Yellowstone investigates drone photo of Grand Prismatic

[packnrat]

peoples words are not treated as proof. if the park service could not find it after some years, it is not there.
they used a helo many times, even (O no the horror), a drone to search many times.
heck in a court of law the last thing either side wants to use is a "unbiased person"

 

[tcope]

peoples words are not treated as proof. if the park service could not find it after some years, it is not there.
they used a helo many times, even (O no the horror), a drone to search many times.
heck in a court of law the last thing either side wants to use is a "unbiased person"

Yup... who ever heard of "eye witnesses" being used in court. In reality witness information IS used as proof. It's done all day and every day. To say that it's not proof is to simply not understand the truth.

At this point you are simply a troll. So I'll bail out of the thread.

 

[dirkclod]

 

[packnrat]

not a troll. just no proof of a drone in the water, to me says it is not there.and as another stated 300 trillion gallons of water, there will be no effect to anything in the spring. but then the eico nuts say one drop of crud oil in a 10 square mile lake is pollution.

 

[dirkclod]

OK guys I just reopened this but do be aware..

 

[Marko9219]

peoples words are not treated as proof. if the park service could not find it after some years, it is not there.
they used a helo many times, even (O no the horror), a drone to search many times.
heck in a court of law the last thing either side wants to use is a "unbiased person"

Oh brother... Is your world still flat too? There's absolutely no proof it's really round, right? Did we really land on the moon? Where's the proof, right? I have to laugh at someone who's never seen Grand Prismatic spring wondering how on Earth the Park Service couldn't find something as obvious as a tiny little drone 160 ft down in boiling mineral water covered by steam. You're making my day. Keep going!

 

[Marko9219]

Now why on Earth would it be so hard to see a drone 160 ft under the surface there?!? Heck, I don't understand it!

 

[tedurquhart]

A lot of animated responses on this thread. Keep it positive (and non-personal), people. I think the point is simply questioning/debating the need to ban drones for all National Parks. These parks are some of those most beautiful places on Earth, ideally for people to enjoy. Ideally for photographers (Camera and Drone) to share with the world. Granted, there's no guarantee 100% of drone pilots would be respectful and responsible. That's a/the concern. Some balance, perhaps? Control those operating drones, charge a fair amount of $ to weed out the non-serious folks, require formal pre-registration, require an altitude where other guests are not affected, etc.?

 

[Marko9219]

Yeah, the thread sorta turned south when packnrat decided to imply some kind of crazy conspiracy by the Park Service administration, the Park Service law enforcement officers, dozens of witnesses, a judge and who knows who else. Simply because they didn't find a drone, he postulates it didn't even happen. I've spent way, way too much time in our National Parks, I personally know rangers and I for one can't sit by and read such accusations without challenging them. People don't just get to question the honesty of others and not expect a strong response.

 

[sar104]

Yeah, the thread sorta turned south when packnrat decided to imply some kind of crazy conspiracy by the Park Service administration, the Park Service law enforcement officers, dozens of witnesses, a judge and who knows who else. Simply because they didn't find a drone, he postulates it didn't even happen. I've spent way, way too much time in our National Parks, I personally know rangers and I for one can't sit by and read such accusations without challenging them. People don't just get to question the honesty of others and not expect a strong response.

Unfortunately there are several forum members who post that kind of stuff as bait. It's difficult, but best just to ignore it.

 

[JDawg]

peoples words are not treated as proof. if the park service could not find it after some years, it is not there.
they used a helo many times, even (O no the horror), a drone to search many times.
heck in a court of law the last thing either side wants to use is a "unbiased person"

Umm, what??!!

 

[AMann]

Unfortunately there are several forum members who post that kind of stuff as bait. It's difficult, but best just to ignore it.

I just started using the ignore option, it makes annoying content disappear like a

 

[AMann]

A blanket ban anywhere is far over reaching IMO.... the entire west cost of California from just south of San Francisco to Cambria is off limits. A 1000 foot altitude minimum - don't want to disturb any wildlife, at 100 feet??! - ridiculous! I could understand no lower than 100 feet or something like that. My brother does a lot of work around whales, dolphins, seals etc. They don't give a hoot unless you get real close. I guarantee there ans not been a single study about how far away would be "reasonable".

There are studies about drone noise and marine mammals listed on Google Scholar. The 1000’ height restriction was originally placed due to sightseeing airplanes and helicopters. The main concern is the affects on sea otters with pups, pups can scare and alert predators to their presence while mom is diving for food. Drones and kites over certain beaches can have deleterious affects on nesting birds as well. A kite or drone flying overhead can make a adult nesting bird scare off or abandon a nest with nestlings, leaving them vulnerable to predators or the elements. Thats more of a seasonal closure though, typically spring and summer when birds like the snowy plover are nesting on beach sand.

 

[packnrat]

sorry but i just have this distrust of the goverment.

 

[Marko9219]

sorry but i just have this distrust of the goverment.

So, that distrust extends to rangers, who are simply doing their jobs, investigating several phone calls by several witnesses, who must also obviously be in on the conspiracy against this poor drone pilot, who called to report the incident. All those witnesses must be phoney, staged, and stooges, put there by our Government, to wait for some unsuspecting drone pilot that they obviously knew would show up and fly right there, that day. Wait, the witness accounts are probably just fabricated, right? You distrust the judge that saw the evidence in his court? Or is it because you, yourself aren't privy to all the evidence presented that irks you? You weren't personally notified of everything they had against this idiot that dropped his drone into the spring? Because you weren't there to see it with your own eyes, it must not have happened? I'm betting that in truth, you probably don't believe we landed on the moon, right? I'm done now and thanks for the entertaining exchange. I can't wait to show this to my Yellowstone ranger friends. They'll be amused too.

 

[Miki121]

there is no ban sign next to airports.. but its comon sense not to fly .. or look if it's allowed i guess no ?

i did 10 national parks this summer and wrote everysingle of them to ask permission. (The main center told me i should ask each because it might change )

well turns out all said no .. but i think it's normal to ask first... "national park" , "natural park" , "nature protected area" sound like places you maybe should look for regulations

 

[Mr. Salty]

peoples words are not treated as proof.

Yes they are. It's called "testimony."

And in this case, the tourist admitted to it, pleaded guilty in court and paid more than $3,200 in fines.

 

[sar104]

Yes they are. It's called "testimony."

And in this case, the tourist admitted to it, pleaded guilty in court and paid more than $3,200 in fines.

Don't be silly - you can't believe any of that. The tourist was probably a government invention - never really existed - probably CGI.

 

[Mr. Salty]

Don't be silly - you can't believe any of that. The tourist was probably a government invention - never really existed - probably CGI.

Ooh, that would explain why the Illuminati made the "tourist" Dutch. Impossible to track down!

 

[Chip]

Dont feel bad packnrat, its tough to run the ball on these guys sometimes....

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies