junko
New Member
Posts: 47
|
Post by junko on Mar 8, 2014 2:51:42 GMT -4
okay, i don't know why i let this stuff get me worked up but let me get it off my chest and i'll shut up and go back to postin my links. i was readin that antler management thread on the other site and found out there was a whitetail biologist on there givin his views. i figured i check out other stuff this guy posted because he seems to know his crap. that's when i came across his post here: novascotiahunting.com/forums/index.php?/topic/8249-q-d-m-a/page-6. post #108. he says that evolution is a theory not a fact but adaptation is a fact. i don't work with deer biologists but i work with microbiologists and i took highschool biology so i know what a theory is. the guy he's arguin with in the thread posted a link to a good explanation of what a real scientific theory is. any biologist knows that adaptation is just as much a theory as evolution is. my real issue is that no scientist i've ever met would compare theories to facts. in science there are no facts, there's only theories. and that's my issue. anyone with basic science education would never say that one theory is just a guess and another theory is a fact. scientists have a word for guesses and it's "hypothesis". so, if this deer-humper character is a real biologist my problem is that he knows all of what i just said. he also knows how the word theory had a scientific definition and layman definition. he purposefully switched definitions to try to misguide people and discount a scientific phenomenon that's as widely accepted as gravity. after all that here's my issue: i don't know this guy from a hole in the ground. he says he's a biologist but i didn't see him ever post his name. what i found him doing was trying to manipulate people with his "credentials" and misguiding them when it came to how science works when it comes to his personal beliefs. so, what it boils down to is this: how do i know this guys beliefs about our deer herd aren't just as biased as his other beliefs? how do i know he's not willing to try to manipulate my understanding of our deer situation in NS to justify his own beliefs. i don't like bein tricked and this guy was caught red handed tryin to trick people in a field he's claimin to be an expert in. i don't know the other guys talkin there and i guess i don't have alot of the background other people on this site have. none of the other guys pretended to be deer biologists though. and i'm givin this guy credit in that he's actually a biologist tryin to decieve people. my gut tells me that he's just another QDMA member tryin to convince people he's a biologist.
|
|
|
Post by lsf on Mar 8, 2014 7:38:55 GMT -4
Junko I don't know who that guy is but I do know a couple of others in that thread. lotsa people like to make online folks think they are something that they aren't . There are a couple of real humdingers contributing over there.
|
|
|
Post by cochise on Mar 8, 2014 7:46:14 GMT -4
junko, Really, there are no answers to the questions you've asked. Personally, I read information provided on anonymous internet forums and take them for what they're worth...anonymous, unsubstantiated opinion (in most cases). IF I find that opinion is relevant and reasonable, I'll typically give it a bit more consideration / credance. In respect to TF...I know who he is...in fact every DNR wildlife biologist in the northeast knows who he is. He is well respected in his field. Because of that, I, typically, do not outright question his points because he does have the data, and access to the data, that supports them (in respect to whitetail deer, which is what I am interested in. Darwinism, Religion, and Evolution are theories that I don't come to these sites to discuss) I think it was in one of those threads (not sure which...and I'm too lazy to go find it ) that linked to a study / info provided by our DNR. When I read it and got to the bibliography, TF was referenced as a source (1 of 3) of that information. (wouldn't that have been a surprise to the fella arguing against him ?!? ) So...in my opinion and point of view...Who should I believe?...the coast guard deckhand who reads the internet a lot...the brick layer who reads the internet and QDMA literature...or the wildlife biologist who actually writes that literature?? It is not a dilemma at all...I'll always side with the biologist. He has the applied and practical knowledge that makes him most relevant. All in my humble opinion, of course.
|
|
|
Post by mwo on Mar 8, 2014 8:07:20 GMT -4
Great replies LSF and Cochise, I was trying to reply, with some sort of logic, however you both are accurate with your takes and sum it up quite well.
|
|
|
Post by lsf on Mar 8, 2014 8:46:20 GMT -4
Well said Bob
|
|
junko
New Member
Posts: 47
|
Post by junko on Mar 8, 2014 11:28:20 GMT -4
well cochise, that's all well and good but i'm still not buyin what the guy is sellin and another anonymous person sayin that this guys is definitely a real top deer biologist without any proof isn't gonna change my mind. watch this: i junko, am the queen of england.
imagine you're on facebook and people are talkin about guns and gun laws. some dude shows up and has lots of fancy facts and figures and says he's a formally trained gunsmith. imagine he's talkin to a bunch of soccer moms and semi-automatics come up. he says "i don't like semi-automatics cause you just have to hold the trigger and it will fire until empty." if you're a gun owner alarms are gonna go off.
so either 1. this guy isn't really a formally trained gun smith and doesn't know what he's talkin about. 2. this guy IS a formally trained gun smith who doesn't like semis and will lie to people about them because he doesn't like them. 3. this guy is a formally trained gun smith who actually believes that's how semis work.
so, i don't care if it's 1, 2 or 3. i'm not takin any of my guns to this guy.
the worst part is, the whole theory and hypothesis thing is science 101. its impossible to have any real training and be confused about it. its more like a gun smith being confused about which end of the gun the bullet comes out of.
|
|
|
Post by cochise on Mar 8, 2014 11:44:46 GMT -4
Fair enough, junko. Two anonymous sources talking about another anonymous source...
It is what it is.
|
|
|
Post by CanadianGoldenEagle on Mar 8, 2014 11:49:27 GMT -4
Guys,
I gave up on logic as soon as I started working on IT. I can sympathize with Junko regarding the dispute between adaptation and evolution but both words can be used as synonyms for each other, if a species is to survive it has to adapt to it's environment or evolve to match the environment. I was brought up in the church but since I turned 18/19 I started questioning what was written and taught within the Bible. I came up with the conclusion that there were some areas that could be true but regarding the Book of Genesis until somebody can definitively prove that fossilized remains aren't proof of evolution/adaptation and the Bible is the true answer I will be an Atheist. I will also listen and respect those who are more knowledgeable within their field of expertise. As TF is a DNR biologist, as stated above, I feel I need to respect his opinions but I can also have my own even if they contradict his. If we both sat down in a pub and started talking you'd probably find that he would listen and respect your own feelings without saying that you were wrong or right. Both of us would leave the pub with a broader mind and also a very healthy respect for each others areas of expertise, I wouldn't expect him to be able to tell me that I was wrong with IT like I wouldn't tell him he was wrong with wildlife biology.
We all have our own feelings and healthy discussions are part of being involved in forums. I'm glad to see it was kept clean and nobody was disrespectful to other members on this forum, don't care about people being disrespectful to members on other forums.
Keep it clean and feel free to voice just be prepared for differing viewpoints.
I would also like to say thank you to Junko for providing a deeper explanation of his comments yesterday. They could have been taken in a number of ways and without any further explanation the wrong ideas could have been formulated.
Ken
|
|
|
Post by linnie on Mar 8, 2014 14:27:45 GMT -4
junko, In respect to TF...I know who he is...in fact every DNR wildlife biologist in the northeast knows who he is. He is well respected in his field. Because of that, I, typically, do not outright question his points because he does have the data, and access to the data, that supports them (in respect to whitetail deer, which is what I am interested in. Darwinism, Religion, and Evolution are theories that I don't come to these sites to discuss) I think it was in one of those threads (not sure which...and I'm too lazy to go find it ) that linked to a study / info provided by our DNR. When I read it and got to the bibliography, TF was referenced as a source (1 of 3) of that information. (wouldn't that have been a surprise to the fella arguing against him ?!? ) So...in my opinion and point of view...Who should I believe?...the coast guard deckhand who reads the internet a lot...the brick layer who reads the internet and QDMA literature...or the wildlife biologist who actually writes that literature?? It is not a dilemma at all...I'll always side with the biologist. He has the applied and practical knowledge that makes him most relevant. Junko, What cochise has said is accurate. I am usually on the opposite side of the fence than tf but I bow to his expertise on whitetail biology. No love lost between us, usually when tf and I are in the same thread on the NB Hunting site he is telling me to go the heck away
|
|
junko
New Member
Posts: 47
|
Post by junko on Mar 8, 2014 17:50:33 GMT -4
linnie,
well then i guess i have to go with the theory that either the guy is usin his authority as biologist to intentionally mislead people based on what sounds like his religious views or he doesn't know the basics of science.
either way, at this point i'm more likely to believe the brick layer and the coast guard.
|
|
|
Post by linnie on Mar 8, 2014 18:01:33 GMT -4
Well sorry you don't want to belive in his deer expertise, totally your choice. But if your saying his deer sicence is wrong how would you disprove ?
|
|
junko
New Member
Posts: 47
|
Post by junko on Mar 8, 2014 18:42:38 GMT -4
i'm not saying anything about his deer science. i'm saying i don't trust anything he's saying because he's obviously willing to mislead people about things he feels strongly about. just going back for a quick look guy incognito posts links to studies and articles and deer biologist just says stuff like, "nope, that's wrong because some reason and trust me i'm a deer biologist." well not exactly like that but you get my point. look at the antler measuring stuff. everything about how they're measured in NS must be wrong because deer biologist doesn't like the look of the number.
so really, just some anonymous guy not using any sources for his info because why? because "trust me, i'm a deer biologist."
not saying he's wrong, just "trust me, i'm a deer biologist" isn't good enough for me especially after reading the exchange that spawned this rant.
|
|
|
Post by lsf on Mar 8, 2014 19:28:14 GMT -4
I tend to agree with junko, a bit, the guy does have the "its my job and I know it but don't have to explain to you lay people" attitude.....I am not doubting his creds but if he is going to come onto an internet forum and profess his knowledge then explain your ideas a little better. I don't mean posting endless googled links from armchair scientists either ...If I want to google something I can do it just as well as others and I would atleast read the info unlike the deck scrubber cause he has been caught a bunch of times posting google links that go opposite to the argument he is making...LMAO
|
|
junko
New Member
Posts: 47
|
Post by junko on Mar 9, 2014 1:34:50 GMT -4
well lsf, on top of all that it's "trust me, i'm a deer biologist" but i'm not gonna tell ya my name but i'm gonna tell you i worked here and did this and i know this guy and i talked to that guy. well sure bud, i guess i have to trust you because no ones ever made something up on the internet before.
but yeah, the antler beam thing is like, "i measured all the beams for all the places...... except NS. NS measurements are wrong though because trust me, i'm a deer biologist."
if someone is gonna be blah-blah-blahin about science crap, i'd prefer it if they summarised the science crap but at least put in some sort of reference to the study or info they're talkin about so i can have something to read on the crapper.
i feel a bit left out though because there seems to some history with some of these guys that i'm not catchin. oh well, i'm gonna go back to tryin to find fun stuff on the internet to post here.
|
|
|
Post by lsf on Mar 9, 2014 9:43:14 GMT -4
junko some of us have been members there since Dave started the site over 10 years ago and know some of the "gentlemen" in real time away from the internet...lol...so yes there is some history because we have been listening to thier shit for years and years and years....
|
|
junko
New Member
Posts: 47
|
Post by junko on Mar 10, 2014 21:19:04 GMT -4
i was bored so i read the rest of that thread. i should have done that before i shot off here. that was an eye opener.
with apologies to anyone that respects that guy as a deer biologist, that dude is kookoo for coco puffs. there has to be some pretty serious mental gymnastics goin on to be a "scientist" and spout some of that stuff.
think i actually figured out who the mystery man is. if i see that name used as source for anything i'll be sure to take it with a grane of salt.
|
|