ORIGINAL: ShatoDavis
The key term is Peer. I seen some "research" done for the Sierra club,Peta, Humane society, etc. They where peer reviewed and they where total garbage.
That's possible but again your paranoid. Peer reviewed articles have to pass extremely rigorous review before they are published. For the most part they are solid science. Are there some obviously biased studies out there?Sure. But notas many as the "Ivory Tower" haters would like the public to believe.
ORIGINAL: ShatoDavis
That is very true. A degree doesn't make you an expert. Its human nature to think that your stand on issue is right and others that disagree are totally wrong. As a scientist you should know that there are no absolutes. Your arrogance is palpable!
I'm not advocating an absolute. Quite the opposite. I'm the one interjecting in an attempt to balance the fanaticism of the anti-wolf side. It's the anti-wolf side that would have us believe that it's a black and white issue. To them it seems all natural resources are tagged with a "evil" or "good" moniker. As we all know, few things in the universe above the atomic level are binary, and natural resource issues are no exeception.
Of course I'm going to debate hard and attempt to sway people to what I feel is true, such is the purpose of debate in case you've forgotten.
ORIGINAL: ShatoDavis
My personal feelings on the wolf issue is that theyhave just as much right to be here as us. There are too many interests involved to say that the wolf should be allowed to go unmanaged. There has to be a middle ground where the wolves can be controlled to the point where there is a sustainable population with as little detrimentas possible to wildlife, livestock, and humans.
That'smy point. Personal feelings have no place in seeking the truth. It only invites bias, subjectivity while at the same time undermining any credible points that might be made. This is why the antiwolf argument falls flat.
There is a middle ground and as with almost every scientific foray, the truth lies somewhere in the middle. The prowolfers don't have it, and the antiwolfers don't have it. The only people who are even moderately inclined to be objective is scientists.
I have to say though that the quality of posts on this topic has gone up 100% since that last time this can of worms was opened.