July 16, 2018

The Continued Misrepresentation of Wildlife Watching

A recent Letter to the Editor in a Maine newspaper is, at best, misleading as well as selfishly hypocritical probably due mostly to ignorance.

In the Letter, the author says, “…about two-thirds more people come to this state every year to watch a live moose than to kill a moose…” I have my doubts that this person has any real data to support this claim but even if they did, the data would be inaccurate unless “you know a thing or two because you’ve seen a thing or two.”

I happen to know a thing a two about these statistics that claim that there are more wildlife watchers than hunters. Here’s how it works.

Yellowstone National Park is a prime and representative example of how “statistic prove that statistics can prove anything.” When visitors to the park are surveyed they are asked if they saw any wolves during their trip. Whether they did or didn’t matters not. The statistic they were seeking was to put this visitor down as someone who traveled to Yellowstone for the purpose of viewing a wolf. This way the data gatherers can drum up a number to support their wolf agendas.

Throughout the country similar surveys take place. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service conducts similar surveys. When asking participants in a survey what they did and where they went, they were also asked if they saw wildlife. If they did, they automatically become designated wildlife watchers even if their intent was something else. What they don’t differentiate is the honest and complete demographics of the person being surveyed.

Another example would be when a person who happens to be a hunter is in the woods hunting for any game animal when asked if they saw other wildlife, they then become a statistic labeled as a wildlife watcher, not necessarily a hunter. Most people believe because it is what they have been wrongfully misled to believe, that there are hunters and there are wildlife watchers. I don’t know of any hunters who aren’t wildlife watchers. So, what percentage of the “two-thirds” are actually hunters, fishermen, and/or trappers?

I might tend to agree that there are more people who come to Maine in hopes of seeing a moose somewhere than come to moose hunt. That’s a no-brainer. Only 210 moose permits were issued to “those from away” for the 2016 moose hunt.

The author mentions that hunting licenses in Maine have been on the decline. That may be so but it should be as important to ask why that might be so. Is it because those potential hunters have become wildlife watchers instead? Is it because the hunting over the past decade or so in Maine has become so poor fewer want to spend the money or take the time off work to hunt when success rates are dropping faster than the number of licensed hunters? Or maybe it’s like the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has determined that the number one reason for any reduction in hunting has to do with being able to get time off from work. So what does that suggest about the hunter? I’ll let you figure that out while you’re standing in the welfare hand-out line waiting to collect so you can go watch wildlife.

What’s also deliberately never spoken of is that if not for the efforts and money spent by hunters, there would be no moose watching or wildlife watching in general. And that is a fact that ALL hunters are extremely proud of. And we do that WITHOUT demanding that someone else change their lifestyle.

The author states a couple more grave errors deliberately attempting to influence public opinion. First, it is stated that if a constitutional amendment passed in Maine placing a “right to hunt” as part of the constitution, it “…would enshrine the right to hunt and fish into the Maine Constitution.” Whether intended by the author or not to mislead readers to believe that an amendment, as proposed, would give Maine citizens the protected right to hunt, fish and trap regardless of the goals and direction of the state’s wildlife management programs, use of the word “enshrine” certainly paints that picture. The proposal basically recognizes that hunting, fishing, and trapping are a scientifically proven method of managing wildlife populations to ensure their sustainability. It’s called the North American Model of Wildlife Management.

Secondly, if such an amendment passed it would not eliminate the right of citizens to petition the state in regards to wildlife management.

However, at the root of all this, we clearly see the real problem. The author makes the bold and extremely inaccurate statement that “…the hunting and trapping special interests in this state view wildlife as their own private preserve rather than a public resource.” That is the biggest bag of horse manure that I am sick and tired of selfish, ignorant, Leftist, immoral degenerates stating.

Clearly, it is before the reader to understand that there is nowhere in the majority of the hunting, fishing, and trapping collective that believes they own wildlife or game. It is the opposite. For decades the left has spent millions of dollars doing everything they can to force their perverse, degenerate lifestyle onto the rest of us. And just like the spoiled rotten brats they are, when hunters, fishermen, and trappers take a necessary step to protect one small activity to stop the onslaught, we are painted as selfish people who think the resource is ours alone. That’s never been the case in a million years.

Hunters understand that part of what they do is to perpetuate wildlife and make it so that everyone can enjoy it. We know that doesn’t come without a price. We understand that at times reductions in hunting permits need to be made in order to responsibly manage game populations. We like it when game populations exceed goals and we can hunt them and eat them. We understand that when we purchase a hunting, fishing, and/or a trapping license, that money is going toward responsible wildlife management for everyone to enjoy. How can any of this be seen as believing we own the resource?

As a matter of fact, it is the complete opposite. Not only does this writer want to claim ownership of the resource, but wants to prohibit those of us who have worked for generations from being able to enjoy it in our own way. Instead, by the will of the writer, we are supposed to stop doing what we do because the writer doesn’t believe in it or doesn’t care to be a part of it.

So you tell me who is the selfish one here who thinks THEY own the resource. Maybe if this mixed-up and misled person and their ilk would stop trying to make us just like them, people in Maine wouldnt be trying to figure out how to stop them.

Utter leftist, selfish, psycho-babble!!!

Share

Give Up Second Amendment in Exchange for an “Upgrade” of the First?

You can’t make this stuff up.

I was sent a link to an article at Powerline, where the author made a valiant attempt to inject some semblance of rational discourse into a topic that never experiences anything close to rationality – school shootings.

To prove this point, simply read the comments that follow the article. I’d like to take a moment and address one of them. A commenter writes: “I suggest a trade-off: Conservatives support the deletion of the 2nd amendment in return for an upgraded 1st amendment which restores prayer and Bible reading in the public schools, and makes the graphic depiction of murder on TV, film, the Internet and video games illegal.”

I immediately wondered what world this person must live in. I know where I live and it’s seldom in and of this world but I think my reasoning skills are a tad bit better. Let me explain, even though our existence has driven us to a point where an explanation is actually needed.

This person suggests that “conservatives” support the deletion of the Second Amendment as part of a trade-off. I’m wondering why liberals, who have and will continue to enjoy their Second Amendment right aren’t included in this obvious ignorant attack? I guess I just didn’t know only “conservatives” support the Second Amendment.

Try, if possible, to understand the trade-off. Before I comment further, I hope that it is obvious that this person fails miserably in understanding the First and Second Amendments or even holding any discernment as to the difference between a God-given right, a Government-given privilege, and the freedom to make choices according to your morals and/or ideology.

The commenter suggests an “upgrade” to the First Amendment in exchange for a repeal of the Second Amendment. It is unbelievable, to the unlearned I suppose, that a person views a reduction in their rights as an upgrade. Once upon a time a right, in the context of the Bill of Rights, was constructed with the idea that a person was free to exercise that right while at the same time not infringing on the choices of others in exercising any right or choosing not to. The comment above surely delineates a lost understanding of something so basic.

For those in need, here is the First Amendment as it is written: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

The “upgrade” is said to include: “…restores prayer and Bible reading in the public schools, and makes the graphic depiction of murder on TV, film, the Internet and video games illegal.”

For clarification, we the people and We The People, have butchered the First Amendment but not nearly to the extent of the Second. However, people mostly have the right to pray or read the Bible any place and at any time they so CHOOSE. I have yet to find written in the Bible where Yahweh says that prayer must be done openly in a public arena, in a formal and structurally organized way and included in the curriculum of public schools. In other words, because Government dictates that praying and Bible reading are not part of the public school curriculum, any student, for the most part, and while not disturbing others in their quest for an education, can pray or read their Bible if they so CHOOSE. I’ve never understood those that think they are denied their “right” to their established “religion” because prayer and Bible reading are not “REQUIRED.”

As much as what movies, music, video games, Internet, and all is a reflection of the decadent and immoral American society as a whole, last time I checked, a parent has a right to control what their children are allowed to see and listen to. Parents fail miserably in this but is that a good enough reason to pretend that making this crap illegal, in other words destroying another right of a person to CHOOSE, the right answer? Is that why the person called this an “upgrade.” Up is down, down is up…etc.

Supposedly, once we become “of age” we can CHOOSE to see and hear what we wish. As the Scriptures say: Bring up a child in the way in which he/she should go and he/she shall never depart from it. As much as some would desire, it is still quite difficult to control what a person thinks…short of lobotimization.

I would suppose that in this person’s mind, their “upgrade” was some kind of carrot at the end of a stick. It doesn’t work that way. Rights are about CHOICE not about being forced to have to abide by someone’s ideology, including governments’.

The Second Amendment doesn’t force people to pick up a gun and use it. The Second Amendment is about giving any lawful citizen of this country the option to do that if they CHOOSE. If I believe that Government is a serious threat to my existence, as well as my freedom to make choices, anyone mandating to me that the only gun I can own is a single shot .22 caliber rifle, isn’t allowing me full exercise of my right to self defense and/or the threat of tyranny.

What another commenter said was that there would be no First Amendment if the Second Amendment (or the principle on which it was founded) did not exist.

What man-governments have done to the Second Amendment, masked behind comments like, “reasonable controls,” is to continue to limit and restrict the choices of people in how they can defend themselves. Gun Free Zones outlaw freedom of choice. People who get shot and killed in a Gun Free Zone are the responsibility of every government and individual who demands and has been successful in taking away my freedom to choose how and where I can defend myself. Someday, you will have to answer for your totalitarian behavior, but for now, you will have to live with the reality of what you have done. There is blood on your hands.

Sleep well tonight, my pretty!

Share

A Psychological Meme On The Psychology Of The Modern Era Wolf Pimp

I bet if we used neuroscience, to better know the brains of pantheists who most often are psychopaths, a neurodevelopmental disorder, akin to autism, we’d then understand the pantheist wolf pimp mentality better. We know so much about the pathological psychopath mental state already, even reading these pantheists numerous comments advocating for wolves rights over mans rights and do a forensic analysis based on the psychopathy check list these disgusting comments they make in defense of wolves become self explanatory.. I see a need for more mental asylums in the U.S. and in Canada.. The Psychopathy Check List-Revised (PCL-R) was developed for researchers in 1980 and released publicly in 1991. It’s been the gold standard used by researchers ever since. Forensic clinicians and the justice system use it to identify the obvious hallmark traits and behaviors that make psychopaths chillingly unique. This research covers the ever growing population of ambulatory psychopaths as well, this is where the pantheist naturalist rights of trees dirt rocks even bugs are superior to mankind’s rights comes into recognition in the psychological world of this research. Thus wolf pimps can be a case study.. The term psychopath was coined in the mid- to late 1800s from its Greek roots psykhe and pathos, meaning “sick mind” or “suffering soul.” In that era, the condition was typically considered a type of moral insanity. An excellent book on the subject is The Mask of Sanity by psychiatrist Hervey Cleckley. The lack of empathy and callousness of the animals rights gurus speaks for itself.. In the case of the pantheist wolf pimp psychoanalysis perhaps using the method of semantic aphasia as an analogy could be useful. In semantic aphasia there is a loss of understanding of the meaning of words and terms, even though the pantheist wolf pimp subject can use words. Research professionals have used semantic aphasia to explain how psychopaths appear normal on the outside (the ‘Mask’) but inside have no comprehension of other people’s real experiences. This might explain why they claim wolf management rural advocates are not in touch with reality and obviously lie about everything , when in fact we’re telling them the truth.. This is certainly a fascinating research project I’m currently getting into… Essentially the psychology of scientism theories in relation to what pantheist wolf pimps are willing to believe meme is no less based on designing ‘experiments’ to test these ‘theories’ rather than simply advocating to enforce the theories, a ‘scientism theorist pantheist wolf pimp’ should be investigating and testing the assertions of these scientism narratives. And then also they should Psychoanalyze themselves__perhaps they can discover what makes THEM ALL tick?

Have a nice day psychos….

Share

The International System of Depopulation Explained

 

 

 

Share

A Conspiracy Of Quotes – Eugenics

Share

Placing Responsibility For Agenda 2030 Where It Deservedly Belongs

Where this Environmentalist Holocaust Originates is interesting..

AGENDA 2030 – A CALL TO ACTION{FOR DEPOPULATION OF PEOPLE}

Agenda 21’s eugenics programme of worldwide ‘preparedness’ having been finalised, calls for its eugenicist ambitions to be put into ‘action’ with its successor, Agenda 2030, primed and ready to do just that; whose programme into action for the eugenicist depopulation of the Earth has been officially announced by the Holy See as law at the General Assembly of the United Nations on the 25th of September 2015.

It must be understood that when the Holy See gave his climate-change encyclical – preceding his appearance at the United Nations – as well as his speech at the United Nations General Assembly, that his encyclical is an ecclesiastical letter as ‘actual law’ for all of the Churches fictitious jurisdictions. Together with his official pronouncements as ‘law’ given at the United Nations General Assembly, these both quite rightly are to be taken as ‘personally owned private laws’ for fictitious jurisdictional territories.

We read last paragraph, that –

“In the early centuries the term encyclical was applied, not only to papal letters…”

Source:

Encyclical
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05413a.htm

Letters of the popes:

We read from the 1st paragraph –

The popes began early, by virtue of the primacy, to issue laws as well for the entire Church as for individuals. This was done in the form of letters. Such letters were sent by the popes either of their own will or when application was made to them by synods, bishops, or individual Christians.”

We also read and learn –

“Following the example of the Roman emperors the popes soon established archives (scrinium) in which copies of their letters were placed as memorials for further use, and as proofs of authenticity.”

Source:

Ecclesiastical Letters
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09202a.htm

~

The Pope is an example of a Roman emperor –

Source:

EYE OF NEWT, TOE OF FROG – ACT III
https://thereisnodebt.wordpress.com/2014/12/29/eye-of-newt-toe-of-frog-act-iii/

From Chapter 2, entitled, The Crown of the Cæsars Passes to the Papacy, we read,

The Roman Church, without dispute, had by 538 inherited the seat of the Caesars, as Adolf Harnack recorded in his book What is Christianity?,

It [the Papacy] is a political creation, and as imposing as a World-Empire, because of the continuation of the Roman Empire. The Pope, who calls himself “King” and “Pontifex Maximus” is Caesar’s successor. (New York, Putnam, 1901, second edition, page 270).

The same historian concluded that—

The Roman Church in its way privily pushed itself into the place of the Roman World-Empire, of which it is the actual continuation. (Ibid.)

Alexander Clarence Flick in his historical work, The Rise of the Mediaeval Church, concluded that,

The mighty Catholic Church was little more than the Roman Empire baptised. Rome was transformed as well as converted. The very capital of the old Empire became the capital of the Christian Empire. The office of the Pontifex Maximus was continued in that of the Pope. . . . Even the Roman language has remained the official language of the Roman Catholic Church down through the ages. (New York: Burt Franklin, 1959 pp 148, 149).

http://www.sundaylaw.net/books/other/standish/twobeasts/tb02.htm

SOURCES & ALTERNATIVE SOURCES FOR READINGS IN CHURCH HISTORY

What is Christianity? (1957) by Harnack, Adolf von, 1851-1930, New York, Harper 1901
https://archive.org/details/whatischristian01saungoog

Adolf Harnack – German historian and theologian
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/harnack

Adolf von Harnack
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_von_Harnack

John 8:44

[44] You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and he stood not in the truth; because truth is not in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father thereof.

http://www.drbo.org/chapter/50008.htm

__

RULE THYSELF LEST YE BE RULED
https://thereisnodebt.wordpress.com/2014/01/22/rule-thyself-lest-ye-be-ruled/

_______

GOD OF PHARAOH AND HOLDER OF THE PERPETUALLY SELF-ENNOBLING PROPRIETARY SYSTEM OF DOMINANCE THAT IS OF NOBILITY— Of Pontifex Maximus

 

~

114-115 Supremacy of the Papal Power –

Innocent III here gives an interesting statement of the theory of papal supremacy and of the relations existing between papacy and empire. Innocent III to Acerbius, prior, and to the other clergy in Tuscany. As God, the creator of the universe, set two great lights in the firmament of heaven, the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night [Gen. 1:15, 16], so He set two great dignities in the firmament of the universal church, . . . the greater to rule the day, that is, souls, and the lesser to rule the night, that is, bodies. These dignities are the papal authority and the royal power. And just as the moon gets her light from the sun, and is inferior to the sun in quality, quantity, position, and effect, so the royal power gets the splendor of its dignity from the papal authority. . . .

http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/2277

~

I saw the coward on the stairway I did I did… He was looking at his toes…

So for more than 2000 years now the Devil huffed and puffed ’till he blew his disguise clean off and stands revealed as The New Rome… Risen From the Ashes to bring forth more death..

Share

The Crown Of The Caesars Passes To The Papacy

The Crown of the Cæsars Passes to the Papacy –

From Chapter 2, entitled, The Crown of the Cæsars Passes to the Papacy, we read,

The Roman Church, without dispute, had by 538 inherited the seat of the Caesars, as Adolf Harnack recorded in his book What is Christianity?,

It [the Papacy] is a political creation, and as imposing as a World-Empire, because of the continuation of the Roman Empire. The Pope, who calls himself “King” and “Pontifex Maximus” is Caesar’s successor. (New York, Putnam, 1901, second edition, page 270).

The same historian concluded that—

The Roman Church in its way privily pushed itself into the place of the Roman World-Empire, of which it is the actual continuation. (Ibid.)

Alexander Clarence Flick in his historical work, The Rise of the Mediaeval Church, concluded that,

The mighty Catholic Church was little more than the Roman Empire baptised. Rome was transformed as well as converted. The very capital of the old Empire became the capital of the Christian Empire. The office of the Pontifex Maximus was continued in that of the Pope. . . . Even the Roman language has remained the official language of the Roman Catholic Church down through the ages. (New York: Burt Franklin, 1959 pp 148, 149).

http://www.sundaylaw.net/books/other/standish/twobeasts/tb02.htm

SOURCES & ALTERNATIVE SOURCES FOR READINGS IN CHURCH HISTORY

What is Christianity? (1957) by Harnack, Adolf von, 1851-1930, New York, Harper 1901
https://archive.org/details/whatischristian01saungoog

Adolf Harnack – German historian and theologian
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/harnack

Adolf von Harnack
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_von_Harnack

Share

Over Focused On Only UNEP Wolf Issues Is A Huge Mistake

This is what you’re leaving your grandchildren because of your lazy lack of interest in the entire aspect of The United Nations Environmental Policies Biodiversity Assessment – Agenda 2030-2050-2100 Depopulation of Direct Drivers {Thats your children and grandchildren} Population Management of people objectives being implemented all around us in every aspect of today’s reality.. Banking, business, agricultural,slow removal of the hunting model, meat intake, goods and services, medical, legal.. All of course connected to a certain document that can do no wrong since Congress Assembled which is the Corporation Board room for the United States Corporation {privately owned business} via their COTUS deciding these changes of depopulation dynamics are Necessary and Proper.. In other words your beloved constitution is a device to subjugate and even eliminate your bloodline.. This effort is so out in the open to ignore it and continue looking down at your toes is simply completely redundant.. Lazy.. What do these monsters have to do to get your attention? Shoot at you?

Article I Section 8 Powers Of Congress
https://pepehateme.wordpress.com/2017/05/09/article-i-section-8-powers-of-congress/

 

From There Is No Debt.. Numerous blogs within a blog..

 

“THIS IS WHERE PEOPLE ARE BEING LED WITH THE USE OF DISTRACTIONS AND DOUBLESPEAK…TACIT AGREEMENT TO THEIR OWN GENOCIDAL DEPOPULATION AND FEUDAL CONCENTRATION CAMP ENSLAVEMENT”—ThereIsNoDebt

THIS IS THE HERE AND NOW…

The Privacyless, Freedomless Smart City of 2030 the Elite Are Engineering

Note –

Concentration camp smart city inmates, feudal serfs, citizen-slaves, subjects etc., all names synonymous with slaves, cannot of course own anything, and their movements will be restricted and limited within certain boundaries. (The Wildlands Project ensures restricted movement by implanting tracking microchips both in vehicles and personal identifying items and finally people, providing for invisible fences, without the necessity of crude barbed wire, that alerts the Self-Ennobling Ones and their self-validating clergy’s countries authorities to any attempted escape from smart city concentration camp imprisonment).—ThereIsNoDebt

Rosa Koire : Smart Cities are Future Agenda 21 Hi-Tech Monitored Concentration Camps

Reference material:

Scroll down to Appendix title heading –

APPENDIX I – WILDLANDS

Source:

APPENDICES
https://thereisnodebt.wordpress.com/2015/08/06/appendices/

¬

Flashback

AGENDA 21 – 2030 Genocidal Depopulation, Land Eviction, & Concentration Camp Human Settlements Disguised through the ‘WILDLANDS’ PROJECTS –

Uploaded on 2 May 2009
Henry Lamb on Wildlands Project

Reference source:

The Global Agenda presented by Henry Lamb
Henry Lamb: Agenda 21

Henry Lamb on Global Governance and the Future of the United States

 

Share