mvdaog

ahahha thats really funny.......... We've all lost someone and of course who and when makes a huge difference as to if this is funny or not. I say laugh while you still can, we dont live forever. I laughed.

I guess Ill just add that I dont wanna start an argument cuz itll be one against every person on this board... but I just wanted to know what the hockey fans all thought about this if they took a second to really think about it.... and so far already one person thought it should be banned so maybe its not as popular as i was thinking...

Yea Im a huge fan of NBA and NFL, and the difference is simple- When it happens, rare as it may be, its a huge deal (if noticed). If refs see that sort of thing its broken up as fast as possible, the league takes quick action to suspend and fine. In the NHL, the refs move away and let them fight, and its considered part of the game - no fines, no suspensions. The only time that stuff seems to happen is when someone brutally attacks a helpless opponent (like Roy Junior) or if someone uses a stick or some other form of aggravated assault. A regular old fight is punished by nothing except a longer penalty. The smallest signs of poor sportsmanship like spitting in a face, punches thrown, pushing, etc are all frowned upon in those other sports - immediately kicked outta the game and punished. With hockey its hitting someone in the face with a stick or hitting a helpless person from behind into the boards or something major for it to even be news. Also in those other sports, they usually shake hands before and after the game, commonly its seen that people help eachother back on their feet (I understand this is impossible to do in hockey), and you see a lot of players joking around with eachother. Hockey seems like nothing is allowable except a pure hatred for eachother when in the uniform. There is a fairbit of cheap shots taken in the scramble in football, but if they were to take their helmets off and start fighting im sure u can imagine what would happen - definitely not everyone standing back and pausing the game to let them fight.... The NFL wide recievers messing with the crowd is totally different than poor sportsmanship on the field.... also the soccer stuff is always with the crowd - doesnt have anything to do with the soccer players. Soccer players are actually the most sportly out of all the sports, no cheap shots or anything allowed or youre outta there. The fact that there is these montages on fights for other sports is cuz they are so rare - for hockey theyre so common that no one would bother to look up a regular hockey fight online. Maybe when something wierd happens like two stars fighting or two goalies, but the good ol normal fight in the nhl wont even be on youtube. The other sports are though because theyre so common - exactly what Im tryin to say - its not part of those other sports.... juss rare events

I for one wish the game of hockey wasn't ruined in Canada.... I love watching european and international tournaments.... but the WWE on ice is just becoming a bit too much for me. I've heard all the arguments from so many NHL fans over the years about why fighting is necessary and part of the game blah blah... bottom line is if I want to watch a fight, I'll watch boxing or professional fighters, if i want to watch basketball or football or soccer I will watch the game. NHL? Dont even know what I consider that anymore. There is NO sportsmanship, I've never seen any sport where no two players EVER joke around, smile at eachother, lift eachother up after getting knocked down, offer a hand after/before the game. Its just became a spectacle to watch a few guys with too much 'adrenaline' as 'Roy Junior' put it the other nite acting like little boys. Where else would 25+ year old men think its the right thing to do, starting fights as part of a game? I might expect behavior like that from a bunch of drunks in a bar, or some troubled 15 year old kids, but to see it on TV during nearly ever NHL game and on all the highlights, its really ridiculous. I know no one will agree because Canada and hockey is like Brasil and soccer, but I think if we all took a step back and really analyzed if fighting was a necessary part of the game and if it makes it a better game, we'd all come to the conclusion that it ruins it every way. The culture we're bringing our young up into, in one of violence and that its okay to be a poor sport, and okay to never grow up and learn to control your emotions, is really sad to see. A fight here and there like you see in other sports that really get broken up in seconds might be fine. But involving it as part of each game and letting it happen while the refs watch on, hard to believe it even came to that. Thats why I hate the NHL and always have. I love hockey though, outside of this Canadian culture thing thats going on. A bunch of testosterone-high, immature men fighting on ice skates. cool. Hate me if you want, but I would honestly love to be involved in the passion that you guys all show about your teams, I miss that kind of dedication to sports teams. Theres just no way Id ever get into this league with all the fighting and poor sportsmanship. And trust me, people with the same views as me are a LOT more common than you might think. I mean, imagine any other sport where you have the talented players, like Kobe and Ronaldo, and then on every team you have some fighters, who arent good fighters and arent that good at basketball or soccer. Every game, at least once sometimes more, the game is halted for a while to watch people fight.... these fighters take up spots normally played by more skilled players. To me, the games would be ruined. Playoff hockey - better. Less fights. I don't know, since seeing that Roy stuff the other day Ive became even more disappointed in the NHL and the culture of hockey in Canada.

Oh then youll be fine they arent that bad..

Sunburst was the best for us... just casting from the shore endless supply of rainbows... We were actually there when the cuttys were spawning, so they were all moved out of lake magog into the creek mentioned above, so we didnt fish for em but was cool to see. Other than that, we went twice. Once in July and once in August. I don't consider myself a wuss when it comes to dealing with bugs, but due to the number of horseflies and mosquitos early on in the summer there, I would highly recommend going in later august, for that reason alone. I cant think of any drawback of heading up there later in the summer, and it just made it a LOT more enjoyable being there without the bugs in late august.

very close call between a few but i guess this was my fav of last summer...

http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/personfactsheet.php?id=1138 http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/personfactsheet.php?id=1008 http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/personfactsheet.php?id=1164 Strangely, the whole article is an argument of this type: "Not very many scientists are specialized in every aspect of climate and geopgraphy. Therefore, not very many scientists commented on every aspect of the report. Also, the IPCC refused to take every single comment recieved and spend time explaining to the commentee why they believed the commentee was wrong. Also, they contacted two scientists and an economist who do not believe in anthropogenic climate change, and who by chance or not are all associated with groups funded by Exxon (irrelevant, but see links above for proof). Conclusion from this procession of logic: Climate change as being anthropogenically caused is a hoax and "should be ignored entirely". Im really sorry for jumping in, I hate wasting my time because reason and sensibility dont always penetrate dogma, but if this is considered a great article and some sort of proof or evidence, a study of mathematical logic needs to be conducted. HOW COULD THIS CONCLUSION POSSIBLY FOLLOW FROM THIS PROGRESSION OF THOUGHT? It is absolutely impossible! You are right, however, that scientists do follow the money. For example, those three above. Please in the name of god, be logical and think logically. If you thought the above article was anything but an ad hominem argument against the IPCC, which is of course a logical fallacy, you are mistaken. And wow, lets bash the UN for overestimating the population of AIDS in the world? How low can we get to try and bash those in support of climate change? Even if they overestimated, who can prove it was on purpose for some evil cause? And even so, in the name of good-will and human nature, theres still 33 million estimated cases of AIDS in the world.... 33 MILLION frickin ppl with AIDS. There is no where near enough resources or help for these 33 million people many of them in third world countries or worse...they need all the help they can get jesus christ. AIDS is not some fabricated thing by UN to get some money or etc etc i cant even believe that someone wrote that............. whats wrong with ppl? AIDS is a huge problem. and its not decreasing in number the estimate is just bein decreased

"Philosophy is not science but the art of understanding mind and soul. Please convince other pro-global warming zealots to realize this and then honest debate can happen." I don't know how many of the users have taken any courses in philosophy (particularly logic, which seems to be absent in many of the arguments here) but it's sad that philosophy has taken a non-existant role in all of our educations. Straight from the almighty source of knowledge (wikipedia)- 'Though no single definition of philosophy is uncontroversial, and the field has historically expanded and changed depending upon what kinds of questions were interesting or relevant in a given era, it is generally agreed that philosophy is a method, rather than a set of claims, propositions, or theories. Its investigations are based upon rational thinking, striving to make no unexamined assumptions and no leaps based on faith or pure analogy. Different philosophers have had varied ideas about the nature of reason, and there is also disagreement about the subject matter of philosophy. Some think that philosophy examines the process of inquiry itself.'.....sounds a lot like....science? To most people familiar with philosophy, science is in fact only a branch of philosophy. Many people confuse philosophy with another branch of philosophy, that which deals with 'understanding mind and soul'. All of the sound reasoning and logic, that science could not be possible without, is due to philosophy, and without philosophy science would not have had a chance to evolve to the power it is now, nor could it have seperated itself from religion like it (fortunately) has. So... philosophy is not science, but science is philosophy, and please convince other anti-global warming zealots to realize this and then honest debate can happen. Just jokin, but really. Everyone should get a used textbook for some introductory logic course, so that these wierd arguments that fail in so many ways won't keep happening.

yea huge landlocked steelhead...MASSIVE and supposedly the best fightin fish that dont go to the sea i.e. on par with steelhead almost...huge river tho hard to fish but can definately be done...check it out sometime

rainbows (steelhead)...period. as long as were talkin freshwater that is. god damn try gettin one of those monster rainbows from the columbia down around castlegar using light stuff...HA

Lonefisher....juss quickly looked up an article and its quoting prior studies on the effects of bleeding fish and mortality rates. A study with rainbow trout indicated a 16% mortality rate with catch and release fishing, no bleeding, but 40% when bleeding. A study with cutthroats found 6.5% mortality rate with no bleeding, and 52.8% with bleeding. Personally I think these are both low, Ive always heard from other fishermen that if you let a fish go and its bleeding, chances are its not gonna make it.

o cmon i wanted a rise outta ya....gotta switch up flies i guess

O MY GOD....did u guys actually look at all those pictures? they have caught some huge trout but anyways....they caught this f'n huge rainbow, probably the most healthy looking and largest ive seen caught on the bow, an amazing fish. But suprise suprise the first thing you notice in the picture is the blood coming out of the fishes gills and running down the guys hand, out of the fishes mouth, along the fins, as hes sittin there grinning and holding it up for a picture. We seriously do need to do somethin about the regs on the bow and especially these f'ers.....holy shhh that is depressing http://www.mycyberimages.com/gallery/index.php?id=253

theres no way thats a 5.7 lb fish....

just wondering if this is due to human or natural causes? if its a natural process that rivers migrate and mix together then i dont think we should be doing anything about it, lettin nature run its course is always best. If, though, the migration of this river and possible invasion into stauffer creek is due to human influences that sure is a sad thing to see happening.