Let's see those examples of re-working the constitution. Back up what you say and not just make bias general statements that are only meant to discredit without facts.

Kshark, I apologize for commenting on your writing, which clearly did not sit well with you. It was meant to suggest that some of your thoughts were hard to follow, but that you certainly had knowledge of the subject. Please don't feel "insulted as hell"- I'm not worth it!

My extreme position displayed in the Dolphin thread is for debate purposes only, and does not reflect my exact views. I acknowledge and respect that you and your fellow researchers believe you are on the right track and are doing everything you can to solve problems. However, is it possible that some of your methods, and more importantly responses to your work could stand a little tweaking? Can you see that, for all your efforts, the environment, etc. still sits dangerously on the edge of disaster?

Why is that? What could or should be done to make research more effective in bringing about change? Why do you all work so hard in fact finding only to have so many problems continue? These questions are not meant to insult- I really want to know what you think.

In spite of my comments, I know the fault lies not with you, but in a disconnect between the scientific world, the government(s), and the public. Information filters in, but the response is sluggish and sometimes nonexistent. There's plenty of blame to go around, but for the purposes of this conversation, what could YOUR brethren do about it? Anything?

I am sincere in my words, and I do thank you for taking the time to read and respond. Don't let my lack of etiquette get to you!

Regards, Sheaster