Thread: Warning Distressing and Disturbing Photographs- 1080 Poison

Originally Posted by ebf

Well @Maca49, even if John had those figures, I'm pretty sure you guys would claim they were false propaganda by the evil DOC/AHB/OSPRI conspiracy... And lord knows the likes of the anti-1080 brigade (who seem to be the only people you think are speaking the "truth") would not publish something like that

So it is a bit of a pointless argument, no ?

Problem with polar positions. Both sides have those that tend to take the extreme stance and be very vocal about it. It is the majority in the middle ground with rational thoughts that tend to get drowned out.

If you have never personally seen a single scientifically validated death of a kiwi by 1080 - anywhere - ever. Then Tahr perhaps you should take your own advice and put in an OIA.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...type=3&theater

Originally Posted by gadgetman

Problem with polar positions. Both sides have those that tend to take the extreme stance and be very vocal about it. It is the majority in the middle ground with rational thoughts that tend to get drowned out.

Come on gadget, that is way too sensible ! You should know by now that you are either completely anti-1080 or completely pro-1080. There is no middle ground

Originally Posted by ebf

There is no middle ground

Is too. It's 540

Originally Posted by Graeme Sturgeon

If you have never personally seen a single scientifically validated death of a kiwi by 1080 - anywhere - ever. Then Tahr perhaps you should take your own advice and put in an OIA.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...type=3&theater

You realise that this is a table that shows there is 1080 in the liver of animals that have been necropsied, and is not a measure of if they were in fact killed by the 1080. You are assuming causation without sufficient evidence.

You do understand the liver is a cleaning device that filters and accumulates toxins and hence is why they use it to detect poisons.

Without a further indication of cause of death this data is entirely useless.

This sort of ideological leap hurts your cause.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

You have forgotten some are still eggs. I think you are assuming causation without sufficient evidence Nick-D

Originally Posted by ebf

Well @Maca49, even if John had those figures, I'm pretty sure you guys would claim they were false propaganda by the evil DOC/AHB/OSPRI conspiracy... And lord knows the likes of the anti-1080 brigade (who seem to be the only people you think are speaking the "truth") would not publish something like that

So it is a bit of a pointless argument, no ?

I don’t disagree with you @ebf but DOC by their own actions cause this mistrust. My feeling are simple, NZ should not have this, or any other poison, dropped all over it. This is my homeland and it distresses my how easy it is for this to happen by one out of control group. By its very nature of operating, it knows it wrong. There seems to be very little activity or interest to persue any alternatives?

Originally Posted by ebf

Come on gadget, that is way too sensible ! You should know by now that you are either completely anti-1080 or completely pro-1080. There is no middle ground

That’s incorrect, convince me this spread of poison is s good thing?

Originally Posted by Rushy

Is too. It's 540

Just about your age next birthday?

Originally Posted by Graeme Sturgeon

You have forgotten some are still eggs. I think you are assuming causation without sufficient evidence Nick-D

I'm not assuming anything. I wasn't the one implying 1080 kills kiwi and presenting that data as evidence.

Your claims, true or not are simply not represented in the evidence you supplied. Simply put, you are just making shit up.

You could given that evidence argue that 1080 bio accumulates in native birds, specifically in carnivorous species. That's much of my issue with the anti 1080 movement, much of the real issues(of which there are many) get drowned out by nonsense claims and conspiracy theories.


Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Nick-D

You realise that this is a table that shows there is 1080 in the liver of animals that have been necropsied, and is not a measure of if they were in fact killed by the 1080. You are assuming causation without sufficient evidence.

You do understand the liver is a cleaning device that filters and accumulates toxins and hence is why they use it to detect poisons.

Without a further indication of cause of death this data is entirely useless.

This sort of ideological leap hurts your cause.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Well said Nick.
I just looked at that link and came to the same conclusion...none have died.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Get your hand off it Nick-D. If we have poisoned their livers and their eggs then the rest of the birds pretty damned manky. I cant believe that you could claim only finding 1080 in the livers and eggs of our most iconic bird is hailed by you as some sort of a triumph.

Originally Posted by Graeme Sturgeon

Get your hand off it Nick-D. If we have poisoned their livers and their eggs then the rest of the birds pretty damned manky. I cant believe that you could claim only finding 1080 in the livers and eggs of our most iconic bird is hailed by you as some sort of a triumph.

Hes not saying it's a triumph mate hes just pointing out the birds are not killed buy 1080 as you first said...
A minute searching Kathy Whites history on Google certainly makes it not very valid data....

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by BRADS

Hes not saying it's a triumph mate hes just pointing out the birds are not killed buy 1080 as you first said...
A minute searching Kathy Whites history on Google certainly makes it not very valid data....

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Nothing to do with Kathy White who is a much respected, long serving Waikato Regional Councillor Brads. But I thought you just might recognise an OIA when you saw one.

Originally Posted by Graeme Sturgeon

Get your hand off it Nick-D. If we have poisoned their livers and their eggs then the rest of the birds pretty damned manky. I cant believe that you could claim only finding 1080 in the livers and eggs of our most iconic bird is hailed by you as some sort of a triumph.

I'm not claiming it's a victory. I'm not claiming anything. You're the one making claims.

Again your making a claim based on no evidence. Show me the evidence that this tiny level of accumulated toxin (.05 parts per million) in the liver is enough to effect or impact the animal in questions health.

I'm not a toxicologist and neither are you so let's stop pretending you know what these results actually mean, cos I sure don't.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk