Date: 3/26/18 2:35 pm From: Eric Arnold <eba...> Subject: Re: [birders] I apologize...
No need to apologize to me. Talking about the way that the policies
promoted or carried out by our so-called "leaders" as they affect the bird
population, based on accumulating scientific evidence, is not a statement
that is based on a political position. A politician may support or oppose
opinions based on scientific observation and analysis, based on the
political principles that the politician wishes to promote or suppress,
thus "politicizing" the issue in th minds of some, but insofar as the
politician's position does not address the scientific information and
analysis in a way that addresses inaccuracies or errors in analysis, but
simply refutes it because the scientific view is at odds with his political
position, support for the scientific view isn't "political."
I don't feel that birders should avoid discussing a topic which directly
affects birds and/or birders in particular ways that relate to birding, and
while Roger's remarks certainly relate to birds and birders, they don't
particularly refer to birds or birders, but are much more general; they
relate to everybody and everything, and include many aspects which have
nothing to do with birds or birding, and therefore would easily overwhelm
the discussion for which I believe birders is intended. Certainly a
discussion of human overpopulation is essential. I think the lack of
discussion represents the daunting scope of the problem. It is a problem
which goes beyond politics even at the national level.
On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 9:38 AM, John Farmer <ajf-jlf...> wrote: