|
Post by starlightcriminal on Jun 3, 2011 10:14:35 GMT -8
How bout the "coolists" though, how many of them have their fingers (and other unmentionables) in big oil? You see that was already the precedent set, so is wrong for Al Gore to buy up as much alternative energy stock as he can while Dick Cheney bathes in blood oil? Let's not use economics as the excuse for pro-warming opinions- there is so much more invested in the old system of fossil fuels, and so many more prominent people involved in maintaining that "oil is not the problem" that the sheer numbers alone will dwarf any amount of financial benefit one could imagine from buying up every alternative fuel company you can think of. Oil is the hottest commodity out there and has been for quite some time. These are oil monarchs sad to see their kingdoms collapsing. And we are mistaking politicians for researchers. Most researches don't own much stock and politicians don't do research. The overwhelming majority of scientists in the world are in accord, it's the political end that is not so much. So it takes us back to the idea that "is" or "isn't" has nothing to do with reality and everything to do with political persuasion, otherwise we would not have to have conversations like this.
And by the way, "making little sacrifices" for the better of the earth is always self-aggrandizement- even those who supposedly "live off the grid"- they use currency don't they? Someone manufactured those solar panels, someone installed them, someone set up the electricity, and so on and so on. They are still taking advantage of the modern world's systems of commerce, meaning that whether or not you use city electricity or solar, you still are benefiting from it. The mere fact that you are using a computer, which represents all kinds of resource depletion in the manufacturing of a single unit, shows that we all just do it when it is convenient, and just to make ourselves feel better. Changing out your bulbs to compacts is very easy. Stop driving, don't use water pumped from the ground, don't buy anything ever, all of those things mean you can say you didn't have anything to do with supporting environmental destruction. Otherwise, the mere act of you buying something is confirming to the company that you endorse the product and everything involved in its production. It's not to say those things are evil, just that there are better, more sustainable ways of doing it that could be made even better if we would spend our money figuring that out rather than fighting overseas for the last two drops of oil.
And yes, most of the fuel alternatives are silly so far although even within that there are better options than what we have now- Biodiesel anyone? What's better right now than fuel made from your trash? And what would you suggest then, not spending money on research and development? How do you know fuel is bad until if you've thoroughly investigated it, or that it is even a potential fuel? As far as I know the only fuel that has really been very thoroughly investigated is OIL.
Denying the firm convictions of the "warmests" puts you with the Republican party I would guess, I don't think there are any other groups that align themselves this way- certainly not the majority of independents or Democrats. Not sure how that works across the seas, but I bet the "coolists" everywhere else are also aligned with their respective conservative parties. Naturally, conservatives by definition don't like change, even climate, right?
|
|
|
|
Post by starlightcriminal on Jun 2, 2011 10:56:28 GMT -8
papilio- Geographically isolated populations of the same species are often not useful for gene pool enrichment, especially if they have experience a bottle neck in population like the Ivory Bill would have, which presumes it is even still around (I'm reserving my opinion for more evidence as well- not very convincing at all). Please see Cheetah's for the most famous example. The two races cannot produce offspring even though they are the same and would be found in FAR greater number than the last two Ivory Bills, assuming they are still around.
Second, the "rash" of sightings is a common phenomenon as well. One person sees something and reports it, suddenly the suggestion is implanted in every would-be believer's mind and you have reports of it all over the place. This happens with alien sightings all the time. The aforementioned Skunk Ape is another great example of a "flurry" of sightings that are in reality a bunch of nut-cases or people who really crave attention. That is not reason to believe the animal is still alive either.
There is only one actual "observation" that is suggestive, the audio recording that has been dissected thoroughly here and everywhere else. Once someone who is not an amateur and NOT the group spending all their time and money on finding the Ivory bill produces something concrete I might be more apt to believe it. So far, only experts that claim to see this bird are the people most invested in it. Like all science, it is not convincing technically until you can demonstrate the validity of your hypothesis with independently verifiable data derived from separate, unique approaches. Goes to credibility, which has also been discussed at length here. You wouldn't make broad ultimatums, like declaring rediscovery of an extinct species you can't really show is alive exactly, without more than a "belief" that what you think is correct. If you do, then I also am very skeptical of the rest of your work and, moreover, of your ethics as a researcher. That's why we abstain from doing this in the scientific community and why those who do are... suspicious.
I think these guys really really want to find that bird so they are extrapolating conclusions that are unsupported. Notice how they are either brief, discrete sightings by locals or all from the Cornell Ornithology Lab? Why no other institutions?
|
|
|
Post by starlightcriminal on Jun 2, 2011 10:13:23 GMT -8
I experienced the Rapture, they're awesome live! But that guy is way off- it was last year and the show was completely free.
|
|
|
Post by starlightcriminal on Jun 2, 2011 10:08:29 GMT -8
Very cool, I'm jealous. My next security system will be a Cassowary. Wonder how it would look with a pedicure?
|
|
|
Post by starlightcriminal on Jun 2, 2011 10:04:29 GMT -8
Don't they do that every generation?
|
|
|
Post by starlightcriminal on Jun 2, 2011 9:47:13 GMT -8
Hello InsectNet,
Curious to hear if anyone has dealt with David Shaw before (Boones Mill, VA). Several recent postings and some last year. I tried to contact once before but only got a response that was something to the effect of-
"send money in advance, and quickly because it is first come first serve and I won't reserve" and doesn't accept paypal or anything "safe." Wondered how that works if I send money but everyone else beats me to it... so what? I'm just out the money then? Responded twice, but he never wrote back. Just the one message asking for money in advance for stock that was not guaranteed to be available, so I quit pushing the issue.
All of those things are easily explainable, but as I said, he never wrote back. Maybe that alone is reason enough to not use him? Poor customer service?
Appears to be legitimate, albeit non-communicative. Would love to hear if anyone else know this guy and what kind of experience you had. Thanks!
|
|
|
|
Post by starlightcriminal on Jun 1, 2011 9:23:27 GMT -8
Oops, I see you are in Chile. Elevation?
|
|
|
Post by starlightcriminal on Jun 1, 2011 9:21:38 GMT -8
A. dubernardi is tricky and they don't eat Salix for sure (or anything else but Pinus sp. despite whatever suggested diet you may see online) according to my buddy who has a great deal of experience with this species. Try two needled pines I'm sure you read- use a cladogram of Pinaceae to determine which species in your area is most related to confirmed hosts as they will be the most likely to have overlapping chemical profiles. They refuse all types of pine from my area. I know for certain they will eat P. virginiana, P. nigra and P. sylvestris but all occur in cooler climates generally than here- they also refuse P. thunbergiana, a two needled pine which is more tolerant of inconsistent winter dormancy. Let us know how it goes though, especially in regards to diet, always interested to hear in case I am ever brave enough to attempt them.
Fernando, are you located in a temperate region?
|
|
|
Post by starlightcriminal on Jun 1, 2011 9:04:38 GMT -8
Sounds unfortunate, I'm sorry to hear this happened.
One thing I would mention, only vaguely related since I don't know either party involved (and really more for Clark as we will want to follow his rules for providing this wonderful service), is that in cases where things escalate like this it may be prudent to post the emails if permitted. I understand they are lengthy but if I were a potential buyer I would surely like to read the exchange in order to get a feeling of why the transaction went bad. I would take the time to read them, personally. Then we can read direct quotations and appreciate how each party treated the other and whether or not the response was fair, if it was intentional, a misunderstanding, and so on.
On the issue of emails being private- ha ha ha. Do not think for one minute that emails are ever considered private, at least not here in the United States. Even if you are writing from a secure server to a secure sever, or just internally, emails are, by law, not considered private though we all like to imagine they are. Functionally, emails are more or less private, but legally (as in the case of defending your reputation from libel or slander) emails are fair game. So in a way, this is a note to everyone else as well- do not think using email protects you from exposure as you are not afforded any expectation of privacy in the eyes of the (US) law. A number of our politicians and a other social figures have learned this the hard way in recent years.
Clark will have to weigh in for the specifics of how he prefers things to be handled here specifically as that is his right as moderator, one which we should all be respectful of.
|
|
|
Post by starlightcriminal on May 23, 2011 9:50:45 GMT -8
Yes, most of the so-called "unindustrialized" nations skipped right over the primitive dial up crap and took to the internet when companies like Virgin, Verizon and the like set up cellular monopolies on each continent. Now I can whip out my cell phone and call someone at the top of the Massif de la Hotte after riding a mule for three hours to get there. I don't think South Africa, for example, is any less internet savvy or has any fewer highly impoverished people than Cameroon. I sort of think it has something to do with the political end- the other countries mentioned are all under established governments, at least since the internet revolution happened. Cameroon is somewhat fragmented to this day and may not have a government capable or interested in dealing with this type of international crime. Just a guess though.
|
|
|
Post by starlightcriminal on May 23, 2011 9:31:28 GMT -8
Yes proflek, but all of this can be solved another way. You point out all of the privacy issues. Why not just ask for a picture of the specimen with your name by it or with some other specific object? It's very easy to tell if a photo is altered. Then no privacy violation and it takes only a digital camera or a decent cell phone. Again, there are lots of ways you can prove your reliability without needing to expose yourself or others information. It's really the seller's loss if they can't do this and it is the seller's burden to prove. A buyer can take a risk if they feel it is worth it (i.e. inexpensive order or too good to pass up the chance type of thing) but seller's have no right to complain about doing business. After all, that's what they are doing. If they don't want to sell because you asked for a picture then they really deserve to get an *honest* (don't say the stole from you if they just wouldn't provide verification) review that states the facts- "so-and-so told me I asked to many questions and would not provide references, photographs, other documentation such that I cannot distinguish the offer from a potential scam and therefor will not buy from them or recommend them." That's the point of the trading reports. I certainly wouldn't order from someone with a report like that even though it is absolutely honest and says nothing about the legitimacy of the trader one way or the other. Just that they were not forthcoming. So as a seller, have something ready whether it is a reference or a reference photograph or don't be offended when someone reports the truth. If you don't want to seem like a suspicious seller then don't act like one. Using known bad-business practices will only make people think you are a bad businessman. The upkeep of your business and your professional reputation is not the buyer's responsibility. It's how business works- make accommodations for customers or lose them and potentially your business with them.
Nobody say over and over photographs, just one with something specific. Very easy. If you are too troubled by taking a photograph, why would I believe you aren't too troubled to pack up the specimen decently or label correctly in the first place? Why would I believe you weren't too troubled to actually have a real specimen in the first place? A simple photograph takes less than one minute to take and email. It's not an excuse, it's cause for suspicion. Of the examples you have above both lead to probably scammers (one that asks for money WesternUnion to Cameroon after clearly stating that they were in the US in the initial emails and that they accepted paypal; the other provides a picture of specimens with the label laid on top of the photo and then sent as "proof") so I'm guessing more often than not this type of treatment from a seller usually indicates dishonesty or at the very minimum a poorly constructed business with an impatient and disinterested seller. Either way, not the type I care to do business with.
|
|
|
Post by starlightcriminal on May 20, 2011 5:11:34 GMT -8
I will be there for a wedding so not much choice about the timing. But why miss an opportunity, right? Anyone have the scoop on necessary permits for Panama (collecting in general, leaving the country, etc.)?
|
|
|
Post by starlightcriminal on May 17, 2011 19:37:52 GMT -8
Of course the *crowning jewel* of any Criminoptera collection would be the ever present, yet seemingly impossible to net, the Cameroonian Scamarus westernunionotis. They go for lots if you get a really big one.
|
|
|
Odonata
May 17, 2011 7:48:58 GMT -8
Post by starlightcriminal on May 17, 2011 7:48:58 GMT -8
It should as far as I know- it's chemically sound reasoning and works in my experience. I haven't tried on everything and sometimes it does require injection for some of the larger bodied specimens, but it works very well on Odonata and Coleoptera, also some Hemiptera and Diptera. It's a matter of permanently "fixing" the bonds of the proteins that make up each pigment, which acetone is excellent for. It works by virtue of its ability to rapidly dehydrate in part so it's likely that some of the other desiccants that are non-denaturing would also work. Pruinosity is another issue because acetone treatment would disrupt the fine surface structure that creates the "powdery" look, as would most other liquids. Freeze drying might work but in general freezing and thawing only cause shearing of the pigment peptides (think of when you drop an ice cube into a glass of water and it pops and cracks- same thing happens to cells, proteins, everything else when it freezes and thaws which is a very easy way to ruin them) so I would be hesitant to recommend it unless you are certain the specimen is completely dried before you try to remove it, and then I would only remove it in a vacuum until the temperature of the specimen can equilibrate with the ambient temperature so it doesn't immediately begin to rehydrate with atmospheric moisture.
|
|
|
Post by starlightcriminal on May 17, 2011 7:36:37 GMT -8
Yes, Guiness book of world records lists the Cassowary (as we call it in the US) as the most deadly bird on earth. I've seen them only in aviaries and they are scary even behind wire- those evil looking eyes. It looks at you almost as though it *wants* to kick you.
|
|