[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

These Are The Most Stolen Cars In Every US State

Earth Changes Summary - June 2025: Extreme Weather, Planetary Upheaval,

China’s Tofu-Dreg High-Speed Rail Station Ceiling Suddenly Floods, Steel Bars Snap

Russia Moves to Nationalize Country's Third Largest Gold Mining Firm

Britain must prepare for civil war | David Betz

The New MAGA Turf War Over National Intelligence

Happy fourth of july

The Empire Has Accidentally Caused The Rebirth Of Real Counterculture In The West

Workers install 'Alligator Alcatraz' sign for Florida immigration detention center

The Biggest Financial Collapse in China’s History Is Here, More Terrifying Than Evergrande!

Lightning

Cash Jordan NYC Courthouse EMPTIED... ICE Deports 'Entire Building

Trump Sparks Domestic Labor Renaissance: Native-Born Workers Surge To Record High As Foreign-Born Plunge

Mister Roberts (1965)

WE BROKE HIM!! [Early weekend BS/nonsense thread]

I'm going to send DOGE after Elon." -Trump

This is the America I grew up in. We need to bring it back

MD State Employee may get Arrested by Sheriff for reporting an Illegal Alien to ICE

RFK Jr: DTaP vaccine was found to have link to Autism

FBI Agents found that the Chinese manufactured fake driver’s licenses and shipped them to the U.S. to help Biden...

Love & Real Estate: China’s new romance scam

Huge Democrat shift against Israel stuns CNN

McCarthy Was Right. They Lied About Everything.

How Romans Built Domes

My 7 day suspension on X was lifted today.

They Just Revealed EVERYTHING... [Project 2029]

Trump ACCUSED Of MASS EXECUTING Illegals By DUMPING Them In The Ocean

The Siege (1998)

Trump Admin To BAN Pride Rainbow Crosswalks, DoT Orders ALL Distractions REMOVED

Elon Musk Backing Thomas Massie Against Trump-AIPAC Challenger


Activism
See other Activism Articles

Title: Sarah Palin Champions Barbaric Aerial Hunting of Wolves
Source: YouTube
URL Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGPFPBmzRrQ
Published: Sep 3, 2008
Author: defendersactionfund
Post Date: 2009-02-03 17:56:11 by FormerLurker
Keywords: Barbaric, Animal slaughter, Compassionate Conservatism, Sarah Palin
Views: 17703
Comments: 460


Poster Comment:

"Compassionate Conservatism" at it's best...

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 447.

#7. To: FormerLurker, Christine, All (#0)

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.)

SKYDRIFTER  posted on  2009-02-03   19:13:52 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: SKYDRIFTER (#7)

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.

FormerLurker  posted on  2009-02-03   20:21:15 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: FormerLurker (#12)

own for millions of years

lol

Old Friend  posted on  2009-02-03   20:25:06 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: Old Friend (#13)

lol

What's so funny?

FormerLurker  posted on  2009-02-03   20:26:00 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: FormerLurker (#14)

What's so funny?

You believe in millions of years.

I find that quite humorous.

Old Friend  posted on  2009-02-03   20:28:22 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: Old Friend (#15)

You believe in millions of years.

So what are you, one of those "geniuses" who think the Earth and all life on it was created 2000 years ago?

Do you think the world is flat too?

FormerLurker  posted on  2009-02-03   20:42:17 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: FormerLurker (#17)

So what are you, one of those "geniuses" who think the Earth and all life on it was created 2000 years ago?

Do you think the world is flat too?

A few more years then 2000. Millions is laughable.

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.

Old Friend  posted on  2009-02-03   20:45:05 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#21. To: Old Friend (#19)

A few more years then 2000. Millions is laughable.

Like what, 2090, 3029, 3091? Give me a time frame that YOU think life was around for...

FormerLurker  posted on  2009-02-03   20:46:05 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#23. To: FormerLurker (#21)

Go read your Bible. Add up all the begats and begats. Go back to the original creation and you have your answer. I haven't counted it up but I know its not millions.

Besides if it was millions of years old where are all the bodies?

Old Friend  posted on  2009-02-03   20:57:33 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#53. To: Old Friend (#23)

Go read your Bible. Add up all the begats and begats. Go back to the original creation and you have your answer.

Which version, the Hebrew or the English? I can't seem to find where in Genesis the exact year was given of Creation, can you find it?

FormerLurker  posted on  2009-02-03   22:06:56 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#56. To: FormerLurker (#53)

Which version, the Hebrew or the English? I can't seem to find where in Genesis the exact year was given of Creation, can you find it?

It doesn't matter. The dates are the same. Show me a contradiction in dates if your not just blabbering.

Or just use the good old King James version. God promised his word would be translated into all tongues. Have faith in your creator. He is not a weakling like some seem to think.

Old Friend  posted on  2009-02-03   22:08:50 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#64. To: Old Friend (#56)

God promised his word would be translated into all tongues

Did you know the Hebrew word ADAM means MANKIND and is NOT the name of a man?

FormerLurker  posted on  2009-02-03   22:18:45 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#66. To: FormerLurker (#64)

You said that earlier. You sound like a broken record player. Anyway Adam is the name of a man. That being so someone probably took his name and used it as the name for mankind. Not that complicated. I'm surprised you didn't figure it out. On second thought no i'm not.

Old Friend  posted on  2009-02-03   22:20:57 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#69. To: Old Friend (#66) (Edited)

Anyway Adam is the name of a man.

Only to those who know absolutely nothing about Hebrew and believe whatever bullshit somebody tells them because it makes them feel good.

So again, what DATE DID GOD CREATE THE EARTH? I wouldn't ask if you didn't firmly say you knew what it was.

FormerLurker  posted on  2009-02-03   22:25:35 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#70. To: FormerLurker (#69)

It was created in the year 0 AC

Old Friend  posted on  2009-02-03   22:30:01 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#75. To: Old Friend (#70)

It was created in the year 0 AC

Uh huh. Now give us the exact year in terms of BC, as unfortunately your AC era is undefined.

FormerLurker  posted on  2009-02-03   22:38:47 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#79. To: FormerLurker (#75)

I just defined it. It was the date of creation 0 at creation

Old Friend  posted on  2009-02-03   22:40:30 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#85. To: Old Friend (#79)

I just defined it. It was the date of creation 0 at creation

Ok, then I say the Earth formed billions of years ago, and life did not all of sudden pop up, it took another billion years or so for sentient creatures to walk the Earth.

In fact, what about all the other worlds being created as we speak? They aren't forming in a day, they are still being formed from gasses. Why doesn't the Bible speak about them, and why THEY aren't forming in a day?

In fact, are you sure you know how long a day is in the eyes of the Creator?

FormerLurker  posted on  2009-02-03   22:44:49 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#187. To: FormerLurker (#85)

Ok, then I say the Earth formed billions of years ago, and life did not all of sudden pop up, it took another billion years or so for sentient creatures to walk the Earth.

Do you REALLY believe that?

True macro evolution belief is only for die-hard believers who have gone over the edge of reality into the abyss of insanity.

RickyJ  posted on  2009-02-04   0:32:20 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#193. To: RickyJ (#187) (Edited)

Do you REALLY believe that?

True macro evolution belief is only for die-hard believers who have gone over the edge of reality into the abyss of insanity.

Do you think the Earth is the center of the Universe? Apparently you do, as you believe that all that exists revolves around you and your world.

How small can you think? Creation is an ongoing process, and we can see billions of stars in this galaxy alone, each of which is a sun (in case you didn't know what a star was).

Each of those stars (or suns) may well have their own planetary system, and at least a few of those planets amongst those distant solar systems could have intelligent life on them.

Have you never imagined anything other than what you've been told, or beyond what you were taught to think? If it's not dictated to you by a preacher, must it be a lie or impossible?

You are apparently the sort of person who clings to junk science and superstition, while at the same time throwing stones at those who speak of true science. Were you at the bottom of your class in grade school? Did you ever finish high school?

You are irrational and akin to those who believed the world was supported by elephants traveling around in circles.

FormerLurker  posted on  2009-02-04   0:43:50 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#204. To: FormerLurker (#193)

Creation is an ongoing process...

You really do believe that crap.

UNBELIEVABLE!

RickyJ  posted on  2009-02-04   1:03:32 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#206. To: RickyJ (#204) (Edited)

You really do believe that crap.

You really believe this single little chunk of matter is the center of the Universe.

Before I had access to the Internet I thought people such as you existed in the Middle Ages, but not in the 20th century (and of course the 21st century nowadays). I thought only retards and jungle dwellers were as uneducated and totally clueless on such things.

I've seen many things since I first logged onto the net, but that sort of ignorance still shocks me to this day.

FormerLurker  posted on  2009-02-04   1:08:05 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#213. To: FormerLurker (#206)

You really believe this single little chunk of matter is the center of the Universe.

That's not what I was commenting on and you know it. You said "creation is an ongoing process", that is what I find so unbelievable. What is it that you think has been created lately without man doing it? Even then man is only using the resources already in existence, no new matter is being created by man. To believe in macro evolution one must believe that in enough time that the computers of today, which are much less complex than humans, could come into existence without anyone ever making them and programs for them that can do meaningful things such as edit an image could happen by pure chance without anyone actually making them. Sorry, but that kind of faith is WAY beyond my level of faith in anything, including God.

RickyJ  posted on  2009-02-04   1:28:23 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#219. To: RickyJ (#213)

To believe in macro evolution one must believe that in enough time that the computers of today, which are much less complex than humans, could come into existence without anyone ever making them and programs for them that can do meaningful things such as edit an image could happen by pure chance without anyone actually making them.

BTW, I never said that God did not create all that exists, I simply said it did not happen the way ancient desert dwellers described it.

Can't you see that Nature IS the process of Creation? Can't you understand that evolution is but a tiny piece of that Creation, and that Creation itself goes well beyond that?

FormerLurker  posted on  2009-02-04   1:35:18 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#224. To: FormerLurker (#219)

Can't you understand that evolution is but a tiny piece of that Creation, and that Creation itself goes well beyond that?

Let's put it this way. I would not believe in God before I would buy the story of macro evolution. If believing in God required believing in macro evolution then I would be an atheist.

RickyJ  posted on  2009-02-04   1:43:49 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#226. To: RickyJ (#224)

If believing in God required believing in macro evolution then I would be an atheist.

Oh, and why is that?

FormerLurker  posted on  2009-02-04   1:45:07 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#231. To: FormerLurker (#226)

If believing in God required believing in macro evolution then I would be an atheist.

Oh, and why is that?

Macro evolution does not need a God to occur. So why believe in a God when there would be no reason to do so?

My faith in God is not irrational, and is minuscule compared to the faith people who believe in macro evolution have to have in order to believe it. Belief in macro evolution is irrational.

RickyJ  posted on  2009-02-04   1:59:20 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#233. To: RickyJ (#231)

Macro evolution does not need a God to occur. So why believe in a God when there would be no reason to do so?

Wrong. The very fact that DNA is a blueprint for life indicates that an intelligence beyond our understanding created not only the DNA, but the concept of DNA and the mechanisms for it to behave as it does.

That's nothing compared to the nature of matter, energy, time, and space. For it all to behave as it does, and for life to exist, there has to something beyond dumb luck.

FormerLurker  posted on  2009-02-04   2:02:49 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#235. To: FormerLurker (#233)

OK, if you would have told me you were a troll at the start I could have saved my typing on you. You are taking my words out of context and then implying something I am in no way saying.

RickyJ  posted on  2009-02-04   2:06:58 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#252. To: RickyJ, farmfriend (#235)

#235. To: FormerLurker (#233)

OK, if you would have told me you were a troll at the start I could have saved my typing on you. You are taking my words out of context and then implying something I am in no way saying.

God is always good!

RickyJ posted on 2009-02-04 2:06:58 ET Reply Trace Private Reply

#242. To: RickyJ (#235)

You are taking my words out of context and then implying something I am in no way saying.

LOL I could have told you that would happen.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss — The Who

farmfriend posted on 2009-02-04 3:42:40 ET Reply Trace Private Reply

Well RickyJ and farmfriend, since this is the post you are saying that I'm being a troll and twisting your words, please show me how that is true...

#233. To: RickyJ (#231)

Macro evolution does not need a God to occur. So why believe in a God when there would be no reason to do so?

Wrong. The very fact that DNA is a blueprint for life indicates that an intelligence beyond our understanding created not only the DNA, but the concept of DNA and the mechanisms for it to behave as it does.

That's nothing compared to the nature of matter, energy, time, and space. For it all to behave as it does, and for life to exist, there has to something beyond dumb luck.


"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen

FormerLurker  posted on  2009-02-04   2:02:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   Edit


FormerLurker  posted on  2009-02-04   5:11:01 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#271. To: FormerLurker (#252)

I said macro evolution does not need a God to occur. And I am correct. But macro evolution is only a fairy tale that has no evidence to support it whatsoever. If macro evolution were proven true then God would be a liar saying he created all things in six days. If God is a liar, then what difference does it make if he exists or not?

I said my faith in God is not irrational, and it isn't. If believing in God required me to be irrational to do so then I couldn't do it. But your faith in macro evolution and man made global warming is irrational.

RickyJ  posted on  2009-02-04   15:05:42 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#288. To: RickyJ (#271)

I said macro evolution does not need a God to occur. And I am correct.

No you are not. God could very well work through any process God chooses, and just because YOU think he can't doesn't make it so.

If macro evolution were proven true then God would be a liar saying he created all things in six days.

God didn't say that, MEN did. That you think God sat down and wrote a book illustrates how childish you are.

FormerLurker  posted on  2009-02-04   17:17:37 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#308. To: FormerLurker (#288) (Edited)

If macro evolution were proven true then God would be a liar saying he created all things in six days.

God didn't say that, MEN did. That you think God sat down and wrote a book illustrates how childish you are.

It's called the inspired word of God. You can choose to believe men made it up, but I don't believe that at all. For me it is the inspired word of God written down by men. God is more than capable of preserving his inspired word should anyone try to change it.

God made all things we can know about in six 24 hour days. He could have done it in a nano-second if he wanted to, but he chose to do it in six 24 hour days.

RickyJ  posted on  2009-02-04   19:06:18 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#367. To: RickyJ (#308)

God made all things we can know about in six 24 hour days. He could have done it in a nano-second if he wanted to, but he chose to do it in six 24 hour days.

When was the last time you actually read your Bible?

A thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday. Psalms, xc, 4.

One day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. Peter, iii, 8.

RickyJ, which is correct? Your analysis of six 24 hour days or these Biblical sources, the inspired word of God, that contradict your own assumptions? The Bible is filled with contradictions such as this.

My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge. Hosea 4, 6.

For this very reason, make every effort to add to your faith, virtue; and to virtue, knowledge.

abraxas  posted on  2009-02-04   22:54:05 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#388. To: abraxas (#367)

One day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. Peter, iii, 8.

God is outside of time numbnuts. But he created time and our world is governed by it. Damn your slow.

Old Friend  posted on  2009-02-05   9:43:23 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#442. To: Old Friend (#388)

God is outside of time numbnuts. But he created time and our world is governed by it. Damn your slow

Damn you are a walking contradiction. If God is outside time, who shall deem one of His days 24 hours? What no response to the warnings of following the scribes and the prophets? What no mention of Biblical contradictions?

I thought you said that a day was 24 hours, Old Friend. Peter contradicts your statement within the "infallible" Bible. Don't you even read the Bible you profess to be the science of life on Earth? Obviously not.

abraxas  posted on  2009-02-05   12:25:47 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#444. To: abraxas (#442)

If God is outside time, who shall deem one of His days 24 hours?

We are subject to time not God. Not that complicated.

Peter contradicts your statement within the "infallible" Bible.

Please show me what you believe to be a contradiction. Maybe I can clear it up for you or maybe not.

Old Friend  posted on  2009-02-05   12:40:49 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#445. To: Old Friend (#444)

We are subject to time not God. Not that complicated.

Huh? Did you mean to say that time is more powerful than God, or was that a typo?

FormerLurker  posted on  2009-02-05   12:55:16 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#447. To: FormerLurker (#445)

We are subject to time not God. Not that complicated.

We are subject to time, god isn't. Not that complicated.

Old Friend  posted on  2009-02-05   12:59:16 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 447.

        There are no replies to Comment # 447.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 447.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]