Seriously, it has been done. South Africa opened up the ivory market to farm raised rhinos and the population started to rebound. The PETA types got that shut down.
So hunting white rhinoceros or elephants or dolphins or any other animal would increase their numbers?
South Africa experimented with letting farmer raise rhinoceros for income. The rhinoceros population rebounded. But, then PETA complained and the country started banning the practice again.
So, yes. Legalizing the hunting WILL increase the numbers, because there will be an incentive for people to provide resources to keep them around.
And yet, the largest land animal, the elephant, continues on in Africa where these extinctions started, and even in India, one of the more heavily populated areas of the world. Then there is the rhinos and hippos (still in Africa).
You clearly have no idea how little we care about how you perceive America. Here is a clue, I don't live my life to impress you, Benji. I would tell you to go fuck yourself and the rest of your country sideways, but I actually don't care.
Now, that being said, who decided that I don't have a God-given right to play with guns? You? Do I have a God-given right to play with stick? Must I have your permission to play with a rock? May I, sir? Please?
Once again, go fuck yourself, you overbearing prick.
But using words like slaughter, etc....that's really going above board. No one is calling for that.
To be fair, the GP did use the term "dogwhistle", which is almost always a term the left uses to excuse their exercise of imparting words and motives onto those they would like to discredit. It is their dogwhistling way of saying, "He didn't say that, but we all know what words we're going to put in his mouth."
A) Humans are really, really bad in deducing the consequences of the ideas they advocate (especially those who defend the idea of limitless capitalism and extreme individualism);
But, those who defend enslaving a subset of humans to serve the needs of those that would be happy so barely subsist as long as they are not required to give back have vision bordering on clairvoyance? In other words, anyone that doesn't agree with your predictions and extrapolations is poor at deduction? Multi-generational government welfare dependency is not a thing in your world?
I'm going to be more direct, and say that you are really bad at OBSERVING THE DIRECT RESULTS of ideas you advocate.
I was impressed by that audio, the air traffic guy seemed much more upset when he started hearing about parts of the plane missing etc than the pilot. If she was not brave, her voice would either start braking or show panick, and the outcome of the ordeal might not have been as favorable for the passengers.
Maybe she was so composed because she still had a working engine, and airport well within range, and hours of simulator time practicing that exact same situation?
It's not always a landing. Sometimes it's a "ditching". When it IS a landing, a good one consists of one where everyone on board survives. A GREAT landing is one which permits the plane to fly again.
Actually, not to be a wet blanket, but the skill set wasn't that extraordinary, either. She still had an engine running. If it had happened on takeoff, saving the plane would have been more significant, but this engine gave up enroute. Standard training to get a multi-engine rating is that you be able to control the plane with one engine out.
And increasing the efficiency of airplanes that are flying is going to be like pulling hen's teeth.
Consider this: Increasing the efficiency of an airliner's jet engine has reverberating positive effects on the airlines bottom line. A 5% increase in the engine's efficiency can mean: -the plane has more range with the same fuel (often, the airliner would like to wait to fill up where the fuel would be cheaper) -can carry less fuel, allowing for more paying passengers -can carry less fuel, allowing for more paying cargo -will allow for using less fuel
The airlines use very complex software to plan flight routes, cruising altitudes, speeds and engine profiles to maximize fuel use. Do you think GE would be holding back on engine technology that the airlines would greedily snatch up at their first chance? Do you really think Boeing has been sitting on technology (like increased use of composites) that would make the airframes more efficient? The legal fiat can not do more to push the technology than the scramble for economic survival that the airlines have now?
If it is so economical, why do they need to switch bases on governmental fiat? One of the biggest cost centers in any shipping operation is fuel cost. If that can be eliminated...SCORE!!
People who were trump fans probably had the impression Mr. Trump was very popular with MSM.
No they didn't. The appearance was that the MSM was out to get Trump to prop up Hillary. For instance, reporting on violence at Trump rallies. First, the MSM downplayed or completely failed to report protestors attacking Trump rally attendees. They never asked, "Why are these people interrupting Trump's rally?" (You are free to protest in the public arena. Not inside a private venue that someone else paid for.) Instead, all the violence was Trump's fault, even when his people were being physically attacked. Due to social media, the truth did get out, though.
How well do you think that went over with his supporters?
Slashdot Mirror
You know that's illegal to send by the US Postal Service don't you? You have to use UPS or Fedex.
Just don't want you to get in trouble, or for the AC to miss out on the specimen.
Seriously, it has been done. South Africa opened up the ivory market to farm raised rhinos and the population started to rebound. The PETA types got that shut down.
So hunting white rhinoceros or elephants or dolphins or any other animal would increase their numbers?
South Africa experimented with letting farmer raise rhinoceros for income. The rhinoceros population rebounded. But, then PETA complained and the country started banning the practice again.
So, yes. Legalizing the hunting WILL increase the numbers, because there will be an incentive for people to provide resources to keep them around.
And yet, the largest land animal, the elephant, continues on in Africa where these extinctions started, and even in India, one of the more heavily populated areas of the world. Then there is the rhinos and hippos (still in Africa).
The why are men the victims of 98% of all workplace fatalities? You don't seem to understand what oppression is.
You clearly have no idea how little we care about how you perceive America. Here is a clue, I don't live my life to impress you, Benji. I would tell you to go fuck yourself and the rest of your country sideways, but I actually don't care.
Now, that being said, who decided that I don't have a God-given right to play with guns? You? Do I have a God-given right to play with stick? Must I have your permission to play with a rock? May I, sir? Please?
Once again, go fuck yourself, you overbearing prick.
But using words like slaughter, etc....that's really going above board. No one is calling for that.
To be fair, the GP did use the term "dogwhistle", which is almost always a term the left uses to excuse their exercise of imparting words and motives onto those they would like to discredit. It is their dogwhistling way of saying, "He didn't say that, but we all know what words we're going to put in his mouth."
And what will happen when those automated looms take the place of all the weavers!?!
BURN THEM ALL!!
A) Humans are really, really bad in deducing the consequences of the ideas they advocate (especially those who defend the idea of limitless capitalism and extreme individualism);
But, those who defend enslaving a subset of humans to serve the needs of those that would be happy so barely subsist as long as they are not required to give back have vision bordering on clairvoyance? In other words, anyone that doesn't agree with your predictions and extrapolations is poor at deduction? Multi-generational government welfare dependency is not a thing in your world?
I'm going to be more direct, and say that you are really bad at OBSERVING THE DIRECT RESULTS of ideas you advocate.
Yes, we have to make sure the wrong lizard doesn't win.
Also, the plane is flying somewhere on the order of 600mph. That makes "hurricane force wind" seem like a summer breeze.
I was impressed by that audio, the air traffic guy seemed much more upset when he started hearing about parts of the plane missing etc than the pilot. If she was not brave, her voice would either start braking or show panick, and the outcome of the ordeal might not have been as favorable for the passengers.
Maybe she was so composed because she still had a working engine, and airport well within range, and hours of simulator time practicing that exact same situation?
It's not always a landing. Sometimes it's a "ditching". When it IS a landing, a good one consists of one where everyone on board survives. A GREAT landing is one which permits the plane to fly again.
Actually, not to be a wet blanket, but the skill set wasn't that extraordinary, either. She still had an engine running. If it had happened on takeoff, saving the plane would have been more significant, but this engine gave up enroute. Standard training to get a multi-engine rating is that you be able to control the plane with one engine out.
This was literally a basic part of her job.
I'm not sure that word means what you think it means.
It's easier to get a gun than build a bomb,
Only for people that lack imagination. That empty gas can you just filled your lawn mower with.....excellent bomb.
Which Walmart has guns on sale for $50?! I'll camp out for THAT!!
And increasing the efficiency of airplanes that are flying is going to be like pulling hen's teeth.
Consider this: Increasing the efficiency of an airliner's jet engine has reverberating positive effects on the airlines bottom line. A 5% increase in the engine's efficiency can mean:
-the plane has more range with the same fuel (often, the airliner would like to wait to fill up where the fuel would be cheaper)
-can carry less fuel, allowing for more paying passengers
-can carry less fuel, allowing for more paying cargo
-will allow for using less fuel
The airlines use very complex software to plan flight routes, cruising altitudes, speeds and engine profiles to maximize fuel use. Do you think GE would be holding back on engine technology that the airlines would greedily snatch up at their first chance? Do you really think Boeing has been sitting on technology (like increased use of composites) that would make the airframes more efficient? The legal fiat can not do more to push the technology than the scramble for economic survival that the airlines have now?
If it is so economical, why do they need to switch bases on governmental fiat? One of the biggest cost centers in any shipping operation is fuel cost. If that can be eliminated...SCORE!!
Do you understand how the internet works, Tim?
But, he didn't have a problem when the hacking was first exposed over 8 years ago when the Obama campaign bragged about it?
People who were trump fans probably had the impression Mr. Trump was very popular with MSM.
No they didn't. The appearance was that the MSM was out to get Trump to prop up Hillary. For instance, reporting on violence at Trump rallies. First, the MSM downplayed or completely failed to report protestors attacking Trump rally attendees. They never asked, "Why are these people interrupting Trump's rally?" (You are free to protest in the public arena. Not inside a private venue that someone else paid for.) Instead, all the violence was Trump's fault, even when his people were being physically attacked. Due to social media, the truth did get out, though.
How well do you think that went over with his supporters?
Unfortunately, the Democrat's have their own set of roaches that also vote. It's an arms race of who can hold on to the most roaches.
I've never understood the need for anything other than a text based installer for an OS. How often are you supposed to use it, after all?
The summary chose someone that "worked on fake news" as the lead. If that is the best they have to show for "greatness", well...umm...