean alternative energy. Imagine a world where America lead the way in clean energy - how much (recently lost) respect would we garner for ourselves if that were to happen!? I am personally willing to pay substantially more in taxes (providing everyone else would do the same of course) to see it done. I've outfitted my home w/ those nasty little CF lightbulbs, and drive a hybrid, but right now, affordable options are limited - especially on my income. It's going to take a greater committment by our country than the scale of the space exploration program or (name your favorite war)to make it happen. When there are affordable solar panels/shingles for our roofs, I'll buy em. I know some people who have a personal windmill to supplement their energy as well. Many many small solutions will provide the bigger solution. Good post Al.

I can barely catch a fish if someone throws it to me.

Good post. My thing is - what we are doing (pollution) is bad. No one can argue that. But some very rich and powerful people stand to make a lot of $$$ if they can convince us to buy carbon credits and drive certain cars and burn certain light bulbs. I promise that sooner or later, some other global crisis will erupt that will be a bigger cash cow, and we'll all panic and panic and buy whatever we are told. Funny part is, I support many of the measures that the global warming crowd suggest, but still don't subscribe to the panic and fear-mongering.

hmmm. Sometimes, one has to respond, by giving it up as a bad job. I better delete my post about a close of topic - as that point is completely valid. Never said toxins in the environment were linked to global warming, my point was that they are a more present danger. Already responded to cherry picking - representing both sides (even those that are contrary to your hypothesis) is important. But then again, you can always shout me down. That is a popular trend as well with some. Didn't mean to hurt yer feelers, but there we have it. In 20 years, when a new global hysteria is gripping the planet, we'll have another discussion.

Actually not. Sorry. At the time, the worry was imminent global cooling. and just found this http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=121447 . It's hilarious - a meteorolgist predicting imminent global cooling (like we havent seen since the 70s) from 2010. jeepers. Do you get the idea that we really have no idea??? Go clean environment, Stop with mass hysteria about cooling...no wait... warming... no wait... cooling.

I might add that I completely support alternative energy efforts, and am willing to pay more in taxes GLADLY if it means America can lead the way in the quest. Its the best 200 million that Obama has thus far spent (on incentives for clean energy)

I might point out that you would've written the same nonesense in the 70s, but substituted global cooling for global warming. Think about that. I'm not saying its not going on. I'm saying that just presenting one side for the purpose of political/economical means is a obvious to almost everyone. I'm not breaking off little pieces of data and presenting them as a whole, I'm pointing out conflicting data, which is what science is suppose to do. Right now, the working hypothesis is global warming, but in the country where the methods of recording data from as early as the 1880s are the most accurate, there is no noticible trend. There are WAY to many variables to make Mr. Tim Smith, or myself some expert. I am saying BE CRITICAL.

If they have a stake in it, they are going to cherry pick they data that supports their claim. How come Al Gore has never posted the U.S. warming data. Because there is no noticible warming trend in the U.S. How come he didn't include a side-by-side graph of Albany and New York City (Albany is cooling, and NYC is warming) in his little slide show that won him a Nobel Peace Prize? Not liking someone doesn't invalidate their position, but when they stand to make millions off of manufactured hysteria, I tend to be critical.

Michael Crighton's "State of Fear" is both a good read, and very instructive. Personally, I'm more worried about direct pollution and toxicity of our cars and lifestyles than us somehow baking the planet. If we got to an increase of 5 degrees by our own doing, our planet would be so shot by the direct toxic effects of what we would have to do to reach that point that it wouldn't matter anyway. I'll believe Al Gore when we stops cherry picking his science to suit his political and monatary agenda. I'll believe Rush when he does the same. Both sides have political agendas.

6/10, with a couple of guesses on top of it. Teaching BIO 122 lab helped on the water quality one - we did a stream team lab. It said I know trout, but I think they're crazy.

150lb Tarpon - off of Daytona. Blacktip shark comes in second, same trip. Third have to be coho salmon, off of Oregon. Yellowstone brown trout comes in next. super pretty fish.

I use a Berkely Lightning rod (medium action), with braided line. It's sensitive, and the lightning rods seem to have enough backbone to handle spooning. I have a friend that I fish with who also uses the lightning rod while spooning. For me, more important than the rod is the line.

Not into braid?? I'm partial to using a berkely vanish 4lb leader for trout (attached to my braid of course!). For crappie, I fish strictly braid, as it can bend a crappie hook out of a tree stump, and I save on hooks. helpful?

Camp Zoe siezed because of rampant illegal drug use and sales. Most of OAF members upset about it. wierd thread.

Can't you stay in the water and technically be within the law? (I'm a bit fuzzy on it) Interesing section in this article http://reason.com/archives/2010/01/26/the-forfeiture-racket , called Guilty property, innocent owners. There is legal precident for siezing property if it has been shown to be related to a crime. It seems it started in the seventies, as a means of siezing the profits of organized crime. Not saying it's right however. Our country was founded on the principles of (among others)John Locke, who believed in the right of 'life, liberty, and pursuit of property.' (changed to 'happiness' for us, because we thought slaves and servants didn't have the same rights as their masters). Property rights for individuals has always been central to America being a free society.

It's bizzare - a large intrusive government is perfectly ok, until it starts interfering with our illegal drug sales... It doesn't seem right to take the guys land w/out charges filed, though I'm sure they're on the way. He is legally liable if he observed drug use/sale on his property, and did nothing about it. Rest assured, those who sold/bought the drugs to undercover agents have already been taken care of in the standard no-fanfare way. As for the poster who pointed out the hypocricy of targeting some drugs, but not cigarettes and alcohol, I agree completely. Cigs and alcohol provide too much cash that the large intrusive government needs to operate... and catch all the other 'illegal' drug users with... indeed it is odd. Where's Trav's dead horse?