Poor Larry. Still trying to hold me to a different standard than you hold yourself? The original topic of this thread is #4 lead shot, but that didn't stop you from going off-topic and talking about steel shot and hunting waterfowl that can no longer be hunted with any lead shot in the U.S. or Canada. So why don't you start a new thread to enthrall us all with your vast shotgun and pellet counting knowledge?
I see you backed away from that wild claim you made earlier when you said this about your "Lead is Toxic. Toxic = Bad." statement:
Thanks for the useful contribution to the discussion, Keith. The first 3 sentences of that quote represent the position of those who think we should switch from lead to nontox for everything. Not my position.
It would be impossible for you to support that lame excuse to anyone who took the time to actually read that whole post (#434181 on 1/26/16), especially after all of the other posts you made in the Condor thread preceding it. But I guess it was more important to attempt to discredit me than to tell the truth.
If you didn't consider the original North Dakota data on lead fragments in 53 out of 95 packets of ground venison valid, then why did you keep repeating it... along with your many unproven statements about seeing eagles feeding on almost every road killed deer you saw in Wisconsin, comments on eagles feeding on hunter shot deer carcasses or gut piles that are contaminated with lead bullet fragments, and the obviously biased data on the alleged large amount of lead bullet fragments found in gut piles and dead game animals? I didn't miss your actual points within that thread, and neither did craigd or any of the several other guys who disagreed with you.
Besides, we weren't discussing blood lead levels in humans. Your big concern was raptors that had allegedly been getting sick and dying from eating lead tainted ducks and geese until the 1991 ban on lead shot, and then apparently moving on to consuming lead tainted deer and gut piles that were chock full of lead bullet fragments. That, and the problem rifle hunters faced in justifying the continued use of lead bullets.
Since you are such a great ballistics expert Larry, did you ever stop to think about those alleged bullet fragments that supposedly ended up 2 to 3 feet from the wound channel in Dr. Comatzer's junk study? He said that many of these particles that showed up on CT scans were difficult or impossible to locate within the meat because the particles were usually extremely small... down to dust size. So Mr. Ballistics Expert, how does a dust sized fragment of lead take a near right angle turn, and travel so far from the wound channel through muscle, entrails, and other tissue? What is the sectional density of tiny particles and lead dust?
And isn't that exactly why I have said you aren't ready to engage in a discussion on all of the science that is readily available to anyone with an interest... Science that opposes the junk science that you tout, and that was used to support the Federal lead shot ban in 1991? Do you really think I'd just be bluffing about something like that? If you did ten minutes of serious searching, and had the ability to differentiate between good science and agenda driven garbage, you'd quickly realize that you are wrong. But being able to admit you are wrong just isn't in you. You keep demanding something that you couldn't understand and would never accept, and would sooner shoot any messenger who disputes your beliefs. A smart guy like you should understand by now that attempting to dishonestly discredit me isn't going to make me go away.
