Jump to content
Snow?
Local
Radar
Cold?

Hemlock

Members
  • Posts

    553
  • Joined

Posts posted by Hemlock

  1. Sorry GW but you've got most of that back to front and upside down, I spent several years working as a Keeper and many more working along side them and i'm yet to meet one who actually wanted to kill anything protected.

    As with most things in life money is the real evil at work here not the keeper, rearing birds to adulthood ready for shooting is a very expensive business, costs vary but we worked on an average cost of £10 per bird, generally a keeper is told that all predators without exception have to be eradicated, 'They cost me £10 a shot so you'd damn well better make sure nothing else is taking them' or words to that effect are often used. Something else that people often don't realise is that keepers are usually paid a pittance, often living in tied accomodation, and paid little more than a living allowance, so, even if you disagree with your employer its very difficult to rebel, especially those with a family, not only do you stand to loose your job but your home as well.

    I must add that not all landowners are evil, infact the vast majority aren't, a few bad uns get the rest a bad name i'm afraid.

    We have the same on our grouse moor. I think both landowner and gamekeeper should be open for penalties if protected species are killed on their land.

    Game keepers should be put on a restricted list not allowing employ for a specified period and land owners should forfeit a percentage of shoot profits.

    All too often landowners give their men carte Blanche to run the estate and then try and plead ignorance of their head keepers 'ways'. They employ them they should ensure they know what is and isn't allowed!!

  2. I can't get rid of the image of 'Comic book guy' from the Simpson's and his last words as he faces the French Neutron bomb/missile..................

    Oh dear, can it be true, are we really doomed? assuming we survive bird flu first :wallbash:

    No offence GW, if you want to worry about something with a remote possibility of occuring almost 30 years in the future you carry on and i'll carry on living my life, i've no need to worry, you do it for me.

  3. Thanks Mondy , I was begining to think I'd not read up enough before opening the post. Obviously Wikpedia need to revise their odds or I might consider a wager with them (Hemmy, take note!!!).

    Note taken, so now you want me to worry about a magnolia rock having to hit a 400 metre wide theoretical corridor in space to set up a remote possibility of hitting the earth?

    I'm more worried about the lack of milk in the office this morning.

  4. However there remained a possibility that during the 2029 close encounter with Earth, Apophis would pass through a "gravitational keyhole", a precise region in space no more than about 400 meters across, that would set up a future impact on April 13, 2036.
    An additional impact date in 2037 has been identified, however the impact probability for that encounter is 1 in 12.3 million.

    No offence, but i've get better things to do than worry about a rock having to hit a 400 metre wide corridor to set up a shot of hitting us. A 45000 - 1 shot I should add.

    Edit: taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_MN4

  5. Well, having read most of this thread the thing that really strikes me is how the onus has been put on the consumer not the manufacturer or supplier to cut energy usage, pollution etc, turning a light off, turning your heating down a degree or two, not very effective is it? Sure, IF the entire country did it (Unlikely) then yes, it would make a slight difference. Personally what i'd like to see is manufacturers forced to find ways of producing appliances that use far less energy, imagine the difference if appliances world wide used 30-40% less energy,apply the same to transport and industry and then we are really starting to make a difference, turning a light off just smacks of a token effort in tackling a far bigger problem.

  6. Sarcastic comments aside, I was referring to your posts earlier in the thread as you well know.

    We are rural and as such have many tight ,blind corners. My biker 'sense' has stopped me having many unplanned meetings around these routes (mostly witnessed by my partner) so I don't mind it so much when I find no danger around the bend but these instances are remarkable as they make up the least frequent event.
    So your accepting that 'prior knowledge' can be a useful addition to your personal safety but only see it as cognitive process?

    If you had a 'bad feeling' about something would you/have you dismissed it because you couldn't understand why you should have the concerns or have you 'hedged your bets' just in case?

    Have there been any 'problems' with things if you haven't accepted your 'gut feelings' and carried on regardless?

  7. So your accepting that 'prior knowledge' can be a useful addition to your personal safety but only see it as cognitive process?

    If you had a 'bad feeling' about something would you/have you dismissed it because you couldn't understand why you should have the concerns or have you 'hedged your bets' just in case?

    Have there been any 'problems' with things if you haven't accepted your 'gut feelings' and carried on regardless?

    Erm, its just common sense GW, I know an area can be dangerous and as such I'm naturally cautious when approaching said area, there is nothing mystical about it, its just plain old common sense, same as when somebody makes you a cup of tea, the first sip you always tentatively bring the cup to your lips because you are aware there is a chance it could be hot enough to burn you, our brain is very good at remembering places and situations that have hurt or scared us, any future caution is 2nd nature in those situations, almost as if its been hardwired in, however, it IS just a reference to a past experience.

  8. We are rural and as such have many tight ,blind corners. My biker 'sense' has stopped me having many unplanned meetings around these routes (mostly witnessed by my partner) so I don't mind it so much when I find no danger around the bend but these instances are remarkable as they make up the least frequent event.

    I'm not sure I understand this, I also live in a very rural area, I use a tight twisty B road twice a day to and from work and I've also managed to avoid several accidents through nothing else but caution, I know the areas where people are liable to cut corners, be driving to fast, i know where the pot holes that can throw you into the middle of the road are etc and have avoided a certain collision on several occasions, this however is nothing more that a bit of common sense and a prior knowledge of the road and its conditions.

×
×
  • Create New...