doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Simon says, Oh, never mind…

Lead is a persistent contaminant. The bird was not "guzzling leaded gasoline".
Stop being so juvenile.

Once I respected scientific articles. Having seen enough bunk between Climate and COVID, I am now suspicious of supposed scientific truth. The liars, spinners, and politicians of science have taught to read their stuff with much more caution. I see it in economics, education and history too and with a little thought could carry it into more fields with ease. Academic journals appear at times more about getting published than producing sound supported truth.

Nor do I believe that the politically motivated twisters of truth get their just desserts. I have lived long enough to see scoundrels prosper.

Should we insist scientists abide by the classic rules they once claimed to, of course we should. Do I think the genie of biased unscientific results masquerading as definitive truth will disappear, not likely.

Even medicine seems poisoned by the have changed, one example is equity over excellence in admissions. Psychology is terribly tainted with politics, every year we seem to add a new sex orientation category and then pretend it is new biologically founded truth. COVID goes without saying. I could go on but I believe the point is made.

Now back to the original question of Lead shot first for waterfowl then the the uplands. I remain convinced while extreme examples can be found that the evidence for non toxic waterfowl is suspect. It is a dead subject that is likely not to get revisited.

The science for the uplands might have some proof with condors, however given who produces those studies my suspicions are naturally raised. The same state argues for Carbon reduction, while consistently increasing their carbon footprint. Outside of their fairly unique Condor situation I have not heard any proven general upland threat posed by lead shot that is proven.

I believe that Upland lead shot bans are more about a back door to gun control. We must fight it hard. I really feel for hunters in blue states as they have an uphill battle.

So where did it come from? What's the chain that leads to eagles - a juvenile nonetheless.

"So where did it come from? What's the chain that leads to eagles - a juvenile nonetheless".

Are you really that stupid or do you just like stirring the pot? I'm through discussing science with you since you and science appear to be not well acquainted. Just because you claim to be a university prof does not make you a scientist.

Doesn’t surprise me that a liberal professor, dottering toward retirement, doesn’t have a clue where to start the process, with a species that is so easy to kill, either.


Best,
Ted

In other words, you can't answer. I get it. Pretty amazing that it hangs out in quantities large enough to kill a juvenile for decades. Interesting indeed.

Ted, if only you were half as tough and smart as you think you are.

But continue on. Maybe you can shoot another grouse with a wad (in your dreams like the first one). In the meantime, you will continue on as the bitter old man on a keyboard. At least you are good at that.

Behold, the professor who has discovered for us all, that wads in factory loaded ammunition can’t kill birds. He can’t read, either. I never said I did it, only witnessed it.

Details are important in science.


Best,
Ted

Thanks Ted, your determination to make an ass of yourself has been successful. Congratulations. Now, get out there with your wad loads and have at it. Great to know that we don't need lead - we don't even need shot. Just a wad. Yup. Great news.

Yes, up is down. I'm thankful for the little things, such as you're no longer accepting students. Stick 'em with a small fortune in loans, when they could pick up the same science and philosophy degree at the corner latte shop for free, right B.