Why You Dont Collect

Dedicated exclusively to field herping.

Moderator: Scott Waters

User avatar
Jeroen Speybroeck
Posts: 825
Joined: June 29th, 2011, 12:56 am
Location: Belgium
Contact:

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by Jeroen Speybroeck » December 10th, 2016, 5:27 am

Regardless of opinions, I for one have given up on arguing with Ernie because he seems unable to state facts without an overload of arrogance, subjectivity and rudeness. It has made me reluctant to participate in any of this (interesting) type of discussions, and even in the forum as a whole. For the sake of FHF, I can only hope I am an exception.

User avatar
WSTREPS
Posts: 485
Joined: June 9th, 2010, 3:03 pm

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by WSTREPS » December 10th, 2016, 8:21 am

Rather then sort thru the silly meanderings made in response to my post on a complete point by point basis. It is not an interesting endeavor. Ill let the general silliness of those responses speak for themselves.

'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

Facts involving the Timber rattlesnake extortionist that tried to push for a cites listing.

What the "big wig " Rattlesnake scientist claimed (lied about), the whole premise for the listing was centered on them trying to convince the Cites convention that collection (poaching) of the Timber rattlesnake was a serious and viable threat to the species survival, the same bullshit they try to pass off on everyone. A formulamatic (is that a word? It is today) approach that is repeatedly copied by other biologist seeking to gain traction for their pet projects.
Given the current status and biological characteristics of C. horridus, especially in the Northeast and Upper Midwest, it is likely that collecting this species from the wild for international commercial trade could have a detrimental impact on the species by either exceeding, over an extended period, the level that can be continued in perpetuity, or reducing it to a population level at which its survival could be threatened by other influences. This situation meets the criteria of Resolution Conf. 9.24, Annex 2a, for inclusion in Appendix II under the provisions of Article II (a).


The domestic market does not hold much hope for men with hooks and snakebite-proof boots, but what about the "lucrative export market," we are warned has an even higher dollar per pound value than cocaine?  Surely selling rattlesnakes abroad is where the real money is.

According to Robert Onda, Supervisory Wildlife Inspector of the USFWS at Kennedy Airport. With Kennedy the world's largest gateway to the European frontier, and sitting square in the middle of the timber rattlesnake populations of New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania (where it is still legal to collect them), surely he would have some insight.  Here is Mr. Onda's "damning evidence" against the pet trade, Mr Onda's testimony :

Onda....."Rattlesnakes...exported? Negligible. So few in fact, I can't remember the last shipment. We don't see them much any more these days.

Hardly ever see them. Any rattlesnakes, I can't remember the last time I saw a docket."

And so the world's largest port of entry can't even remember the last shipment, so few rattlesnakes go out


The world's largest dealer in venomous snakes (at the time) said , they would certainly have sent a few timber rattlesnakes overseas. Uh...maybe 100...in the last five years, only about 25 per year, that's all.  Mostly captive born. 

All the export numbers can be checked and validated, all the details found. And they were. The scientific rattlesnake extortionist were just to dumb to see that coming. They were so impressed with their own ability to bamboozle everyone.

Ernie Eison

MonarchzMan
Posts: 341
Joined: September 8th, 2011, 5:12 pm
Location: Oxford, MS

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by MonarchzMan » December 10th, 2016, 8:58 am

Jeroen Speybroeck wrote:Regardless of opinions, I for one have given up on arguing with Ernie because he seems unable to state facts without an overload of arrogance, subjectivity and rudeness. It has made me reluctant to participate in any of this (interesting) type of discussions, and even in the forum as a whole. For the sake of FHF, I can only hope I am an exception.
While I'd generally agree, I feel it's important to call out people like Ernie out for not representing the values of this hobby. Silence is tacit acceptance, IMO.
WSTREPS wrote:Rather then sort thru the silly meanderings made in response to my post on a complete point by point basis. It is not an interesting endeavor. Ill let the general silliness of those responses speak for themselves.
Ignoring my points does not invalidate them. And honestly, only supports my position and demeans yours since you're unable to refute my points.
Facts involving the Timber rattlesnake extortionist that tried to push for a cites listing.

What the "big wig " Rattlesnake scientist claimed (lied about), the whole premise for the listing was centered on them trying to convince the Cites convention that collection (poaching) of the Timber rattlesnake was a serious and viable threat to the species survival, the same bullshit they try to pass off on everyone. A formulamatic (is that a word? It is today) approach that is repeatedly copied by other biologist seeking to gain traction for their pet projects.
Given the current status and biological characteristics of C. horridus, especially in the Northeast and Upper Midwest, it is likely that collecting this species from the wild for international commercial trade could have a detrimental impact on the species by either exceeding, over an extended period, the level that can be continued in perpetuity, or reducing it to a population level at which its survival could be threatened by other influences. This situation meets the criteria of Resolution Conf. 9.24, Annex 2a, for inclusion in Appendix II under the provisions of Article II (a).
You're ignoring a number of reasons that were made (16 years ago, I'll note) to include the Timber Rattlesnake as being CITES listed. Human exploitation, which included collection, persecution, and road mortality, was the third reason to include it. You're making it out to seem like it was the only reason, but it wasn't. And those big wigs have more credibility in their statements than you do. Period. No one in the CITES committee will take seriously any point you make, but someone who has spent their careers studying the animals of note? Yea, that holds weight.
The domestic market does not hold much hope for men with hooks and snakebite-proof boots, but what about the "lucrative export market," we are warned has an even higher dollar per pound value than cocaine?  Surely selling rattlesnakes abroad is where the real money is.

According to Robert Onda, Supervisory Wildlife Inspector of the USFWS at Kennedy Airport. With Kennedy the world's largest gateway to the European frontier, and sitting square in the middle of the timber rattlesnake populations of New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania (where it is still legal to collect them), surely he would have some insight.  Here is Mr. Onda's "damning evidence" against the pet trade, Mr Onda's testimony :

Onda....."Rattlesnakes...exported? Negligible. So few in fact, I can't remember the last shipment. We don't see them much any more these days.

Hardly ever see them. Any rattlesnakes, I can't remember the last time I saw a docket."

And so the world's largest port of entry can't even remember the last shipment, so few rattlesnakes go out
You know, for one, if you're going to copy and paste something, you ought to quote it and provide a link. Then people can see that you got it off of one random page on a random serpentarium. Also, hardly a scientific source.

The world's largest dealer in venomous snakes (at the time) said , they would certainly have sent a few timber rattlesnakes overseas. Uh...maybe 100...in the last five years, only about 25 per year, that's all.  Mostly captive born. 

All the export numbers can be checked and validated, all the details found. And they were. The scientific rattlesnake extortionist were just to dumb to see that coming. They were so impressed with their own ability to bamboozle everyone.

Ernie Eison
Again, you are making it sound like the sole basis for listing was because of collection, but that's not the case. There was plenty of scientific backing behind their conclusions. You've not provided any to support your position. You're completely biased because collection restrictions would negatively impact the bottom dollar of the pet trade. You're really not qualified to talk about science. Stick to keeping snakes in tupperware.

stlouisdude
Posts: 412
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 7:30 pm
Location: St Louis, MO / Hartford, CT

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by stlouisdude » December 10th, 2016, 8:59 am

I think the reason people, including myself for most of my life, psychologically wanted poaching of reptiles to be a problem because it's something that could then just be fixed without any lifestyle changes. In other words, I wouldn't have to change a single thing and the problem would be done with. Plus it fits the familiar theme of poaching of certain mammal species.

It took years of hard proof being shoved in my face before I finally admitted that in order for the decline of reptiles to stop, the boogeyman poacher must stop being sought after. We have to admit there are too many people, too many roads, too many shopping malls spread out all over the place. We cannot solve a problem by ignoring the root cause and focusing our efforts on side shows. It's kind of like trying to treat cancer by focusing on the patients cough. All the attention given to boogeymen poachers is taking attention and focus away from the root cause of decline.

MonarchzMan
Posts: 341
Joined: September 8th, 2011, 5:12 pm
Location: Oxford, MS

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by MonarchzMan » December 10th, 2016, 9:12 am

stlouisdude wrote:I think the reason people, including myself for most of my life, psychologically wanted poaching of reptiles to be a problem because it's something that could then just be fixed without any lifestyle changes. In other words, I wouldn't have to change a single thing and the problem would be done with. Plus it fits the familiar theme of poaching of certain mammal species.

It took years of hard proof being shoved in my face before I finally admitted that in order for the decline of reptiles to stop, the boogeyman poacher must stop being sought after. We have to admit there are too many people, too many roads, too many shopping malls spread out all over the place. We cannot solve a problem by ignoring the root cause and focusing our efforts on side shows. It's kind of like trying to treat cancer by focusing on the patients cough. All the attention given to boogeymen poachers is taking attention and focus away from the root cause of decline.
There are a number of reasons that cause declines, and collection, while less impactful than other causes such as habitat destruction and fragmentation, and for species like many rattlesnakes which have common hibernacula that can very easily be exploited (and in a number of documented cases, are), collection should be seriously considered for the protection and conservation of a species. It is easy to target a den or a breeding pond and have a massive impact on the local population.

User avatar
mtratcliffe
Posts: 533
Joined: January 19th, 2014, 4:34 pm
Location: Springfield, VA

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by mtratcliffe » December 10th, 2016, 9:25 am

Jeroen Speybroeck wrote:Regardless of opinions, I for one have given up on arguing with Ernie because he seems unable to state facts without an overload of arrogance, subjectivity and rudeness. It has made me reluctant to participate in any of this (interesting) type of discussions, and even in the forum as a whole. For the sake of FHF, I can only hope I am an exception.
Don't feel bad. Ernie is basically nothing but a troll at this point. He never posts anything Field Herping related, but only posts to stir controversy with wild claims.

User avatar
WSTREPS
Posts: 485
Joined: June 9th, 2010, 3:03 pm

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by WSTREPS » December 10th, 2016, 12:07 pm

You're ignoring a number of reasons that were made (16 years ago, I'll note) to include the Timber Rattlesnake as being CITES listed. Human exploitation, which included collection, persecution, and road mortality, was the third reason to include it. You're making it out to seem like it was the only reason, but it wasn't. And those big wigs have more credibility in their statements than you do. Period. No one in the CITES committee will take seriously any point you make, but someone who has spent their careers studying the animals of note? Yea, that holds weight.

Again, you are making it sound like the sole basis for listing was because of collection, but that's not the case. There was plenty of scientific backing behind their conclusions. You've not provided any to support your position. You're completely biased because collection restrictions would negatively impact the bottom dollar of the pet trade. You're really not qualified to talk about science. Stick to keeping snakes in tupperware.

Wow some real zinger's courtesy of the MonarchzMan .......... CITES (the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora)

Again MonarchzMans lack of background and poor understanding of the matter betrays him, all potential threats real or imagined are listed and considered when assessing the impacts of collection for international commercial usage (they always are), However the purpose of the CITES convention is to monitor , control, regulate the commercial trade in wildlife and wildlife products. Species are listed based on potential and or current international commercial usage. All species listed or not are required to have CITES documentation for international transport. This way when a proposal for a new listing is submitted. The committee will have all the most accurate and confirmed data on hand to make their assessment, no guesswork.

The rattlesnake scientist involved made a profound effort to make it appear as if the Timber rattlesnakes were being jeopardized by commercial collection for the international pet trade, a falsehood they constantly harp on. It was the focal point of their proposal. Proving this was the only way they could get the Timber rattlesnake listed. The demonstrable facts as gathered by the CITES committee proved them to be liars.
No one in the CITES committee will take any point you make seriously
Is that a fact a now? Well one thing is for sure that bogus Timber rattlesnake proposal got tossed out , along with Bill Browns C- third grade biology report. Probably the best work Bill ever did.
You know, for one, if you're going to copy and paste something, you ought to quote it and provide a link. Then people can see that you got it off of one random page on a random serpentarium. Also, hardly a scientific source.


Again your out of touch, its paraphrased not quoted, the link has been posted multiple times in the past. Yep , Just some random serpentarium. Hardly a scientific source. Maybe you should go back to your vanishing frogs. For the frogs sake I hope your more up to speed in that department.


I asked MonarchzMan the following simple question ,
Can you tell us about all the rattlesnake research you have done. How much you have read? How familiar you are with the people and research involved with these animals. All the stuff I covered in other post. I want to hear this stuff from someone who knows what their talking about, Since I don't.
MonarchzMans answer , "I don't need to be an expert in rattlesnake biology to understand basic, and I do mean basic, population genetics. "

That answer means No, he has no actual experience or background with the species discussed. He cannot state an informed opinion. But wont admit that so he try's to put his own spin everything to save face. With all MonarchzMans qualifications, huffing and puffing, assertions etc. The one thing he has certainly proven is .............he doesn't have enough education to admit when he's wrong.

Ernie Eison

MonarchzMan
Posts: 341
Joined: September 8th, 2011, 5:12 pm
Location: Oxford, MS

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by MonarchzMan » December 10th, 2016, 12:28 pm

WSTREPS wrote:Wow some real zinger's courtesy of the MonarchzMan .......... CITES (the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora)

Again MonarchzMans lack of background and poor understanding of the matter betrays him, all potential threats real or imagined are listed and considered when assessing the impacts of collection for international commercial usage (they always are), However the purpose of the CITES convention is to monitor , control, regulate the commercial trade in wildlife and wildlife products. Species are listed based on potential and or current international commercial usage. All species listed or not are required to have CITES documentation for international transport. This way when a proposal for a new listing is submitted. The committee will have all the most accurate and confirmed data on hand to make their assessment, no guesswork.

The rattlesnake scientist involved made a profound effort to make it appear as if the Timber rattlesnakes were being jeopardized by commercial collection for the international pet trade, a falsehood they constantly harp on. It was the focal point of their proposal. Proving this was the only way they could get the Timber rattlesnake listed. The demonstrable facts as gathered by the CITES committee proved them to be liars.
No, they don't harp on it. They mention that dens are particularly vulnerable to collection (with records of dens being wiped out by collectors), and coupled with the other threats facing the species, trade could be detrimental to the species. They make a valid argument. I would expect someone who depends on collecting animals from the wild to disagree with these statements.
Is that a fact a now? Well one thing is for sure that bogus Timber rattlesnake proposal got tossed out , along with Bill Browns C- third grade biology report. Probably the best work Bill ever did.
Sounds like it was miles ahead of anything you could put forth.
Again your out of touch, its paraphrased not quoted, the link has been posted multiple times in the past. Yep , Just some random serpentarium. Hardly a scientific source. Maybe you should go back to your vanishing frogs. For the frogs sake I hope your more up to speed in that department.
Because you can keep snakes alive and even get them to breed doesn't mean you have any clue what you're talking about when it comes to population genetics and conservation. I'll believe them when it comes to husbandry, but when it comes to conservation, I'll believe the people who have working their lives to it. You're just a hack who couldn't make it.
I asked MonarchzMan the following simple question ,
Can you tell us about all the rattlesnake research you have done. How much you have read? How familiar you are with the people and research involved with these animals. All the stuff I covered in other post. I want to hear this stuff from someone who knows what their talking about, Since I don't.
MonarchzMans answer , "I don't need to be an expert in rattlesnake biology to understand basic, and I do mean basic, population genetics. "

That answer means No, he has no actual experience or background with the species discussed. He cannot state an informed opinion. But wont admit that so he try's to put his own spin everything to save face. With all MonarchzMans qualifications, huffing and puffing, assertions etc. The one thing he has certainly proven is .............he doesn't have enough character or education to admit when he's wrong.

Ernie Eison
What experience do you have Ernie? You've been asked that a couple of times and have ignored it. I've worked on conservation projects and dealt with population genetics data. I can easily admit when I'm wrong, but I'm not in this case. It does not matter that I don't research rattlesnakes. Do you think that the people making decisions at CITES or the IUCN are rattlesnake researchers? Nope. Just like me, they're capable of using their experience on other species and apply it to the species at hand. I'm sorry that you can't seem to understand that. But then again, that explains my success and your lack of it.

MCHerper
Posts: 443
Joined: September 22nd, 2012, 5:13 pm

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by MCHerper » December 10th, 2016, 3:32 pm

Jeremy Wright wrote:
MCHerper wrote:an we at least tentatively agree that taking one or a few specimens from the wild where their numbers are plentiful and their populations are stable is not the same as taking large numbers of specimens from the wild in places where their populations are potentially threatened?
In theory yes, but if no one knows how many individuals are being collected we can not draw any conclusions. I used the example of Pseudacris cadaverina in the San Gabriel Mountains near me. These frogs are in every canyon, but I used to see 30-40 sometimes even on one rock. I hardly see 2 or more now. I'm not saying that this decrease is entirely due to collecting which I have witnessed on many occasions, I'm just saying that we can conclude the collection was a factor in the decrease of the population.
There are increasingly more collectors and trade in the reptile / herpeculture industry as habitats are decreasing significantly worldwide, chytrid continues to wreak havoc on amphibians, and climate change alters the living styles of many organisms. If we want herps to be around for our children, grandchildren, and further on I think limiting our private collecting to a minimum and changing the attitudes of many is a big step in the right direction. I'm sure there are enough of the legal species for take in people's collections that captive breeding could created CB stock for most of these animals, and that would be ideal in my opinion.

I understand that many will think I'm an anti-collection advocate, but I used to legally collect and have owned wild herps, especially when I was younger. At least where I am in Socal, year after year you see more people out in spots herping, more road cruisers, and less and less pristine habitat. :?
-Jeremy
Sorry, my post was meant to be more of a centrist but common-sense approach to viewing this. I actually do not collect nor do I encourage it, I suppose that the best summary of my point is that large-scale collecting and collecting of threatened populations disturbs me much more than a green frog taken away in a kid's pocket.

User avatar
WSTREPS
Posts: 485
Joined: June 9th, 2010, 3:03 pm

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by WSTREPS » December 10th, 2016, 4:07 pm

It does not matter that I don't research rattlesnakes. Do you think that the people making decisions at CITES or the IUCN are rattlesnake researchers? Nope. Just like me, they're capable of using their experience on other species and apply it to the species at hand.
No not like MonarchzMan. Unlike MonarchzMan the people making decisions at CITES or the IUCN read and critique, they carefully evaluate all the specific available data. They converse with a range of experts representing different fields. Then they make a determination after the proper due diligence has been preformed. Boy are they stupid. MonarchzMan admittedly without knowing anything about the species in question, doing the proper research, conferring with others comprising a diverse array of individual's and with no intimate knowledge involving the background and various claims. Boast great expertise over the subject. That's amazing. Why read , why study , why put in extensive field time, why preform the needed due diligence to have a well rounded educated species specific perspective. When MonarchzMan can just apply his clairvoyant wisdom to any biological situation and give you all the answers. Trust him he's right.
What experience do you have Ernie? You've been asked that a couple of times and have ignored it.
I ignore questions and accusations that I have fully addressed in the past.
Because you can keep snakes alive and even get them to breed doesn't mean you have any clue what you're talking about when it comes to population genetics and conservation. I'll believe them when it comes to husbandry, but when it comes to conservation, I'll believe the people who have working their lives to it. You're just a hack who couldn't make it.
So the guy who runs the Cape Fear serpentarium is what just a snake keeper with no scientific background, he just keeps snakes in boxes, he don't know nothin bout snakes in th wild and such, and I'm a hack who couldn't make it. Is that correct. Yeah, I'm a complete hack there's no way I could ever make it. What is it I was trying to make again?

Ernie Eison

MonarchzMan
Posts: 341
Joined: September 8th, 2011, 5:12 pm
Location: Oxford, MS

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by MonarchzMan » December 10th, 2016, 4:40 pm

WSTREPS wrote:
It does not matter that I don't research rattlesnakes. Do you think that the people making decisions at CITES or the IUCN are rattlesnake researchers? Nope. Just like me, they're capable of using their experience on other species and apply it to the species at hand.
No not like MonarchzMan. Unlike MonarchzMan the people making decisions at CITES or the IUCN read and critique, they carefully evaluate all the specific available data. They converse with a range of experts representing different fields. Then they make a determination after the proper due diligence has been preformed. Boy are they stupid. MonarchzMan admittedly without knowing anything about the species in question, doing the proper research, conferring with others comprising a diverse array of individual's and with no intimate knowledge involving the background and various claims. Boast great expertise over the subject. That's amazing. Why read , why study , why put in extensive field time, why preform the needed due diligence to have a well rounded educated species specific perspective. When MonarchzMan can just apply his clairvoyant wisdom to any biological situation and give you all the answers. Trust him he's right.
I never said I didn't know anything about the species in question. I said that I don't research rattlesnakes. That does not mean that I'm ignorant to research and threats facing those animals. And like I said, the people making those decisions can use their expertise on their species of interest and apply basic conservation concepts to unknown species. Undoubtedly, they consult the literature and experts in the field (i.e., clearly not you) to make a determination. And in my brief examination of the proposals, I find the arguments sound. But like I said, I don't need to have researched the snake for 20 years to understand the arguments they make.
What experience do you have Ernie? You've been asked that a couple of times and have ignored it.
I ignore questions and accusations that I have fully addressed in the past.
I'm sure that's a lie. We'll just say you don't know a damn about Timber Rattlesnakes or rattlesnakes in general, since you cannot prove anything otherwise. And we'll just say you don't actually know what constitutes good or bad science because you have no experience in it.
Because you can keep snakes alive and even get them to breed doesn't mean you have any clue what you're talking about when it comes to population genetics and conservation. I'll believe them when it comes to husbandry, but when it comes to conservation, I'll believe the people who have working their lives to it. You're just a hack who couldn't make it.
So the guy who runs the Cape Fear serpentarium is what just a snake keeper with no scientific background, he just keeps snakes in boxes, he don't know nothin bout snakes in th wild and such, and I'm a hack who couldn't make it. Is that correct. Yeah, I'm a complete hack there's no way I could ever make it. What is it I was trying to make again?

Ernie Eison
I see no evidence that the guy who runs Cape Fear Serpentarium has conducted science. He's caught stuff. He's bred stuff. And like I said, herpetoculturalists are invaluable for husbandry which can be very useful for breeding programs, but they have little practical experience conducting experiments or collecting empirical population-level data. That is no dig against them, just the truth. There are plenty of people that can go out and find a rattlesnake, but just because you can go find a rattlesnake doesn't mean you're an expert on rattlesnakes. Their experience and knowledge can even be very helpful in conducting experiments and observations, but that still doesn't make them experts or scientists themselves.

And yes, you're a hack.

User avatar
WSTREPS
Posts: 485
Joined: June 9th, 2010, 3:03 pm

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by WSTREPS » December 11th, 2016, 7:15 am

I ignore questions and accusations that I have fully addressed in the past.

I'm sure that's a lie. We'll just say you don't know a damn about Timber Rattlesnakes or rattlesnakes in general, since you cannot prove anything otherwise. And we'll just say you don't actually know what constitutes good or bad science because you have no experience in it.
I see, And your sure about all that ?
I never said I didn't know anything about the species in question. I said that I don't research rattlesnakes. That does not mean that I'm ignorant to research and threats facing those animals. And like I said, the people making those decisions can use their expertise on their species of interest and apply basic conservation concepts to unknown species. Undoubtedly, they consult the literature and experts in the field (i.e., clearly not you) to make a determination. And in my brief examination of the proposals, I find the arguments sound. But like I said, I don't need to have researched the snake for 20 years to understand the arguments they make.
When first asked about his rattlesnake knowledge MonarchzMan sidetracked the question.When put to MonarchzMan again he elaborated by saying, he doesn't research rattlesnakes. Now MonarchzMan is saying he's not ignorant about rattlesnake research.

Once again MonarchzMan points the fact that he doesn't need experience. He can briefly look at something as complicated as a CITES proposal. Then make a solid determination if its good or bad. MonarchzMans conclusion after a brief glancing over was that the Timber rattlesnake proposal was sound. But when the proposal was properly looked at and its scientific criteria examined and evaluated it was not sound, it was rejected.

MonarchzMan has done a fine job of illustrating a point I made earlier. Lets look,

The proposal met the criteria except for one thing, the reserchers own data proved them to be Liar's. BIG liars. Proposal Rejected. These clowns had gotten used to the idea that they could just show up and everyone was going to take their word for it. Why not, that's the way it usually work's. It must have been a big surprise to find out that the details of their data was going to be looked at and reviewed by someone who knows what their doing and wasn't there just to sign off on legislation or hand out funding.

Ernie Eison

And in my brief examination of the proposals, I find the arguments sound. But like I said, I don't need to have researched the snake for 20 years to understand the arguments they make.

MonarchzMan
In a nutshell. MonarchzMans mindset provides a shinning example of exactly how junk science thrives and proliferates, is excepted. Its a mindset shared by amateurs and professional's alike. A mindset that creates a snowball effect leading to the popular acceptance of lies and then building off of those lies.



Ernie Eison

stlouisdude
Posts: 412
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 7:30 pm
Location: St Louis, MO / Hartford, CT

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by stlouisdude » December 11th, 2016, 7:39 am

One thing I wanted to clarify if that I don't actually want anyone to go out and bag up a bunch of timbers, cut their rattles off, eat them, whatever else they may want to do with them. I just don't think it's a realistic threat. If that were the case, a lot of locations which still have timbers today would have run dry decades ago. Some dude grabbing a snake here and there is far different than bulldozing and dynamiting dens. As far as trade for pets go, I think it's a bad idea to take them and risk bringing in snake fungal disease. Personally, if I were going to keep one, I would certainly look for captive bred from someone who has not brought in fresh wild caught. So while I am not losing sleep worrying about it, I wouldn't touch a wc timber as a pet with a 10' pole.

MonarchzMan
Posts: 341
Joined: September 8th, 2011, 5:12 pm
Location: Oxford, MS

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by MonarchzMan » December 11th, 2016, 8:58 am

WSTREPS wrote:
I ignore questions and accusations that I have fully addressed in the past.

I'm sure that's a lie. We'll just say you don't know a damn about Timber Rattlesnakes or rattlesnakes in general, since you cannot prove anything otherwise. And we'll just say you don't actually know what constitutes good or bad science because you have no experience in it.
I see, And your sure about all that ?
Yep, given that you've not provided any proof to the contrary, I'm going to go with yea, pretty sure.
When first asked about his rattlesnake knowledge MonarchzMan sidetracked the question.When put to MonarchzMan again he elaborated by saying, he doesn't research rattlesnakes. Now MonarchzMan is saying he's not ignorant about rattlesnake research.
You do understand that nothing I've said is contradictory, right? One does not need to research rattlesnakes to have come across rattlesnake literature. And being experienced in conservation of other animals can be of benefit to understanding conservation of an animal with which one has not researched but is familiar with the literature and threats associated with that animal. You do understand that, right? Or are you really that dense?
Once again MonarchzMan points the fact that he doesn't need experience. He can briefly look at something as complicated as a CITES proposal. Then make a solid determination if its good or bad. MonarchzMans conclusion after a brief glancing over was that the Timber rattlesnake proposal was sound. But when the proposal was properly looked at and its scientific criteria examined and evaluated it was not sound, it was rejected.
Actually, it was withdrawn. The Spotted Turtle proposal in the same conference was rejected. But yea, I'm sure that the people pushing the Spotted Turtle listing were just a bunch of liars saying that Spotted Turtles aren't threatened at at risk of overcollection and trade.

I said that their concerns were sound. And they are, given the evidence they presented. You've not provided one iota of evidence to the contrary, but just said "this is junk science," "they're liars," "they're in it for the money," so on and so forth, even though you haven't, and quite clearly can't actually provide any evidence to back your position up. Why don't you just say that you come from a reptile farm that collected wild animals to sell, and that you're against collection because it would mean less in your wallet?
In a nutshell. MonarchzMans mindset provides a shinning example of exactly how junk science thrives and proliferates, is excepted. Its a mindset shared by amateurs and professional's alike. A mindset that creates a snowball effect leading to the popular acceptance of lies and then building off of those lies.

Ernie Eison
Prove that it's junk science. You've not done so. Given that your only credentials appear to be being able to sell animals, I don't think you could tell a good scientific proposal from a bad one. How many grant proposals have you read and decided on? How many manuscripts have you reviewed? I'm betting it's a big ol' goose egg on that one.
stlouisdude wrote:One thing I wanted to clarify if that I don't actually want anyone to go out and bag up a bunch of timbers, cut their rattles off, eat them, whatever else they may want to do with them. I just don't think it's a realistic threat. If that were the case, a lot of locations which still have timbers today would have run dry decades ago. Some dude grabbing a snake here and there is far different than bulldozing and dynamiting dens. As far as trade for pets go, I think it's a bad idea to take them and risk bringing in snake fungal disease. Personally, if I were going to keep one, I would certainly look for captive bred from someone who has not brought in fresh wild caught. So while I am not losing sleep worrying about it, I wouldn't touch a wc timber as a pet with a 10' pole.
The authors who brought up the Timber Rattlesnake for CITES listing point out published literature that states that there have been dens over-collected in the past, and as a result have been greatly reduced if not decimated, causing collections to other dens that would have been considered suboptimal. That's been recorded in the literature, so it is a reasonable threat. And the authors make the point that, particularly in the northeast, these relic populations probably cannot withstand collection pressure, in addition to the other threats they face.

In the heart of its territory, the species can probably sustain sustainable harvest, but in regions like the northeast, populations could easily be extirpated. The issue, as I see it, for Timbers is that their biology allowed them to be very easily over-exploited. And unlike what the hack seems to imply, CITES listing does not stop trade, but helps regulate it so that species cannot be over-exploited. There are a number of common species that are CITES listed. The Green Iguana is a CITES II species (same designation that was being sought for Timbers). And CITES would have no effect on domestic trade.

User avatar
Brian Hubbs
Posts: 4733
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 10:41 am
Location: "Buy My Books"-land

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by Brian Hubbs » December 19th, 2016, 8:49 am

I'd like to put all your little minds at ease with a prediction...
When Trump takes office he will destroy the environment in ways you've never imagined. Kiss the ESA goodbye, kiss your favorite herp spots goodbye, kiss any fragile eco-system goodbye. Trump's developer buddies are going to have a field day with our wild lands in the next 4 years that will make collecting rattlers seem like a vision of paradise... :shock:

condyle
Posts: 206
Joined: September 25th, 2010, 2:46 pm
Location: Santa Cruz ca

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by condyle » December 19th, 2016, 8:55 pm

Yep.......

craigb
Posts: 625
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 5:02 am
Location: Southern Cal.

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by craigb » December 19th, 2016, 10:21 pm

Well Brian I think you are wrong. But, only time will tell. In four years lets look at this post again.

I am just an angry white guy and this is how I have felt for the last eight years.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHzU-9iozmo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGcsIdGOuZY

I'm sorry if having my own opinion is not politically correct.

craig

User avatar
Brian Hubbs
Posts: 4733
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 10:41 am
Location: "Buy My Books"-land

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by Brian Hubbs » December 19th, 2016, 10:52 pm

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. I hope I'm wrong too...but, I would get out there and enjoy those urban wild places while you can. :thumb:

Of course, I'd be sick of it too if I listened to that noise. I prefer this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfdL62ss-vQ

craigb
Posts: 625
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 5:02 am
Location: Southern Cal.

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by craigb » December 20th, 2016, 6:05 am

No one knows what tomorrow holds. I have to agree with you on getting out there. It is never a bad idea to get out in wild places.

A simpler message: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMmTkKz60W8
craig

MonarchzMan
Posts: 341
Joined: September 8th, 2011, 5:12 pm
Location: Oxford, MS

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by MonarchzMan » December 20th, 2016, 6:20 am

Brian Hubbs wrote:I'd like to put all your little minds at ease with a prediction...
When Trump takes office he will destroy the environment in ways you've never imagined. Kiss the ESA goodbye, kiss your favorite herp spots goodbye, kiss any fragile eco-system goodbye. Trump's developer buddies are going to have a field day with our wild lands in the next 4 years that will make collecting rattlers seem like a vision of paradise... :shock:
Agreed. I don't think Trump has actually seen an oak tree before, so he's not going to place any value in it. None of his picks have any indication that they value American wild spaces. They just see unexploited resources they can utilize to make a quick buck.

craigb
Posts: 625
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 5:02 am
Location: Southern Cal.

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by craigb » December 20th, 2016, 7:18 am

Gloom and doom, gloom and doom, gloom and doom, gloom and doom, gloom and doom, gloom and doom, gloom and doom, gloom and doom,gloom and doom.


Wow, I can be a smart guy too.

Let's just bash the crap out of someone with lies, a month before they even start the job.

I am so tired of fake news.... This is just feces.

MonarchzMan
Posts: 341
Joined: September 8th, 2011, 5:12 pm
Location: Oxford, MS

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by MonarchzMan » December 20th, 2016, 8:37 am

craigb wrote:Gloom and doom, gloom and doom, gloom and doom, gloom and doom, gloom and doom, gloom and doom, gloom and doom, gloom and doom,gloom and doom.


Wow, I can be a smart guy too.

Let's just bash the crap out of someone with lies, a month before they even start the job.

I am so tired of fake news.... This is just feces.
And I'm so tired of reactionary politics. I'd rather not have to chain myself to the last tree in the Redwoods to protest what these people will do to the environment. I'd rather be proactive and stop it before they can even think of doing it. Because being proactive is the only way everything doesn't get screwed. Because at the end of the day, if I save that last redwood, those people still won because they destroyed everything else.

Show me one appointee who does not have a history of seeing nature in terms of money and how it can be exploited, and I'll reserve a little bit of hope that the dumpster fire won't burn out of control.

User avatar
WSTREPS
Posts: 485
Joined: June 9th, 2010, 3:03 pm

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by WSTREPS » December 20th, 2016, 9:12 am


However the purpose of the CITES convention is to monitor , control, regulate the commercial trade in wildlife and wildlife products. Species are listed based on potential and or current international commercial usage. All species listed or not are required to have CITES documentation for international transport. This way when a proposal for a new listing is submitted. The committee will have all the most accurate and confirmed data on hand to make their assessment, no guesswork. Ernie Eison

And unlike what the hack seems to imply, CITES listing does not stop trade, but helps regulate it so that species cannot be over-exploited. MonarchzMan
Compare the two statements , clearly I made a concise summary as to what the purpose of CITES is to clarify any misconceptions. MonarchzMans intentionally skewed interpretation of my words furthers the points I've been making.

To expand. The appendix 2 listing would not have stopped trade. So why then would the saintly Timber rattlesnake researcher's go thru so much trouble to try and get the species listed. I explained the reasoning in a past post. This is the readers digest version, The listing would have done NOTHING to relieve all the dangers real or imagined found listed in the proposal. The CITES listing would have had some major benefits for the interested party's, not so much for rattlesnake conservation.
You do understand that nothing I've said is contradictory, right? One does not need to research rattlesnakes to have come across rattlesnake literature. And being experienced in conservation of other animals can be of benefit to understanding conservation of an animal with which one has not researched but is familiar with the literature and threats associated with that animal. You do understand that, right? Or are you really that dense?
What is understood is that the further MonarchzMan was pushed into a corner by being called out for his lack of understanding on the topic. The more MonarchzMan tried to ad lib his "knowledge".

MonarchzMan should hit the French Guianese black market, pick up a few bottles of bootleg Adderall and pull an all nighter. Read everything he can google up. Then he can start posting like real internet expert.

The authors who brought up the Timber Rattlesnake for CITES listing point out published literature that states that there have been dens over-collected in the past, and as a result have been greatly reduced if not decimated, causing collections to other dens that would have been considered suboptimal. That's been recorded in the literature, so it is a reasonable threat. And the authors make the point that, particularly in the northeast, these relic populations probably cannot withstand collection pressure, in addition to the other threats they face.


That's the narrative (full of untruths) that's kept some rattlesnake gurus in grant money for close to 40 yrs. In past post I went over many aspects of timber rattlesnake biology, the gross misconceptions about what comprises a den, detailed historical data on collection, persecution, its cause and effects as well as personal information about some of the most historical figures involved with the species. Detailing and debunking the many myths perpetuated by popular (and most often regurgitated) published literature. By comparison MonarchzMan has offered cockamamie gems such as the following,
Collection does have effects on populations. For the most overt example, look at the rattle-less rattlesnakes that have evolved not to rattle because of over-collection from round ups.
Sheesh


Ernie Eison

User avatar
Bryan Hamilton
Posts: 1217
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 8:49 pm

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by Bryan Hamilton » December 20th, 2016, 9:55 am

Some new science relative to the vulnerability of northern populations of timber rattlesnakes to collection:
http://www.bioone.org/doi/abs/10.1655/H ... 16-00019.1

Brown, W. S. 2016. Lifetime Reproduction in a Northern Metapopulation of Timber Rattlesnakes (Crotalus horridus). Herpetologica 72:331-342.

I'll post on the reading room too. This is some really impressive detective work over 36 years!

MonarchzMan
Posts: 341
Joined: September 8th, 2011, 5:12 pm
Location: Oxford, MS

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by MonarchzMan » December 20th, 2016, 10:17 am

WSTREPS wrote:To expand. The appendix 2 listing would not have stopped trade. So why then would the saintly Timber rattlesnake researcher's go thru so much trouble to try and get the species listed. I explained the reasoning in a past post. This is the readers digest version, The listing would have done NOTHING to relieve all the dangers real or imagined found listed in the proposal. The CITES listing would have had some major benefits for the interested party's, not so much for rattlesnake conservation.
Because it would have regulated trade. Geez, are you really that dense? What benefit at all would be gained for the researchers? Do you not understand how academic research works? Seriously? With $5 and a CITES listing on my CV, I could buy a McDonald's breakfast.
What is understood is that the further MonarchzMan was pushed into a corner by being called out for his lack of understanding on the topic. The more MonarchzMan tried to ad lib his "knowledge".

MonarchzMan should hit the French Guianese black market, pick up a few bottles of bootleg Adderall and pull an all nighter. Read everything he can google up. Then he can start posting like real internet expert.
Dude, you don't really know what you're talking about. By your logic, anyone assessing, whether for listing in the ESA, CITES, or anything else, has to be to be an expert on rattlesnakes in order to assess threats to them, when that is not the case in the real world by any means. I have a background in genetic analysis on frogs. Does that mean that I'm not qualified to do genetic analysis on fish? No. The expertise is transferable, despite what you may think. Likewise, with conservation, you do not have to have done 20 years of research on an animal to be able to assess whether it's in need of protective measures.

You clearly lack any experience, however, in conservation, so you actually are clearly unqualified to make any statements regarding conservation measures. Just keep complaining about listing because it will affect your bottom line.

That's the narrative (full of untruths) that's kept some rattlesnake gurus in grant money for close to 40 yrs. In past post I went over many aspects of timber rattlesnake biology, the gross misconceptions about what comprises a den, detailed historical data on collection, persecution, its cause and effects as well as personal information about some of the most historical figures involved with the species. Detailing and debunking the many myths perpetuated by popular (and most often regurgitated) published literature. By comparison MonarchzMan has offered cockamamie gems such as the following,
Collection does have effects on populations. For the most overt example, look at the rattle-less rattlesnakes that have evolved not to rattle because of over-collection from round ups.
Sheesh


Ernie Eison
I'm going to believe the published literature over someone who depends on collection for making money. Simple as that. You're arguing with science and science doesn't care what you think. It just is what is. Likewise, there are plenty of actual experts (i.e., not you) that have been observing increased instances of rattlesnakes not rattling and relationships to collection or killing. Again, the science doesn't care what you think. You apparently don't understand evolution.

Oh, and this gem came across my desk a couple days ago:

http://www.bioone.org/doi/abs/10.1655/H ... 16-00019.1

Hot off the presses. Basically, Timber rattlesnakes take, on average, nearly 10 years before they're reproductively mature, and then they're likely to only reproduce once. Species which take a long time to mature and have low reproductive rates are easily threatened with exploitation. Look at southeast Asian turtles. Look at tuataras (not collection, but predation by invasive predators - which still removes individuals at greater rates than they can rebound). This study was from observations over the course of 36 years. Like I said, these guys know what they're doing. You don't. Clearly. But please, keep on trying to discredit me. It's humorous.

Edit: just saw that Bryan posted the same paper. Good on ya.

User avatar
Porter
Posts: 1994
Joined: March 19th, 2011, 6:43 pm

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by Porter » December 20th, 2016, 12:01 pm

:arrow:

User avatar
Porter
Posts: 1994
Joined: March 19th, 2011, 6:43 pm

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by Porter » December 20th, 2016, 12:02 pm

.

craigb
Posts: 625
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 5:02 am
Location: Southern Cal.

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by craigb » December 20th, 2016, 2:18 pm

Thank you, some levity was needed.

You know Mr. Trump likes the Newt....

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

User avatar
Kelly Mc
Posts: 4319
Joined: October 18th, 2011, 12:03 pm

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by Kelly Mc » December 20th, 2016, 2:56 pm

Its not a tea social around here - it funny because Porter NAILED IT.

User avatar
Ribbit
Posts: 601
Joined: June 12th, 2010, 9:28 am
Location: Monterey Peninsula, CA
Contact:

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by Ribbit » December 20th, 2016, 3:13 pm

I was going to suggest that we might need some new Trump-based form of Godwin's Law but then I read Porter's post and nearly spat out my lunch at the final photo. Thanks Porter!

John

User avatar
mtratcliffe
Posts: 533
Joined: January 19th, 2014, 4:34 pm
Location: Springfield, VA

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by mtratcliffe » December 20th, 2016, 3:31 pm

Brian Hubbs wrote:I'd like to put all your little minds at ease with a prediction...
When Trump takes office he will destroy the environment in ways you've never imagined. Kiss the ESA goodbye, kiss your favorite herp spots goodbye, kiss any fragile eco-system goodbye. Trump's developer buddies are going to have a field day with our wild lands in the next 4 years that will make collecting rattlers seem like a vision of paradise... :shock:
I am as terrified of the Trump presidency as anyone, but I don't think it's going to play out like this. Development is managed at the state and county level, and the processes in place won't change too much. I'm more worried about which Trump crony will be appointed to run the Department of the Interior, screwing up the NPS and wildlife agencies in the process. Hopefully none of that land is privatized.

User avatar
Kelly Mc
Posts: 4319
Joined: October 18th, 2011, 12:03 pm

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by Kelly Mc » December 20th, 2016, 5:05 pm

Yeah there are checks and balances and its the same blah blah every time we have another president.

Porter really captured Trump's speaking pattern though and probable naivety with all life forms outside of employees, buyers and sellers. Very funny and well composed.

I could not really care less about Trump and if Hillary won, same, though I would be concerned she would fall or become ill in office, she seemed to be trying hard to conceal a lack of flourish.

Involvement with nature and animals, provide a respite from human affairs thats much welcomed.

craigb
Posts: 625
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 5:02 am
Location: Southern Cal.

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by craigb » December 20th, 2016, 5:40 pm

Well, there is no shortage of this kind of material either....

I think this guy nailed many people's feelings as well...

Image

User avatar
Kelly Mc
Posts: 4319
Joined: October 18th, 2011, 12:03 pm

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by Kelly Mc » December 20th, 2016, 5:48 pm

Thats not a very Christian meme. Especially around the time commemorating the Baby Jesus.

MonarchzMan
Posts: 341
Joined: September 8th, 2011, 5:12 pm
Location: Oxford, MS

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by MonarchzMan » December 20th, 2016, 6:27 pm

mtratcliffe wrote:
Brian Hubbs wrote:I'd like to put all your little minds at ease with a prediction...
When Trump takes office he will destroy the environment in ways you've never imagined. Kiss the ESA goodbye, kiss your favorite herp spots goodbye, kiss any fragile eco-system goodbye. Trump's developer buddies are going to have a field day with our wild lands in the next 4 years that will make collecting rattlers seem like a vision of paradise... :shock:
I am as terrified of the Trump presidency as anyone, but I don't think it's going to play out like this. Development is managed at the state and county level, and the processes in place won't change too much. I'm more worried about which Trump crony will be appointed to run the Department of the Interior, screwing up the NPS and wildlife agencies in the process. Hopefully none of that land is privatized.
It is a bit of an extreme scenario, but we're probably going to see a more decentralized government and increase of movement of powers to the states, which is what concerns me. Alaskan state interests, for example, would love to carve up ANWR. If we see federal authority of national lands move to the states, we're probably going to see a great amount of interest to develop federal lands. And if we go out west to Bundy-land, well, we'll see federal land be turned into livestock feed.

And then there's the EPA and dismantling the protections it has for our environment. Relaxing regulations, which is likely to happen, will mean that more oil spills, fracking, and every other environmentally damaging practice will occur with increased frequency. And they may not happen on protected lands, but those things will affect protected lands.
craigb wrote:Well, there is no shortage of this kind of material either....

I think this guy nailed many people's feelings as well...

Image
You said you don't like fake news yet you post this. I suggest you actually look at see what presidents are responsible for what part of the debt. A very significant portion did not come from the Obama administration. Yes, there was an increase in debt over the last 8 years, but a large chunk came from policies of past presidents, not this one.

craigb
Posts: 625
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 5:02 am
Location: Southern Cal.

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by craigb » December 20th, 2016, 7:31 pm

Very easy to toss this aside and blame past presidents....

In your own words "Show Me"

Show me the national debt before Obama and after.

User avatar
Kelly Mc
Posts: 4319
Joined: October 18th, 2011, 12:03 pm

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by Kelly Mc » December 20th, 2016, 7:42 pm

Hey Craig Ive got something to show you ..

Something youve probably looked at many times yet never thought of.

With the turning over of tables at the temple and release of doves, lambs and other animals sold for sacrificial purposes, that technically makes Jesus .. the first Animal Activist

MonarchzMan
Posts: 341
Joined: September 8th, 2011, 5:12 pm
Location: Oxford, MS

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by MonarchzMan » December 20th, 2016, 8:19 pm

craigb wrote:Very easy to toss this aside and blame past presidents....

In your own words "Show Me"

Show me the national debt before Obama and after.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter ... debt-all-/

But let's not forget that republicans have had a majority in the house for the last 6 years, majority in the senate for the last two, majorities in governorships, majorities in state legislatures. Yet some how, despite all of this, Obama is able to be responsible for everything on his own? Alright, well, come January 19, guess where the blame is. Guess whose shoulders it firmly lies on. And don't you dare "blame past presidents." And this dumpster fire can't say "well the democrats had control over all of the other legislatures, they're responsible for it."

But we're getting off track. To bring it sorta back on track, I'm still waiting for you to show me a single appointee that doesn't view natural resources like a commodity. You conveniently ignored that to try to distract with your own accusations. The fact remains is that all of the dumpster fire's appointees view natural resources as a commodity and regulation as a problem. Those two simple facts do not mean good things for our natural resources.

craigb
Posts: 625
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 5:02 am
Location: Southern Cal.

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by craigb » December 20th, 2016, 8:21 pm

Yes Kelly, I realized that....

And did you know that Jesus drove a Honda....

Says right there in the New Testament that all of his disciples were in Accord....
That makes just as much sense.

It's a book you can interpret many ways. The Old Testament not so much...

And in reality the Obama poster was a joke. Come on, a little girl giving the finger, with that look on her face!
That's funny.

Like history shows, there are three parts to our government. It has checks and balances. No president will accomplish their agenda (man or woman).

To go on about what Trump MIGHT do is just ignorant. It will take all three parts to accomplish anything.

I truly believe he wants to get the federal government out states rights issues. He wants to cut federal interference and give the states the power to decide for themselves.

So instead of blaming Washington, we will need to look at Sacramento (and ourselves).

I do have a problem with all presidents and their ability to commute criminal sentences and release felons. But that applies to all presidents, not just the one that has done it more than all the others.

User avatar
Kelly Mc
Posts: 4319
Joined: October 18th, 2011, 12:03 pm

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by Kelly Mc » December 20th, 2016, 8:47 pm

Perhaps Jesus's actions and intentions were more dimensional than the recorders of the time were able to acknowledge.

But back to the worldly obscene gesture, according to Christian demeanor its kind of in bad form for a Christian to think its funny - especially a picture of a little child for petty, meaningless internet points?

I dont know the exact rules for Angry White Christian Guys though.

User avatar
Porter
Posts: 1994
Joined: March 19th, 2011, 6:43 pm

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by Porter » December 20th, 2016, 8:59 pm

:beer:

User avatar
Brian Hubbs
Posts: 4733
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 10:41 am
Location: "Buy My Books"-land

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by Brian Hubbs » December 20th, 2016, 9:21 pm

This discussion is just terrific. It's an amazing and fantastic discussion. It's simply terrific, fantastic, and amazing! You can believe me...

Image

Image

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

craigb
Posts: 625
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 5:02 am
Location: Southern Cal.

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by craigb » December 20th, 2016, 9:33 pm

Yes Kelly I could careless about you pointing to the cinder in my eye without seeing the plank in your own.

But that is between you and your God.

As my beliefs are my own.

This forum is basically to entertain and educate. My sarcasm is not that difficult to understand.

I do have fun, when I see opinions and predictions that people want taken seriously. :sleep: :sleep: :sleep:

So mote it be...

craig

User avatar
Brian Hubbs
Posts: 4733
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 10:41 am
Location: "Buy My Books"-land

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by Brian Hubbs » December 20th, 2016, 11:17 pm

Oh C'mon Craig...didn't you think my post was funny? :lol: 8-)

User avatar
Kelly Mc
Posts: 4319
Joined: October 18th, 2011, 12:03 pm

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by Kelly Mc » December 20th, 2016, 11:52 pm

craigb wrote: My sarcasm is not that difficult to understand.

Are you sure you understand what sarcasm is?

I am not sure if its acceptable to converse with you as if you are an adult - like there is something I dont know that explains the strained, pie eyed Your your own sucky wing man thing but your insistent so you must know its unpleasant. And you are an adult so well there it is.

craigb
Posts: 625
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 5:02 am
Location: Southern Cal.

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by craigb » December 21st, 2016, 5:17 am

Yes Brian, I did like your cartoon. It was meant to be funny and not spiteful or hateful.

And yes Kelly, thank you for your permission for me to be myself; And my eyes are fine.

I was born in 1957 so your comment about me being an adult is lost on me. Because I have different views from you I must be a child? And I hold two Master's degrees so I don't doubt my ability to converse about, or debate issues in their proper forum. This is not that place.

The idea of debating politics on this internet forum is ridiculous. I was just using different ways to point that out.

MCHerper
Posts: 443
Joined: September 22nd, 2012, 5:13 pm

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by MCHerper » December 21st, 2016, 7:06 am

Kelly Mc wrote:Thats not a very Christian meme. Especially around the time commemorating the Baby Jesus.
Why was offense taken at Craig's meme but not Porter's? Both are crude political humor and neither are, as you noted, very Christian. :?

craigb
Posts: 625
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 5:02 am
Location: Southern Cal.

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by craigb » December 21st, 2016, 7:11 am

Kelly, maybe I understand what you meant by "wing man". On my drive to work I had a thought that might be relevant. I do have a different respect for a few of the folks that post here. It is because I have met them personally.
Brian Hubbs is one of those unfortunate souls that has met me in person several times (I keeed). So, when I read his posts I can see him saying that. I have also read all of his books.

And a little more of a look behind the curtain. In 18 months or so I plan to retire and spend more time in Mr. Hubbs' backyard, and maybe walk a few miles with him (and or road cruise).


And understand when I discuss my Christianity, I have a personal relationship with Christ. I listen to criticisim from people wrapped up to varying degrees in this world. I know that I am not of this world and have a higher calling, and truly realize who will judge my actions.
craig

User avatar
Kelly Mc
Posts: 4319
Joined: October 18th, 2011, 12:03 pm

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by Kelly Mc » December 21st, 2016, 8:30 am

Ok Im not really interested in your personal life or who you herp with but you are the one who brought up politics and made a large fonted point that Monarchzman Show You so why wont you respond to his answers?

User avatar
Kelly Mc
Posts: 4319
Joined: October 18th, 2011, 12:03 pm

Re: Why You Dont Collect

Post by Kelly Mc » December 21st, 2016, 9:24 am

MCHerper : I didnt "take offense" I am extremely hard to offend. I was asking a question of a pious person.

Plus The Porters was actually quite well executed with the photo shop of the herps and the funny misidentifications and it is a herp forum, while the other one that Craig posted was just dumb and kind of creepy. Sad even, in a way.

Post Reply