I was raised in the Alaskan "bush." This is an old issue.
If wolves are a factual problem to mankind, who cares as to how they are killed. That's not to sanction aircraft in place of a rifle or a trap, relative to "ordinary" hunting and trapping. For one thing, the aircraft accident rate would go through the already sky-high roof, for 'bush' accidents. To do such hunting requires a slow airspeed -add sharp maneuvering - putting an aircraft on top of a stall-spin scenario at too low an altitude, for successful recovery.
Often, herds of thousands of caribou manage to slip into the bush, undetected, for six months, or more. So to blame wolves for over-kill of the herds is often poorly justified. In reality, wolves can kill caribou like delta-force on a rampage, but nature has her magical way of reliably balancing the wildlife populations.
In the background, the State Fish & Game has historically had near gestapo powers to preclude even the 'ordinary' hunting of any wildlife, add fishing. Arial wolfe hunting was once legal, but has historically been one of the worst offences one can commit.
Sarah may be pissing atop a powerful air vent. (Even with her Chutzpah, she can't piss into the wind.)
Often, herds of thousands of caribou manage to slip into the bush, undetected, for six months, or more. So to blame wolves for over-kill of the herds is often poorly justified. In reality, wolves can kill caribou like delta-force on a rampage, but nature has her magical way of reliably balancing the wildlife populations.
Exactly. Nature has done quite well on her own for millions of years, I don't think she needs nor wants Man's help.
The world flat. lol. That is what "scientists used to think. If they had only consulted their Bible and read Isiah they would have known better.
There are plenty of artifacts a million years older than the Bible, long before Isiah (sic) roamed the earth.
January 30th, 2009 @ 4:39am By JULIA ZAPPEI Associated Press Writer
KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia (AP) - Malaysian archeologists have unearthed prehistoric stone axes that they said Friday were the world's oldest at about 1.8 million years old.
Seven axes were found with other tools at an excavation site in Malaysia's northern Perak state in June, and tests by a Tokyo laboratory indicate they were about 1.83 million years old, said Mokhtar Saidin, director of the Center for Archaeological Research at the University of Science Malaysia.
The group released their conclusions Thursday, and other archeologists have not yet examined the results.
"It's really the first time we have such evidence (dating back) 1.83 million years," Mokhtar said, adding that the oldest axes previously discovered were 1.6 million years old in Africa.
However, other chopping tools, as well as human remains, have been found in Africa that are much older, with some dating back 4 million years, he said.
Geochronology Japan Inc., a lab in Tokyo, calculated the age of the tools by analyzing the rock that covered them, Mokhtar said. The result has a margin of error of 610,000 years, he said.
Some previous discoveries have suggested there were humans in Southeast Asia up to 1.9 million years ago, but those have been disputed, said Harry Truman Simanjuntak, a researcher at the National Research Center of Archaeology in Jakarta.
Simanjuntak cautioned that others still need to investigate claims about the axes' age.
The oldest previous evidence of human existence in Malaysia was stone tools dating back about 200,000 years, found at the same excavation site in Perak.
The archeologists are trying to find human bone remains in Perak, Mokhtar said, but stressed that it might be unlikely because of decay due to warm, humid climate conditions. The oldest bones found in Perak so far have only been about 10,000 years old.
(Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.) AP Scraping Prohibition
Anyone can say anything. Tell me how they came up with this number.
Did you read the article or just get your panties in a wad and zip off a quick response? : )
FROM THE ARTICLE: However, other chopping tools, as well as human remains, have been found in Africa that are much older, with some dating back 4 million years, he said. (Did you catch that, Old Friend? 4 MILLION)
Geochronology Japan Inc., a lab in Tokyo, calculated the age of the tools by analyzing the rock that covered them, Mokhtar said. The result has a margin of error of 610,000 years, he said. (note that the axes in question could be 1.2 Million years old OR 2.4 Million years old)
And, no, not just anyone is saying anything. These are scientists and archeologists who are making the statements and deciding the numbers. These are professionals, not a bunch of bloggers stating opinions.
But anyways, Carbon dating is only reliable if you think the rate of decay is a constant. If it isn't a constant then carbon dating may only work reliably for a few hundred years at best. There is evidence the Carbon-14 decay rate is not a constant.
But anyways, Carbon dating is only reliable if you think the rate of decay is a constant. If it isn't a constant then carbon dating may only work reliably for a few hundred years at best. There is evidence the Carbon-14 decay rate is not a constant.
I just happened to respond to Old Friend poking fun at another, calling them "flat earther" for having a different persepective re: man's time on this earth. I had just read the article re: the axes prior to checkin out 4um. Hence, I thought I would share that millions of years of humans is not so far fetched in the realms of archeology and science.
Nobody mentioned carbon dating of the axes, but rather rock dating. The margin of error on this particular dating was give or take 610K years, not a few hundred years.