The FACT is what that guide said it 100% correct if you took time to analyze what he said. And what that guide said has been said a zillion times before. And all hunters know it's factual.
Wow. And this from a guy who wants to lecture us on the "scientific method." Tell me more, professor.
Prove that I have tried to pawn myself off as expert on anything.
That's not what I said. I said you think you're an expert. And I also said you like to comment on things you know nothing about as if you were an expert. Which is nicely demonstrated by the first quote above.
Or by the past thread on using drones to locate game, you remember that one? The one where you opined at length that drones should be allowed for spotting game and relaying the information to hunters on the ground, because you were against any "new regulations" that infringed on our rights? Remember that? You were ignorant of the fact that using aircraft to spot game and relay the information to hunters on the ground was already illegal, had been for some time, and for good reason. It's no secret and any responsible hunter knows the regulations.
Ignorant of the facts, yet you chose to flap your gums anyway. "Ignorance in action" is a pattern with you.
A miss with a .375 H&H ain't doing anyone any good. A heart shot with a .270 Win and back-breaking work begins. Maybe you can't discern this fact. But it's 100% factual. Moreover, it's also 100% factual that a .243 Win in the boiler room is a whole lot better than an '06 in the guts. A three-year old could understand this FACT, convey it to me, and it'd still be factual.
Now, if you're able to intellectually refute these FACTS, get on it. If you can't, get back to your dope shop and fill your bowl. You are easier on the eyes when you're wasted.
Funny, I don't recall ever arguing about any of those things. Because they're not worth arguing about, just drivel, cliches you read somewhere, most likely Outdoor Life. Maybe Field & Stream?
