|
|
#41
10-08-2005, 08:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: A thought on the big moose post.
[ QUOTE ]
Swordfisy used to weigh ~250 lbs if I remeber correctly. The big ones now are~100 lbs. Due to over fishing. [/ QUOTE ] I would be shocked if the reason for this was that fisherman were keeping the ~250 lb fish and throwing back the ~215 lb fish. Also, for this kind of thing, post a link or a reference. That way people won't dismiss your comment out of hand. 
|
|
#42
10-08-2005, 08:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A thought on the big moose post.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] badgers the size of bears [/ QUOTE ] Really? How big were the bears? [/ QUOTE ] lobsters used to grow to 6ft + before we started mass harvesting them
|
|
#43
10-08-2005, 08:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A thought on the big moose post.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I had the same reaction and had not chimed in yet for the same reasons. [/ QUOTE ] Well that is 3 people that have had the same reaction. And I insulted the OP (of this reaction). I guess this shows I have emotional issues or something, but whatever. I just know this thread is going to suck me in when I'm the only one giving sources. Sorry for being so hard on you sackup. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4281171.stm There are world records still being set, but there are counter arguements to that. Ugh... work to do. Later. [/ QUOTE ] No Worries at all. I definitely think it is an interesting topic and something I wish more people did consider. Most people have zero clue how much of an impact humans have on things from their different endeavors. I have not been up to date on this stuff as much as I would like recently. I was a bio major in undergrad, which was like 4 years ago and I'm now finishing up law school so not as much time to keep up with the science stuff. I'll have to check out the show you suggested...I'm usually just a little hesitant when someone suggests a movie with a hollywood actor talking about science...probably not fair, but I think an understandable reaction. Maybe I'll get motivated and have my old g/f who is a phd student in EEB look into this for me [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] According to her, she would love to get rid of all the house cats. Apparently they destroy more habitats than anything else. Super stealthy hunters.
|
|
#44
10-08-2005, 09:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A thought on the big moose post.
check this out
http://www.pbs.org/strangedays/episo...aters/experts/ I have a lot of respect for Edward Norton, he is no ordinary hollywood balloon.
|
|
#45
10-08-2005, 09:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A thought on the big moose post.
[ QUOTE ]
The biggest and the strongest fish are being replaced with smaller and often more sickly animals. [/ QUOTE ] Mismanagement of resources will screw things up every time. I used to hunt elk and deer in WA every year. Over the years, F&G instituted many changes in order to beef up the heard for the reasons you site. Usually through changes in what type, gender and size an animal had to be in order to be legally hunted. No longer are they managing just the size of the heard but also the quality. Many state F&G's have watersheads and fisheries that are catch and release only or have very stingy keeper regs. For instance when you fish for sturgeon it has to fall within a certain range in order to be kept. Not just anything over 3ft. There is no doubt much much more work needs to be done.
|
|
#46
10-08-2005, 10:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A thought on the big moose post.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Wow. I had never thought about this. I am googling for research right now. Very interesting. Thanks for posting a very interesting point to consider and discuss. I will return to this thread after having done some reading. [/ QUOTE ] Damn you diablo. Here is one link from Nature which is a top journal. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...4AF5FAF9FDAE00 [/ QUOTE ] Here's my problem with this study: it wasn't/can't be done in isolation. Maybe other factors are involved also? It does seem to be common sense, but as players-of-a-certain-game, we're aware that common sense isn't always correct. --Dave.
|
|
#47
10-08-2005, 11:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A thought on the big moose post.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Evolution takes hundreds of years when the environment is stable. Bacteria under a UV lamp evolve in days if not hours. I know I've done hundreds of experiments. It's all about the strength of the selective mechanism. Humans are a very strong selective mechanism. You also vastly underestimate the impact humans have on the planet. There has been a 90% decrease in large oceanic fish since 1960. Google it for articles. There is so much wrong with your post it's hard to know where to begin. [/ QUOTE ] Humans are definitely a HUGE selective mechanism, but moreso via endeavors other than big game hunting. I didn't say that hunting does not have an influence, but it would seem rather counterintuitive to think that animals would develop a mechanism to stop getting hunted by a limited predator (humans) compared to a natural predator which would be greatly advantaged by having its prey weaker. Please show me some articles that where an animals gets smaller when that animal has lots of natural predators and is hunted by humans. I'm just hard pressed to see that happening. Not saying it could not be the case, I'm just don't see it happening. [/ QUOTE ] Evolutionary theory suggests that something in many ways analogous to this happened with mammals vs. dinosaurs. The dinosaurs were such successful predators that mammals couldn't evolve past the size of rodents.
|
|
#48
10-08-2005, 11:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A thought on the big moose post.
[ QUOTE ]
This is such a garbage quote- animlas don't set themselves into equilibirm, competition and predators (and other natural selection measures) set limits. Without these limits basically every single species would eat them selves out of thier food sources. Also viruses do not do this (any more than anything else)- the only times that viruses wipe out huge segments of populations is where there is massive overcrowding or a lack of genetic variability or another "unnatural" circumstance. This quote shows an utter lack of understanding of biologicalorganisms... guess thats why its made by a computer. [/ QUOTE ] Too easy. Viruses like the Black Plague killed millions, from Asia to Africa to Europe, involving an obviously wide genetic variety in the death toll. At this time most people did not live in cities, so it wasn't from overcrowding, either, that this virus got its historical-scale deadliness.
|
|
#49
10-08-2005, 11:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A thought on the big moose post.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] So I'm wondering if, from a genetic standpoint, humans on average are in the process of getting somewhat dumber as generations go by. My guess would be "yes", but that's only a guess. And I admit to basing this guess not only on the above theory, but partially on personal anecdotal experience (such as my experiences buying things at checkout registers in stores, now versus 25 years ago), even though I know that anecdotal experience may be of limited or no value. [/ QUOTE ] You are evaluating the entirety of human intelligence based on your experience checking out of the grocery store? IIRC, you are close to being a senior citizen. I guarantee you no one in my much younger age group would be dumb enough to make prognostications on human intelligence based on what they see in the Enquirer. [/ QUOTE ] Bullsh*t. People of every age make stupid statements and have stupid ideas as a matter of course, and the idea that every generation is somehow smarter or better than the last is a narcissistic fantasy only the most naive among the young could possibly have.
|
|
#50
10-08-2005, 11:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A thought on the big moose post.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] So I'm wondering if, from a genetic standpoint, humans on average are in the process of getting somewhat dumber as generations go by. My guess would be "yes", but that's only a guess. And I admit to basing this guess not only on the above theory, but partially on personal anecdotal experience (such as my experiences buying things at checkout registers in stores, now versus 25 years ago), even though I know that anecdotal experience may be of limited or no value. [/ QUOTE ] You are evaluating the entirety of human intelligence based on your experience checking out of the grocery store? IIRC, you are close to being a senior citizen. I guarantee you no one in my much younger age group would be dumb enough to make prognostications on human intelligence based on what they see in the Enquirer. [/ QUOTE ] Bullsh*t. People of every age make stupid statements and have stupid ideas as a matter of course, and the idea that every generation is somehow smarter or better than the last is a narcissistic fantasy only the most naive among the young could possibly have. [/ QUOTE ] Google Flynn effect and get back to me. That goes for you too MMMMMM.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
