Please correct me if i'm wrong,,
but wont the seawater itself, when the tide comes in, put the little creatures under pressure?
I'm sure one of you clever fellows can work out the comparison;)
Printable View
Please correct me if i'm wrong,,
but wont the seawater itself, when the tide comes in, put the little creatures under pressure?
I'm sure one of you clever fellows can work out the comparison;)
Backstroke perhaps?:angel:
Try this experiment:
1> Wait till the tide comes in, wade out to the same spot and sit on the sand:).
2> Wait till the tide goes out, walk out to the same spot and lay on the sand, then have your Mrs run over you with the 4WD:angel:.
I think the latter will hurt more.....but your Mrs would probably get a laugh.:D
Quite right and your mention of the Franklin gives me a good excuse to tell a story that I believe has a tenuous connection with this thread. Anyway relevant or not, I think it is a revealing story.
After enjoying a cruise up the Gordon about 18 months ago, I asked the very capable and articulate young lady who had been our guide what the attitude of the locals was now to the Franklin Dam issue. I asked her if there was anyone who still believed the dam should have been built.
Her comment about why some locals had been so enthusiastic about the dam was very interesting.
I think she used her own uncle as an example of someone who was desperate for the dam to proceed. Apparently he was one of the Taswegians who believed that because the Tas govt said it should be built and because the Hydro Commission said it should be built, that the project would go ahead.
It seems that on the strength of that he took out a huge loan to buy some very expensive earth moving equipment because he had reason to believe he would get some of the earth moving work.
He wanted the dam to go ahead because if it didn't, he would be ruined financially. His enthusiasm for the dam had nothing to do with the issue of whether the dam was needed or appropriate. He needed it to survive financially.
Apparently that was not an isolated case.
Sometimes people's support for or opposition to a project or philosphy is prompted by reasons that have nothing to do with the rights or wrongs of the project itself.
I think the dubious connection with this thread is that sometimes it is necessary to read between the lines to understand what motivates someone's stance on an issue.
Yes, I think you are in need of a mirror.
These two clowns have perpetuated a lie and some of you have taken it, hook line and sinker.
One provided the bullets and the other fired them, yet they have not given one shred of evidence that there is any problem at all.
Had they shown that there was a problem then I would be one of the first to voice my concerns and to ask if there was a remedy or solution.
The only real problem is that is that they have created a mythical problem that lacks any form basis to this mythical problem.
Point one, as already raised, the beach sand is still pristine and the birds and fish are still there and this is after 50 or 60 years of 4x4 use, so where are all these 4x4s causing any problem?
Point two, the story covers the beach during daylight hours but there is no mention of whether the beach microbe life is back to normal at night when there is very little to no 4x4 activity or would this upset the mythical problem causer?
Reality check, I hate liars and these two are nothing more than that. 4x4s may very well be killing these microbes but there is zero evidence that this is causing any other forms of problems, so if these two were fairdinkum, they would not have made out there was a mythical problem, BUT HAY this would have meant there program would not have of any interest to anybody, greenie or otherwise.