"Pelle Schultz" <evil_empire RemoveThis @mac.com> wrote in message
news:1188326921.701388.171370@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 28, 1:13 pm, "neon leon" <f.m... RemoveThis @comcast.net> wrote:
> Most biologists are pretty left-wing politically--speaking from
> personal experience--yet would never be so naive as to believe a bear
> or any other wild animal would cease to act wild just because you've
> become 'friendly' with it. That's a foolishly anthropocentric way of
> viewing things, frankly. Hard-wired behavior is exactly as advertised.
First off, Treadwell was NOT a biologist. He was a fool, and he did believe
that Bear's wouldn't hurt him because they were his friends.
Biologist left wing? Most doctors have biologists undergrad degrees. And,
my person experience says that most are conservative. Personal experience
is hardly data to be relied upon by me or you.
> The only ones 'huge'-ing the terrorists are the far right (e.g. the ),
> who've relentlessly amplified and exploited irrational fear of terror
> to justify policies that have nothing to do with it. If you meant
> "hugging," I'd say that is about as accurate a view of the left's
> beliefs as the "Let's nuke Mecca" view is of the right's.
Sure, left wing and far left is different... Most liberals don't go as far
to say embrass the terrorists, but many do. It's bullshit to say a bear or
terrorist won't attack - like you said its hard-wired. I disagree, the
right wing is more like a Bear hunter. And, irrational fear? Most experts
say its a matter of time until another attack, not if.
>> Stay informed about: off to alaska