[BC] FCC Bird ruling

[Cowboy]

On Monday 12 December 2011 06:47:22 pm Alan Kline wrote:
> I may be wrong, but I thought the Communications Act gave the DC Court 
> of Appeals jurisdiction over appeals from orders of the FCC?

 Possibly.
 I didn't think it worth the research.

> That said, I agree with your argument that the whole thing is absurd.

 Which is really the whole point.

On Monday 12 December 2011 07:02:43 pm Al Stewart wrote:
> Why are they protecting Canada Geese? They're not an endangered species.

 Quite clearly you don't understand the problem.
 Canada Geese are *birds* !
 Birds *fly* !
 They fly through the *air* !
 Towers *intrude* into the *air.*
 Therefore, towers present a clear and present danger to Canada Geese.

 As such, they *must* be protected from those horrible, EEEEVIL radio towers !
 That they may be starving from overpopulation is totally irrelevant.
 Starving to death is OK, because that's natural. Organic, even.
 A swift and painless demise by other means is not OK, because it's not natural.

 Though there is no proof, no documentation, and no casual observation by anyone
 in a position to have made such an observation, such as broadcasters, but it *is*
 imaginable in fantasy, that a blind bird could break its little neck by flying into
 a tower, so towers obviously must be prevented to eliminate any possibility
 of a single bird being in any way harmed, or even distracted, by such man made
 hazards.
 Trees are OK though, because they are not man made. They're organic, man !


-- 
Cowboy