Ok Mike I like you but that was a lousy answer. You wan't us to provide acurate info and you will only provide subjective numbers, what does modreate numbers mean!!!!

Huh?! How so? Mike provided you with more info than you had before, and does so on a regular basis. A little research goes a long way - there's more info out there, too... Hunt it down yourself if you want the facts. And what on Earth is wrong with wanting "you"/"us" (I'm included in "us", I think, since I keep herps) to provide accurate info?! LOL Dude, if you think making things up is going to help you out, then more power to ya.

As far as why Mike can't release specific number until the work is reviewed and published, it has a lot to do with scientific integrity and intellectual plagiarism. A real, solid scientific work (unlike the USGS Internal Report) must generally undergo a blind peer review process. The purpose of the peer review is to examine the work for errors in methods, calculations, etc. Sometimes papers are rejected due to major flaws in the work, and often they're sent back to the authors (scientists) to make various corrections. Standard practice dictates that valauble data pertaining to the work is not released until after the paper is published in an appropriate journal to prevent intellectual plagerism and theft. This process keeps the work honest and without major flaws. That's how real science works. Mike, Frank, and others (who are on the same "side" as the hobbyists) are working hard to produce real, solid scientific conclusions that everyone wants and needs.

I'm blown away by the anti-intellectualism that goes on.

-Cole

[ Reply To This Message ] [ Subscribe to this Thread ] [ Show Entire Thread ]