bad news for my state. old news.. but still, a good read.
Posted 17 February 2005 - 10:25 PM (#1)
i know the canal is huge... but maybe the state could set up a series of commercial aerators.. i know it has been done in very large lakes.. might there be ill effects in this case with aerators?
Posted 18 February 2005 - 01:20 AM (#2)

~~Red-Tail Boa Profile~~
Member of the Month, December 2004
Piranha Picture of the Month, December 2005
Non-Piranha Picture of the Month, December 2005
Posted 18 February 2005 - 02:29 PM (#3)
there alot, all you catch really was smelt and cod that had signs up warning you not
to eat it at all
Posted 18 February 2005 - 06:04 PM (#4)
Peacock, on Feb 18 2005, 03:25 AM, said:
i know the canal is huge... but maybe the state could set up a series of commercial aerators.. i know it has been done in very large lakes.. might there be ill effects in this case with aerators?

Aerators are not the answer. A simple band-aid can't cover up a wound that needs stitches. Huge scale changes need to be done, very sad story.
Posted 18 February 2005 - 06:30 PM (#5)
acestro, on Feb 18 2005, 06:04 PM, said:
Peacock, on Feb 18 2005, 03:25 AM, said:
i know the canal is huge... but maybe the state could set up a series of commercial aerators.. i know it has been done in very large lakes.. might there be ill effects in this case with aerators?

Aerators are not the answer. A simple band-aid can't cover up a wound that needs stitches. Huge scale changes need to be done, very sad story.

That sad part about that is the changes needed more then likely wont be comfronted.

~~Red-Tail Boa Profile~~
Member of the Month, December 2004
Piranha Picture of the Month, December 2005
Non-Piranha Picture of the Month, December 2005
Posted 18 February 2005 - 08:22 PM (#6)
Posted 19 February 2005 - 04:58 AM (#7)
acestro, on Feb 18 2005, 11:04 PM, said:
Peacock, on Feb 18 2005, 03:25 AM, said:
i know the canal is huge... but maybe the state could set up a series of commercial aerators.. i know it has been done in very large lakes.. might there be ill effects in this case with aerators?

Aerators are not the answer. A simple band-aid can't cover up a wound that needs stitches. Huge scale changes need to be done, very sad story.

Well unfortunatly stitches cannot be administered.
A band-aid with some neosporin is better then leaving the wound open.
What can we do? WE are the problem... The government just cant start exterminating random people to bring the population down. Not everyone has the same moral ethics as i do.
there really is nothing we can do because the problem is overpopulation and polution. polution is a byproduct of population.
what IYO should be done Ace?
Posted 20 February 2005 - 11:29 AM (#9)
recycle center for booze money
Posted 20 February 2005 - 11:58 PM (#10)
Peacock, on Feb 20 2005, 08:07 AM, said:
Sorry Peacock, I don't have as much computer time lately.
The solution is grassroots work and coordination of efforts in a multidisciplinarian sort of way. There actually can be more research done. Pinpointing sources is hard here but is important because, as mentioned, you cant solve all of these problems. Tax incentives or laws (nasty as they are) can help. Just see how many bottles/cans you see on the side of the road in Michigan as compared to Alabama.
Within your healthy (somewhat) overconfidence, youth denies you some experience that leads to wisdom. Look up in American history where one of our rivers was actually ON FIRE! That river has come a long way (hint, midwest state...). How much worse can it get than having a river so polluted that it was on fire?! Then do your research on how they pulled things together, you will find your answer there.
I really hate correcting you (honestly
Posted 21 February 2005 - 12:05 AM (#11)
Quote
Wasn't it you that wanted "OWNED" put on a picture of victims who had died in the Tsunami?
Posted 07 March 2005 - 11:00 AM (#13)
acestro, on Feb 21 2005, 04:58 AM, said:
key phrase = repeated use.
how long does it usually take for the goverment to start helping out? Who funds the work?
Posted 07 March 2005 - 11:02 AM (#14)
acestro, on Feb 21 2005, 05:05 AM, said:
Yes it was I.
Im saying that people(not me) wont allow the government to exterminating random people to bring the population down.
Posted 09 March 2005 - 03:43 AM (#15)
Posted 09 March 2005 - 07:20 AM (#16)
jamesdelanoche, on Mar 9 2005, 08:43 AM, said:
you have to realize i dont share the same ethics as you and look at life with a more natural outlook. Your personal opinion on the value of human life is not "right" just as its not "wrong". its too subjective to personal opinion and not of fact.
answer me this-
Why should some random humans life have more value then a feederfish's? There is no Factual answer to that question because its solid personal opinion..
My opinion is as good as yours. so shush.. oh and BTW- i am past puberty, therefore i am grown up.
Posted 09 March 2005 - 12:41 PM (#17)
jamesdelanoche, on Mar 9 2005, 08:43 AM, said:
I'd have to agree with you. And I'm not letting Peacock go off on another pointless series of posts. Half asking good questions and half acting like a confused unethical moron doesn't work here. If you cant understand human life having more value over feeders, you're beyond help. I'm done with giving you good answers to your questions.

Help
Info
Videos

Blue
Green
Red
Black
This topic is locked














