Woman Shoots Gator That Attacks Her Dog

[Jocko]

Good point. Though "Greater Miami" includes Surfside, Hialeah, Miami Shores, Doral, Kendall, Homstead, Aventura, and every other seperately incorporated ethnic or upper class enclave that has splintered away from the city for tax purposes. Include all of those, and you get a contiguous urban region with 2.5+ million people.


Which is roughly 30% of "Greater Chicagoland." ;) Still, the Gulf Coast areas are still amazingly rural, considering the growth, building and influx of northerners. Some people *cough*Claus*cough* obviously don't realize that one doesn't need to visit the Everglades to find an alligator.

All too often, they find you... when you least expect it, as in this case.

[CFLarsen]

I was thinking the same thing but if you look at the shadow it's not nearly as bright as the daylight on the sidewalk coming through the gaps of the dog door. It looks like the shadow cast by glass.


http://www.skepticreport.com/download/images/floridawoman.jpg

A: Glass.

B: No glass.

From the story (http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060518/COLUMNIST36/605180346):Satisfied? Or are you now going to demand evidence like a doctor's X-ray of her back to prove that she really needs the cane, or something?

That's not the point. The point is, are people with canes "handicapped"?

That seems a bit harsh to me.

Perhaps a description that uses the adverb "wildly", or perhaps one that's in any way synonymous with "wildly". oh, look, she didn't use any adverb at all to describe her shooting. Funny how you think you can fill one in. I will too! She freaked out and started shooting the dog maniacally. I can even hear her freakish laugher in my mind.

You attach a lot of significance to her words "freaked out". I see no reason to assume this means she was not in proper control of the weapon.

I disagree.

You speak a lot of drawing purely evidence-based conclusions... I know you insist on it from others. So why are you making assumptions you would NEVER let anyone else get away with?

I sure do that a lot - about conclusions that can be reached based on evidence. What I go with here is her own description.

You don't agree - fine with me.

And that fact has something to do with what I wrote?

If the alligator were to go through the dog door shown, he would have to jump.

It's certainly possible to get evidence that you wouldn't be willing to do what you claim is the best option.

That's not what I asked. I asked for your evidence of a best option. Let's see it.

I just wrote, "It's certainly possible to get evidence that you wouldn't be willing to do what you claim is the best option."

That's what it would prove.

This has nothing to do with your suggestion of putting me in a cage with an alligator. Please explain what that would prove.


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8169270605970054952&q=alligator

Claus, here's a video of a Florida alligator immediately after getting run over by a boat. A reasoably big boat. Surely something you'd call unreasonably forceful, I'm sure.

Note its complete lack of injury, except to its attitude. Pay particular attention to the narration that explains how they can leap out of the water up to half their length... like 5-6 feet.

Then go hug one, because you're not going to be swayed by any silly facts, I'm sure.

When are you going to send me the money you promised?

[Jocko]

When are you going to send me the money you promised?

You're right, Claus, I'm sorry for my reticence. Just shoot me a PM with your address and I'll cut you a check. I need to know where to send it, obviously. :)

[BPSCG]

You're right, Claus, I'm sorry for my reticence. Just shoot me a PM with your address and I'll cut you a check. I need to know where to send it, obviously. :)Remember I said I was good for some of it. How about the rest of y'all?

Hmmm... I just had an unsettling thought. Imagine the following exchange a month or two from now:

Jocko: So when are you buying the plane ticket?
Claus: When you send me the money.
J: I sent it three weeks ago.
C: I didn't get it.
J: I sent it return receipt.
C: I didn't get it.
J: I have the receipt here with your signaure on it.
C: Can you prove it's my signature?

[CFLarsen]

You're right, Claus, I'm sorry for my reticence. Just shoot me a PM with your address and I'll cut you a check. I need to know where to send it, obviously. :)
You can use Paypal.

[CFLarsen]

Remember I said I was good for some of it. How about the rest of y'all?

Hmmm... I just had an unsettling thought. Imagine the following exchange a month or two from now:

Jocko: So when are you buying the plane ticket?
Claus: When you send me the money.
J: I sent it three weeks ago.
C: I didn't get it.
J: I sent it return receipt.
C: I didn't get it.
J: I have the receipt here with your signaure on it.
C: Can you prove it's my signature?

Paypal solves all this.

[Bob Klase]

[qimg]
That's not the point. The point is, are people with canes "handicapped"?

That seems a bit harsh to me.

The cane would not necessarily be compulisve evidence that she's handicapped. The fact that the reporter wrote in the article that she was "handicapped" is backed up by the cane in the photo and the reporter apparently didn't just make it up.

Since you're not are disputing whether she was handicapped, perhaps you could provide some evidence that the reporter was lying or mistaken?

[qimg]If the alligator were to go through the dog door shown, he would have to jump.

Is that a fact based conclusion? If so, where's the evidence? Or is it merely your opinion based on your already proven ignorance about alligators and doors?

[qimg]This has nothing to do with your suggestion of putting me in a cage with an alligator. Please explain what that would prove.

I explained it once. It would be evidence that you really the best course of action is to run. It could prove that running would not necessarily avoid bloodshed- there could still be bloodshed, it just wouldn't be the alligators blood.

[Hutch]

Must've crushed her pelvis, passing your ego during childbirth.

Dammit, Jocko, neaderthal neocon nebbishes like you ARE NOT supposed to make me leak Mountian Dew out of my nose!! :eye-poppi :D :D

I think Claus is just lonely now that his dancing partner Shanek has forsaken him for true love and he figures the rest of the board is just about equal to his posting level...

FWIW, I don't own a gun but givne the same circumstances I'd probably grab a shovel and hit the sucker between the eyes as hard as I could.

But that's just me...

[Jocko]

You can use Paypal.


Sorry, Claus, I don't use the internet. What's your address?

[Jocko]

Dammit, Jocko, neaderthal neocon nebbishes like you ARE NOT supposed to make me leak Mountian Dew out of my nose!! :eye-poppi :D :D

I think Claus is just lonely now that his dancing partner Shanek has forsaken him for true love and he figures the rest of the board is just about equal to his posting level...

FWIW, I don't own a gun but givne the same circumstances I'd probably grab a shovel and hit the sucker between the eyes as hard as I could.

But that's just me...

Thanks Hutch, it's a rare opportunity to insert a reasonably cerebral "mother" joke. Glad I didn't squander it. ;)

[CFLarsen]

The cane would not necessarily be compulisve evidence that she's handicapped. The fact that the reporter wrote in the article that she was "handicapped" is backed up by the cane in the photo and the reporter apparently didn't just make it up.

Since you're not are disputing whether she was handicapped, perhaps you could provide some evidence that the reporter was lying or mistaken?

It's not a question of whether the woman uses a cane or not. I object to the description of her being handicapped.

Is that a fact based conclusion? If so, where's the evidence? Or is it merely your opinion based on your already proven ignorance about alligators and doors?

Show me a 3-foot alligator that jumps through that dog door.

I explained it once. It would be evidence that you really the best course of action is to run. It could prove that running would not necessarily avoid bloodshed- there could still be bloodshed, it just wouldn't be the alligators blood.

Of course there could still be bloodshed. I just think that the risk is lower than staying, whilst firing a gun when highly agitated, in the presence of your kid.

Now, can I see that evidence of yours of a best option?

[CFLarsen]

Sorry, Claus, I don't use the internet. What's your address?

Of course you use the Internet. Use paypal. That way, you have evidence that I got the money.

[Jocko]

Of course you use the Internet.

Evidence?

[CFLarsen]

Evidence?
You post here.

[Jocko]

You post here.

Ah, I suppose you don't have dictation in Denmark? That's not proof. It's not even evidence. Sorry, Claus, but you're gonna have to tell me your address.

If, like most trolls, you live under a bridge, just tell me the nearest intersection and I'll send it there.

[ImaginalDisc]

FWIW, I don't own a gun but givne the same circumstances I'd probably grab a shovel and hit the sucker between the eyes as hard as I could.

But that's just me...

Hit it in the neck behind the skull. Trying to get to its brain with blunt intruments is a lost cause.

Similarities to other posters are for you to make.

[CFLarsen]

Ah, I suppose you don't have dictation in Denmark? That's not proof. It's not even evidence. Sorry, Claus, but you're gonna have to tell me your address.

If, like most trolls, you live under a bridge, just tell me the nearest intersection and I'll send it there.
If this is your pathetic way of weaseling out of your promise, fine with me.

[thaiboxerken]

That seems a bit harsh to me.

If they have need of a cane to walk, then they are handicapped. That may be harsh, but it's true.

[CFLarsen]

If they have need of a cane to walk, then they are handicapped. That may be harsh, but it's true.
Who are not handicapped, then?

[ImaginalDisc]

Who are not handicapped, then?

People who do not have medical conditions restricting their mobility, vision, hearing and/or balance?

[thaiboxerken]

Who are not handicapped, then?

The Danish.

[CFLarsen]

People who do not have medical conditions restricting their mobility, vision, hearing and/or balance?
People with glasses are handicapped?

[thaiboxerken]

People with glasses, that need them, are handicapped to a certain degree.

[Jocko]

If this is your pathetic way of weaseling out of your promise, fine with me.

No, Claus, it's not a weasel at all. I'll send you the money (I hope a check is all right?)... It's just that you seem to misunderstand my means of communication here.

See, I have a staff of 13 acolytes (13 being a mystical number, you know) who regularly form a fire-chain of information between me and a computer located in an adjacent building. The reason for this should be obvious.

Each time you post something to me, the first acolyte reports it to the second. The second relays it to the third, and so forth. When word arrives in my inner sanctum, the message is relayed to the appropriate player. I did tell you about the cast of amateur actors I keep on staff to represent forum members, didn't I? The reason for them, too, should be obvious.

So in this case, the actor designated to represent Claus (i.e., you) will step into the spotlight and deliver the post in soliloquy form. I then verbally provide my answer while Jane Seymour constantly anoints my brow with exotic oils. And if you need a reason for that, there's something quite wrong with you! ;)

The 13 acolytes relay my repsonse in reverse order, which then is posted to the Internet in a relatively expeditious and transparent manner. I'm not surprised you thought I was an actual Internet user; I get that a lot. But I can assure you, dear Claus, that I do not and cannot execute payment by means of this "Paypal" of which you speak.

Please let me know your address ASAP, as the frumpy gentleman who plays you in my court gets paid by the word and your terse "yes or no?" responses are not helping him pay for his daughter's tuition.

Thanks in advance, and I anticipate your reply.

[ImaginalDisc]

People with glasses are handicapped?
That's a grey area, and the determination to be about that is essentially in the hands of the person's physician. I had a coworker who was "legally" blind, and recieved some small accomodations (as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act) including a ridiculously large monitor, which I wound up inheriting, and being allowed to by whatever magnifiers she needed. She was technically just very myopic. She qualifies as a hanidcapped person.

[ImaginalDisc]

People with glasses are handicapped?
That's a grey area, and the determination to be about that is essentially in the hands of the person's physician. I had a coworker who was "legally" blind, and recieved some small accomodations (as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act) including a ridiculously large monitor, which I wound up inheriting, and being allowed to by whatever magnifiers she needed. She was technically just very myopic. She qualifies as a hanidcapped person.

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by BPSCG :
Remember I said I was good for some of it. How about the rest of y'all?

Hmmm... I just had an unsettling thought. Imagine the following exchange a month or two from now:

Jocko: So when are you buying the plane ticket?
Claus: When you send me the money.
J: I sent it three weeks ago.
C: I didn't get it.
J: I sent it return receipt.
C: I didn't get it.
J: I have the receipt here with your signaure on it.
C: Can you prove it's my signature?
Paypal solves all this.

Prove it.

[Manny]

No, Claus, it's not a weasel at all. I'll send you the money (I hope a check is all right?)... It's just that you seem to misunderstand my means of communication here.

See, I have a staff of 13 acolytes... cast of amateur actors I keep on staff to represent forum members... Jane Seymour constantly anoints my brow with exotic oils.
Geez, and I thought I was reading the forum in the lap of luxury sitting down on the comfy couch with a glass of Dogfish 90-minute IPA.

[BPSCG]

Prove it.Ah, you have learned well, grasshopper.

[Jocko]

Geez, and I thought I was reading the forum in the lap of luxury sitting down on the comfy couch with a glass of Dogfish 90-minute IPA.

You read it yourself? How barbaric. You probably wind up touching that disgusting keyboard all day long, too. With your own hands. *Shiver*

See, I'm not surprised that a working-class schlub like you types his own posts, but an eryudite customer like Claus? That caught me off guard. Still, being the sophisticate he is, I'm sure he'll understand my situation and accommodate promptly and fully.

[Grammatron]

I might have to revise my estimate upward.

[CFLarsen]

People with glasses, that need them, are handicapped to a certain degree.
Ahhh....to a certain degree.

Where can I see this scale of handicaps?

[CFLarsen]

That's a grey area, and the determination to be about that is essentially in the hands of the person's physician. I had a coworker who was "legally" blind, and recieved some small accomodations (as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act) including a ridiculously large monitor, which I wound up inheriting, and being allowed to by whatever magnifiers she needed. She was technically just very myopic. She qualifies as a hanidcapped person.

Does this woman's "handicap" fall under the ADA?

[BPSCG]

That's a grey area, and the determination to be about that is essentially in the hands of the person's physician. I had a coworker who was "legally" blind, and recieved some small accomodations (as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act) including a ridiculously large monitor, which I wound up inheriting, and being allowed to by whatever magnifiers she needed. She was technically just very myopic. She qualifies as a hanidcapped person.I distinguish between "handicapped" and "disabled." Going back to my previous life as a Social Security claims rep, a disability was defined as an illness, injury, or medical condition that made substantial gainful work impossible (I'm simplifying somewhat; don't try to take this back to your local SSA office...).

SSA didn't use the term handicap, but it was commonly understood among SSA employees that while all disabilities are due to handicaps, not all handicaps are disabilities. A handicap is an illness, injury, or medical condition that makes normal functioning more difficult than it would be without the handicap. Mild nearsightedness is a handicap, but a very mild one. It does not rise to the level of a disability, however, because it does not make substantial gainful work impossible.

Blindness, OTOH, is normally considered to be a handicap that is so severe that it is considered disabling.

In horse racing, there are "handicap" races, where faster horses are given a handicap; they have to carry extra weight. They are not disabled.

In our current discussion, Ms. Frey is clearly handicapped, as it is pointed out in the story that she walks with the use of a cane.

She is not disabled, however. She is clearly able to get around, able to push an aggressive alligator out the door, able to get her gun and plug the gator.

A friend recently told me that the term "disabled" is no longer politically correct, and insists that I use the term "handicapped" to describe a paralytic in a wheelchair. Screw her. It's a useful distinction. I'm handicapped; I'm nearsighted and farsighted. I'm not disabled, because I can work and function normally.

[Grammatron]

Does this woman's "handicap" fall under the ADA?

Yup.

[Mahatma Kane Jeeves]

She doesn't look particularly "handicapped".
It's not a question of whether the woman uses a cane or not. I object to the description of her being handicapped. Classic. I'm sure you would love to turn this into a "discussion" of the definition of "handicapped." It diverts attention from the large hole in your "run away" scenario. Since you object to that description, why don't we just say she had "impaired mobility?" Hmmm. That doesn't help your argument, either. I guess I'll have to admit she's not handicapped, and thus perfectly capable of running away. :rolleyes: Congratulations on your mastery of the slippery slope fallacy.

:eye-poppi
Get used to it.

You speak a lot of drawing purely evidence-based conclusions... I know you insist on it from others. So why are you making assumptions you would NEVER let anyone else get away with?
This might help:
He is well on his way into the "I am going to ask for evidence, and when I get it, I will ignore it, and instead come up with new conditions, so I won't have to admit that I was wrong" territory.

[Grammatron]

I salute you Mahatma.

[thaiboxerken]

Where can I see this scale of handicaps?

Right here:

Glasses = 1
Coke-bottle Glasses = 2
Hearing aid = 3
Deaf = 4
Blind = 5
Cane = 2
Wheelchair = 5
Danish = 8

[ImaginalDisc]

Ahhh....to a certain degree.

Where can I see this scale of handicaps?
Look up the Americans with Disabilities act. Keep in mind that "handicapped" in common parlance is a broader term than when used in regards to the law.

Edit: BPSCG elaborated more fully on this above. Didn't see it.

[Grammatron]

CFL, so how do you propose this woman who uses a cane to move around would get away from the gator while dragging the dog and her kid all while being chased?

For a bonus round, exactly where would she be running to and for how long?

[Morrigan]

Why is running away a better solution? Even if she succeeds, she's letting an intruding predator into her house, which has the potential of damaging her house while she's away? Also, there is guarantee the animal wouldn't get out of the house and pursue them around. Do we know where the nearest neighour was, if he was available to help?
It's perfectly reasonable for a woman, with limited mobility, to stay and defend herself and her family and belongings, especially if she has a gun and knows how to use it (being a ex-Marine and all). It's not excessive force unless you're some sort of hippie.

Right here:

Glasses = 1
Coke-bottle Glasses = 2
Hearing aid = 3
Deaf = 4
Blind = 5
Cane = 2
Wheelchair = 5
Danish = 8
Hahahaha.

[thaiboxerken]

I don't know why she used a gun, she had a cane to beat the gator with. She must not be a good escrimador.

[thaiboxerken]

It's not excessive force unless you're some sort of hippie.

Hippie or Danish. I think Austin Power's dad was right.

[Morrigan]

Hmm, the only other Dane I know is a left-wing extremist hippie. He once claimed he'd rather give up his property than hurt and kill a burglar. A smart guy, but hopelessly blinded by his ideology.
So, maybe you're on to something...

[Jocko]

Hippie or Danish. I think Austin Power's dad was right.

I think that was the Dutch, but your point is well taken.

Don't even get me started on the Dutch...

[Huntster]

Remember I said I was good for some of it. How about the rest of y'all?....

I did, too. I think you mentioned $25. I'll go there.

But I also mentioned that "fact finding" about alligators should involve study in the water, too. I mean, I want true research, not just a junket.

Claus, are you in for a bit of underwater research?

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by Huntster :
Prove it.
Ah, you have learned well, grasshopper.

I may be slow, but I can learn how to reverse ideology.:D

[Mahatma Kane Jeeves]

I salute you Mahatma. Right back at ya. I think you should update your list of unwarranted assumptions (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=1646585#post1646585).

It seems I took too long comosing my post: the thread has devolved into a debate on the definition of "handicapped."

For your viewing pleasure, a time-lapse study of the slippery slope in action.

Does your body work perfectly? How many people on this planet can say that? The point is, are people with canes "handicapped"?It's not a question of whether the woman uses a cane or not. I object to the description of her being handicapped. Who are not handicapped, then?There we have it. From start to completion in only four posts. The suspense was delicious. Pay particular attention to the use of rhetorical questions--complete deniability is built in! Just "asking questions," after all. Hold on a second, I feel a "line must be drawn" argument coming on... Well, that will have to wait. Now that we're all handicapped, I have to beat the rush to the Dept. of Motor Vehicles to get a parking decal. See you on the road!

[Huntster]

I'm a big city guy...

I'm so very sorry. That wasn't your fault, at least at birth or during youth.

There's always a chance at salvation, however..............

...I suppose my standards are different. 54,000 is a piddling little town.

It's like Croc Dundee (an appropriate figure for this thread) said:

New York must be the friendliest place on Earth......All these people wanting to live together!

Frankly, I miss the days when there were no grocery stores around here. As soon as somebody builds a grocery store, the dependant types move in. Next comes McDonalds, then the place goes to Hell in a handbasket.

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by Huntster :
She and her clan don't resemble barbarians and conquerors. They are very peaceful, respectful people (like you seem to be).

But piss them off, and all hell breaks loose.

Yeah, we'll start throwing Danablu around...

Yeah, the danablu has hit the fan around here. Just last weekend, in fact.

Originally Posted by Huntster :
What's more, this Danish clan, especially those of them who migrated up here to Alaska, are very proficient with firearms....

Real vikings don't use pussy guns. Real vikings kill game with their bare hands.


What? You've even discarded the old battle axes?

Actually, I've read accounts of the occupation of Denmark during WWII. It was almost funny, because it so resembled my wife's family.

The Nazis ended up wanting to leave, they were so damned frustrated.

It appears many on this forum need to do some research on that bit of history, in order to figure out who and what they're dealing with here..........

[BPSCG]

Wow. I originally posted this just as a "news of the weird" kinda thread. Now we're up to 300 replies.

Thanks, Claus! We cound't have done it without you!

Now lemme see if I can find another news item involving a shooting..

[rocketdodger]

What the hell is everyone arguing about? The facts are simple.

a) Facts against claus -
The alligator had already tried to come in more than once.
The alligator, knowing where the doggy door was, would certainly try to come in again EVEN IF the lady took her dog and kid and left the area.

These two facts suggest that the alligator either needed to be killed or else trapped and relocated to another area. Simply chasing it away, out of the house, would probably not be a long term solution because it would come back.

b) Facts for claus -
The alligator was only 3 feet long and I seriously doubt it would give chase to a full grown woman and a barking dog.
An animal sprinting on land has no relation to an animal trying to get through a house to chase someone -- she can simply close a door on it.
Firing a firearm in front of a young child is always a bad idea, even if only because of the possible hearing damage.
She couldn't even kill the animal with 4 shots, so if it had charged her kid, her choice to stay and fight with the kid present would have resulted in the kid getting hurt.

Thus, my interpretation of claus's argument is that it would have been better for the lady to either
1) Take her kid and dog somewhere else and return to kill the alligator.
2) Take her kid and dog somewhere else and then call animal control.

I would have to agree with claus here... in fact I don't see how anyone can logically argue against him (or at least the two interpretations I gave above).

[ImaginalDisc]

What the hell is everyone arguing about? The facts are simple. And yet, you get them entirely wrong.

b) Facts for claus -
The alligator was only 3 feet long and I seriously doubt it would give chase to a full grown woman and a barking dog.

Other posters have repeatedly hammered in the point that alligators are very fast over short distances, and easily capable of catching a fleeing human. Running from an alligator is extremely difficult without a significant head start, and young alligators locomote very well. A doggie door poses no barrier.

[Grammatron]

Wow. I originally posted this just as a "news of the weird" kinda thread. Now we're up to 300 replies.

Thanks, Claus! We cound't have done it without you!

Now lemme see if I can find another news item involving a shooting..

If you find a story with a gun in it Claus will...you know.

[rocketdodger]

And yet, you get them entirely wrong.

Other posters have repeatedly hammered in the point that alligators are very fast over short distances, and easily capable of catching a fleeing human. Running from an alligator is extremely difficult without a significant head start, and young alligators locomote very well. A doggie door poses no barrier.

No, I did not. Observe my claim -- that trying to relate an animal's sprint speed with how well it can chase a human in a man-made 3D environment is not something that would hold up in court. All she would have to do is get through a doorway and shut the door. Or she could simply put her foot in front of the doggy door (I doubt the alligator would be smart enough to reach out and pull the door open).

You are assuming that the animal's fast sprint speed means it can perform some kind of aerial stunt reminiscent of the bunny guardian of the holy grail, and that is just not correct.

[CFLarsen]

Yup.

What is her ailment?

Classic. I'm sure you would love to turn this into a "discussion" of the definition of "handicapped." It diverts attention from the large hole in your "run away" scenario. Since you object to that description, why don't we just say she had "impaired mobility?" Hmmm. That doesn't help your argument, either. I guess I'll have to admit she's not handicapped, and thus perfectly capable of running away. :rolleyes: Congratulations on your mastery of the slippery slope fallacy.

Congratulations on forgetting that she had time to get her gun.

Look up the Americans with Disabilities act.

What do I look for? What is wrong with the woman?

[rocketdodger]

And yet, you get them entirely wrong.


Furthermore, my point by saying "give chase" was not that the alligator could not catch them, but that it probably wouldn't want to.

I have serious doubt that a 3 foot alligator would be brave enough to attack a barking golden retriever and a screaming crazy woman, both of whom are much taller than it. Follow them curiously, maybe. Attack them? I doubt it.

[SezMe]

Beeps, throw in an airplane, a chicken leg and find a story in Upper Podunkville that nobody knows anything about and we should be good for ~50 pages.

[Bob Klase]

It's not a question of whether the woman uses a cane or not. I object to the description of her being handicapped..

Could the description of handicapped be applied to any human without you objecting? Do you object to the definition of the word, or do you object to the fact that the definition accurately applies to some people?

Show me a 3-foot alligator that jumps through that dog door.

Show me evidence that alligators can't jump.

Now, can I see that evidence of yours of a best option?

You're the one claiming to have the best option. I'm still waiting for any actual evidence to support your claim of "best".

[ImaginalDisc]

You are assuming that the animal's fast sprint speed means it can perform some kind of aerial stunt reminiscent of the bunny guardian of the holy grail, and that is just not correct.

You are punching a strawman. Alligators are capable of hasing down running humans. She may not have been able to flee.

[Grammatron]

What is her ailment?


Mobility Impairment.

Now answer my question.

[Huntster]

...Now lemme see if I can find another news item involving a shooting..

This one (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/eastsidenews/2003004618_bear19e.html) looks like great fun:

...An officer got within about 50 yards of the bear, determined it was aggressive and fired at it, Hebner said. The animal ran. The officers, after finding a small amount of blood, concluded the bear had suffered only a minor injury.

We've got it all here: officials doing the shooting, a wounded and escaped bear, an irresponsible citizenry with their garbage.......

We can pontificate on this forever. This could reach record posts on this forum.

[Bob Klase]

CFL, so how do you propose this woman who uses a cane to move around would get away from the gator while dragging the dog and her kid all while being chased?

For a bonus round, exactly where would she be running to and for how long?

I think we can answer the "how long" part using assumptions. If we assume that the gator gets its mouth around the dog then she'll probably be running hysterically until she drops from exhaustion. If her handicap is severe enough that could be just a few seconds.

If the gator gets its mouth around the daughter, she'll be running just long enough to get the gun that she should have got in the first place instead of running.

[Rob Lister]

Additionally, alligators do not seem to scare easily. A barking dog might make it hungry, that's about it. I'm not sure who would win in the dog/gator fight but I'll bet on the gator in a cage match. The dog has a weight advantage but I doubt a dog can get through the thick hide to do any real damage. The gator on the other hand could probaby snap a dogs leg in a single chomp.

[ImaginalDisc]

All she would have to do is get through a doorway and shut the door. Or she could simply put her foot in front of the doggy door (I doubt the alligator would be smart enough to reach out and pull the door open).


Two things you have neglected to take into consideration:

1) She has a mobility impairment.

2) Thrusting your foot in the direction of an alligator is quite possibly the stupidest thing you could do.

[Manny]

Off topic here (yeah, like that's possible at this point), but having seen the picture of this lady's house I want to know when the hell did a porch become a "lanai?" What the hell pish-posh real estate agent sold that one?

[CFLarsen]

Could the description of handicapped be applied to any human without you objecting? Do you object to the definition of the word, or do you object to the fact that the definition accurately applies to some people?

Read what I posted: I objected to her being referred to as handicapped.

Show me evidence that alligators can't jump.

...through the dog door you showed. I see no evidence that it could.

You're the one claiming to have the best option. I'm still waiting for any actual evidence to support your claim of "best".

Like I explained, I offered an opinion. You, OTOH, claimed that this could be settled by evidence.

Let's see it.

Mobility Impairment.

Spare us the flippant posts, please.

[Morrigan]

I have serious doubt that a 3 foot alligator would be brave enough to attack a barking golden retriever and a screaming crazy woman, both of whom are much taller than it. Follow them curiously, maybe. Attack them? I doubt it.
Why do you doubt that? Do you think alligators are infused with human reasoning, "oh let's see, this creature is taller than I, if I attacked I might lose, oh look it's screaming, it's probably frightened by me, hmm I'll just follow them curiously"?
Alligators have attacked humans, much taller than themselves, before. Many animals attack larger and stronger creatures for various reasons, whether they feel threatened, are hungry, or are simply crazy.

I have a story like that. I once tried to adopt a small black cat that my dad found abandoned. He bit me, very hard, 3 times: once when I was softly petting him (he had previously shown no objections to being petted), once when I picked up a water bowl to refill it (he must have thought I was taking it away, that's the only reason I can think of other than him being crazy), and once when I had just fed him (being extremely careful and paranoid and wearing gloves) and moved away, turned around the kitchen counter and bent down to pick up some tea in my cupboard. The cat actually followed me around the counter and bit down my leg! No provocation whatsoever, and nothing that could be interpreted as such (unlike the other two, which a dumb animal could have done).

Keep in mind these things: other than these incidents, the cat showed no hints of rabies or hostility. He moved quietly around the house, was generally very calm, and sometimes purred and rubbed himself on our legs in a rather friendly way. But he attacked with no provocation, a creature much larger than him. And the first two bites (which were on my left hand, and let me tell you they were not just tiny playful kitty bites like I've had, they were nasty, deeply sinking fangs bites), despite my best attempts at desinfecting them, made my hand all swollen, and I had to go to the hospital, was made to stay overnight after an intraveinous penicillin injection, and had to take antibiotics for several more days. The third bite occurred just as I returned from the hospital.

(Needless to say I did not keep the cat. He was crazy and unpredictable, and I did not want to run the risk of getting sent to the hospital every day. We gave it to the SPCA, who observed it around a bit to make sure he had no rabies, and then euthanized it. Too bad, he was cute. :()

So, the point of the story: I don't know how dangerous a bite from a small crocodilean can be. But if a cat bite can send me to the hospital, then you can be DAMN SURE I would take zero chances at being attacked by a wild reptile predator, and I would definitely not count on him "merely following me curiously". If I had a gun, I'd shoot the critter. I wouldn't like it, and of course, running from the backdoor would be very very impractical anyway, but **** if I'm just gonna expect the best behaviour out of an unpredictable, fast, dangerous animal.

[Grammatron]

Read what I posted: I objected to her being referred to as handicapped.

You can call her Supercalifragelistikexpialidocious, doesn't change the fact that she uses the cane to move around. Of course, if you have evidence that this is some sort of a fashion statement or otherwise useless prop she does not need feel free to present it.

Like I explained, I offered an opinion.

Based on what evidence?

Spare us the flippant posts, please.
Uhm...that's how the ADA describes it. Did you look at their website at all?

[Bob Klase]

Or she could simply put her foot in front of the doggy door

That wouldn't be hard to test. We just need to put a hungry, mad 3 foot alligator on one side of a doggy door and a volunteer to put his foot in front the door on the other side. Are you volunteering?

(I doubt the alligator would be smart enough to reach out and pull the door open).

I thought it would be impossible to find someone who knew even less than Claus about doggie doors and how they open. I was wrong.

Here's how you can enjoy the same experience as a dog (or alligator) when going through a doggie door. Find a large piece of thin, clear plastic. Take it to a doorway in your house and using tape, tape the top edge of the plastic to the top of the doorway. The large piece of plastic will now be hanging down in front of the door- much like a curtain.

Now you have two options:

1- Reach out and pull the plastic forward, then hold it out of your way while you walk through the doorway. This approach is the least likely to be taken by an alligator.

2- Look through the clear plastic. Pretend the plastic is not there and just walk through it (actually you walk under it and the plastic sheet is lifted up over you as you pass under it).

Tests indicate that 99.7% of all alligators would select option 2. The remaining 0.3% are not hungry enough to go through a door.

[ImaginalDisc]

Tests indicate that 99.7% of all alligators would select option 2. The remaining 0.3% are not hungry enough to go through a door.


Unfortunately, most of the test subject simply tried to eat the plastic. :-p

[Jocko]

Off topic here (yeah, like that's possible at this point), but having seen the picture of this lady's house I want to know when the hell did a porch become a "lanai?" What the hell pish-posh real estate agent sold that one?

That's what we Yankees call a screened-in porch.

They are generally not rated as protection against large, carnivorous reptiles.

[CFLarsen]

And that's the end of that thread.

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by rocketdodger :
Or she could simply put her foot in front of the doggy door

That wouldn't be hard to test. We just need to put a hungry, mad 3 foot alligator on one side of a doggy door and a volunteer to put his foot in front the door on the other side. Are you volunteering?....

We were beginning the fund raising to send Claus to Florida for fact finding. When funds are sufficient, there is no longer a need for volunteers, is there?

[Grammatron]

And that's the end of that thread.

Run away from yet another thread? I am surprised.

You are a coward.

[punchdrunk]

Thus, my interpretation of claus's argument is that it would have been better for the lady to either
1) Take her kid and dog somewhere else and return to kill the alligator.
2) Take her kid and dog somewhere else and then call animal control.


The lady said that faced with a similar situation, she will for now on call the state's nuisance gator line. Clearly she now believes there was a better choice for her to make, though not for the reason Claus gives. That doesn't solve the question of whether gunfire was necessary, and I don't think anyone but her would know for sure. Given that, it seems to me the Manatee deputy handled this in the best manner possible.

[tkingdoll]

I have read this entire thread, so my prize is getting to post in it.

I have a question:

If the decision of simply taking her child and dog and locking herself in another room, there to call the police or pest control or whoever, was not an option (because she is mobility impaired, or because alligators can run faster than people, or whatever), then how did she get hold of the loaded gun?

If it was close by, then I have a second question:

Who keeps a loaded gun that handy when they have a child?

Something is fishy. Or reptiley, whatever.

I simply can't see the scenario whereby an alligator tries to get into your house and you have a loaded gun so handy, it's quicker to grab it than to go to another room and close the door.

Also, from the photo and the story it is from, the doggy door leads onto her porch, not into her house.

[strathmeyer]

We were beginning the fund raising to send Claus to Florida for fact finding. When funds are sufficient, there is no longer a need for volunteers, is there?

Wouldn't it be cheaper to just send alligators to Claus?

[HarryKeogh]

http://www.skepticreport.com/download/images/floridawoman.jpg

A: Glass.

B: No glass.

They look the same shade to me. But if you want to think they would build a dog access door next to an open area go for it!

:big:

One would think the newspeople would have said something! "The alligator kept trying to get through the dog door. When its attempts were foiled it moved 6" to the left and climbed through the gaping hole in the fence."

[pipelineaudio]

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/48203

Just in case youre getting any bright ideas claus

[Jocko]

And that's the end of that thread.


It doesn't have to be, Claus. How about helping me out with your address so I can send your airfare? I'll even make it roundtrip.

Come on, you're not frightened to fly, are you? I figure you're ready to kill an armed man without a reason, so you must be brave enough to fly to Florida.

[Bob Klase]

Read what I posted: I objected to her being referred to as handicapped.

Why do you object to that? Do you also object to the fact that she was referred to as a woman? Do you always object to people being referred to with descriptive adjectives when they're accurate? Or do you merely object when the descriptive adjective would interfere with your opinion? Or, more likely, objecting is just a diversion to direct attention from your inablity to support your "opinion".

Show me evidence that alligators can't jump

....through the dog door you showed. I see no evidence that it could.

Show me evidence that jumping would be required for an alligator to get through that door. Otherwise it's pointless to worry about whether alligators can jump or how high they can jump.

Or perhaps you'd should just claim that the gator would have to fly to get through the door and then ask for evidence that gators can fly.

Here's some evidence anyway:

http://www.gatorland.com/tour/tour_map-3.html

http://members14.clubphoto.com/carla606622/3200234/guest_icons.phtml
(click on 'Snack Time')

http://www.napleszoo.com/Visitor_Info/zoo%20events/alligatorbay.html

Like I explained, I offered an opinion. You, OTOH, claimed that this could be settled by evidence.

I don't believe I claimed that it could be "settled by evidence" at all. But if you have evidence of me making that claim I'll certainly look at it. (Perhaps something as simple as a direct, in context quote from a post of mine).

Or just continue to do what you've been doing- make a claim based on ignorance and supported by no evidence, demand evidence from anyone who disputes you claim, then assert that your claim was only an opinion that doesn't require evidence while any dissent does require it.

[Bob Klase]

We were beginning the fund raising to send Claus to Florida for fact finding. When funds are sufficient, there is no longer a need for volunteers, is there?

I've already offered $100 if Claus meets my conditions.

[Bob Klase]

The lady said that faced with a similar situation, she will for now on call the state's nuisance gator line. Clearly she now believes there was a better choice for her to make, though not for the reason Claus gives.

Perhaps her reason is that she's realized that her gun isn't powerful enough to actually do significant damage to the alligator. And considering that her gun didn't do significant damage, that's evidence that's Claus' initial claim of "excessive force" was wrong to start with.

[Huntster]

Wouldn't it be cheaper to just send alligators to Claus?

No way. Capture, crating, shipping, permitting, and even shipping costs are higher than a single coach seat.

Besides, those of us who can make it to Florida might like to watch him find facts........

[Rob Lister]

I'll put in a $100

But I want a cage match.

[Bob Klase]

Besides, those of us who can make it to Florida might like to watch him find facts........

I think the real fun would start when the facts started to find him.

[Huntster]

I've already offered $100 if Claus meets my conditions.

I think that brings us up to $150 pledged.

How much does a roundtrip ticket cost between Copenhagen and Miami?

[rudar]

Who keeps a loaded gun that handy when they have a child?

Someone whose major reason for keeping a loaded gun handy is to protect the child from invaders, whether two-legged or four-drumsticked, would be my guess...


I simply can't see the scenario whereby an alligator tries to get into your house and you have a loaded gun so handy, it's quicker to grab it than to go to another room and close the door.

Also, from the photo and the story it is from, the doggy door leads onto her porch, not into her house.

From that photo, true. But we don't know that the door from the porch/ patio/ lanoi to the house doesn't also have a doggie door in it. I could see a plausible scenario where the gun was stored just inside the door, and it would therefore be faster to take one step to the left and grab it than to herd a dog (which, if I know anything about dogs, may well have been far more interested in barking at the alligator than in following the owner anywhere) and kid in through the door, and closing it. But if it also has a doggie door in it, even that wouldn't help much...

That, and I cannot believe no-one's yet asked whether the alligator had eyelids :)

[Jocko]

No way. Capture, crating, shipping, permitting, and even shipping costs are higher than a single coach seat.

Who said I wasn't going to have Claus captured, crated and shipped? I told him I'd buy airfare, not a seat. Besides, I'd never treat an alligator like that. I have too much respect for them. Claus, on the other hand...

[Bob Klase]

How much does a roundtrip ticket cost between Copenhagen and Miami?

Found some here for as little as $516 or as much as $1060.

http://www.cheapflights.com

[Mahatma Kane Jeeves]

If the decision of simply taking her child and dog and locking herself in another room, there to call the police or pest control or whoever, was not an option (because she is mobility impaired, or because alligators can run faster than people, or whatever), then how did she get hold of the loaded gun?According to this report (http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060518/COLUMNIST36/605180346), her main concern was protecting her pets. That gator's ferocity was impressive, as were its relentless efforts to get back onto the lanai after Frey pushed it back into the yard, but Frey's main concern had been about her pets.[my emphasis]It seems to me it would be easier for a mobility impaired person to "get a gun" than to wrestle their golden retriever away from a violent altercation with an alligator. Or she had a short amount of time betweeen its efforts to get back in. I have not seen any reference to the daughter's age. The woman is 48 years old, so her "child" could be anywhere from 5 to 30(?) I think any child age over 12 to 14 (approx) is old enough to know about gun safety.

The bottom line for me is that the two people with access to alot more evidence than we have here--the deputy and state wildlife officer--let her off with just a warning rather than five years in prison and a $50,000 fine. I think that was the right decision.


Another account: (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,195851,00.html)
"My daughter kicked at the gator and the gator lunged at her," Frey said. "He kept coming through the porch and the screen … I kept trying to flip him away" with the shovel, she added, "but every time I kept trying to flip him away, he came back, so I shot him. I thought that's the only option I had ... you're on instinct to protect your loved ones … he was quite aggressive."

[Huntster]

I think the real fun would start when the facts started to find him.

The other day, after one of those ladies got eaten, I saw on TV news a Florida wildlife or gator specialist say that lawnmowers and other vibration producing phenomena attract them.

He also said that there are an estimated 1 million alligators in Florida alone.

That's a lot of big lizards.

[Jocko]

Found some here for as little as $516 or as much as $10060.

http://www.cheapflights.com

I was thinking more along the lines of this. (https://gtm.fedex.com/GTM?cntry_code=us)

[brodski]

I figure you're ready to kill an armed man without a reason, so you must be brave enough to fly to Florida.
for some reason the Florida tourist board rejected this slogan. ;)

[Huntster]

Who said I wasn't going to have Claus captured, crated and shipped? I told him I'd buy airfare, not a seat. Besides, I'd never treat an alligator like that. I have too much respect for them. Claus, on the other hand...

Claus, you've gotta admit:

Americans are a very humorous lot. You might like it over here.

[ImaginalDisc]

for some reason the Florida tourist board rejected this slogan. ;)

Hey, we keep O.J. around.

[Rolfe]

:dl:

Oh, I needed that! Picture me slumped over the computer, tears running down my cheeks. I even went on reading rather than watch Have I Got News For You, which is usually my laugh-out-loud Friday entertainment.That, and I cannot believe no-one's yet asked whether the alligator had eyelids :)Earlier this evening there was an hour-long programme on C5 about alligator attacks in Florida. Just in homage to this thread, I watched it. The lady featured in the main story died, not of her injuries, but of Aeromonas hydrophila septicaemia introduced by the bite.

Certainly the most alarming events involved alligators more than 3 feet long. But I'll tell you this. Having seen that lot, especially how totally indestructable they are, I'd have shot it too.

I can also inform you categorically that they do have eyelids. Quite a lot of them.

Rolfe.

[Huntster]

...Having seen that lot, especially how totally indestructable they are, I'd have shot it too....

I watch a lot of hunting and fishing shows on "The Outdoor Channel". Not long ago was a show on alligator hunting in Louisiana. It was really interesting, and as you might imagine, quite funny watching those coonass guides and their antics.

But what I was amazed at was how easily those lizards died after being shot, and how readily those guys were willing to pull the gator into the boat with them after shooting them just a single time with a handgun.

I can assure you, that doesn't happen when bear hunting. The rule there is shoot until your rifle is empty (handguns are out of the question), then reload.

[punchdrunk]

Perhaps her reason is that she's realized that her gun isn't powerful enough to actually do significant damage to the alligator. And considering that her gun didn't do significant damage, that's evidence that's Claus' initial claim of "excessive force" was wrong to start with.

The article seems to indicate that she had a change of heart because she didn't want to go to the pokey or pay a fine.

And though the gun wasn't powerful enough to damage the alligator, it certainly could have injured all other involved parties. I guess that's not the definition of excessive, but I would certainly call it a bad idea.

For the record and from what I can tell of the at best murky details, I think this lady should have gotten her daughter and pet into a bedroom, closed the door, and called the authorities. If she was willing and had time to push the beast outside with her daughter and then get her gun, then she had enough time and opportunity to take her family out of harm's way behind a closed bedroom door.

[SteveGrenard]

But what I was amazed at was how easily those lizards died after being shot, and how readily those guys were willing to pull the gator into the boat with them after shooting them just a single time with a handgun.

I can assure you, that doesn't happen when bear hunting. The rule there is shoot until your rifle is empty (handguns are out of the question), then reload.


Alligators are not lizards. They are crocodilians.

[LeFevre]

Run away from yet another thread? I am surprised.

You are a coward.

And a possible liar and hypocrite.

[Bob Klase]

The bottom line for me is that the two people with access to alot more evidence than we have here--the deputy and state wildlife officer--let her off with just a warning rather than five years in prison and a $50,000 fine. I think that was the right decision.[/URL]

The article seems to indicate that she had a change of heart because she didn't want to go to the pokey or pay a fine.

I haven't seen it in print, but according to the local TV news a night or two ago (I'm about 40 miles from Bradenton), they (the officer or department that gave her the warning) returned and took back the warning. Apparently they suddenly realized that she wasn't actually hunting and they couldn't really support giving her a warning about doing something that she wasn't doing. Or they just realized how stupid the warning was making them look to everyone else in Florida.

[ImaginalDisc]

Hunster, there's a couple ways to shoot it in the head that are instantly lethal. I think bear skulls lack any of those weak points.

[Rolfe]

Run away from yet another thread? I am surprised.

You are a coward.When he was completely tied in knots in the "all eyelids are drumsticks" thread, someone mentioned that one virtue Claus does have is the ability never to go near a thread again once he has decided to stop posting. Sure enough, after a couple of witty sallies of "Alice in Wonderland", he left.

This time, he seems to have decided that without him, the thread is nothing.

He also seems to have abandoned the Susan Blackmore and global warming thread, shortly before abandoning this one, after once again failing to persuade the lieges that any text means exactly what he wants it to mean, irrespective of what it actually says.

Where is he now? Is he getting bored? Can this delightful entertainment be continued elsewhere?

Rolfe.

[SteveGrenard]

Alligators and other crocodilians don't jump either but they do high-walk, raising their bodies off the ground. In fact their normal gait is with their bodies off the ground; they are able to swivel their ankles which permits their legs to be almost underneath the body, making the gait resembling that of mammals. Other reptiles do not move this way. Crocodilians also run by speeding up their walk; in smaller crocodilians this may change the gait into a "gallop" in which the animal appears to be bouncing; some may acheive speeds of 10 miles per hour (17 kph). This has been photographed and is quite amazing to see.

We tend to think we can outrun them on land but we'd have to try pretty hard to do so if we are surprised by one. They don't have endurance but are excellent sprinters, using the element of surprise to attack on land. They are most at home in the water when it comes to attacking, however. They also move like lizards, moving one foot at a time with their belly scraping the ground; they employ this method of movement when rapidly sliding down an embankment into the water when they feel threatened. We have probably all seen footage of them sliding down an embankment into the water. They are most at home in the water and they are most vulnerable on land.

Since crocodilians, such as this three foot youngster, can momentarily leap, usually from out of the water, to grab prey, it is easy to think they can jump to get over a stationery obstacle. They have been filmed grabbing a bird in low flight over the water's surface.

They do have a double set of eye lids, actually 3 per eye... an upper and lower and one called a nictitating membrane which is semi-transparent which they use to cover their eyes when hunting underwater. When engaged in "battle" or attacked, if pressure is exerted against their eyeballs, the entire orb descends into a space in the skull, taking them out of harms way. They also have a reflective layer in the eye called the tapetum lucidum which glows red in the dark when a light is shone on them. This is called "eye-shine" and is now used to count alligator populations where as at one time it wasused to hunt them. Using eye shine to hunt them I believe is illegal even if you have a permit to legally hunt them during special restricted hunts. Lots of animals and people have such such a reflective layer in their eyes.

okay, back to the debate .... sorry for the interruption.

[Manny]

They look the same shade to me. But if you want to think they would build a dog access door next to an open area go for it!
I don't care enough to take him off ignore, but I do care enough to ask: Why has Claus circled the shadow left by the lady's pool skimmer in that picture?

[SteveGrenard]

I don't care enough to take him off ignore, but I do care enough to ask: Why has Claus circled the shadow left by the lady's pool skimmer in that picture?

What post# is this? Thanks

[HarryKeogh]

I don't care enough to take him off ignore, but I do care enough to ask: Why has Claus circled the shadow left by the lady's pool skimmer in that picture?

Maybe he thinks it's made out of glass.

[HarryKeogh]

What post# is this? Thanks

see post #252

[Luke T.]

I'm going to drop out for a bit -- probably until page 7 or so.

Good luck to everyone in the meantime.

Page 9 now, NoZed.

[Grammatron]

Page 9 now, NoZed.

Page 10, actually, but who's counting.

[BPSCG]

Where is he now? Is he getting bored? Can this delightful entertainment be continued elsewhere?I'll see if I can start up another gun thread involving alligators with guns on planes.

I think we know one thing is for damned sure. This lady isn't going to let her dog outside off a leash again. Might as well remove the doggie door and sell it on eBay.

[BPSCG]

Here we go. Guns and a plane. No alligator, unfortunately, except in the URL.

But there's a cow (http://www.alligator.org/pt2/050519cops.php)...

[Grammatron]

Here we go. Guns and a plane. No alligator, unfortunately, except in the URL.

But there's a cow (http://www.alligator.org/pt2/050519cops.php)...

What's up with these people and/or animals?!

The guy shot the cow 3 times with a .45 and it lived.

[Huntster]

Alligators are not lizards. They are crocodilians.

Yeah, you're right.

I was being derogatory.

[SteveGrenard]

see post #252

He wrote glass and no glass.....

[SezMe]

"My daughter kicked at the gator and the gator lunged at her," Frey said. "He kept coming through the porch and the screen … I kept trying to flip him away" with the shovel, she added ...
Some of you wonder where she kept a gun in the house, I wonder where and why she keeps a shovel in the house.

[Grammatron]

Some of you wonder where she kept a gun in the house, I wonder where and why she keeps a shovel in the house.

You mean you don't have a cabinet on your lanai with a shovel and a gun? Weirdo.

[NoZed Avenger]

Page 9 now, NoZed.


Sorry. I was out of town all day and had no access to a computer.


Kind of nice to read all that happened today in one go, as opposed to a little at a time.

[NoZed Avenger]

If I see an alligator on a plane? I am feeding him drumsticks, no questions asked, until he is full up to his eyelids.

[Huntster]

...Ogborn was arrested and charged with killing and aggravated abuse of cattle.

The cow, who survived the shooting, will be put to sleep at owner's discretion, reports state....

It used to be that when you survived a shooting, you hadn't been killed.

I guess it's different with cows.

[Huntster]

Some of you wonder where she kept a gun in the house, I wonder where and why she keeps a shovel in the house.

She's got a dog. Dog owners need shovels.

Maybe it was near the doggie door.

[HarryKeogh]

He wrote glass and no glass.....

Yeah, he's under the impression one would install a dog door next to a large opening in a gate.

[Rolfe]

Lots of animals and people have such such a reflective layer in their eyes.Never heard that people have a tapetum lucidum. That's why you get red-eye in photos, it's just the blood vessels showing up, while with animals you get all sorts of satanic special effects. I've got a great one of Caramel looking as if his eyes are shooting yellow fire.

What is the structure of the reptile tapetum lucidum? It's an interesting example of parallel evolution in mammals in that it has a completely different structure in different species - the cat and the sheep were the two I remember being used as contrasting examples in classes.

Rolfe.

[SteveGrenard]

Never heard that people have a tapetum lucidum. That's why you get red-eye in photos, it's just the blood vessels showing up, while with animals you get all sorts of satanic special effects. I've got a great one of Caramel looking as if his eyes are shooting yellow fire.

You're right .. humans dont have this structure ... I was just being derogatory....



What is the structure of the reptile tapetum lucidum? It's an interesting example of parallel evolution in mammals in that it has a completely different structure in different species - the cat and the sheep were the two I remember being used as contrasting examples in classes.








Comparative morphology of the tapetum lucidum (among selected species).

Ollivier FJ (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&itool=PubMed_Abstract&term=%22Ollivier+FJ%22%5BAuthor%5D), Samuelson DA (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&itool=PubMed_Abstract&term=%22Samuelson+DA%22%5BAuthor%5D), Brooks DE (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&itool=PubMed_Abstract&term=%22Brooks+DE%22%5BAuthor%5D), Lewis PA (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&itool=PubMed_Abstract&term=%22Lewis+PA%22%5BAuthor%5D), Kallberg ME (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&itool=PubMed_Abstract&term=%22Kallberg+ME%22%5BAuthor%5D), Komaromy AM (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&itool=PubMed_Abstract&term=%22Komaromy+AM%22%5BAuthor%5D).

Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32601-0126, USA. ollivier@mail.vetmed.ufl.edu

OBJECTIVES: The phenomenon of 'eye-shine' is seen in a variety of animal species, and is generally thought to be related to the presence of an intraocular reflecting structure, the tapetum lucidum. The tapetum lucidum is a biologic reflector system that is a common feature in the eyes of vertebrates. It normally functions to provide the light-sensitive retinal cells with a second opportunity for photon-photoreceptor stimulation, thereby enhancing visual sensitivity at low light levels. The tapetum lucidum is presented here according to a classification based on the location, as well as the composition, of this reflective layer. Finally, the physical and chemical properties, as well as the origins of the different tapeta lucida, are discussed and compared. METHODS: The anatomic and biochemical aspects of the tapetum lucidum in various vertebrates are examined. Morphologic observations were made from paraffin and plastic embedded specimens. Specimens were treated with traditional stains and observed by light and transmission electron microscopy. RESULTS: Some species (primates, squirrels, birds, red kangaroo and pig) do not have this structure and they usually are diurnal animals. In vertebrates, the tapetum lucidum exhibits diverse structure, organization and composition. Therefore, the retinal tapetum (teleosts, crocodilians, marsupials, fruit bat), the choroidal guanine tapetum (elasmobranchs), the choroidal tapetum cellulosum (carnivores, rodents, cetacea), and the choroidal tapetum fibrosum (cow, sheep, goat, horse) are described. CONCLUSIONS: The tapetum lucidum represents a remarkable example of neural cell and tissue specialization as an adaptation to a dim light environment and, despite these differences, all tapetal variants act to increase retinal sensitivity by reflecting light back through the photoreceptor layer. These variations regarding both its location and structure, as well as the choice of reflective material, may represent selective visual adaptations associated with their feeding behavior, in response to the use of specific wavelengths and amount of reflectance required.

[SteveGrenard]

Caimans are members of the alligator family .....

Article http://public.metapress.com/images/covers/publications/101559.jpg Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology
Publisher: Springer Berlin / Heidelberg
ISSN: 0721-832X (Paper) 1435-702X (Online)
DOI: 10.1007/BF00406990
Issue: Volume 208, Numbers 1-3

Date: March 1978
Pages: 159 - 168
Electron microscopy of retinal tapetum (Caiman crocodilus)
Claus E. Dieterich1, 3 and Hans Jost Dieterich2
(1) Institute of Anatomy of the Philipps-University, Robert-Koch-Str. 6, D-3550 Marburg a.d.L., Germany(2) Institute of Anatomy of the University, Vesaliusweg 2-4, D-4400 Münster/W., Germany(3) Present address: University Eye Clinic, Friedrichstr. 18, D-6300 Giessen, GermanyReceived: 30 June 1978

Summary The distribution and ultrastructure of the retinal tapetum lucidum in Caiman crocodilus is described. In the light adapted eye the tapetum is recognized in the superior half of the fundus. It consists of guanine containing crystalline platelets which are spread almost over the entire retinal pigment epithelial cell which can be divided into different layers: 1. The basal surface facing the choriocapillary vessels is differentiated into numerous densely packed true microfolds which are commonly described as http://springerlink.metapress.com/media/images/contributions/P/L/3/4/PL34J0JK1601RTL0_html/xxlarge8220.gifbasal infoldingshttp://springerlink.metapress.com/media/images/contributions/P/L/3/4/PL34J0JK1601RTL0_html/xxlarge8221.gif. 2. A remarkable high content of mitochondria as well as a great number of lipid droplet-like spherical bodies is observed. 3. In the nuclear zone a Golgi apparatus and all stages of phagocytosis are found. 4. Within the level of intercellular junctions, crystalline platelets are arranged mainly perpendicularly to the long axis of the neighbouring receptor cells, whereas 5. platelets in large pigment epithelial cell processes extending from the apical cell surface between the photoreceptors are oriented parallel to the receptor axis. 6. Heavy pigmentation of the apical tips of pigment cell processes by melanosomes is observed, but only within the lower half of the fundus. The functional significance of the tapetum of Caiman crocodilus is discussed.

This paper was presented in part at the Sixth Annual Meeting of the European Club for Ophthalmic Fine Structure in Paris, France on March 31 and April 1, 1978

[CFLarsen]

In fact their normal gait is with their bodies off the ground; they are able to swivel their ankles which permits their legs to be almost underneath the body, making the gait resembling that of mammals. Other reptiles do not move this way. Crocodilians also run by speeding up their walk; in smaller crocodilians this may change the gait into a "gallop" in which the animal appears to be bouncing; some may acheive speeds of 10 miles per hour (17 kph).

Crocodilians' normal gait is with their bodies off the ground; their ankles swivel to allow their legs to be almost underneath their body, making their gait resemble mammals'. No other reptiles move in this way. Crocodilians can also run by simply speeding up their walk; in smaller crocodilians this may change the gait into a "gallop" in which the animal appears to be bouncing; some may acheive speeds of 10 miles per hour (17 kph).
Source (http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Crocodilia.html)

They also move like lizards, moving one foot at a time with their belly scraping the ground; they employ this method of movement when rapidly sliding down an embankment into the water when they feel threatened. We have probably all seen footage of them sliding down an embankment into the water.

Crocodilians can also move like lizards, moving one foot at a time with their bellies scraping on the ground; they also use this mode of movement when sliding down a river bank when frightened and sometimes occurs when they are running and their legs get out of sync.
Source (http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Crocodilia.html)

They are most at home in the water when it comes to attacking, however.

They are most at home in the water and they are most vulnerable on land.
Source (http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Crocodilia.html)

Since crocodilians, such as this three foot youngster, can momentarily leap, usually from out of the water, to grab prey, it is easy to think they can jump to get over a stationery obstacle. They have been filmed grabbing a bird in low flight over the water's surface.

Flying prey can be caught by the crocodilians leaping into the air with thrusts of their powerful tail.
Source (http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Crocodilia.html)

They also have a reflective layer in the eye called the tapetum lucidum which glows red in the dark when a light is shone on them.

A layer of tapetum at the back of their eyes greatly increases their ability to see at night as well; this also makes their eyes glow in the dark.
Source (http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Crocodilia.html)

Steve, you're a fraud.

[SezMe]

Larsen, you're an embarrassment.

Now, that has certainly moved this thread forward, hasn't it? Name calling is SO skepticism, SO the face we want to present to the world, SO cool.

Can I have my eagle scout silliness badge now?

[CFLarsen]

Larsen, you're an embarrassment.

Now, that has certainly moved this thread forward, hasn't it? Name calling is SO skepticism, SO the face we want to present to the world, SO cool.

Can I have my eagle scout silliness badge now?
You don't consider it fraud to take the work of others and present it as your own?

Really? Wow.

[SezMe]

I do. But saying, "Steve, you're a fraud" hardly makes your case. Why is he a fraud? What is wrong with his cites? Where did he "take the work of others and present it as your own?"

Give 'em hell, Larsen, if hell is what he deserves. But don't yell "faud" and expect that that makes your case.

[NoZed Avenger]

I do. But saying, "Steve, you're a fraud" hardly makes your case. Why is he a fraud? What is wrong with his cites? Where did he "take the work of others and present it as your own?"

Give 'em hell, Larsen, if hell is what he deserves. But don't yell "faud" and expect that that makes your case.

But did you notice how the topic of the entire thread seems to have magically changed?

[Kerberos]

Alligators, like many reptiles, can move very quickly.

http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/natsci/herpetology/brittoncrocs/cbd-faq-q4.htm



Over long distance, a human can apparently outrun an alligator.

Over short distance, no, as evidenced by the unfortunate jogger who was killed by an alligator last week--although in that case, the gator probably lunged from the water, as they are wont to do.

However, I call for double-blind testing. Any volunteers?
I'll second the blind testing thing, blind people are a burden to socierty anyways and the alligators need to be feed.

[CFLarsen]

I do. But saying, "Steve, you're a fraud" hardly makes your case. Why is he a fraud? What is wrong with his cites? Where did he "take the work of others and present it as your own?"

Give 'em hell, Larsen, if hell is what he deserves. But don't yell "faud" and expect that that makes your case.

Did you read the cites at all?

But did you notice how the topic of the entire thread seems to have magically changed?

Are you suggesting I should not point out fraud?

[Rob Lister]

Did you read the cites at all?



Are you suggesting I should not point out fraud?

Perhaps you should point it out in a different thread. I got your dirft, I just didn't think it was 1) important, 2) topical, 3) meaningful, or 4) fraud. Start a new thread instead of 1) trying to change the topic, and 2) failing to address any of your logical fallacies.

Fact is, I'd have done the same. I'd have shot the gator dead, dead, dead, and then had it stuffed, mounted, and sold on ebay. Perhaps turned into a pair of boots. Maybe a purse. Whatever.

You, on the other hand, would [attempt] to run from it. Good move for you, IMHO.

IMO, the force used was resonable given the knowledge and experience of the actor.

[CFLarsen]

Perhaps you should point it out in a different thread. I got your dirft, I just didn't think it was 1) important, 2) topical, 3) meaningful, or 4) fraud.

You don't think it is fraud?? Are you serious?

Start a new thread instead of 1) trying to change the topic, and 2) failing to address any of your logical fallacies.

I am not trying to change any topic. People are free to discuss whatever they want.

But since Steve Grenard posts his fraud here, I also point it out here.

This has not been a problem in other threads where Steve also was exposed for fraud. Why in this one?

[SteveGrenard]

Claus:

re your notations on a news photo........

What did you mean by glass and no glass?

Thank you.

PS: Crocodilians larger than this one bring down and have killed children, dogs, zebra, antelopes, inebriated adults on land.

It is well documented. If the victim/prey is in the water with them crocs have it easier. In
Africa they have been found not only to drag their victims into the water but to haul them to holes they have excavated and store the flesh for future consumption.

I am also very skeptical of how this young alligator supposedly got into the house, however, where it allegedly became a threat. Here are some links and references for you from PBS. If you click on Lizards below you'll find photographic evidence of a gecko lizard licking its lid-less eye with its tongue....a keeper:

www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/reptiles/gators_resources.html

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/images/spacer.gifhttp://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/images/spacer.gifhttp://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/reptiles/images/rep_nav_off_01.gifhttp://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/reptiles/images/rep_nav_on_02.gifhttp://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/reptiles/images/rep_nav_off_04.gif (http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/reptiles/turtles.html)http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/reptiles/images/rep_nav_off_05.gif (http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/reptiles/lizards.html)http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/images/spacer.gifhttp://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/images/spacer.gifhttp://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/images/spacer.gifhttp://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/images/spacer.gif
Resources

Web Sites
Crocodilians: Natural History and Conservation (http://www.crocodilian.com/)
http://www.crocodilian.com
Detailed information about alligators and crocodiles, including a species list and biology database.
The American Alligator (http://agrigator.ifas.ufl.edu/gators/)
http://agrigator.ifas.ufl.edu/gators
Facts and tips from the University of Florida.
Alligator Radio (http://www.floridaenvironment.com/programs/fe00529.htm)
http://www.floridaenvironment.com/programs/fe00529.htm
Radio stories from FloridaEnvironment.com.
Nuisance Alligator Control in Florida (PDF) (http://www.wildflorida.org/gators/research/Articles/nuisance-csg2000.pdf)
http://www.wildflorida.org/gators/research/Articles/nuisance-csg2000.pdf
An in-depth description from experts at the Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission.
Alligator Net (http://wld.fwc.state.fl.us/gators/Default.htm)
http://wld.fwc.state.fl.us/gators/Default.htm
An impressive collection of information from the State of Florida.
Alligator Attacks by State Through 1995 (http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/fish/Sharks/attacks/relariskgator.htm)
http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/fish/Sharks/attacks/relariskgator.htm
A stastical rundowm from the Forida Museum of Natural History.
Crocodilia (http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/chordata/reptilia/crocodilia.html)
http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/
chordata/reptilia/crocodilia.html
More information about the order that includes alligators and crocodiles.

Books

Behler, John. ALLIGATORS & CROCODILES. Montreal: Voyager Press, 1998.

Garnett, Stephen. CROCODILES AND ALLIGATORS. New York: Checkmark Books, 1989.

George, Jean Craighead. THE MISSING 'GATOR OF GUMBO LIMBO: AN ECO MYSTERY. New York: HarperTrophy, 1993.

Grenard, Steve. HANDBOOK OF ALLIGATORS AND CROCODILES. Miami: Krieger Publishing Company, 1991.

Simon, Seymour. CROCODILES & ALLIGATORS. New York: HarperTrophy, 2001.

[Huntster]

I don't have a problem with someone pointing out such an offense as this. Steve should have simply linked properly.

Further, starting a new thread on it doesn't work for me, because that could be seen as simply petty poking. Correcting the man here seems appropriate. Claus pointed it out very simply, and didn't go on and on with it.

Seems fair and right to me.

...This has not been a problem in other threads where Steve also was exposed for fraud. Why in this one?

This has happened before with Steve?

[CFLarsen]

Claus:

re your notations on a news photo........

What did you mean by glass and no glass?

Thank you.

PS: Crocodilians larger than this one bring down and have killed children, dogs, zebra, antelopes, inebriated adults on land.

It is well documented. If the victim/prey is in the water with them crocs have it easier. In
Africa they have been found not only to drag their victims into the water but to haul them to holes they have excavated and store the flesh for future consumption.

I am also very skeptical of how this young alligator supposedly got into the house, however where it allegedly became a threat.

Don't you have anything to say about your obvious theft? Ignore it, in the hopes it goes away?

I don't have a problem with someone pointing out such an offense as this. Steve should have simply linked properly.

No, no. This isn't a case of simply lifting a text from somewhere. Steve made an effort (albeit a lousy one) to disguise that he had stolen the text from somewhere else.

This has happened before with Steve?

Oh, yes.

[HarryKeogh]

I do. But saying, "Steve, you're a fraud" hardly makes your case. Why is he a fraud? What is wrong with his cites? Where did he "take the work of others and present it as your own?"

Give 'em hell, Larsen, if hell is what he deserves. But don't yell "faud" and expect that that makes your case.

On this point I would agree with Claus. Steve took a nicely sized paragraph from another source and changed a few words around. Steve should have linked to the source. In another thread he claimed to have a PhD in herpetology but when he put his resume on this board for scrutiny he had no mention of it. Odd to have a PhD and not put it on your resume, no?

Some things he does come off as intellectually dishonest.

[CFLarsen]

On this point I would agree with Claus. Steve took a nicely sized paragraph from another source and changed a few words around. Steve should have linked to the source. In another thread he claimed to have a PhD in herpetology but when he put his resume on this board for scrutiny he had no mention of it. Odd to have a PhD and not put it on your resume, no?

Some things he does come off as intellectually dishonest.
Thank you.

The list of Steve's transgressions is long, but distinguished.

[SteveGrenard]

This has happened before with Steve?

It actually has. When I quoted material from one of my own 23 published books which other authors quoted and which I then got blamed for stealing from them. This occurred mainly because my books are not online anywhere if you can believe that whereas the material that was borrowed from me was. Unlike some people around here, and it would be useless anyway, I do not spend my life writing to every online author of commonly held knowledge and observations and ask them to be cited. In this case you can go to the library and requisition through inter-library loan if it is not on the shelf a book called: Handbook of Alligators and Crocodiles by Steve Grenard. 1991. It just came out of print after a nice run of 15 years
where it was adopted by many wildlife management programs throughout the southeast.

You can find everything I wrote in there and more including a reference to an unpublished thesis (Lewis) detailing in the lab the different gaits of experimental Caimans (Alligatorines) and confirmed by myself in the field observation of 24 different illustrated gaits:

1. Belly-run-dive
2. Belly-run-leap-dive
3. high walk-run-dive
4. high walk jump dive
5. surface patrolling
6. quadrupedal bottom walk w/horizontal float and tail movements
7. bipedal bottom walk w/horiz float and tail movements
8. sinking
9. surface dive, head first
10. aquatic leap (referred to in earlier post)
11. submerged patrolling
12. surface torpedo swimming
13. submerged torpedo swimming
14. hauling out
15. bipedal bottom walking w/ horiz float and limb patrolling
16. surface over the shoulder dive
17. casual high walk
18. belly sprint with rapid serpentine tail movements
19. terrestrial bipedal stand w/o support
20. high walk w/lateral head movements
21. bail-out with heads thrown back
22. obstacle climbing
23. high walk freeze-high walk
24. belly slide with limbs tucked

pp. 17-21.

of course its nice when an online source does actually credit me such as this:

http://www.uh.edu/engines/epi1946.htm

and which is why my name comes up thousands of times in Google.

[CFLarsen]

It actually has. When I quoted material from one of my own 23 published books which other authors quoted and which I then got blamed for stealing from them. This occurred mainly because my books are not online anywhere if you can believe that whereas the material that was borrowed from me was. Unlike some people around here, and it would be useless anyway, I do not spend my life writing to every online author of commonly held knowledge and observations and ask them to be cited. In this case you can go to the library and requisition through inter-library loan if it is not on the shelf a book called: Handbook of Alligators and Crocodiles by
Steve Grenard. 1991. It just came out of print after a run of 15 years.
It's not just your own books, Steve.

You have problems with discerning between your own work and that of others. (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=229108#post229108)

Do you have any comments on your obvious theft in this thread?

[LeFevre]

Thank you.

The list of Steve's transgressions is long, but distinguished.
Yeah Grenard's been know to do that.

If only he'd retreat from the hard questions and then ignore the threads where those questions were asked, that is the skeptical way here at the JREF (at least for some).

[Thanz]

What an odd thread. It shows the strange impulses of both CFLarsen and Steve Grenard. All Steve had to do to make his post legit was put in a link and say "adapted from here" - it would, in fact, enhance his posts credibility even in the absence of Claus showing his plagarism - but for some reason he refuses to.

As for Claus, it seems that his brain is wirde thusly:

Attacking a man on a plane and killing him, indisciminately, for having a gun yet making no threatening moves is okay. Despite the fact that it is far more likely that the man is there to protect you rather than hurt. And despite the fact that any person who manages to get a gun on a plane (legitimately or not) is likely to have more combat training than you and will likely kill you when you attack them without provocation.

However, if a predator is actually attacking you and your loved ones, and you have already made attempts to get the predator to stop attacking you (shoving it out the dog door, flipping it with a shovel) it is bad to shoot it.

Let's recap: Killing man on plane who is not threatening you: Good.
Killing alliagator that is in the process of attacking you and your loved ones: Bad.

Odd choice of morals there.

Let's recap again:
When attacked by alligator: run, despite the fact that these animals have great short bursts of speed and can catch you and kill you. Especially if you need a cane to move around.

When you see an armed man on a plane, who surely has more training and fighting experience than you: Attack and try to kill them with your bare hands.

Odd survival instincts.

Is it something in the water over there?

[LeFevre]

Summed up quite well Thanz. It is a truely weird postions to hold from my point of view.

Also killing an annoying fly isn't the thing to do.

[CFLarsen]

Let's recap: Killing man on plane who is not threatening you: Good.

Wrong. A person concealing a weapon on board a plane is very threatening. If anything, 9-11 taught us that.

Clearly, you have learned nothing. I find that sad. Incredibly sad.

[Thanz]

Wrong. A person concealing a weapon on board a plane is very threatening. If anything, 9-11 taught us that.
Actually, 9-11 taught us nothing of the sort. Absent any other information, the fact that a man has a gun on a plane is not threatening. Chances are, the man is a peace officer of some kind rather than a terrorist.
Clearly, you have learned nothing. I find that sad. Incredibly sad.
Clearly, you believe in knee-jerk reactions without any critical thought. I find that sad. Incredibly sad.

[SteveGrenard]

It's not just your own books, Steve.

You have problems with discerning between your own work and that of others. (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=229108#post229108)

Do you have any comments on your obvious theft in this thread?

This was obviously in the context of the debate over the the scientific rigour or lack thereof of the Horizon program. My position was then and is now that scientific experiments cannot be done on television. It was countering your position that the Horizon experiment on homeopathy, and I could care less if homeopathy is real (actually I don't think it is and have
debated that position in true scientific forums) was a huge sucess and monumentally proved that homeopathy was fake. I did not disagree it was fake but I felt the manner in which that conclusion was reached by you and other groupies who fawn over Randi was subject to skeptical rejection.

[SteveGrenard]

CFL: What did you mean by glass and no glass?

[CFLarsen]

This was obviously in the context of the debate over the the scientific rigour or lack thereof of the Horizon program. My position was then and is now that scientific experiments cannot be done on television. It was countering your position that the Horizon experiment on homeopathy, and I could care less if homeopathy is real (actually I don't think it is and have
debated that position in true scientific forums) was a huge sucess and monumentally proved that homeopathy was fake. I did not disagree it was fake but I felt the manner in which that conclusion was reached by you and other groupies who fawn over Randi was subject to skeptical rejection.

The question is whether you stole - once again - the works of others and presented it as your own.

You did. Care to comment on that?

CFL: What did you mean by glass and no glass?

There's no glass at B. Nothing to misunderstand.

[Thanz]

There's no glass at B. Nothing to misunderstand.
I think it is too hard to tell from the photograph, but logic would indicate that you are wrong. Or, at least, wrong in the implication that there is no barrier to entry there. One does not install a dog door if it is just as easy for that size animal to go around it. And an attacking predator does not try to keep going through the door if it can just go around it.

[SteveGrenard]

The question is whether you stole - once again - the works of others and presented it as your own.

You did. Care to comment on that?



There's no glass at B. Nothing to misunderstand.

1. I already have. This content appears in my book which was written in 1989-90 and published in 1991. It is not copywritable, it is common knowledge in the field of crocodilian biology and I and others have previously placed it in print. I cite myself. My book also contains
over 600 published references and citations, most of which I have right here in my library.
Since I have personally observed in field work in Florida all of which I describe it is not necessary for me to attribute everyline of a description such as this to a previous author.
Again: I cite myself. If someone else publishes something of a unique nature or on subject matter which I did not observe or am not familiar with, I agree it is necessary to cite references as back-up. Not in this case. I did not "steal" this material. I did not see this specific material before I described alligator gait from my own knowledge and previous publication of same. You can no doubt find other descriptions which match this as well. The previous case involved a description of acid-base balance which I described in print as long ago as 1970 and can easily prove it.

Since it was a standard description of the physiology I was chided by Mr Larsen for failing to
credit another source he could find on the net. There was a world before the net, I just think that Mr. Larsen is oblivious to its existence. While Larsen feels I could expect to get away stealing a transcript of a TV show under discussion without properly citing it as a reason to
oveerturn my argument is absurd on its face but it is typical of the lengths to which he will go when he is faced with no other reasonable responses. Now please reply to your original mark-up of the photograph in question of the doggie door? ...see #2.

2. I asked you what you mean by no glass versus glass? What kind of glass? What was the glass doing? Why is it relevant? Was there a glass window, a barrier, a piece of glass on the floor, what is it you see and I cannot see. I can't normally see clear glass (unless it is reflecting something) in a photograph or a shadow of glass. What is the forensic significance of your notation? What is its bearing on the case of the animal gaining entrance to the porch?

Alligators can climb stairs or negotiate other obstacles by hauling, they can go through a flap used as a doggie trap door such as the one shown.

Thank you.

[CFLarsen]

1. I already have. This content appears in my book which was written in 1989-90 and published in 1991. It is not copywritable, it is common knowledge in the field of crocodilian biology and I and others have previously placed it in print. I cite myself. My book also contains
over 600 published references and citations, most of which I have right here in my library.

Steve, the article you stole your post from is authored by Danny Goodisman. (http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Crocodilia.html)

2. I asked you what you mean by no glass versus glass? What kind of glass? What was the glass doing? Why is it relevant? Was there a glass window, a barrier, a piece of glass on the floor, what is it you see and I cannot see. I can't normally see clear glass in a photograph or a shadow of glass. What is the forensic significance of your notation? What is its bearing on the case of the animal gaining entrance to the porch?

Read the thread, Steve.

[SteveGrenard]

I can't find Danny Goodisman anywhere save for here unless he's also now the same one running cartoys.com. In any case he did not cite me in his short list of references but I won't hold that against him.

I did read the thread and still don't understand the relevance of the glass.
Can you please elaborate. Thank you.

[CFLarsen]

I can't find Danny Goodisman anywhere save for here unless he's also now the same one running cartoys.com. In any case he did not cite me in his short list of references but I won't hold that against him.

Look at the link I posted in #404. All the way down.

I did read the thread and still don't understand the relevance of the glass.
Can you please elaborate. Thank you.

I can't make it clearer.

[NoZed Avenger]

Are you suggesting I should not point out fraud?

Do you ever tire of asking argumentative, multifarious questions that build up straw men for you to knock down?


Do you plan on changing to topic with each new message by asking these questions in a completely predictable way?

[Bob Klase]

There's no glass at B. Nothing to misunderstand.

Apparently there's always something to misunderstand- and you misunderstood it.

The area you circled as 'A' and said "glass" is not glass. You circled the shadow created by what appears to be the mesh of a pool cleaning net or a fish net. The area you circle and claim "no glass" is too small and unclear to make an accurate comparison, but should be compared to the rectangular area above your circle A- and only with the parts of that area not darkened by the shadows of tree limbs.

You have no valid evidence.

[whitefork]

The hell with funding Clausianarchy's trip to Florida. I'm tempted to buy him a membership in PETA. They would seem to be natural soulmates.

[SteveGrenard]

Look at the link I posted in #404. All the way down.



I can't make it clearer.

1. Yes, I read the link you posted all the way down. I see Danny's name. I see also that this site is written by college students. When I search Danny I find he is/was or maybe still is or isnt the webmaster of cartoys.com. This is an interesting website with no relevance whatsoever to crocodilian biology. Maybe we can buy some neat stuff for our cars. I cannot find that Danny has any prior experience in the field of crocodilian biology and especially in crocodilian gait other than the fact he probably borrowed his material from the references he cited, particularly the book by my friend Charles Ross then at the Smithsonian ....who is a highly esteemed croc expert. Both our books came out almost at the same time. His in 1989 when mine was written, mine in 1991. He probably did not see my book which is why he omitted it from the references but as I said I will not hold that against him.

2. No, your glass explanation is not clear even though its punny. Can you please share any additional thoughts you have on this matter without being so circumspect? Thank you.

[CFLarsen]

Do you ever tire of asking argumentative, multifarious questions that build up straw men for you to knock down?


Do you plan on changing to topic with each new message by asking these questions in a completely predictable way?
Are you suggesting I should not point out fraud?

[CFLarsen]

1. Yes, I read the link you posted all the way down. I see Danny's name. I see also that this site is written by college students. When I search Danny I find he is/was or maybe still is or isnt the webmaster of cartoys.com. This is an interesting website with no relevance whatsoever to crocodilian biology. Maybe we can buy some neat stuff for our cars. I cannot find that Danny has any prior experience in the field of crocodilian biology and especially in crocodilian gait other than the fact he probably borrowed his material from the references he cited, particularly the book by my friend Ross at the Smithsonian ....who is a highly esteemed croc expert. Both our books came out almost at the same time. He probably did not see my book which is why he omitted it from the references but as I said I will not hold that against him.

2. No, your glass explanation is not clear even though its punny. Can you please share any additional thoughts you have on this matter without being so circumspect? Thank you.

:hb:

[rudar]

For what it's worth, I'll go right on record and say I don't see anything necessarily indicative of fraud in the fact that the way an (apparent) expert on crocodiles and snakes would describe some pretty basic and well-known (in the field) facts about crocodiles would bear some resemblance to the way someone else might describe those same basic facts.

I mean, really, how much room far creative prose is there in saying that crocs can jump out of the water to grab flying prey?

Plus Steve's explanation that it's quite possible that the web site from which he is alledged to have ``stolen'' his post here was in fact written by a college student, possible relying heavily on books written on co-written by Steve, makes the similarities in language even less suspicious.

[NoZed Avenger]

Are you suggesting I should not point out fraud?

Do you ever tire of asking argumentative, multifarious questions that build up straw men for you to knock down?


Do you plan on changing to topic with each new message by asking these questions in a completely predictable way?

[CFLarsen]

For what it's worth, I'll go right on record and say I don't see anything necessarily indicative of fraud in the fact that the way an (apparent) expert on crocodiles and snakes would describe some pretty basic and well-known (in the field) facts about crocodiles would bear some resemblance to the way someone else might describe those same basic facts.

I mean, really, how much room far creative prose is there in saying that crocs can jump out of the water to grab flying prey?

Plus Steve's explanation that it's quite possible that the web site from which he is alledged to have ``stolen'' his post here was in fact written by a college student, possible relying heavily on books written on co-written by Steve, makes the similarities in language even less suspicious.

Fraud is fraud. There is no doubt that Steve stole the text.

[Rob Lister]

Fraud is fraud. There is no doubt that Steve stole the text.

I think setting up strawmen is fraud.

Fraud is fraud, Clause, right?

[Bob Klase]

Fraud is fraud. There is no doubt that Steve stole the text.

And that's your 'opinion'? Or do you have real evidence?

[SteveGrenard]

Some of you wonder where she kept a gun in the house, I wonder where and why she keeps a shovel in the house.

Here's a use for shovels:

http://www.ukiahdailyjournal.com/local/ci_3837764

[Rob Lister]

Here's a use for shovels:

http://www.ukiahdailyjournal.com/local/ci_3837764

Clause would have run.

[CFLarsen]

Clause would have run.
Are you in any way impaired?

What will it take for you to understand that my name is Claus, not Clause?

Perhaps you are merely mocking my name?

[Rob Lister]

Are you in any way impaired?

What will it take for you to understand that my name is Claus, not Clause?

Perhaps you are merely mocking my name?

Oh, sorry. CFLarson

Anyway, would you have run?
Would you have called the police?
Would you have screamed and jumped up on a table?
Which, Larson, which?

[CFLarsen]

Oh, sorry. CFLarson

If you can't even be bothered to spell my name right, why should I pay attention to anything you say?

That kind of infantile behavior immediately invalidates any argument you make. Such childish games belong to the kindergarten you obviously have left too early.

[Rob Lister]

If you can't even be bothered to spell my name right, why should I pay attention to anything you say?

That kind of infantile behavior immediately invalidates any argument you make. Such childish games belong to the kindergarten you obviously have left too early.

Keep that in mind the next time you're tempted to click the reply button.

[Bob Klase]

If you can't even be bothered to spell my name right, why should I pay attention to anything you say?

That kind of infantile behavior immediately invalidates any argument you make.

It takes a very stupid person to claim that an argument is invalid because of things that have absolutely no relation to the argument.

[CFLarsen]

Keep that in mind the next time you're tempted to click the reply button.
I see you are not even trying to excuse your puerile attempts of countering my arguments by mocking my name.

Get back when - if ever - you are able to argue in an adult manner.

[Rob Lister]

I see you are not even trying to excuse your puerile attempts of countering my arguments by mocking my name.

Get back when - if ever - you are able to argue in an adult manner.

It doesn't appear that you can stop yourself. That's okay by me. Look, Clause, if you argue rationally and set the example, things like this [thread] won't happen.

[SezMe]

Here's a use for shovels:

http://www.ukiahdailyjournal.com/local/ci_3837764
That is interesting but unrelated to where the shovel is kept. She probably keeps her shovel in the garden shed. Oh, and BTW, why does she need a shovel to pick up a dead snake? [/derail]

[SteveGrenard]

That is interesting but unrelated to where the shovel is kept. She probably keeps her shovel in the garden shed. Oh, and BTW, why does she need a shovel to pick up a dead snake? [/derail]

Shovels can be very handy for moving dead venomous snakes:




7. Bring in the dead snake only if this can be done without risk of further injury. Do not waste time hunting for the snake, and do not risk another bite if it is not easy to kill the snake. Be careful of the head when transporting it -- a dead snake can bite from reflex for up to an hour.

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/000031.htm



......which may also be why you should keep one in the house and another one in the garden shed and a third one on the porch, a fourth one next to your bed ... next to your gun(s) of course.

[whitefork]

http://www.shootingtimes.com/newproducts/STGatorAR/

[SteveGrenard]

[derail]

It's a common mistake in America to cross-spell Larsen and Larson since most Americans are not familiar with Danish, Swedish or Norwegian and what to us are subtle differences. In English Claus sounds like Clause as well even though clause is a different word altogether. One is Santa, the other something or other to do with gramma.



Clause

A clause is a group of words containing a subject and verb which forms part of a sentence. The first sentence on this page is made up of two clauses: the first clause from "A clause" to "verb," the second from "which" to the end.

http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000008.htm

[Huntster]

Actually, 9-11 taught us nothing of the sort. Absent any other information, the fact that a man has a gun on a plane is not threatening. Chances are, the man is a peace officer of some kind rather than a terrorist......

.....Or the pilot............

Hell, I can't even get on a plane with my little, teeny pocket knife, or even a bic lighter anymore. If a terrorist gets on the plane with a gun, I'm not going to kill him. I'm gonna kill the TSA people back at the airport of my origin for screwing with me, then letting the terrorist on........

[CFLarsen]

It's a common mistake in America to cross-spell Larsen and Larson since most Americans are not familiar with Danish, Swedish or Norwegian and what to us are subtle differences. In English Claus sounds like Clause as well even though clause is a different word altogether. One is Santa, the other something or other to do with gramma.

That's no excuse. Making fun of people's names is evidence that you have lost the argument.

[SteveGrenard]

That's no excuse.

I didn't say it was; but, it's an explanation.

[Rob Lister]

That's no excuse. Making fun of people's names is evidence that you have lost the argument.

You're right. It assumes the misspelling was unintentional.

When you act like an adult, so too shall I.

Now, run away from the gator.

[whitefork]

There's an argument buried somewhere in this thread?

[Rob Lister]

[derail]

It's a common mistake in America to cross-spell Larsen and Larson since most Americans are not familiar with Danish, Swedish or Norwegian and what to us are subtle differences. In English Claus sounds like Clause as well even though clause is a different word altogether. One is Santa, the other something or other to do with gramma.

For Larson, I perfer this definition...

A group of words with at least a subject and a verb which agrees with it. (http://universitywriting.shu.ac.uk/defs.htm)

[Huntster]

There's an argument buried somewhere in this thread?

Yes, although you're correct that it is well buried. The moral of this thread is:

Use the shovel.

1) Steve has linked us to a site which shows that a shovel is a great tool for killing rattlesnakes, and then to pick up the carcass for disposal.

2) A shovel is a great tool for picking up and dispose of doggie do (the criminal woman, who shot the alligator) may have had her shovel handy for both doggie do and snake-killing utility.

3) Someone else mentioned that the shovel may have been utilized by this criminal woman as a garden implement. This is a common use for a shovel, and it works very well for such.

4) I once observed how a shovel can be used as a negotiating tool. A co-worker once used one to convince a stupid supervisor to be quiet when he began to get stupid.

5) A shovel can be also used to help extract a vehicle stuck in a myriad of media; mud, snow, sand, etc.

6) A shovel can be used as a resting post for tired laborers. This can be observed on all highway construction, maintenance, or repair projects.

7) There are many, many other uses for a shovel that I will not outline here (killing 3' long alligators, for instance, which avoids firearms charges). Let your creativity be your guide.

* Never mind those two men behind the curtain (Claus and Steve :catfight:). Just bring me the shovel of the Wicked Witch of the North, and I'll stop fueling this silly thread.

[SteveGrenard]

For Larson, I perfer this definition...

A group of words with at least a subject and a verb which agrees with it. (http://universitywriting.shu.ac.uk/defs.htm)

Ah, clauses which don't agree.....

Anyway, I sent an e-mail to Danny to ask him if he saw my book. If he answers me and hasn't, I will donate a copy to Gonzaga University's librray where(apparently) he is/was a student, teacher or?? in 2002. I don't know if they will accept the book since it mentions evolution and ignores ID and creationsim ... and this is a Catholic, actually Jesuit university, but I'll let us all know what happens.

[Huntster]

....I will donate a copy to Gonzaga University's librray where(apparently) he is/was a student, teacher or?? in 2002. I don't know if they will accept the book since it mentions evolution and ignores ID and creationsim ... and this is a Catholic, actually Jesuit university, but I'll let us all know what happens.

That was either a cheap shot, or really ignorant.

[SteveGrenard]

That was either a cheap shot, or really ignorant.

I really don't know. Do you think they would mind having a book that
contravenes creationism and Genesis? The religious side of the great debate is
not something I am familiar with so chalk it up to ignorance and educate me.

[Rob Lister]

Ah, clauses which don't agree.....

Anyway, I sent an e-mail to Danny to ask him if he saw my book. If he answers me and hasn't, I will donate a copy to Gonzaga University's librray where(apparently) he is/was a student, teacher or?? in 2002.

Now THAT is an adult.

[Rob Lister]

Catholic's generally support evolution. I'm in the same boat as you there. I don't really know what all the various religions think of ID and such. Nor do I much care.

[hgc]

I really don't know. Do you think they would mind having a book that
contravenes creationism and Genesis? The religious side of the great debate is
not something I am familiar with so chalk it up to ignorance and educate me.http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=56497

[Huntster]

I really don't know. Do you think they would mind having a book that
contravenes creationism and Genesis? The religious side of the great debate is
not something I am familiar with so chalk it up to ignorance and educate me.

The Roman Catholic Church does not oppose evolution, and recognizes it as science.

I suggest sending a copy of your book directly to Gonzaga, and asking if they would consider including it in their library. All it will cost you is postage.

[Silly Green Monkey]

Normally I look forward to reading CFLarsen's contributions to any thread, but sometimes he just seems to go insane.

My professors in college assured me that there are levels of information for which no cite is required. I can, for instance, state that humans are made up of cells without needing to find even one corroborating source. Similarly, I can state that a certain Mr. Bush is President of the United States without needing a .gov site to back me up. Some things are known enough and by enough people that citing is silly. Someone who's put in the decade or so of becoming an expert really shouldn't have to cite to back up their own knowlege.

What's the point of spending all that money and time if what you know doesn't matter, only what others know?

[SteveGrenard]

The Roman Catholic Church does not oppose evolution, and recognizes it as science.

I suggest sending a copy of your book directly to Gonzaga, and asking if they would consider including it in their library. All it will cost you is postage.

Okay, good idea, will do. Thanks for the info and prior threads about the church and evolution.

edited to add: PS: I have e-mailed my publisher (Krieger) to arrange to have them gift a copy to the Foley Center Library at Gonzaga. They have a nice search engine of their holdings and I checked for my title which wasn't there and will check again after they get it.

http://www.krieger-publishing.com/natscience/herpetology/STACKherpetology/stackherpetology_20.html

[Huntster]

You're welcome.

I hope Gonzaga decides to stock your book.

[Mahatma Kane Jeeves]

My professors in college assured me that there are levels of information for which no cite is required. I can, for instance, state that humans are made up of cells without needing to find even one corroborating source. You're right. "Common" facts do not need to be sourced; the presentation of those facts most certainly does, however. You can't lift entire passages wholesale out of an enyclopedia simply because the facts are "common knowledge." The first two passages cited by Claus are clearly copy/paste jobs with only minor edits. That's plagiarism. Sure, this is just a message board, not a refereed journal; but how hard is to provide a link or citation? Now, it's certainly possible that the author of that web page stole from Steve's work; but given Steve's past lapses (being very kind) in this area, I don't really believe that. I'm sure those individual facts appear in various places in Steve's works, but phrased in exactly the same way? Doubt it. I'm willing to be proven wrong, however.

[Morrigan]

What, exactly, is the evidence that Steve plagiarised others instead of the reverse? Keeping in mind I am not aware of those "past lapses".

Anyway, it's clear that Claus is not interested in discussing the alligator story further... *lol*

[SteveGrenard]

I have asked this "author" at his student e-mail address if he has seen my book which contains almost the exact same material he presents on the website but he has not replied as yet. I have also arranged to donate a copy of my book to his school's library. In a previous case of which I was accused, some professor placed his teaching syllabus on the internet and although I published the details of that syllabus in a book 30 years ago, I was blamed for stealing his syllabus. Clearly his syllabus was stolen from me, and if not from me, from any of a dozen other sources that are not on the internet which covered this material in the exact same words, format and details. I can understand how someone who is paranoid about such matters can put their own spin on such things which is I why I am not miffed by this student/author failing to include my book among his references, a book that long predates his writing, and which is based on actually researching and observing the behaviors he describes and which I describe in my book in exactly the same way. The difference between me and him is that I did the work, in Florida and in the field. He's in Spokane which is almost as far away from alligators in the U.S. as geographically you could get. One of his references, a multi authored volume which he did not correctly cite, contained a chapter by an author that has this exact material as well. He cited the book but not the chapter and the actual author. I pointed this out to him as well in my e-mail to him so he could correct his reference if he even answers me.

Now if Larsen would please provide a sensible response to the questions about his glass and no glass notations that would be great. As anyone working at JREF can tell you, alligators in Florida can and do enter peoples backyards, their pools, their verandas and occasionally their homes and businesses although keeping the house door closed to the porch would prevent this. Perhaps they were not using the A/C and wanted some fresh air and got more than they bargained for. If the presence of some glass which nobody seems to be able to see is credited as an impediment, I wonder if this is what Claus is saying. A call to 911 would bring immediate assistance and eliminate the need for any shooting in the house.

[Pyrrho]

I suggest a field trip to the scene of the crime in order to gather first-hand evidence. Conjecture is just...conjecture.

[SteveGrenard]

I suggest a field trip to the scene of the crime in order to gather first-hand evidence. Conjecture is just...conjecture.

Here is some photo evidence of them jumping, lunging, leaping, and amazingly ... galloping w/text descirptions:

http://reptilis.net/crocodylia/moving.html (http://reptilis.net/crocodylia/moving.html)

If I was earlier going to give a URL as a reference it would be this one which I had to re-discover.

I recall some skepticism that alligators (e.g. crocodilians) can't do some of the things seen in these photos which I why I posted originally and now provide the above photographic evidence. One has to accept that this woman felt sufficiently threatened by such behaviors to act as she did even though if she shooed it out onto the porch and was able to close the door a phone call would've worked unless her dog was outside on the porch and at risk of attack in which case I don't blame her for shooting at the gator.

[Mahatma Kane Jeeves]

What, exactly, is the evidence that Steve plagiarised others instead of the reverse? Keeping in mind I am not aware of those "past lapses". Right now, none. I may have gone out on a limb, but that remains to be seen. It would be very easy for Steve to provide a specific citation (including page number) for those exact passages so someone could check it out. (To be clear, I'm only talking about the first two passages Claus cited; the other sentences seem different enough to avoid accusations of plagiarism.)

...my book which contains almost the exact same material he presents on the website but he has not replied as yet.

...contained a chapter by an author that has this exact material as well.
"Almost the same material?" I have no doubt that similar facts can be found in any number of books, but the first two passages Claus cited are virtually identical in their phrasing and word choice. Has this other author copied from you as well? Why don't you give us the citations for those specific passages so we can look for ourselves?

[schplurg]

http://www.skepticreport.com/download/images/floridawoman.jpg

A: Glass.

B: No glass.


http://www.skepticreport.com/download/images/floridawoman.jpg

Isn't this site supposed to be about logic and reason? Do you really think this lady would install a doggy door next to a large opening? Your 2-3 inch gap proves nothing. Can't you see that the shadow you circled with "A" does not even "fit" snugly into the framework and looks more like something leaning against the railing?

In fact I believe it is a pool cleaning net attached to one of the long horizontal poles. The patio barrier is probably plexiglass and casts little shadow at all.

I think we can deduce since the lady had a doggy door installed that the rest of the patio must be enclosed. Talk about deperate.

You have been provided with ample evidence that this lady acted reasonably. She shot at and hit the gator several times which means she did not fire wildly. There may or may not be neighbors nearby, I can't tell from the photo.

Her daughter was apparently old enough to help shoo the gator out the door, so perhaps she is not exactly a toddler, or even a child. I have not seen her age mentioned. You keep insisting that shooting in front of a child is wrong or dangerous, which is not necessarily true, regardless of age. Perhaps the daughter has even fired a gun before, seeing as this is a military family.

After Frey and her daughter managed to push the gator out of the lanai through the dog door, she blasted away at it four times. You have evidence that the woman is handicapped or disabled to at least some degree, yet on or about page 7 of this thread (which is as far as I'm going) you are debating the definition of disabled or handicapped (I can't remember which one, as this thread has seemed to degenerate severely from that point. I'm only bothering to reply because I've earned it after sorting through all this).

Add to that the fact that there have been several gator attacks recently. With the facts I have, I would say the woman acted reasonably.

That's no excuse. Making fun of people's names is evidence that you have lost the argument.Stop floundering, you already "lost the thread".

[SteveGrenard]

Unfortunately I don't have C.Ross' book handy; but I rememeber reading it since I reviewed it. I have already supplied you with page numbers and a list of gaits/locomotion behaviors (which have descriptions, drawings and/or photos in my text) above. My book is not online, however. Sorry. Neither is Charles Ross'.

The URL I just posted with some excellent photos also contains this material and practically identical descriptors.

These descriptions are widely used, are not copywritable, are not the
property of the author Larsen found who clearly got his material from one of several sources even if one of them was not me. I spent over 5 years
in the field in South Florida alligator watching, confirming in the AA, behaviors observed for African crocodiles and the Australian freshie. In another book I wrote, Medical Herpetology (1994) there is also a chapter on crocodilians and crocodilian behaviors as well. In the lab I worked with alligators, caimans and African Dwarf Crocodiles.

If you can find the full book length text of any of these titles online please let me know as I would be very interested.

Thanks

[SteveGrenard]

Right now, none. I may have gone out on a limb, but that remains to be seen. It would be very easy for Steve to provide a specific citation (including page number) for those exact passages so someone could check it out. (To be clear, I'm only talking about the first two passages Claus cited; the other sentences seem different enough to avoid accusations of plagiarism.)


"Almost the same material?" I have no doubt that similar facts can be found in any number of books, but the first two passages Claus cited are virtually identical in their phrasing and word choice. Has this other author copied from you as well? Why don't you give us the citations for those specific passages so we can look for ourselves?

This is where I read the disputed material originally, not directly on Danny's website. There was no indication it was written by Danny on this page but there was a link below which I didn't use until I returned there:

http://www.tomcaswell.com/studentwork/fall2004studentwork/thorngvo_fws/move.htm (http://www.tomcaswell.com/studentwork/fall2004studentwork/thorngvo_fws/move.htm)

Website: “Crocodilians' normal gait is with their bodies off the ground; their ankles swivel to allow their legs to be almost underneath their body, making their gait resemble mammals'. No other reptiles move in this way. Crocodilians can also run by simply speeding up their walk; in smaller crocodilians this may change the gait into a "gallop" in which the animal appears to be bouncing; some may acheive speeds of 10 miles per hour (17 kph). Crocodilians can also move like lizards, moving one foot at a time with their bellies scraping on the ground; they also use this mode of movement when sliding down a river bank when frightened and sometimes occurs when they are running and their legs get out of sync.”

================================================== ==============================


Post: “Alligators and other crocodilians don't jump either but they do high-walk, raising their bodies off the ground. In fact their normal gait is with their bodies off the ground; they are able to swivel their ankles which permits their legs to be almost underneath the body, making the gait resembling that of mammals. Other reptiles do not move this way. Crocodilians also run by speeding up their walk; in smaller crocodilians this may change the gait into a "gallop" in which the animal appears to be bouncing; some may acheive speeds of 10 miles per hour (17 kph). This has been photographed and is quite amazing to see.

"We tend to think we can outrun them on land but we'd have to try pretty hard to do so if we are surprised by one. They don't have endurance but are excellent sprinters, using the element of surprise to attack on land. They are most at home in the water when it comes to attacking, however. They also move like lizards, moving one foot at a time with their belly scraping the ground; they employ this method of movement when rapidly sliding down an embankment into the water when they feel threatened. We have probably all seen footage of them sliding down an embankment into the water. They are most at home in the water and they are most vulnerable on land. Since crocodilians, such as this three foot youngster, can momentarily leap, usually from out of the water, to grab prey, it is easy to think they can jump to get over a stationery obstacle. They have been filmed grabbing a bird in low flight over the water's surface."


================================================== ===================

So let’s see what I said in my post and which was written in the website that I am supposed to have stolen this from. The first sentence is not the same. Some descriptors are and are apt to be the same no matter who publishes them. If you check the crocodilian bibliography there are 2500 English language references alone, many of which describe these behaviors in these precise terms. Its like you are asking a medical writer to come up with a new way of describing the symptoms for measles or o/w accuse him of plagiarism. Its absurd. By the way in running text finder on my text and comparing it with the website material just 18% of the words were exactly the same.I guess that's 82% that aren't.


1. Ankles swivel, allowing for legs to be almost underneath the body. Common knowledge. Other URLS. Bakker describes this in his 1986 Dinosaur Heresies and is quoted in my book on page 17. He adds more details on the bent hinge joint that permits this.

2. Other reptiles don’t do this. I have written books and articles on lizards and turtles. Crocodilians are unique in this respect. I know it. This author found that out. Common knowledge if you have it.

3. Walking with legs under body or body supported by legs, unlike lizards and turtles, is "like mammals" including how people walk. Common knowledge and observation. This makes high walking crocodilians walk like mammals.Other reptiles do not move this way. True. My book details high-walk in drawings, photos and text.

4. Can speed up high walk into agallop. This has been photographed and discussed. I have a drawing of this in my book on page 22. My drawing came from a photo where the animal was allegedly clocked at a speed of 16 miles per hour but other sites I posted (see last one) which I also happen to have read recently but couldn’t immediately find again has the speed at 10 mph or 17 kph. I have seen moving pictures by my friend Adam Britton of a bouncing/galloping Australian F/W Croc of Johnston’s Crocodile. Adam studied crocs in the NT with Australian croc expert Grahame Webb. The general concensus is the lower speed as indicated by me in the post and by Adam Britton with whom I agree.

5. They also move like lizards and slide on their bellys. I have descriptions, drawings and photographs of this in my book. Common knowledge see pages 64 (USFWS photo), 72 (State of Fla photo), pg 75 (AMNH photo), pg 76 (USFWS), colorplate 3, photos 2 (State of Fla) and 5 & 6 (S Grenard photo).

6. They are most at home in the water. Widespread common knowledge. text page 21

7. Can leap out of the water (e.g. call it a jump) See website I just posted. I have drawings and descriptions of this in my book. There is a picture around (Africa probably) of a Nile Croc grabbing a bird out of the air as the animal jumps out of the water. I have a photo of an alligator thrusting head out of the water while partially submerged (page 37).


I trust these are the references you seek in your request above. Thank you for allowing me to respond.

[CFLarsen]

These descriptions are widely used, are not copywritable, are not the property of the author Larsen found who clearly got his material from one of several sources even if one of them was not me.

"Not copywritable"? :eek:

What you write is copywritable, Steve. You can't steal the works of others and claim that it is "not copywritable".

[Grammatron]

"Not copywritable"? :eek:

What you write is copywritable, Steve. You can't steal the works of others and claim that it is "not copywritable".

So did this thread end? If not address what people have told you.

[SteveGrenard]

If I convey basic knowledge which is well known from numerous multiple sources, I cannot copyright it. Knowledge is not copywritable. The authors of Holy Blood, Holy Grail recently found that out when they tried to sue Dan Brown. If these earlier authors prevailed there would be chaos in academia and the sciences. If a researcher publishes some unique or new finding they certainly deserve a credit by citation or if they create a work of fiction. If they rehash old factual material they don't, nor do they need get permission to do so from some other person who may've done the same thing a week, month or years before.


If a work is unique (The DaVinci Code is unique, Holy Blood, Holy Grail was a work of non-fiction containing historical facts) and contains unique information/story then I agree it is copywritable. My entire book, for example, contains a combination of common knowledge and unique information as well as unique photos and graphics which make it copywritable as a whole but in pieces. I have, for example, photos from the government which are not copywritable.

Forgive me for not posting a few dozen references to support what I write here but I never noticed anyone else doing that so didn't feel it was necessary or that you, Claus Larsen, in his supreme and exalted position has decided to hold me to a higher standard. If you get a copy of my book you will find 600 references and numerous in-text citations, however. But I didn't ask any author for permission to quote them save for one lengthy account which I decided to put in verbatim.

If I give you a list of 25 symptoms of a disease and you check the web you will find it on some website and or other. By your reckoning unless I have embellished it in some way or made it unique, then I am guilty of not posting its source even though I have this knowledge personally and have even published it in print media previously.

A good example was the syllabus on acid-base physiology placed on the web for his students by some college instructor which contained word for word everything I and a dozen others had written about the subject 10, 30, 40 even 50 years earlier. This knowledge is free to use for a syllabus and cannot be copywritten as a whole but no college instructor asks a book author for permission to place their material in their syllabus, nor do they have to. One paragraph containing 18% of the words from another text is not copywritable.

This guy then even published the syllabus with impunity on the web. No doubt you can find hundreds of syllabi such as this. By your perverted reckoning this accords the professor who prepared the syllabus authorship, copyright protection and entitlement to all that he stole from others. I don't think so (sarcasm).

Now there is a unique photo marked up by you saying glass no glass. Can you please answer the questions about this including how you know what's at B? Thank you.

[CFLarsen]

I didn't say it was; but, it's an explanation.
It's a piss-poor explanation in this case.

[Pyrrho]

A few comments on copyright...

Individual facts cannot usually be copyrighted. The manner in which facts are presented, i.e., the sentence structure, word choice, syntax, punctuation, etc. can be copyrighted, except maybe for certain recipes and most, but not all, documents produced by the US Government. Abstracts from research papers are copyrighted. Book chapters are copyrighted. Even a professor's syllabus is copyrighted, unless he is simply listing book titles or unadorned facts. Again, it is not the facts themselves that can be copyrighted, but how the facts are presented, i.e. word choice, sentence structure, etc.

If someone writes a paragraph using unique phrases from a previous work, they might produce a "derivative work", but unless it is sufficiently derivative, it violates copyright unless permission has been obtained to use those unique phrases. It is better to do that than to attempt to paraphrase, because sometimes even that will earn a person an accusation of plagiarism, even if the number of unique, but duplicate, phrases is rather small. 18% might be enough to cause you a problem, as witness the recent incident involving a young author whose book contained plagiarism.

For example, in the work I do, we are required to obtain permission to use statistical graphs or medical illustrations from research papers. This is not a matter of courtesy. It is a legal requirement. Likewise, we are required to list references, such as you will frequently find at the end of medical posters. Credit is due to the authors of prior work.

Anyway, the copyright issue seems to me to be a derailment. In the photo, it is evident that it's a screened-in porch with a doggy door. Little else is evident. All is proves is that there is a screened-in porch, a doggy door, a homeowner with a cane, and a medium-sized dog. No evidence in the photo that there ever was an alligator. We can guess that the reason the door is there is because there is no other entrance for the dog or a 3-foot alligator, aside from merely opening the door. We can guess that the doggy door was installed for reasons of convenience and not for the entry of 3-foot alligators. This does not preclude the ability of a 3-foot alligator to enter a given doggy door of equivalent size.

We can also make reasonable determinations regarding the time of day the photo was taken, but that seems irrelevant.

For any other determinations, we need more detailed photographs or an on-site visit. Given that this investigation does not involve paranormal powers, I'd say it falls outside the purview of the JREF mission, unless we're talking about magical powers of discernment from a 180x250 pixel photograph.

This is one of those cases in which there is insufficient data for people who were not there to make a True Determination as to What Really Happened. We can indulge in an endless morality play about the incident, but what's done is done.

The gator is dead (I assume--can't know it for sure), the woman has been charged. Case closed. Get on with life, it's far too short. Life, that is--not the gator--or this thread.

[CFLarsen]

The manner in which facts are presented, i.e., the sentence structure, word choice, syntax, punctuation, etc. can be copyrighted

No. They are copyrighted, by default (http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-general.html#mywork). You don't have to copyright (since when did that become a verb?) your work.

, except maybe for certain recipes and most, but not all, documents produced by the US Government.

You can waiver your copyright (e.g. by handing it over, or sell, to someone else, or simply put it in the public domain. But it has to be something you do actively.

Abstracts from research papers are copyrighted. Book chapters are copyrighted. Even a professor's syllabus is copyrighted, unless he is simply listing book titles or unadorned facts. Again, it is not the facts themselves that can be copyrighted, but how the facts are presented, i.e. word choice, sentence structure, etc.

And it is clear that Steve Grenard stole the works of others and presented it as his own.

Anyway, the copyright issue seems to me to be a derailment.
...
The gator is dead (I assume--can't know it for sure), the woman has been charged. Case closed. Get on with life, it's far too short. Life, that is--not the gator--or this thread.

You are right that we won't get any further on the alligator issue. But it is highly important to know when people violate copyright, especially on this board.

[Mahatma Kane Jeeves]

I'm going away for a couple of days, so I'll just leave it at: "What Pyrrho said."

[Suddenly]

No. They are copyrighted, by default (http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-general.html#mywork). You don't have to copyright (since when did that become a verb?) your work.




(plagiarisim and violation of copyright are two different concepts that happen to often occur at the same time... Copyright deals with a person protecting his work via legal means, not the morality of passing off other's work as your own... Plagiarism deals with the morality of passing off something as your own, not the legality. )

An unenforcible copyright is completely useless. To "copyright" something is just a term for the general idea of fixing in tangible form and intending to enforce a particular work....

In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work.

17 USC 102(b)

Also, not registering a copyright restricts enforcement options w/r/t possible remidies. 17 USC 412


]

You can waiver your copyright (e.g. by handing it over, or sell, to someone else, or simply put it in the public domain. But it has to be something you do actively.



Not completely correct. Actually just wrong. A copyright will expire at some point. For works created after 1978 the term is life of the creator + 70 years (corporate/for hire/pseudonymous authorship has a term of 95 years from publication or 120 years from creation, whichever is shorter).

Before 1978... it gets a bit complicated involving renewals..

(17 USC 30 et seq.)

Here is a nice chart: http://www.unc.edu/~unclng/public-d.htm




And it is clear that Steve Grenard stole the works of others and presented it as his own.




Such imprecise language...

One cannot steal something he in good faith believes is his. To be really technical he has not committed any larcenous act seeing that "intent to permanently deprive the owner" is required for a larceny, to "steal something."


Furthermore, it cannot be a "fraud" as you first put it unless he has intent to pass something as his own. If he really believes he has the right to use that as a prior owner such intent is not present.

In any event, your allegation of fraud goes unproven, and technical examinations of copyright doctrine are not going to prove it...



You are right that we won't get any further on the alligator issue. But it is highly important to know when people violate copyright, especially on this board

It may be important to some to police plagiarism so to be able to rest assured that while this board is full of silly rhetorical nonsense, it is absent that particular flavour of dishonesty.

As to copyright we have a reproduction of a work that is itself unnoticed and unregistered; a reproduction that is most likely not willfull (in other words the actor knows damn well it is illegal), and clearly not for financial gain and even possibly a work that is itself a violation w/r/t the author. I'm sure the danger that the website owner may register the copyright and sue Steve (and this board for providing a forum that encourages such violations) is one that should be taken seriously. He may succeed in his federal suit (good luck to him there) and require the JREF to refund all its profits from its eggregious actions and desist in the publication. Yikes.

On the other hand we have someone who makes representations as being a leader in some vague "skeptical movement" making wild leaps of logic and fact in trying to show that some lady was wrong in how she dealt with a possible life threatening crisis, all based on nothing but (at least) third hand reports.

In doing such exhibiting quite forceful and complete ignorance about allegators and doggie doors, and a wonderful "proof by picture" that is reminiscent of Carlos and "The Magical Flying Hat of Doom" or whatever in that the whole point is absurd and the "evidence" a matter of one's interpretation of shadows and other lighting in a photograph...

Not to mention posting a picture of a lady with a cane as evidence that she isn't disabled...


In the long run I'd consider the latter more an important matter for this board and its foundation, but that is just me.

[hgc]

...
It may be important to some to police plagiarism so to be able to rest assured that while this board is full of silly rhetorical nonsense, it is absent that particular flavour of dishonesty.

As to copyright we have a reproduction of a work that is itself unnoticed and unregistered; a reproduction that is most likely not willfull (in other words the actor knows damn well it is illegal), and clearly not for financial gain and even possibly a work that is itself a violation w/r/t the author. I'm sure the danger that the website owner may register the copyright and sue Steve (and this board for providing a forum that encourages such violations) is one that should be taken seriously. He may succeed in his federal suit (good luck to him there) and require the JREF to refund all its profits from its eggregious actions and desist in the publication. Yikes.

On the other hand we have someone who makes representations as being a leader in some vague "skeptical movement" making wild leaps of logic and fact in trying to show that some lady was wrong in how she dealt with a possible life threatening crisis, all based on nothing but (at least) third hand reports.

In doing such exhibiting quite forceful and complete ignorance about allegators and doggie doors, and a wonderful "proof by picture" that is reminiscent of Carlos and "The Magical Flying Hat of Doom" or whatever in that the whole point is absurd and the "evidence" a matter of one's interpretation of shadows and other lighting in a photograph...

Not to mention posting a picture of a lady with a cane as evidence that she isn't disabled...


In the long run I'd consider the latter more an important matter for this board and its foundation, but that is just me.Hosanna!

[TragicMonkey]

Since I'm coming late to this thread, I'll confine myself to observations on the photo:

1. To me, the lady's "lanai" looks like it's screened in, not glassed. The lowest horizontal bar in the framework isn't flush with the ground, which suggests screens, not glass, because you wouldn't be able to aircondition it.

2. The shadow is a poolskimmer. There seems to be attachments to the frame for the storage of two such devices (which again suggests screens, because if it were glass it would be fancier and people wouldn't treat it that way). The uppermost one is likely another skimmer, facing the other way. The blue hoop of the netting is viewed nearly edge-on, so in the photo it looks foreshortened. The shadow shows it as an oblong, rectangular with rounded edges. The shadow of the handle of the other device is superimposed.

[Suddenly]

A- Glass
B- No Glass
C- The flying saucer that really caused 9/11

[Bob Klase]

The gator is dead (I assume--can't know it for sure)

Some of the initial stories (such as this one) said the gator was killed.

http://www.allheadlinenews.com/article
"A Florida woman shot and killed an alligator"

Most of the later ones said it wasn't dead.

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/05/17/D8HLJCN00.html
"The alligator barely bled from gunshots to the neck and shoulder, Frey said, and wildlife officer put it back in the lake."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,195851,00.html
"On Sunday near Bradenton, Candy Frey grabbed a handgun and fired four shots at a 3-foot alligator that attacked her golden retriever. The gator wasn't seriously hurt"

the woman has been charged.

The woman was never charged with anything. She was given a warning, and according to my local news that was later retracted.

[Pyrrho]

Some of the initial stories (such as this one) said the gator was killed.

http://www.allheadlinenews.com/article
"A Florida woman shot and killed an alligator"

Most of the later ones said it wasn't dead.

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/05/17/D8HLJCN00.html
"The alligator barely bled from gunshots to the neck and shoulder, Frey said, and wildlife officer put it back in the lake."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,195851,00.html
"On Sunday near Bradenton, Candy Frey grabbed a handgun and fired four shots at a 3-foot alligator that attacked her golden retriever. The gator wasn't seriously hurt"



The woman was never charged with anything. She was given a warning, and according to my local news that was later retracted.
Okie dokie.

Can I still say "Case closed"?

[NoZed Avenger]

(On the other hand we have someone who makes representations as being a leader in some vague "skeptical movement" making wild leaps of logic and fact in trying to show that some lady was wrong in how she dealt with a possible life threatening crisis, all based on nothing but (at least) third hand reports.

In doing such exhibiting quite forceful and complete ignorance about allegators and doggie doors, and a wonderful "proof by picture" that is reminiscent of Carlos and "The Magical Flying Hat of Doom" or whatever in that the whole point is absurd and the "evidence" a matter of one's interpretation of shadows and other lighting in a photograph...

Not to mention posting a picture of a lady with a cane as evidence that she isn't disabled...

In the long run I'd consider the latter more an important matter for this board and its foundation, but that is just me.

Bodyblow.

Oh, that will sting a bit.

[Rob Lister]

Bodyblow.

Oh, that will sting a bit.

Such a body blow I had to nominate it for post of the month. I doubt it will win because it requires the thread's context to understand just how much it said.

Still deserving.

[HarryKeogh]

Wrong. A person concealing a weapon on board a plane is very threatening. If anything, 9-11 taught us that.

wow! Considering it's hundreds, if not thousands, of times more likely that someone concealing a gun on a plane is a sky marshall, FBI agent, etc. (It's likely there are some with their firearms concealed away in their jackets flying over the US as we speak), than a terrorist/hijacker (how many armed hijacking attempts take place a year?) to try and take that person out (or "kill him" as Claus would do) is not only incredibly dumb but criminal and putting the lives and safety of his fellow passengers in jeopardy.

You know what's "very threatening"? Some fool trying to kill a law enforcement official on a plane.

Hint: Inform a flight attendant.

[Rob Lister]

Hint: Inform a flight attendant.

Well, clearly she's in on it.

[LW]

wow! Considering it's hundreds, if not thousands, of times more likely that someone concealing a gun on a plane is a sky marshall, FBI agent, etc. (It's likely there are some with their firearms concealed away in their jackets flying over the US as we speak), than a terrorist/hijacker (how many armed hijacking attempts take place a year?) to try and take that person out (or "kill him" as Claus would do) is not only incredibly dumb but criminal and putting the lives and safety of his fellow passengers in jeopardy.

Funny thing.

Back when I still bothered to read Claus's posts and argue with him I raised exactly the same point. Can you guess what his answer was? Well, it was (not exact words, I can't be bothered to dig them up, they are somewhere in the air marshall thread): "Since the number of air marshalls is a guarded secret, we can't know if there are more them than armed hijackers".

[rocketdodger]

That wouldn't be hard to test. We just need to put a hungry, mad 3 foot alligator on one side of a doggy door and a volunteer to put his foot in front the door on the other side. Are you volunteering?



I thought it would be impossible to find someone who knew even less than Claus about doggie doors and how they open. I was wrong.


Umm, if the doggy door swings both ways (LIKE ALL OF THEM DO) and you put your leg behind it on one side, IT WILL ONLY SWING THE OTHER WAY, so how would the alligator be able to get in?

[Bob Klase]

Umm, if the doggy door swings both ways (LIKE ALL OF THEM DO) and you put your leg behind it on one side, IT WILL ONLY SWING THE OTHER WAY, so how would the alligator be able to get in?

After it gets a chunk of you foot/leg in it's mouth, getting in wouldn't be a concern. It would have what it wants.

[Rob Lister]

Umm, if the doggy door swings both ways (LIKE ALL OF THEM DO) and you put your leg behind it on one side, IT WILL ONLY SWING THE OTHER WAY, so how would the alligator be able to get in?

Isn't hindsight wonderful?

[hgc]

Holy crap! The answer was right in front of us the whole time!

All she needed to do was get out the trusty frozen-chicken launcher. Then she could have fought back with all due violence, and claim that she was just feeding the friendly swamp monster.

[Rob Lister]

Ya know, on reflection, Clause is the only poster we have in the Political forum that can bring conservatives and liberals together on any issue. We all mostly agree he's a non-skeptical woo.

[Pyrrho]

Umm, if the doggy door swings both ways (LIKE ALL OF THEM DO) and you put your leg behind it on one side, IT WILL ONLY SWING THE OTHER WAY, so how would the alligator be able to get in?
Through the screen next to the doggy door...or maybe they'd pull the doggy door open with their claws.

Alligators have no social skills as practiced in polite society.

[Suddenly]

Let's see... If the person puts exactly the correct pressure on the door so that it doesn't open out and allow the gator to eat her foot, and too little so that a sudden push will allow the gator to get in and eat her foot... and the gator goes away before her foot falls asleep or the cane slips...

Maybe it eats the door.

[Bob Klase]

Ya know, on reflection, Clause is the only poster we have in the Political forum that can bring conservatives and liberals together on any issue.

When you put it like that, I almost have to think he does serve a useful purpose in society. Although I still think he might be more useful as alligator food.

[ZirconBlue]

On the other hand we have someone who makes representations as being a leader in some vague "skeptical movement" making wild leaps of logic and fact in trying to show that some lady was wrong in how she dealt with a possible life threatening crisis, all based on nothing but (at least) third hand reports.

In doing such exhibiting quite forceful and complete ignorance about allegators and doggie doors, and a wonderful "proof by picture" that is reminiscent of Carlos and "The Magical Flying Hat of Doom" or whatever in that the whole point is absurd and the "evidence" a matter of one's interpretation of shadows and other lighting in a photograph...

Not to mention posting a picture of a lady with a cane as evidence that she isn't disabled...


In the long run I'd consider the latter more an important matter for this board and its foundation, but that is just me.

You are my new hero.

[LeFevre]

The old lady tricked herself into thinking the gator was an air marshal. KILL IT!

[hgc]

I was on the roof garden of the Metropolitan Museum of Art yesterday, and snapped this not-so-great photo with my camera phone.

http://forums.randi.org/imagehost/5434484832279d64.bmp

In case you can't see, it's got hundreds of knives of every description stuck into it.

[Huntster]

The other day I heard a wonderful proposal that would solve three problems:

Dig a wide ditch from San Diego to Brownsville along the U.S./Mexican border,

haul the dirt to Lousiana and build dikes with it,

then collect up the alligators out of Florida and put them in the ditch.

[hgc]

The other day I heard a wonderful proposal that would solve three problems:

Dig a wide ditch from San Diego to Brownsville along the U.S./Mexican border,

haul the dirt to Lousiana and build dikes with it,

then collect up the alligators out of Florida and put them in the ditch.To paraphrase Stephen Colbert (I forgot where he said it), we should do 3 things with the Mexican border, a mote, a fiery mote, and a fiery mote with fireproof alligators.