Welcome to NEFF

Sign up for a new account today, or log on with your old account!
Register

Give us a try!

Welcome back to the new NEFF. Take a break from Twitter and Facebook. You don't go to Dicks for your fly fishing gear, you go to your local fly fishing store. Enjoy!

Saving the Chuitna River

emoussa said:
Yea I agree you are fuckin dumb. Your first problem is that you think there is any logic to be found on this site.

eating puppies doesn't get you to work and back every morning and then keep you and your kids warm every night.

the way I see it, innovation is not the problem. Thats just human nature. It's regulation that's failing. Blame government. Blame the demand and our wasteful culture.
Click to expand...

Well said.

The me me society; get a new one because the new one is more pretty. I must have it even if the older one works fine.
I have two 25 year old Orvis rods that I use. I have no need to get a new one. I also have far and fine I bought off of MAC, he gave me a price I could not refuse. I did not need it, the two older rods work fine and I have not had a situation that they could not perform to. It is all about wants and needs. It takes a certain amount of discipline to ascertain the difference between the two of them. A discipline that the consumption society frowns upon.
 
tomfly said:
Giving up that quick are we, and to think you went to law school.
Click to expand...

Tom, I will try to explain my argument.

First, I believe that oil and gas shouldn't be privately owned.

Because, roughly speaking, these things are not created by men, they are resources that always have been there.

Or have been there for a long, long time.

I was surprised to hear emoussa argue that drilling technology, and innovations related to extraction, fuel our cars and heat our homes.

He is incorrect about that.

Perhaps he meant to say that oil and gas heat my home? And fuel my car?

Because I don't need to thank anyone for the oil and gas that do those things.

A man invented the car, before man invented a better fuel than oil and gas...

Amazing how the cars keep getting better and better, but the fuel????

Now, it is clear that oil is extracted. And the cost of extracting oil has decreased so much, that this oil out in the Dakotas and elsewhere, which has been known to exist for as long as I can remember, are now being extracted from the earth.

This innovation is for extracting a natural resource.

It is like a sharp tooth, in a shark, or a claw on an eagle or a bear.

It has no moral significance, if it is necessary to make a kill, for the predator, or for man to extract oil he needs.

I am not sure I'd give thanks to my claws, were I a tiger or a bear. Its hard to know what came first, the sharp teeth or the appetite for fresh meat....

Now as to people, the oil is a natural resource, that we have needed for a relatively short period in our history.

Oil as a resource has stopped political, social and economic progress wherever it is abundant.

Like the Middle East.

And Texas.

The means of taking that resource is as much an innovation, I suppose, as a saber tooth in a tiger. It gets a job done.

But once the beasts that the saber tooth had evolved to kill were extinct, the cat went extinct too.

Our drilling technology will have no use, except incidental ones, after the resource either is used up or replaced. Perhaps we could use it to dig on asteroids, or on Mars? That would be cool, and innovative...

But clearly, for our human mind to be designing teeth, to extract resources, like evolution created saber tooths...

We can do better.

How about if all the profits were applied to R & D for alternative energy, that did not cause climate change?
 
Last edited:
golden beetle said:
Tom, I will try to explain my argument.

First, I believe that oil and gas shouldn't be privately owned.

Because, roughly speaking, these things are not created by men, they are resources that always have been there.

Or have been there for a long, long time.

I was surprised to hear emoussa argue that drilling technology, and innovations related to extraction, fuel our cars and heat our homes.

He is incorrect about that.

Perhaps he meant to say that oil and gas heat my home? And fuel my car?

Because I don't need to thank anyone for the oil and gas that do those things.

A man invented the car, before man invented a better fuel than oil and gas...

Amazing how the cars keep getting better and better, but the fuel????

Now, it is clear that oil is extracted. And the cost of extracting oil has decreased so much, that this oil out in the Dakotas and elsewhere, which has been known to exist for as long as I can remember, are now being extracted from the earth.

This innovation is for extracting a natural resource.

It is like a sharp tooth, in a shark, or a claw on an eagle or a bear.

It has no moral significance, if it is necessary to make a kill, for the predator, or for man to extract oil he needs.

I am not sure I'd give thanks to my claws, were I a tiger or a bear. Its hard to know what came first, the sharp teeth or the appetite for fresh meat....

Now as to people, the oil is a natural resource, that we have needed for a relatively short period in our history.

Oil as a resource has stopped political, social and economic progress wherever it is abundant.

Like the Middle East.

And Texas.

The means of taking that resource is as much an innovation, I suppose, as a saber tooth in a tiger. It gets a job done.

But once the beasts that the saber tooth had evolved to kill were extinct, the cat went extinct too.

Our drilling technology will have no use, except incidental ones, after the resource either is used up or replaced. Perhaps we could use it to dig on asteroids, or on Mars? That would be cool, and innovative...

But clearly, for our human mind to be designing teeth, to extract resources, like evolution created saber tooths...

We can do better.

How about if all the profits were applied to R & D for alternative energy, that did not cause climate change?
Click to expand...

How did you pay your college bills; you went somewhere pricey, right?
 
golden beetle said:
Tom, I will try to explain my argument.

First, I believe that oil and gas shouldn't be privately owned.

Because, roughly speaking, these things are not created by men, they are resources that always have been there.

Or have been there for a long, long time.

I was surprised to hear emoussa argue that drilling technology, and innovations related to extraction, fuel our cars and heat our homes.

He is incorrect about that.

Perhaps he meant to say that oil and gas heat my home? And fuel my car?

Because I don't need to thank anyone for the oil and gas that do those things.

A man invented the car, before man invented a better fuel than oil and gas...

Amazing how the cars keep getting better and better, but the fuel????

Now, it is clear that oil is extracted. And the cost of extracting oil has decreased so much, that this oil out in the Dakotas and elsewhere, which has been known to exist for as long as I can remember, are now being extracted from the earth.

This innovation is for extracting a natural resource.

It is like a sharp tooth, in a shark, or a claw on an eagle or a bear.

It has no moral significance, if it is necessary to make a kill, for the predator, or for man to extract oil he needs.

I am not sure I'd give thanks to my claws, were I a tiger or a bear. Its hard to know what came first, the sharp teeth or the appetite for fresh meat....

Now as to people, the oil is a natural resource, that we have needed for a relatively short period in our history.

Oil as a resource has stopped political, social and economic progress wherever it is abundant.

Like the Middle East.

And Texas.

The means of taking that resource is as much an innovation, I suppose, as a saber tooth in a tiger. It gets a job done.

But once the beasts that the saber tooth had evolved to kill were extinct, the cat went extinct too.

Our drilling technology will have no use, except incidental ones, after the resource either is used up or replaced. Perhaps we could use it to dig on asteroids, or on Mars? That would be cool, and innovative...

But clearly, for our human mind to be designing teeth, to extract resources, like evolution created saber tooths...

We can do better.

How about if all the profits were applied to R & D for alternative energy, that did not cause climate change?
Click to expand...

GB your argument is a philosophical. Not scientific or from an engineering aspect. By you statement;

"Because, roughly speaking, these things are not created by men, they are resources that always have been there."

Anyone can argue that all innovation could be considered public domain. furniture is made of trees, trees were not created by humans,. You can make an argument all things that are made of atoms, Atoms are a fundamental building block of all resources needed to produce goods. So everything ever engineered should be without a paten to protect it, because humans did not create the atoms excluding a few heavy elements. From a philosophical stand point I could go on forever with that argument.

You can come up with something better then what an freshmen in high school on any debate team could make a point upon.

Be a lawyer make a compelling argument to support your point.
 
Tom, the biggest company in the world is Saudi Aramco.

Why do you think its there?

(It has nothing to do with innovation and creativity.... More to do with something that was already there for fucking ever...)

I would not call the business of oil a good one. But it is a necessary one.

Apple made iPhones, and IBM and Microsoft made the computer stuff that made GB Mag possible.

Can you see how great innovation is like a fertile field of rich soil, and hot, steaming manure?

I flourish in it.

Seriously.

I am grateful to the computer technology that just lets these creative geeks go crazy with ideas...

And I loved watching the intel chips be improved every year, back in the day. And now I love watching the smart phones get better and better.

I dont buy every new generation of phone, but I would if I could afford it. (I use a Note 3.)

I like small businesses. That dude at River Song who makes nets, I gotta respect the dude and hope he makes a business of it.

I do business with local guides. I think Joe D is the best, but there are others. Find someone who is working on the river. I actually think that Tobias will be a great guide, up in Alaska. There's real passion for the rivers in him.

I sense it, the rivers are strong in that one...

I also built a small website here, with a Jersey developer... Guy named Matt Novak, at Traverse Design Co.

I try to associate myself with creative people.

Now, what the fuck is it about oil that is creative?

Its the most environmentally damaging, war causing, socially, politically, and economically retarding natural resource in the history of man.

Now, you want to do good? Acknowledge that oil is not a creative enterprise, and stop treating the idiots who profit from it, like the King of Saudi Arabia and the Koch Brothers, as if they were innovators, like Steve Jobs at Apple, or me at GB Mag.
 
Tom you nailed it in your first sentence. This is a philosophical or even better and ideological belief that beetle has. His position isn't based on reality:)
tomfly said:
GB your argument is a philosophical. Not scientific or from an engineering aspect. By you statement;

"Because, roughly speaking, these things are not created by men, they are resources that always have been there."

Anyone can argue that all innovation could be considered public domain. furniture is made of trees, trees were not created by humans,. You can make an argument all things that are made of atoms, Atoms are a fundamental building block of all resources needed to produce goods. So everything ever engineered should be without a paten to protect it, because humans did not create the atoms excluding a few heavy elements. From a philosophical stand point I could go on forever with that argument.

You can come up with something better then what an freshmen in high school on any debate team could make a point upon.

Be a lawyer make a compelling argument to support your point.
Click to expand...
 
golden beetle said:
Well said.

Unless you think the risk of causing an earthquake or contaminating the water supply as the type of "risk taking" you admire....
Click to expand...

Are you planning to demonstrate your opposition to fossil fuels in a meaningful way.
 
golden beetle said:
Tom, the biggest company in the world is Saudi Aramco.

Why do you think its there?

(It has nothing to do with innovation and creativity.... More to do with something that was already there for fucking ever...)

I would not call the business of oil a good one. But it is a necessary one.

Apple made iPhones, and IBM and Microsoft made the computer stuff that made GB Mag possible.

Can you see how great innovation is like a fertile field of rich soil, and hot, steaming manure?

I flourish in it.

Seriously.

I am grateful to the computer technology that just lets these creative geeks go crazy with ideas...

And I loved watching the intel chips be improved every year, back in the day. And now I love watching the smart phones get better and better.

I dont buy every new generation of phone, but I would if I could afford it. (I use a Note 3.)

I like small businesses. That dude at River Song who makes nets, I gotta respect the dude and hope he makes a business of it.

I do business with local guides. I think Joe D is the best, but there are others. Find someone who is working on the river. I actually think that Tobias will be a great guide, up in Alaska. There's real passion for the rivers in him.

I sense it, the rivers are strong in that one...

I also built a small website here, with a Jersey developer... Guy named Matt Novak, at Traverse Design Co.

I try to associate myself with creative people.

Now, what the fuck is it about oil that is creative?

Its the most environmentally damaging, war causing, socially, politically, and economically retarding natural resource in the history of man.

Now, you want to do good? Acknowledge that oil is not a creative enterprise, and stop treating the idiots who profit from it, like the King of Saudi Arabia and the Koch Brothers, as if they were innovators, like Steve Jobs at Apple, or me at GB Mag.
Click to expand...

GB I know you are not a idiot. We have hung out. You are lashing out with out proper research.
Here is a small sample size of the thousands of products that have some part of a barrel of oil in the products components

Ammonia, anesthetics, antifreeze, anti-histamines ,anti-septics, artificial limbs, artificial turf asphalt, aspirin, awnings ,balloons ,ballpoint pens bandages. Basketballs, bearing grease , bicycle tires, boats , bubble gum, cameras, candle ,car battery cases ,car enamel ,cassettes ,caulking ,cd playes, cd's ,clothes ,clothesline ,cold cream ,combs , computers, cortisone ,crayons ,curtains, dashboards ,denture adhesive, dentures ,deodorant, detergents ,dice, ,dishes ,dishwasher detergent ,dresses ,drinking cups ,dyes ,electric blankets ,electrician's tape ,enamel ,epoxy ,eyeglasses ,fan belts ,faucet washers ,fertilizers ,fishing boots ,fishing lures ,fishing rods ,floor wax ,folding doors ,food preservatives ,football cleats ,football helmets ,footballs ,glycerin ,golf bags ,golf balls ,guitar strings ,hair coloring ,hair curlers ,hand lotion ,heart valves ,house paint ,ice chests ,ice cube trays, ink .insect repellent ,insecticides , life jackets, linings ,linoleum ,lipstick, luggage , medicines, model cars ,mops ,motorcycle helmet ,movie film ,nail polish ,nylon rope ,oil filters ,paint, paint brushes ,paint rollers ,panty hose ,parachutes ,percolators , perfumes ,petroleum jelly ,pillows ,plastic wood ,purses ,putty ,refrigerant ,refrigerators ,roller skates ,roofing ,rubber cement ,rubbing alcohol ,safety glasses ,shag rugs ,shampoo ,shaving cream ,shoe polish ,shoes ,shower curtains ,skis, slacks, soap, soft contact lenses, solvents, speakers, sports car bodies, sun glasses, surf boards, sweaters, synthetic rubber, telephones, tennis rackets, tents, tires, toilet seats, tool boxes, tool racks, toothbrushes, toothpaste ,transparent tape, trash bags ,tv cabinets ,umbrellas ,upholstery ,vaporizers ,vitamin capsules ,water pipes ,wheels ,yarn.

Even if do not you agree with the petroleum industry. Your life would suck without it. There is very little waste from a barrel of Oil 99.9% is used in some way, This is one of the problems I have with your point. It one sided and only argues the bad that the Oil industry has done to prove a point that it is not innovative industry. But there is another side that has nothing to do with Climate change and make everyday life bearable for most people. GB there is always 2 sides to every coin and both sides need to be examined before a conclusion can be determined.
 
Last edited:
All I know is that tearing up 11 miles of a river with wild salmon and taking 100% of the water out of that section of river is a dumb idea.

There are THREE active coal mines in Alaska. There is no need to make the fourth one cut through 11 miles of a river with wild salmon stocks. Especially a river with king salmon in it. The king salmon numbers in Cook Inlet are not what they used to be, and taking out 11 miles of spawning habitat, sticking an open pit coal mine in the head waters, and de watering a huge section of the river is not a good idea.

They need to look else where to build their coal mine. Maybe PacRim should start by looking in their home state of Delaware.
 
CTobias said:
All I know is that tearing up 11 miles of a river with wild salmon and taking 100% of the water out of that section of river is a dumb idea.

There are THREE active coal mines in Alaska. There is no need to make the fourth one cut through 11 miles of a river with wild salmon stocks. Especially a river with king salmon in it. The king salmon numbers in Cook Inlet are not what they used to be, and taking out 11 miles of spawning habitat, sticking an open pit coal mine in the head waters, and de watering a huge section of the river is not a good idea.

They need to look else where to build their coal mine. Maybe PacRim should start by looking in their home state of Delaware.
Click to expand...

Good stuff.

Agreed.
 
Is there any way possible that when all is said and done, this project could actually benefit the river and salmon spawning? I'm curious if any of the information on the Chuitna Coal Project has any merit, or is it just a pack of corporate lies?
 
FIN-ITE 34 said:
Dr. Margaret Palmer on why PacRim can't re-create a salmon stream.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9BeIyjCZDw
Click to expand...

Let me say that I needed the explanation, even if Mac already understood it...

Incedible stuff. This coal will be strip mined and the river will literally be dewatered for 25 years. Totally destroyed.

To extract a natural resource that should be publicly owned.

Whats creative and innovative about destroying rivers?

For coal that PacRim didnt create?
 
Last edited:
golden beetle said:
Let me say that I needed the explanation, even if Mac already understood it...

Incedible stuff. This coal will be strip mined and the river will literally be dewatered for 25 years. Totally destroyed.

To extract a natural resource that should be publicly owned.

Whats creative and innovative about destroying rivers?

For coal that PacRim didnt create?
Click to expand...

Well it's incredibly creative and innovative way to mine a resource. In this case it's just not a good idea but that doesn't mean it's not innovative. I'm pretty sure prior to this video you surmised it was going to destroy the river bed so the only value of the explanation is if it altered your opinion. Since it didn't I say it was unnecessary:)
 
MACFLY said:
Well it's incredibly creative and innovative way to mine a resource. In this case it's just not a good idea but that doesn't mean it's not innovative. I'm pretty sure prior to this video you surmised it was going to destroy the river bed so the only value of the explanation is if it altered your opinion. Since it didn't I say it was unnecessary:)
Click to expand...

Ok. So you're saying that it is creative and innovative to destroy a river for 25 years, and possibly render it beyond restoration, to strip mine for coal?

Thats creative to you?

And where do you get the notion that its not a good idea in this case, but a good idea in others?

I can accept that you may be correct about that, but am a bit stunned to hear somebody so ill-informed of the facts conclude that this stuff shouldnt happen in Alaska, home of the white man, but its good to mess up other people's shit....

Tell us, oh great white glowing reflector...

Who should have their rivers strip mined?
 
Last edited:
golden beetle said:
Ok. So you're saying that it is creative and innovative to destroy a river for 25 years, and possibly render it beyond restoration, to strip mine for coal?

Thats creative to you?

And where do you get the notion that its not a good idea in this case, but a good idea in others?

I can accept that you may be correct about that, but am a bit stunned to hear somebody so ill-informed of the facts conclude that this stuff shouldnt happen in Alaska, home of the white man, but its good to mess up other people's shit....

Tell us, oh great white glowing reflector...

Who should have their rivers strip mined?
Click to expand...

Haha you are starting to come unglued Johnny.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

rford
Alaska!
2
Replies
37
Views
15K
tkhour
tkhour
dcabarle
Farmington River, Ct.
Replies
13
Views
13K
bjmiller
B
Caddis
MAINE Fishing Report
Replies
0
Views
2K
Caddis
Caddis
Back
Top