Navigate Our Waters
Fly Patterns Forum
Tying Techniques Forum
Tips For Our Forums
Has TSS helped you?
If so, why not help us.
Pledge your support.
New Scientific Anglers
System 4 Reels
Made in the USA!
Stream Flow Data
Moon Phase Data
St Croix Fly Rods!
1900+ Fly Patterns
Double Handed Rods
Fly Fishing Accessories
Gear Bags & Luggage
Bob James Centrepin Reel - Model 2080
This area of the TSS has been developed to discuss the various issues effecting our fishery. This includes a wide arrary of topics from the environment to Zebra Mussels...discuss them all here.
by thompappr » Fri Apr 06, 2007 10:51 am
I think maybe one of the differences between you & me is that I happen to an 'active environmentalist', and you are an ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIVIST. There's a difference. Can you tell what it is, or do you have your head stuck too far up Al's ample behind? You just don't get it, bud. Neither he, nor his corrupt, worthless excuse for an environmental film, is worth my time. It is just this type of 'over the top', wacky environmentalism that ends up costing us a TON, while not doing anything to improve the situation. THINK!!!
by ArcticSnowMonkey » Fri Apr 06, 2007 7:25 pm
Nice post, Spey. Too bad some ignoramuses who obviously are not informed on this issue always have to chime in. There is OVERWHELMING consensus among the scientific community (those who work along principles NOT under any party lines) that climate change and global warming is occurring. In fact, in recent years some formerly outspoken critics of this issue have retracted their earlier stances and now fully acknowledge the facts. You don't see any folks doing it the other way around, though! It does seem Gore's message is getting out more and more. Heck, he's been nominated for a NOBEL PEACE PRIZE so I guess he's doing something right!
Also, we are in the midst of the SIXTH major mass extinction over the past 600 million years...and the ONLY one caused by non-natural causes (man). This also is scientific fact and not debateable (at least among the informed). In the other five mass extincitions, species diversity could rebound, albeit over millions of years, because the energy rich resources of the planet were still intact. In this case, a large portion of the earth's resources will already have been taken up by human activities. This is basic stuff from any current college biology text, such as the one I teach from.
My prediction? Man, along with about 99.9% of species, will be extinct within the next few centuries. Man will be gone (hopefully), but at least a few extreme environment bacteria or archaeobacteria (such as those along thermal vents in the ocean) will persist. From those, after many millions of years (still a blink in geologic time), more advanced life forms will again arise. From those, my hope (and prayer) is that the ones that end up with the biggest brains that time around will actually know how to use them to learn from past mistakes. Not feel good stuff there for most folks, but probably a much more likely scenario than one in which we will be here happily conducting our lives as we do now within the same timeframe at our current rate.
by thompappr » Fri Apr 06, 2007 9:44 pm
Genius - CONCENSUS IS FOR VOTING, NOT SCIENCE!! You people are mind-numbed robots! I would, however, fight to the death to see to it that you have the freedom to disagree with me. I wonder, somehow, if you would do the same for me.
by David Dornblaser » Fri Apr 06, 2007 9:51 pm
Well put. As I think back there was horrific debate, with scientists being put to death over the following issues:
the earth is round
the earth revolves around the sun
gravity is an universal force
I could go on, but with universal truths, there IS a consensus within the scientific community.
Perhaps you would like to persuade us on how the world's scientific community is wrong? Hmmm? I hear a lot of bitching and moaning but nothing that is persuasive. Persuade me that the world's scientific community is wrong and you are right.
- David Dornblaser
by amish-steel » Sat Apr 07, 2007 5:58 am
Frankly I'm surprised that anyone smart enough to catch a steelhead would believe that tripe. First, YES the climate is changing, NO man is not the cause. Solar activity!!!! they can be directly related to temp changes , but no way to make money from that. Did you read NASA repot of the temp monitoring satellites they but up 30 yrs ago because of the global cooloing scare. no apppreachable change. it is 2 degress warmer around urban areas but 1 degree cooler else wher averaging no net change. Did the climate change before we had cars and factory's YES ever hear of an ice age. Even Biblically the World used to be allot more humid and warm. Hypocrate! I (Al Gore) tell you how to live and cut backon wht you use, but I use 20 times the electricity of a normal houshold. Don't you dare ask me to cut back and live like a NORMAL person. I'll buy carbon offsets so I feel better about myself. I am the mighty ALgore! Don't believe all this crap research it yourself and be informed, don't be a lamb lead to slaughter by someone who thinks he's better than you. They want our money to do studys, and could care less if we all burned to death tommorrow.
Later God bless
by thompappr » Sat Apr 07, 2007 9:39 am
Mr. Dornblaster - You stopped thinking as soon as you started to believe this tripe. NO ONE can do anything about that. And, for the LAST time, concensus is NOT SCIENCE!! Now go sit on your Al Gore DVD and flagellate yourself for being an evil American. I'm done with ya.
by kweetech » Sat Apr 07, 2007 10:08 am
lol...the people without facts, and only criticism of Gore are funny...
" I won't believe in global warming because Gore is a hypocrite"
Its not about gore...its about pollution, its about science...not politics
Get out of your fantasy worlds...
by David Dornblaser » Sat Apr 07, 2007 11:03 am
The movie was not on my must see list, I only viewed it recently. It was not what I was expecting, it was terrific. It was suprisingly non-political. It really is worth watching.
P.S. - I am not a Gore apologisits, I did not vote for Mr. Gore when he ran for Vice-President and President.
by David Dornblaser » Sat Apr 07, 2007 11:20 am
There is an article in the New York Times on-line that details the findings of a scientific group, United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and how global warming is effecting the environment and how species are adapting to it.
Unfortunately, you must be registered to be able to read the article, but registration is free. But I think that this link will work:
by LenHarris » Sat Apr 07, 2007 11:29 am
Some people hate gore
and can't see past that.
I saw the movie...
He was a little full of himself...
But the science is on his side and it is true.
It makes me sad to see so many people disagree with solid
by jbartiko » Sun Apr 08, 2007 12:41 am
I'll be brief 'cause I need my beauty sleep.
In the seventies, scientists as a group, were convinced that we were about to go into another Ice Age. They were 90% certain that we were going to have glaciers threatening civilization. That was thirty years ago and now they are equally certain that we are experiencing global warming.
It's a cycle that is bigger than the scientists can figure out. But please explain this. If the polar ice caps on Mars are melting at the same rate as the ice caps on earth, do you think maybe it could be a solar event.
In any case, I would like a little global warming about now. It has been eight degrees for the overnight lows the last three nights and all the streams on the north shore of superior are re-freezing and the run is shut down before it started. I had to buy a WI license so I could drift and I had to wade through ten inches of white fluffy stuff that wasn't melting.
I recently read a book about vikings to my son and it described Greenland as having had Viking colonies on it and they grew crops and raised livestock on Greenland until it became too COLD and inhospittable for them and they left. Sounds like a cycle to me.
Let me know when you guys get it all sorted out. I'm going to bed so I can get up in time tomorrow.
By the way, you guys were really funny, I laughed out loud through most of your entries. The serious ones were as funny as the humorous ones, but that's because I'm not buying it yet. Did I say it was just a cycle?
by Parrish » Sun Apr 08, 2007 8:30 am
As a brand new member I must say I am a tad dissapointed in the tone displayed here.I am a teacher,and this thread reminds me of some of the childish arguments and crude comments I here in the halls.YES.....I know,"If you don't like it,leave".I probably will,so relax.
As an aside,when I graduated from college in the early 70's ,all the scientists warned we were entering another ice age.Additionally they said we would be going to a four -day work week,and that we would soon be living in a paperless society.Not to mention the Y2K dissaster that would reach Biblical proportions.Al Gore....the inventor of the web,and the man who owns three huge estates that consume more energy than an estimated 20 normal homes.Yep...he's my pick for an "expert".But wait;Al buys "carbon credits".That means he pays some kid in Brazil to plant a tree in his name,to ease is conscience.Now there's the answer....carbon credits".My hero.
Did I mention the experts said,by 1985 ,all homes would be solar powered?
by ArcticSnowMonkey » Sun Apr 08, 2007 11:08 am
Obviously you're not a science teacher...or if you are you're a bad one. "All the scientists said" and overwhelming consensus among peer reviewed credible scientists are not equally weighted...you should know that. For example, show me something (an actual REFERENCE) that states that the consensus among the peer reviewed scientific community was that by 1985 all home would be solar powered?!
Again, I hope you're not a science teacher...and if you are PLEASE update yourself regarding the scientific process before setting out to teach our children.
by Eggsniffer » Sun Apr 08, 2007 1:25 pm
why the personal attacks on those that disagree? Science once had a consensus on the flatness of the earth.
anyone hear ever read about Kuhn's paradigm shift? I mentioned it on another thread. "consensus" is everchanging, and in our modern lives "consensus" follows grant money, and grant money flows from...
by David Dornblaser » Sun Apr 08, 2007 5:54 pm
Yes, an ice age is one of the possible consequences of global warming. All previous ice ages have been preceeded by warm spells. Melting ice turns off the gulfstream when fresh water changes the salinity of the water. With the gulfstream disrupted, so too, are it's warming effects on Northern Europe and America (and Asia).
Yes, there are cycles. The cycles are important to recgonize as the changes the environment over the last 20 - 30 have been unprecedented in history. The changes to the environment also impact, negatively, the cycles.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests
Bleeding Prawn Collection
Steelhead/Salmon New Traditionals
Steelhead Alley Collection
Steelhead/Salmon Marabou Collection
Steelhead/Salmon Essentials Collection
Steelhead/Salmon Signature Series Collection
Steelhead/Salmon Extreme Collection
All Fly Collections