they come in all the most random colors. but yea probably a mix or due to a mix down the line. i saw one once at work it was some kind of small dog not sure what kind, but it had thr pattern of a Australian shepherd. its was gray with black speckles and blue eyes. it was the prettiest whatever it was ive ever seen.

Killing an animal on someone else's property without permission or on federal land that isn't designated for hunting would also be considered poaching.

how do you poach deer in a country where deer are so overpopulated they're considered pests?

There are hunting season, usually for specific animals, that are regulated by each state based on the estimated population of said animal. Hunting deer is only legal during deer season and usually requires a permit or license. Many states also limit the number of large game animals that can be killed. So, in this situation, poaching could potentially be hunting outside of a hunting season, hunting without a permit/license or killing more animals than they were legally allowed to.

Additionally, deer are really only overpopulated in some areas and this is usually because the population of their natural predators has been reduced to a point that they can no longer keep the deer populations under control. Also, sometimes they only seem over populated because of the expansion of cities, towns and farms which decrease the natural habitat of the deer and force them to venture into areas populated by people.

Killing an animal on someone else's property without permission or on federal land that isn't designated for hunting would also be considered poaching.

That's not related at all.

Seriously. That had nothing to do with the conversation. I guess some people will take any chance to bash the US government, even if they have to make up that chance out of thin air.

Absolutely. A lot of these characters go through low and high points based on their current writer/writers and their powers can change drastically as well. I remember at one point I think it was in the 80s spider-man was the fourth or fifth physically strongest Marvel hero. I have noticed that DC heroes seem to change more drastically from one writer to the next sometimes with different comics, taking place in the same universe, being published at the same time but Marvel heroes will slowly get more and more ridiculously overpowered over several years before before they start to tone things down a bit.

camcorder pointed at a screen

its real
insider.foxnews.com/2013/09/04/video-iraq-war-vet-jon-alexander-pulls-gun-liquor-store-robber

unless you're recording a screen with another camera

In Islam, the scholars (and apologists) tend to say that evolution is true for everyone but humanity. Any paleolithic humans are pre-adamites. Though there are also very archaic clerics who teach things that are outlandish as the earth being flat. Evolution contradicts the Quran if you read it literally and it should be read literally as it's supposedly the direct word of god.

by everyone I mean all animals

Also if you're using the of the bible old testament to see how old the Earth is, it's 6000 years old. The Bible doesn't say "the earth is x years old" but you can calculate a general "age" of the earth via the context it gives. Also the creation story highly contradicts evolution, you really have to ignore the entire old testament to reconcile the theory.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ussher_chronology

The timeline the bible gives is the age of all the family tree of Adam, so the bible states it's been 6000 years since the creation of Adam. But this does not account for the rest of the creation of the earth, which is only said to have taken 6 days from gods perspective which in reality might have been 6 million years. This is supported by the fact that we have found trees older than that, not to mention the whole dinosaur thing. Plus, the bible mentions pre-adamites who had been on earth for a while

This is exactly the point I am trying to make. Also, you would have to factor in that the Gregorian calendar didn't exist until the late 1500s, what is considered to be years in the old testament and what we consider years could be two very different things. It is very easy to imagine that a measurement for a day to an immortal being, God, to be far longer than how we measure a day and that this measurement could literally be hundreds of millions of years. This would coincide with the scientific theory that the planet is several billion years old and that evolution takes a minimum of hundreds of thousands of years for any noticeable changes and millions of years for significant changes.

What if it tastes different to them? Some people have stronger tastebuds and might be able to taste the steak and the ketchup. It's like people who buy 300 dollar Dr. Dre headphones, people love wasting their money and i think it's ok because it doesn't affect me you know.

>CNN
>a little left
wanna try again?

Sensationalism runs rampant in 24 hours news channels because all they do is speculate. There really isn't enough interesting news to really merit a single 24 hours news network.

CNN is as garbage as FOX, and CBS, and NBC. You can only get the truth from kind and smart men like that solder.

CBS, Fox and NBC are not news channels. You may be thinking of CBSN, Fox News and MSNBC which are news channels owned by the companies CBS, Fox and NBC. Also, there is completely non-bias news source and everyone has their own opinions so what you would be getting from that soldier is an opinion and not necessarily the truth. I am not saying he is right or wrong, I am just saying that what he was saying was his opinion which may or may not be true. When it comes to politics, everything is opinion and there isn't necessarily a single right way to do something but there are certainly many wrong ways to do things.

I didn't say it's great and reliable, I said its main problem is not political bias.

It's $$$ that makes the media talk, not their political views.

Wanna try again?

CNN is pretty much mainstream. It's not MSNBC.
Though I suppose to someone like you, nearly everyone would appear to be far-left.

What generalization?

>CNN is probably about the closest to moderate you could find in a news channel

Since when has the news ever been moderate about absolutely anything? Literally every station or website takes one extreme view or the other, there is never any in between moderation

I never said they were absolutely moderate. I clearly said they are about as close to moderate as you can find in a news channel, which is true. They have fewer politically biased stories than their competition. What I said in know way implied they are moderate. I even stated they leaned slightly to the left.

Apparently you guys haven't ever heard of NPR...funded by the listeners, not by multi-million dollar corporations. Thus, NPR reports on whatever the hell it wants. They also do a good job at unbiased reporting and questions. They don't throw in these loaded and tailored questions like this bitch asked in the video: "Republicans out there think Ron Paul would be very dangerous in this country because..."

It pisses me off when reporters throw out these loaded questions.

1. What source do you have that some Republican's think that way?
2. Even if that was the case is it the majority of Republican's thoughts or just a few (I'd put money it's the latter)
3. Even then, a good reporter would keep opinions, hearsay, and one-sided politics out of the question.

The question should've been reworded to "Do you think withdrawing troops from Iraq would pose an increased threat to the United States?"

NPR isn't a news channel, it is a conglomerate made up of radio stations from all over the US. NPR stands for National Public Radio . It also doesn't only do "news" like the TV channels Fox News, CNN and MSNBC. It is more like PBS. However, I do agree that they are possibly the only news source that could be considered moderate, although they do occasionally have reports that will lean one way or another. I also agree that the question the reporter asked that soldier was poorly worded and could easily be interpreted as her asking if he agreed that homecoming soldiers would be a direct danger to American rather than if their lack of presence in the middle east would increase the potential danger to Americans from terrorist cells in the region which I think is what she meant .