WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THE PA DEER AUDIT?
#41
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,978
Likes: 0
From:
Actually, what it means is that you lie "early and often" and thats why you get called a liar "early and often".[:-]
And your last post is but one more fine example.[&:]
And your last post is but one more fine example.[&:]
#42
Gotta hand it to ya, even though your BS accusations lack any and all substance and you cant back them up, you are a persitent little bugger. Of course, saying the same thing over and over doesn't make it so but go ahead and knock yourself out.


Oh andto get back on topic, for your reading pleasure.....
http://www.huntingnet.com/forum/tm.aspx?m=3425407



Oh andto get back on topic, for your reading pleasure.....
http://www.huntingnet.com/forum/tm.aspx?m=3425407
#43
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
Likes: 0
Anyone who has been here any length of time knows that you have done your best to dispute the science of the current deer management plan. From your smoke and mirrors twists of fact to your laughable claim that folks like Dr Kroll, Charles Alsheimer, Dr Samuel etc simply "don't understand their own data", you have disputed the science all along. Now that an objective audit is getting started, you are back-pedaling before the thing even starts. LOL!
#44
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,212
Likes: 0
From: 3c pa
oh boy corne is in 3rd grade and wants the monkey bars. Say liar all you want i know the truth of the matter
I am waiting for the whole audit to shake out in the wash. before making my decision if it isa sham or not.
I am waiting for the whole audit to shake out in the wash. before making my decision if it isa sham or not.
#49
ORIGINAL: bluebird2
Looks like you decided the audit would be objective before you saw any results , yet you criticize others for expressing their opinion that the audit will be biased.
Anyone who has been here any length of time knows that you have done your best to dispute the science of the current deer management plan. From your smoke and mirrors twists of fact to your laughable claim that folks like Dr Kroll, Charles Alsheimer, Dr Samuel etc simply "don't understand their own data", you have disputed the science all along. Now that an objective audit is getting started, you are back-pedaling before the thing even starts. LOL!
You and Corny on the other hand have already concluded that it will be biased before it has even started and without having any legitimate facts to back up your position. By claiming bias before the fact, youexpose your own blatant unfounded bias on the subject.


