Rocks in the SF Bay

[sfchallenger]

L124C,

Respectfully, you should think a little bit about the concept of navigation. Yes, sure, fine, blow up all the rocks, remove all the bridges, while you're at it, why not get rid of all the pesky shorelines out there, god forbid someone should run aground! Perhaps we can just melt all the polar ice-caps, ridding us of this dry-land problem once and for all. After all, wasn't WaterWorld with Kevin Costner awesome?

The point is, that even with the rocks and bridges *that are already clearly marked or outside of the shipping lanes* removed, there would still always be something for some incompetent pilot to run into. Accidents are accepted as a daily consequence of driving cars around. I'm not suggesting that every reasonable measure possible couldn't or shouldn't be taken to avoid accidents due to poor pilotage, but the idea that we should just blow up any possible obstruction, especially those outside of shipping channels is simply ludicrous. If you disagree, feel free to take your Zodiac and dynamite out and by all means, please report back on your excellent success. Tell the powers that be that you're more informed than they are and in a better position to make these judgements. I'm sure it'll be an interesting story to tell your cellmate.

Thanks,
h

[groggy]

the logical objections about the rocks being marked are all true, and yet it does seem like a bad idea to have rocks so near the shipping lanes (or in them depending on how you read the chart, i am no expert or pilot).

what surprises me is that i thought we, as a country, were pretty handy with bunker-busters, mining, fracking, drilling, and general large scale blowing up of stuff. i know nothing is really as easy as it seems, especially underwater, but still...

[L124C]

Originally Posted by sfchallenger

L124C,

Respectfully, you should think a little bit about the concept of navigation. Yes, sure, fine, blow up all the rocks, remove all the bridges, while you're at it, why not get rid of all the pesky shorelines out there, god forbid someone should run aground! Perhaps we can just melt all the polar ice-caps, ridding us of this dry-land problem once and for all. After all, wasn't WaterWorld with Kevin Costner awesome?

The point is, that even with the rocks and bridges *that are already clearly marked or outside of the shipping lanes* removed, there would still always be something for some incompetent pilot to run into. Accidents are accepted as a daily consequence of driving cars around. I'm not suggesting that every reasonable measure possible couldn't or shouldn't be taken to avoid accidents due to poor pilotage, but the idea that we should just blow up any possible obstruction, especially those outside of shipping channels is simply ludicrous. If you disagree, feel free to take your Zodiac and dynamite out and by all means, please report back on your excellent success. Tell the powers that be that you're more informed than they are and in a better position to make these judgements. I'm sure it'll be an interesting story to tell your cellmate.Thanks,
h

"Respectfully", that is probably the most condescending, ridiculous response I have ever read in this forum! You might want to "think a little bit" about what you are saying before responding! Remove bridges and shoreline? Blow up any possible obstruction? No one has suggested any such thing in this thread! I specifically identified two potential navigational hazards for discussion. I then provided an example of an accident that occurred involving a much more obvious obstacle, to support my concern. Lastly, I have suggested that IMO the two rocks in question ARE CLEARLY in a "shipping lane" and are not "marked". I provided a chart to support my opinion. No one has specifically disputed my interpretation of the chart. If my "concept of navigation" is incorrect on that specific point, please enlighten me. Otherwise, stop stating it is not true.
So please...."think a little bit" before responding. Realize that not responding when you have nothing constructive to add to the discussion is always an option. Sometimes less is more!

[dabnis]

Originally Posted by L124C

"Respectfully", that is probably the most condescending, ridiculous response I have ever read in this forum! You might want to "think a little bit" about what you are saying before responding! Remove bridges and shoreline? Blow up any possible obstruction? No one has suggested any such thing in this thread! I specifically identified two potential navigational hazards for discussion. I then provided an example of an accident that occurred involving a much more obvious obstacle, to support my concern. Lastly, I have suggested that IMO the two rocks in question ARE CLEARLY in a "shipping lane" and are not "marked". I provided a chart to support my opinion. No one has specifically disputed my interpretation of the chart. If my "concept of navigation" is incorrect on that specific point, please enlighten me. Otherwise, stop stating it is not true.
So please...."think a little bit" before responding. Realize that not responding when you have nothing constructive to add to the discussion is always an option. Sometimes less is more!

L,

Easy, easy!! not good for your blood pressure. SF was just pulling your chain and you bit. Fwiw, I agree on your position. It has been done before and with today's technology it shouldn't cost that much. But, as mentioned earlier, generally it takes a disaster to get anything started. Besides some crabs might die from blasting.

Dabnis

[L124C]

Originally Posted by dabnis

L,

Easy, easy!! not good for your blood pressure. SF was just pulling your chain and you bit. Dabnis

I disagree. I don't mind having my "chain pulled" if it's done cleverly. This was simply a silly, witless response, with some unjustified arrogance mixed in. I'll "bite" at that every time!
I value this forum, as I have learned a lot from it. And yes...at times it can be entertaining and funny. This was certainly not one of those times!

[dabnis]

Originally Posted by L124C

I disagree. I don't mind having my "chain pulled" if it's done cleverly. This was simply a silly, witless response, with some unjustified arrogance mixed in. I'll "bite" at that every time!
I value this forum, as I have learned a lot from it. And yes...at times it can be entertaining and funny. This was certainly not one of those times!

Well, maybe next time. I spent many years on the Bay and outside, enjoy your posts.

Dabnis