Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Author Topic: Another example of feedlot industry secrecy.....  (Read 13379 times)

absolon

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 557
Re: Another example of feedlot industry secrecy.....
« Reply #15 on: May 07, 2013, 08:04:57 AM »

I think I'm starting to understand Dr Marty's position a little more......

Which one of you feedlot boys do I need to get permission from before I publish a post?

Why are you unable to answer a direct question?
Logged

alwaysfishn

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2364
Re: Another example of feedlot industry secrecy.....
« Reply #16 on: May 07, 2013, 08:48:29 AM »

http://rigorousintuition.ca/board2/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=34785

Another example of Dr Marty apparently not getting permission from the feedlot industry....

"Garver goes on to say:
“It’s actually quite interesting. The virus has really evolved to put out a lot of particles so that it can subsequently have a lot of particles out there to re-infect.” Megin River is an ecological reserve selected to preserve natural species. I wish this river luck as it pours it’s young salmon into a soup of viruses shed by Atlantic salmon. The river contains “Significant spawning runs of sockeye, chinook, coho, pink and chum – the chinook are listed as threatened and the coho and sockeye are listed as endangered.

”So IHN is known to be deadly to young salmon and Megin salmon are “endangered,” but wielding his position of authority, Dr. Gary Marty, fish farm vet for the Province jumps up to assure us: “the likelihood that this has any impact on wild salmon is very, very low.”

What Gary Marty does not tell us is that DFO reported back in 1991 that Atlantic salmon infected with IHN release more virus into the water than wild salmon. Download IHN Aquaculture Update 1991.pdf (390.6K) DFO also found out the virus can be active for 3 weeks in seawater, that means the billion of viral particles being released right now will continue to be able to infect wild salmon for 3 weeks. Download IHN AQUACULTURE 1992.pdf (681.4K)"
Logged
Disclosure:  This post has not been approved by the feedlot boys, therefore will likely be found to contain errors and statements that are out of context. :-[

absolon

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 557
Re: Another example of feedlot industry secrecy.....
« Reply #17 on: May 07, 2013, 09:02:25 AM »


"Garver goes on to say only this:
“It’s actually quite interesting. The virus has really evolved to put out a lot of particles so that it can subsequently have a lot of particles out there to re-infect.”

And the rest is all Alexandra Morton, a fact you didn't bother to mention.


Why do you always leave out important information?
Logged

alwaysfishn

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2364
Re: Another example of feedlot industry secrecy.....
« Reply #18 on: May 07, 2013, 09:04:16 AM »

And the rest is all Alexandra Morton, a fact you didn't bother to mention.


Why do you always leave out important information?


I didn't leave a word out.....  the link is at the top of my post.
Logged
Disclosure:  This post has not been approved by the feedlot boys, therefore will likely be found to contain errors and statements that are out of context. :-[

absolon

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 557
Re: Another example of feedlot industry secrecy.....
« Reply #19 on: May 07, 2013, 10:09:40 AM »

I didn't leave a word out.....  the link is at the top of my post.

When you quoted the statement, why didn't you say it was a statement by Morton?

Since you've decided to answer questions, why don't you tell us why every time there is mention of out of context or incorrect information, it's always in association with things you post?
Logged

alwaysfishn

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2364
Re: Another example of feedlot industry secrecy.....
« Reply #20 on: May 07, 2013, 11:41:43 AM »

When you quoted the statement, why didn't you say it was a statement by Morton?

Since you've decided to answer questions, why don't you tell us why every time there is mention of out of context or incorrect information, it's always in association with things you post?

Feel free to bring your feedlot perspective to any thread you like....  I prefer to providing objective comments on whatever I post.

Please note that the disclosure in my signature line should be a sufficient explanations for your pointless questioning.
Logged
Disclosure:  This post has not been approved by the feedlot boys, therefore will likely be found to contain errors and statements that are out of context. :-[

absolon

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 557
Re: Another example of feedlot industry secrecy.....
« Reply #21 on: May 07, 2013, 02:07:56 PM »

Feel free to bring your feedlot perspective to any thread you like....  I prefer to providing objective comments on whatever I post.

Please note that the disclosure in my signature line should be a sufficient explanations for your pointless questioning.

Your signature is cute, but unnecessary since it is one of those facts that have become self-evident. As well, just because you can spell objective doesn't mean you understand what it means.

Enough social banter; back to the point. Why won't you answer the question?

Why is it that every time there is mention of out of context or incorrect information, it's always in association with things you post?
Logged

dnibbles

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 281
Re: Another example of feedlot industry secrecy.....
« Reply #22 on: May 07, 2013, 07:55:57 PM »


Why is it that every time there is mention of out of context or incorrect information, it's always in association with things you post?

Because he's generally incorrect lol.
Logged

shuswapsteve

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 894
Re: Another example of feedlot industry secrecy.....
« Reply #23 on: May 13, 2013, 07:22:31 PM »

Because he's generally incorrect lol.
X2
lol
Logged