So I Went To The Birch Aquarium...

[Royak]

"...and learned that many people who are against no-take marine life protection zones are against them for "profit". For a while I thought I was in a place of scientific integrity and ethics..."

I love the Birch Aquarium, but sometimes I think it's run by loons. Lots of "ghost forest" propaganda, etc. We have to remember that it's parent organization, Scripps Institute of Oceanography, is largely dependent on enviro-foundation grant money to "study" subjects that will serve the agenda of those foundations. It may be science, but it's mostly political science.

[FISHIONADO]

I'm a supporter of Scripps and believe in their integrity. They have contributed volumes to our knowledge of the oceans and the environment, Scripps gave us the tide tables we use today, Walter Munk created them to support our D-Day invasion in WWII. Most of our weather forecasting comes from their early research. They do solid research and engineering and are contracted by some of the large oil companies for their underwater engineering. I'd be interested to hear where you did your research and formed your opinions.

Not a hater, just sharing anther opinion.

[Royak]

"I'm a supporter of Scripps and believe in their integrity..."

Well, I believe in its integrity also...its PAST integrity, that is; great names, outstanding science. There's still a lot of good work going on at Scripps, but its tainted by the growing trend toward pseudo-science. An obvious example of this is its blatant support of the MLPA. It's political legislation, not scientific. And the potential foundation grants available to researchers as a result of its implementation is widely accepted. Still, with the state broke and the economy in shambles, one can understand the temptations of this ocean of foundation money.

I've been a member/supporter of the aquarium for over 30 years, but am now starting to cringe when I write my annual check.

[sandydiego]

Originally Posted by Royak

"I'm a supporter of Scripps and believe in their integrity..."

Well, I believe in its integrity also...its PAST integrity, that is; great names, outstanding science. There's still a lot of good work going on at Scripps, but its tainted by the growing trend toward pseudo-science. An obvious example of this is its blatant support of the MLPA. It's political legislation, not scientific.

This was my reaction as well the last trip to the Birch. Just stay out of the south wing!

[yuana]

Nice thread, I am glad there is at this forum and I can learn a lot from this threat.

[sterling]

You all have missed the BIGGEST POINT in regards to global warming.
About a year and a half to two years ago the "inventor" I mean discoverer of global warming publically announced that it was "bad science" and could NOT be proven. It was almost like the news ticker across the bottom of the screen, no one paid attention to it! Here was the F-er that started this BS stating "Opps, my bad, its not true". The damn liberal media whispered it and continued the policitally charged topic to the point that is it still up as scientific displays in "scientific houses." The enviro whackos are really out to F us all!

[FISHIONADO]

Originally Posted by sterling

You all have missed the BIGGEST POINT in regards to global warming.
About a year and a half to two years ago the "inventor" I mean discoverer of global warming publically announced that it was "bad science" and could NOT be proven. It was almost like the news ticker across the bottom of the screen, no one paid attention to it! Here was the F-er that started this BS stating "Opps, my bad, its not true". The damn liberal media whispered it and continued the policitally charged topic to the point that is it still up as scientific displays in "scientific houses." The enviro whackos are really out to F us all!

It takes a naive person to believe that just one person started a scam that most reputable science groups have bought into. You people also distort the actual message by adding crazy stuff to it like "therefore we're all gonna die". I don't know so much about the Birch Aquarium but Scripps tracks and predicts climate change such as droughts and el ninos etc, not Mayan calendar type stuff.

[Fiskadoro]

Originally Posted by Royak

Scripps Institute of Oceanography, is largely dependent on enviro-foundation grant money to "study" subjects that will serve the agenda of those foundations. It may be science, but it's mostly political science.

LMAO!!! Mighty BIG BLUE FONT you got there!!

Thanks for that info.

Has it ever occurred to you that you are insulting a shitload of people that actually have done a shitload of work for us over the years, and whose research has greatly benefited fisherman?

I'll be sure and tell my friends at Scripps that just happen to be marine biologists that those interesting topics they are studying like Thresher Shark, and Tuna migration, are just part of a eco freak agenda and only political science.

What's next are you going to demand we close down the seabass hatcheries because they get grants as well? I'm just asking because those hatcheries and the associated Gill Net Ban were pushed for by the very same scientists your slandering seems to really have improved our seabass fishing in the last decade.

Speaking of the last decade.... aren't you the same Royak from the Allcoast political board? That board and the constant conflicts it's spawned did wonders for that site.

If so good to see you on a board that has something that actually has something to do with fishing. I mean I've always wondered if you actually fish. Or if you just go from fishing website to fishing website posting political stuff.

I mean it seems to me...

Though you play lip service to fishing, your posts are largely dependent on your political agenda, and though it may seem to be fishing related, it's mostly just politics.

Then again I guess trolling IS fishing related.

[Handymansd]

Can someone pass the popcorn?

[bubblehide]

Originally Posted by Handymansd

Can someone pass the popcorn?

Oh come on now, haven't you ever believed in something strongly enough to defend it?

[Croaker Dave]

It was saddening to go to the Aquarium website and see the inflammatory labels "deniers" and "denialism" right up front.

I wonder how they are exempt from UCSD's Principles of Community that require a climate of dignity and mutual respect for each other.

I wonder how much of this attitude comes from Scripps pompous Prof. Emeritus Richard Somerville, who has a history of such intolerance and exaggeration. It has only served to discredit him, but he has not stopped. He seems to think that modern weather incidents such as hurricanes or the floods in Australia are proof of unprecedented runaway global warming, even though they have been diminishing in recent decades and have been preceded many times in the past by worse incidents.

Global warming “contrarians,” argued Somerville, are like people who argue HIV does not cause AIDS and that continental drift is mere fantasy. Responding to the reality that Galileo and Einstein were similarly viewed as contrarians in their time, he said, “An occasional Galileo does come along or an Einstein. Not often. Most people who think they’re a Galileo are just wrong.”

[Fiskadoro]

Originally Posted by bubblehide

Oh come on now, haven't you ever believed in something strongly enough to defend it?

It's one thing to defend something it's another to make ridiculous statements.

Are there people that want to stop us from fishing? Sure there are.... but to suggest that all scientific research associated with Scripps is somehow anti fishing, politically based or "political science" rather then real science is utterly absurd.

[Iceman]

Would you look at this!

http://youtu.be/EF8GhC-T_Mo

[Fiskadoro]

Originally Posted by Iceman

Would you look at this!

http://youtu.be/EF8GhC-T_Mo

Pretty funny....

Actually I prefer looking at these:

http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=...CeVlkoWLlas9wA

http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=...82u713SDJCRIkA

http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=...z2D9K6b40Yjq6g

Damn Scripps Scientists!!!

I'd say tagging all those T-sharks, Tuna and Wahoo many of which they caught on rod and reel is about as far from "political science" or a leftest agenda as it gets. I mean in one study they caught tagged and released something like 9714 hook and line caught tuna, of which 8695 were bigeye.

That sounds more like epic fishing then anti fishing activities. I have an outboard one of the guys gave me after that trip, you talk about beat to shit. They literally fished their gear until they couldn't fish any more.

Jim

[Ed]

Originally Posted by Jim Day

It's one thing to defend something it's another to make ridiculous statements.

Are there people that want to stop us from fishing? Sure there are.... but to suggest that all scientific research associated with Scripps is somehow anti fishing, politically based or "political science" rather then real science is utterly absurd.

X2

[jorluivil]

Originally Posted by Handymansd

Can someone pass the popcorn?

With or without butter?

[Royak]

Originally Posted by Jim Day

.... aren't you the same Royak from the Allcoast political board?

One and the same, Jim, although I haven't posted to that site for many years. Left it partly because of cranks writing multiple posts trying to defend the MLPA. Oh wait, that may have been you. If I remember correctly, it was a Jim Day that that attacked me for my "Sue the Bastards" solution to the MLPA problem.

By the way, re your follow-up comment that said, "...to suggest that all scientific research associated with Scripps is somehow anti fishing, politically based or "political science" rather then real science is utterly absurd.": Jim, no one in this thread has made that suggestion.

[Mtobolsky]

I don't believe in god. Just thought I'de throw that out there.

[Fiskadoro]

Originally Posted by Royak

Left it partly because of cranks writing multiple posts trying to defend the MLPA. Oh wait, that may have been you.

So same old Royak... Why am I not surprised.

I tend to think that people either deal with facts, or that they are intentionally trying to mislead people.

To be polite let's just say: No...you're wrong, you must be confused.... Never defended the MLPA ever to anyone. I've always been against recreational fishing closures from day one.

Originally Posted by Royak

If I remember correctly, it was a Jim Day that that attacked me for my "Sue the Bastards" solution to the MLPA problem.

I don't recall that specifically but I do remember back in like 2001 when some guys claimed that the whole MLPA process was never going to happen, that a simple lawsuit was going to stop it all in it's tracks: I said I thought that was unrealistic and that we had a long fight ahead of us, or basically that we needed to get our shit together or we were going to get screwed.

Then again when the same guys turned around and said that if we just elected Schwarzenegger governor in 2003, that he'd stop the MLPA process: I said I thought that was BS as well, and that the guys posting that nonsense were more interested in getting votes for their party then anything else.

Sorry if those positions offended you at the time but my take is basically I was right on both counts. The lawsuits you and others were suggesting back then were not a solution, we did not stop the process dead in it's tracks back in 2001, and voting in Schwarzenegger was basically a disaster as far as the MLPA was concerned.

Originally Posted by Royak

By the way, re your follow-up comment that said, "...to suggest that all scientific research associated with Scripps is somehow anti fishing, politically based or "political science" rather then real science is utterly absurd.": Jim, no one in this thread has made that suggestion.

Well imagine my confusion..... I mean when I read this....

Originally Posted by Royak

Scripps Institute of Oceanography, is largely dependent on enviro-foundation grant money to "study" subjects that will serve the agenda of those foundations. It may be science, but it's mostly political science.

I simply thought that you were saying that most of "Scripps Institute of Oceanography's" research was "mostly political science" your own words, which again: I do not agree with. I actually know some of the people involved in the research, and since I follow their work, I also happen to know that your politically motivated claim is utter BS.

I mean if you want to pretend I said things in the past I never said, that I supported the MLPA when I did not, or even that you never said things you obviously did say because they are still in this thread for everyone to read.....well... be my guest... because it's kinda funny and it's no skin off my back.

I just think your slandering some pretty good people who have given us a ton of information about the fish we fish for, but don't let that slow you down.

Hell.... I'll even break out the popcorn myself because if your just going to be making things up as you go along this should end up being a pretty entertaining read.

Jim

[Royak]

Originally Posted by Jim Day

"The lawsuits you and others were suggesting back then were not a solution"

OMG, it IS the same old anti-lawsuit JD. LOLOL
Of course a lawsuit against the MLPA had no guarantee of success beforehand. But it was...and is...our only option. Glad to read you've admitted your past reluctance.