EnviroLink Forum

Community • Ecology • Connection
It is currently Thu Nov 20, 2014 10:30 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 164 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 23, 2006 11:05 pm 
Quote:
Because they did not preface hunting with "trophy" in the relation of a common defense it changes the "focus" of the article?


Wow. Another big belch of gas in the middle of what could have been an adequate sentence. "In the relation of a common defense"? "They"?

Are YOU focused here, Wayne?

I noted that the author of the article made statements about hunting in general. Sure...he started his own gas attack by citing the sub-category of hunters called "trophy hunters". That doesn't mean the "focus" of the article was trophy hunters...and it certainly doesn't mean that hunting in general was an irrelvancy.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 23, 2006 11:06 pm 
Wayne Stollings wrote:
focus[1]
(noun) 5 a : a center of activity, attraction, or attention <the focus of the meeting was drug abuse>; b : a point of concentration


Yeah yeah...we've seen your pointing trick. And I once saw a horse that could do math problems by stamping with his hoof.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 23, 2006 11:11 pm 
Quote:
Trophy hunters argue that hunting is a natural instinct of man. We come from a hunter-gathering background they say, yet I don’t see any acorn or root gathering going on. In fact, I don’t think there is a single gathering club in the country. So, if hunting is a natural part of our instincts, then how come gathering isn’t?


I suppose if the author had wrote "Tennis players argue that hunting is a natural instinct of man"...anything except batting a ball back and forth across a net would have been irrelevant.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 7:44 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20577
Location: Southeastern US
RF wrote:
Quote:
Trophy hunters argue that hunting is a natural instinct of man. We come from a hunter-gathering background they say, yet I don’t see any acorn or root gathering going on. In fact, I don’t think there is a single gathering club in the country. So, if hunting is a natural part of our instincts, then how come gathering isn’t?


I suppose if the author had wrote "Tennis players argue that hunting is a natural instinct of man"...anything except batting a ball back and forth across a net would have been irrelevant.


What has this to do with anything? Are you trying to imply someone stated a post was irrelevant? Or are you just being your "witty" self and going off on yet another illogical tangent?

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 7:53 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20577
Location: Southeastern US
RF wrote:
Quote:
Because they did not preface hunting with "trophy" in the relation of a common defense it changes the "focus" of the article?


Wow. Another big belch of gas in the middle of what could have been an adequate sentence. "In the relation of a common defense"? "They"?


Sorry I forgot your lack of retention of context. We were discussing the statement made by trophy hunters (remember that?) and when I said "they" it was in relation to those very same trophy hunters. The "common defense" was the statement you posted earlier (remember that?) where it stated the trophy hunters used the instinct reference to defend their (trophy hunters again don't want you getting lost again) sport.

Quote:
Are YOU focused here, Wayne?


More so than you appear to be. Having to repeat oneself over an over again because you are too ignorant or wish to play that you are too ignorant to follow the context is tiresome though.

Quote:
I noted that the author of the article made statements about hunting in general. Sure...he started his own gas attack by citing the sub-category of hunters called "trophy hunters". That doesn't mean the "focus" of the article was trophy hunters...and it certainly doesn't mean that hunting in general was an irrelvancy.


So the number of times trophy hunting/hunters was mentioned has nothing to do with focus of the article but what RF believes does make it so? My what an over inflated ego you must have that you can make such determinations for the mindsets of others regardless of the evidence in hand.

Why was there such a problem with the Sierra club sponsoring a trophy hunt as a prize then? Why was there such a problem with the trophy pictures being posted? Trophy hunting was a big problem in the article and was significantly related to the focus, which was not hunting as Donnie claimed. The primary focus was the problem with the Sierra Club in relation to their position on trophy hunting and the apparent oxymoron in the mind of the author, which is why few of the posts were related to that focus.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Last edited by Wayne Stollings on Mon Apr 24, 2006 8:33 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 7:55 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20577
Location: Southeastern US
RF wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
focus[1]
(noun) 5 a : a center of activity, attraction, or attention <the focus of the meeting was drug abuse>; b : a point of concentration


Yeah yeah...we've seen your pointing trick. And I once saw a horse that could do math problems by stamping with his hoof.


Still upset because the horse was better at counting than you were perhaps?

What does a horse beating you in counting have to do with the definition of "focus" that you also did not seem to know?

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 8:32 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 5:13 pm
Posts: 7957
Location: Cape Breton Npva Scotia
Wayne Stollings wrote:
RF wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
focus[1]
(noun) 5 a : a center of activity, attraction, or attention <the focus of the meeting was drug abuse>; b : a point of concentration


Yeah yeah...we've seen your pointing trick. And I once saw a horse that could do math problems by stamping with his hoof.


Still upset because the horse was better at counting than you were perhaps?

What does a horse beating you in counting have to do with the definition of "focus" that you also did not seem to know?



Why would you assume that RF was upset that a horse could stamp out a math answer or that the horse was more accurate Wayne. I tought you were trying to erase such assumptions from the board. RF didn't even indicate the answers were correct by human standards BUT you are ASSUMING they were. :shock: .

_________________
I use red, not because of anger but to define my posts to catch rebuttals latter and it makes the quote feature redundent for me. The rest of you pick your own color.

Life is a time capsule we strive to fill with precious memories.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 8:36 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 5:13 pm
Posts: 7957
Location: Cape Breton Npva Scotia
Wayne Stollings wrote:
RF wrote:
Quote:
Trophy hunters argue that hunting is a natural instinct of man. We come from a hunter-gathering background they say, yet I don’t see any acorn or root gathering going on. In fact, I don’t think there is a single gathering club in the country. So, if hunting is a natural part of our instincts, then how come gathering isn’t?


I suppose if the author had wrote "Tennis players argue that hunting is a natural instinct of man"...anything except batting a ball back and forth across a net would have been irrelevant.


What has this to do with anything? Are you trying to imply someone stated a post was irrelevant? Or are you just being your "witty" self and going off on yet another illogical tangent?





The relevancy is that the AUTHOR put those words in the mouth of trophy hunters not that all of the hunters or even trophy hunters stated those purposes themselves. That isn't a hard point to grasp Wayne.

_________________
I use red, not because of anger but to define my posts to catch rebuttals latter and it makes the quote feature redundent for me. The rest of you pick your own color.

Life is a time capsule we strive to fill with precious memories.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 8:36 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20577
Location: Southeastern US
Donnie Mac Leod wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
RF wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
focus[1]
(noun) 5 a : a center of activity, attraction, or attention <the focus of the meeting was drug abuse>; b : a point of concentration


Yeah yeah...we've seen your pointing trick. And I once saw a horse that could do math problems by stamping with his hoof.


Still upset because the horse was better at counting than you were perhaps?

What does a horse beating you in counting have to do with the definition of "focus" that you also did not seem to know?



Why would you assume that RF was upset that a horse could stamp out a math answer or that the horse was more accurate Wayne. I tought you were trying to erase such assumptions from the board. RF didn't even indicate the answers were correct by human standards BUT you are ASSUMING they were. :shock: .


Asking a question is not making an assumption, but it is asking for clarification. Since it seemed to be a significant event for RF and given the history it could be a reason. What does "correct by human standards" mean in relation to counting? Are you trying to say the animals have a different base numeral system?

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 8:40 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 5:13 pm
Posts: 7957
Location: Cape Breton Npva Scotia
Except you completed you assumption and quatified it with perhaps. The point being you imade the structure appear as RF lost to the horse and that is what upset him perhaps. Not a hard thing to admitt you assume that nobdy would notice that slight of words Wayne,we being so stupid and all.

_________________
I use red, not because of anger but to define my posts to catch rebuttals latter and it makes the quote feature redundent for me. The rest of you pick your own color.

Life is a time capsule we strive to fill with precious memories.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 8:42 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20577
Location: Southeastern US
Donnie Mac Leod wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
RF wrote:
Quote:
Trophy hunters argue that hunting is a natural instinct of man. We come from a hunter-gathering background they say, yet I don’t see any acorn or root gathering going on. In fact, I don’t think there is a single gathering club in the country. So, if hunting is a natural part of our instincts, then how come gathering isn’t?


I suppose if the author had wrote "Tennis players argue that hunting is a natural instinct of man"...anything except batting a ball back and forth across a net would have been irrelevant.


What has this to do with anything? Are you trying to imply someone stated a post was irrelevant? Or are you just being your "witty" self and going off on yet another illogical tangent?





The relevancy is that the AUTHOR put those words in the mouth of trophy hunters not that all of the hunters or even trophy hunters stated those purposes themselves. That isn't a hard point to grasp Wayne.


So you are saying this is NOT the common defense for trophy hunters then? That would be the common usage for the phrase "putting words in the mouth of" instead of claiming it was an absolute where all hunters or even all trophy hunters are included or excluded. It is hard to grasp how severely this statement can be twisted in order to make it seem to be something different than what it was .. a statement of the general defense.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 8:42 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 5:13 pm
Posts: 7957
Location: Cape Breton Npva Scotia
Wayne Stollings wrote:
Donnie Mac Leod wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
RF wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
focus[1]
(noun) 5 a : a center of activity, attraction, or attention <the focus of the meeting was drug abuse>; b : a point of concentration


Yeah yeah...we've seen your pointing trick. And I once saw a horse that could do math problems by stamping with his hoof.


Still upset because the horse was better at counting than you were perhaps?

What does a horse beating you in counting have to do with the definition of "focus" that you also did not seem to know?



Why would you assume that RF was upset that a horse could stamp out a math answer or that the horse was more accurate Wayne. I tought you were trying to erase such assumptions from the board. RF didn't even indicate the answers were correct by human standards BUT you are ASSUMING they were. :shock: .


Asking a question is not making an assumption, but it is asking for clarification. Since it seemed to be a significant event for RF and given the history it could be a reason. What does "correct by human standards" mean in relation to counting? Are you trying to say the animals have a different base numeral system?



I do thin k they have a different standard of coun ting then humans Wayne. I think they say," I will have an ear of corn, and now i will have another , and now another ,and now an other." Are you keeping up Wayne???.

_________________
I use red, not because of anger but to define my posts to catch rebuttals latter and it makes the quote feature redundent for me. The rest of you pick your own color.

Life is a time capsule we strive to fill with precious memories.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 8:46 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20577
Location: Southeastern US
Donnie Mac Leod wrote:
Except you completed you assumption and quatified it with perhaps. The point being you imade the structure appear as RF lost to the horse and that is what upset him perhaps. Not a hard thing to admitt you assume that nobdy would notice that slight of words Wayne,we being so stupid and all.


The use of "perhaps" would not 'complete an assumption' nor would it be 'quatified' ... I am not sure what that even is supposed to mean. I did ask the question, but the level of stupidity is your own construct as I assumed nothing.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 8:49 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20577
Location: Southeastern US
Donnie Mac Leod wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
Donnie Mac Leod wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
RF wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
focus[1]
(noun) 5 a : a center of activity, attraction, or attention <the focus of the meeting was drug abuse>; b : a point of concentration


Yeah yeah...we've seen your pointing trick. And I once saw a horse that could do math problems by stamping with his hoof.


Still upset because the horse was better at counting than you were perhaps?

What does a horse beating you in counting have to do with the definition of "focus" that you also did not seem to know?



Why would you assume that RF was upset that a horse could stamp out a math answer or that the horse was more accurate Wayne. I tought you were trying to erase such assumptions from the board. RF didn't even indicate the answers were correct by human standards BUT you are ASSUMING they were. :shock: .


Asking a question is not making an assumption, but it is asking for clarification. Since it seemed to be a significant event for RF and given the history it could be a reason. What does "correct by human standards" mean in relation to counting? Are you trying to say the animals have a different base numeral system?



I do thin k they have a different standard of coun ting then humans Wayne. I think they say," I will have an ear of corn, and now i will have another , and now another ,and now an other." Are you keeping up Wayne???.


No, it does not make any sense at this point. You believe horses count but do not keep that count? Eating more is not generally considered to be counting, unless you also believe there is some intelligent planning in that eating process too. That seems to be an oxymoron in the making.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 8:53 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 5:13 pm
Posts: 7957
Location: Cape Breton Npva Scotia
Wayne Stollings wrote:
Donnie Mac Leod wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
RF wrote:
Quote:
Trophy hunters argue that hunting is a natural instinct of man. We come from a hunter-gathering background they say, yet I don’t see any acorn or root gathering going on. In fact, I don’t think there is a single gathering club in the country. So, if hunting is a natural part of our instincts, then how come gathering isn’t?



RF

Quote:
I suppose if the author had wrote "Tennis players argue that hunting is a natural instinct of man"...anything except batting a ball back and forth across a net would have been irrelevant.

What has this to do with anything? Are you trying to imply someone stated a post was irrelevant? Or are you just being your "witty" self and going off on yet another illogical tangent?




Donnie
Quote:
The relevancy is that the AUTHOR put those words in the mouth of trophy hunters not that all of the hunters or even trophy hunters stated those purposes themselves. That isn't a hard point to grasp Wayne.



Wayne
Quote:
So you are saying this is NOT the common defense for trophy hunters then?


Seems that is the message Watson wanted to give . I already noted their are many reasons that hunters hunt and meat alone could be the throphy . RF also pointed out that point but you wish to pretend the AUTHOR reflection is irrelevant as it suits you and yet relevant now.



Wayne
Quote:
That would be the common usage for the phrase "putting words in the mouth of" instead of claiming it was an absolute where all hunters or even all trophy hunters are included or excluded. It is hard to grasp how severely this statement can be twisted in order to make it seem to be something different than what it was .. a statement of the general defense.



Or more importantly as implied by Watson, a point that supports a straw man fallacy that he is building.

_________________
I use red, not because of anger but to define my posts to catch rebuttals latter and it makes the quote feature redundent for me. The rest of you pick your own color.

Life is a time capsule we strive to fill with precious memories.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 164 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 12 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group