SFGadv123

http://www.nj.com/ocean/index.ssf/2016/08/woman_allegedly_hurt_on_king_cobra_at_six_flags_su.html

Woman who broke her ankle on King Cobra last year is suing Six Flags for $3 million. I don't understand how they let her on in the first place when they exceeded the weight limit and went on a double tube when it is meant for single.

I actually really liked Mean Streak when I rode it a few years ago. People always complained about how rough it was but I honestly didn't think it was that bad.

Absolutely tragic event. The worst part about this is that he was interviewed by the FBI 3 times for possible ties to terrorism, yet he was still able to purchase firearms legally this past week.

Agreed. Using both parking lots would've gave them a ton of land, that way they would've only had to tear down a small amount of trees, or none at all.

Yeah I mentioned that and how the new parking lot would be helpful for them to be able to implement the panels to the person I spoke to, but all she had to say was that the parking lot wasn't suitable for safety and future plans and then named all the organizations that approved it.

What decisions were there that you didn't like?

Mainly the solar farm decision. I do not believe that is the right decision and in my opinion it isn't being done to help the environment, they are just looking to save money in the future. I talked to someone in guest relations about my concerns. After she responded, I sent another email back with more questions and just something I wanted to get straight, but she never responded back. She probably didn't know much about the subject which is why her reply was short and not really what I was looking for. That wasn't a really a big deal, the point of this is just that the solar farm decision just angered me, and not getting a season pass this year will just be my way of showing my disappointment to them.

Officially will not be getting a season pass this year, I din't really have the money for one this year. I gotta say though that I am not too mad about it since the park has pissed me off a bit this year with their decisions.

Superman is definitely overrated. I'd say Skull Mountain is very underrated because while it is short, it has an ejector air time moment on the drop in the back row. Very few people know about it.

I agree. That first drop on skull mountain in the back is actually pretty intense.

Good for them. But this just makes me even more mad they aren't putting the solar panels in the parking lot. I figured a good reason they didn't was because it would require them to pave the parking lot and that would cost money.

 

"But at the end of the day, we did do our homework. We ensured that we're not damaging the habitats of any of the endangered or threatened species in the area, and we're sure of that"

I hope he's right about that.

Either way, it's over. Still not happy about the large amount of trees being removed but it is great that they will be running on clean energy, so I guess I can't say that I am really disappointed with this.

 

Orcas are becoming increasingly endangered in the wild due to overfishing by humans and depleting their food supply, as well as environmental hazards like plastics and pollution. SeaWorld does more to help endangered species and rescuing animals than ANY of the animal rights groups fighting and protesting them.

 

As for the profit motive, don't be deceived. PETA's plan that they want SeaWorld to go with is that SeaWorld pays to build sea pens (which would put the orcas in a dangerous situation) and then PETA would charge tourists to see the whales in those sea pens (raising money for themselves). The majority of the 29 whales in SeaWorld's care were born in captivity (they have not captured a whale in the wild for almost 40 years) and cannot be released into the wild because they are dependent on human care. The staff at SeaWorld knows and loves these animals and would not keep doing this if they didn't believe in what SeaWorld does (working for the park doesn't pay that well).

 

It's not like they are saving them from the wild though. They have been breeding them for the last 40 years since they stopped capturing them. Also I would mention that their breeding program is not good for the whales. I am aware they cannot be released into the wild anymore but we wouldn't be having this problem if they didn't continue the breeding, which was done for no other reason other than profit. Now I am not saying the whales are treated badly or anything but like I said these whales are not meant to be in captivity and the effects of that have been shown in their behavior.

And I am well aware to be skeptical of PETA and other organizations like that that stretch the truth and I also know that Blackfish is also not entirely true. But that doesn't change the fact that whales were never meant to be in captivity.

 

They have stated other reasons including using the lot for events and losing parking spaces. I know you were around in this thread for my huge post, but check it out if you haven't. (link below)

Can you provide me a link to them saying such things? I don't recall the park ever stating that, just people on this forum.

Also, did they ever look into using the unused Safari areas? And if so what were the reasons?

Animal captivity is fine if it is in the animals best benefit if they are injured, endangered, or for some other reason that requires them to need to protected and cared for by humans. An animal as big as a whale is certainly not meant to be living in captivity in a tank so small and we have already seen the harm it has done to them like YoungPup just mentioned. Places like large aquariums where they get their fish for the purpose of profit is not right, but a place like Popcorn Park zoo, a wildlife refuge, is a great and important place. Point is, there are good zoos and bad zoos. Also, I will say that Orcas are not the only problem at Seaworld, just the worst one.

I really want the park to give a legit reason for why they cannot do this in the parking lot. All they have said is for safety concerns I believe, which makes no sense really.

The whales at SeaWorld have very small tanks. They are meant to swim miles a day to be happy and that is impossible with a tank that small. It's inhumane to keep animals that big in such a small confinement. I am glad that SeaWorld has finally stopped Orca breeding but this is still is and always will be on the list of places I will never visit.

Six Flags doesn't trap most of our animals in tiny rooms. Most of the animals at our park are allowed to run around and do whatever they want. I'm SO happy that Seaworld isn't allowed to breed or take any more whales anymore, and I'm so happy we tore down our Dolphin stadium. Don't worry, we'll get around to the other animals: Ringling Bros. circus elephants to retire in May - USA Today

I agree. The animals at Great Adventure are well cared for and have pretty big exhibits to do as they please.

I said ok if it makes sense. I do like the idea of Superhero named rides as it makes for great themes. The best themed roller coasters have been for Superheroes. I love Bizarro's theme with the fire, mist, and so on, it's one of my favorite themed rides. The Dark Knight is great (when everything is working like it should). My problem is that it really doesn't make sense. Batman and TDK next to each other is awesome, makes that section great, sticking with one theme. Superman and Green Lantern somewhat make sense, I mean they are both superheroes but still not related though. Bizarro and Superman next to each other, now that makes sense and would be very cool. And now with The Joker, it is randomly placed. If it was in Movie town, then Movie town would be the best themed section of the park. I have no problem with superhero named rides, in fact, I like them, but it needs to make sense with the section of the park it is in.

White. The red just doesn't match with the surroundings and it stands out too much. The white blends in perfectly.

It's always been a coaster. What else would it be?

One of my more minor issues is that when people pull into the parking lot, they see the beautiful skyline that we've seen for so many years, and if we put solar panels in the parking lot, that will cease to exist.

 

On a more important note, why are people so angry about this? Do they realize how many trees have been cut down and replanted in the 42 years that have made the park what it is today?

 

I'm interested to know how many trees have been cut down to make way for the park, because I feel like this solar farm has been blown out of proportion.

Yeah like what YoungPup said, I don't believe that that comparison really makes much sense. Like you said, the skyline going away is just a minor issue. Driving into the park you will still see all the rides along the skyline and even walking into the park. The skyline may not be as nice as it is now, but having a park completely run on renewable energy is a pretty good trade off I would say.

Theft is already an issue, there were a few reports of it this past summer. Heck, someone stole a car and crashed it a few towns away!

http://www.nj.com/bergen/index.ssf/2015/08/teen_critical_after_crashing_car_stolen_from_great_adventure_cops_say.html

 

I will agree the panels look cool. I park under the Rutgers panels every day.

The question though is would theft increase from adding solar panels? Doubt it. I have not seen any evidence that shows an increase in theft to parking lots with solar panels.

Here is a site that points out all the benefits that come with solar panels in parking lots. It does point out of course that the only problem is cost. Yeah, putting solar panels over the lot would cost more and likely require them to repave it. But I would like them to actually say how much more it would cost to put it in the lot and exactly how it can be dangerous for the gusts, because right now I see it as a doable project, but then again I don't have any formal education in this field.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/01/28/the-best-idea-in-a-long-time-covering-parking-lots-with-solar-panels/

In my opinion, I would not mind the solar panels over the lot. It would not look terrible. To me, it is just giving guests a good impression of the park that they run completely on renewable energy. I know not everyone thinks that way, but that is how I would think. I would much rather hear about it going over the parking lot and destroying 15,000 trees. And again, it provides shade and protection to the cars, I do not see how theft is really a big issue.

After doing a little research, I found that at Rutgers, their solar parking lot is 28 acres. The Six Flags main parking lot and employee parking lot together is approximately 60 acres, so about double the size of Rutgers. Now you say that they need 21.9 MW of power generated. The Rutgers parking lot generates 8 MW. So, having said that, it can be concluded that putting solar panels in the parking lot of Six Flags can generate about 16 MW. Also, HH's parking lot is about 16 acres. That could generate about another 4-5 MW.

Now, I doubt they would also consider installing in HH parking lot, so that still does not reach the goal, but that would significantly reduce the amount of land needed to be cleared for the project.

Now of course, that will cost a lot of money. This was back in September so who knows if this is still possible, but even if it is, it would no longer be 90 acres, but it was said that "The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Green Acres program wants to buy the 90-acre property to prevent the clear-cutting. With that extra money, Six Flags can afford to install the solar on their parking lot."

It's also worth mentioning that solar panels in the parking lot are beneficial to the visitors as well, as it will protect cars from the rain and also from the sun (we all know how gross cars get on hot days from the sun).

I agree with them by saying how places like Rutgers and Lincoln Financial Field have been able to put solar arrays in their parking lots and it works great. Not sure I see John's argument saying it is dangerous to the people. I realize that the parking lot wouldn't be enough for the entire plan. Although maybe they could put some in the parking lot and some in the woods so instead of cutting 15,000 trees they only cut down, say 7,500 or something. I would be very happy if they were to do that.

Anywhere in that area would be a good spot so we have 3 batman rides near each other. I feel like with The Joker it is just so randomly placed. They should have saved the name for a coaster to be put where the chiller was. Too late now, and I am interested to see how the theming is for the ride. I think it will be pretty cool. Plus the colors are definitely better than Total Mayhem.

I think TDK is a great ride. There are two things that almost all parks have: a classic woodie and a wild mouse. Getting rid of TDK would just be another downgrade. Plus it is a good coaster for those who are not yet ready for the big ones, or just don't like the big ones in general.

It would have been better if this ride was put back by where the chiller was, or anywhere in that area really. That would mean Batman, TDK and The Joker all in the same area. Would have been really cool. But overall I still like this theme much better than Total Mayhem regardless of where it is.