Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 
Send Topic Print
Sea: shark's territory (Read 4252 times)
miketrees
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 6490
Gender: male
Re: Sea: shark's territory
Reply #45 - Apr 7th, 2014 at 10:33pm
 
It seems the new trendy lefty pinko thing is to get outraged at sharks being killed.
On one hand why are sharks any different to tuna or herring.
Shark killing had been done for ever, just now that the WA Liberal government does the responsible thing and tries to protect people it has become an 'outrage".

I am happy that they knock off a few of the big ones, i think they should be doing an autopsy on all the ones they kill tho, see if we can learn something.
we had been blowing big sharks up for years, they never became extinct.
Now we have been banned from killing them their numbers have built up again.
Its more about people with excessive repulsive disorder than it is about sharks.
Its all part of the new religion, the new neurosis of I am more outraged than you!
Look how green I am.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
olde.sault
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 2913
Re: Sea: shark's territory
Reply #46 - Apr 8th, 2014 at 7:23am
 
Gnads wrote on Apr 6th, 2014 at 10:44am:
olde.sault wrote on Apr 5th, 2014 at 6:23am:
Untrue, the sea belongs to everyone, at least, for those who can swim.

The reason why sharks don't attack us on land is because they haven't legs nor can breathe on land.



And we don't have fins or gills & can't breathe under water Roll Eyes..... the sea belongs to sea creatures

we enter at our own risk

Is it any different to Lions, Tigers & bears?

We may not be their usual tucker ..... but they will eat us...

& I'm sure they do it purely to eat & survive....

If there is anything that may condition sharks to humans is all these nongs who go out "chumming" up sharks to the backs of boats to take photos or show tourists....

dumb idea


Those who admire sharks are just posers.

Sharks are just large-mouthed eating machines.

They don't partner each other and don't tend
their young, a complete loss.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Lord Herbert
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 34441
Gender: male
Re: Sea: shark's territory
Reply #47 - Apr 8th, 2014 at 8:20am
 
freediver wrote on Apr 7th, 2014 at 10:14pm:
WTF? Black bears are the cuddly ones. It's the grizzlies that rip your head off and feast on the goo inside.


Wot? Like those little chocolate Easter Eggs with the cream inside? ($1.60 ea at Coles.)?

Wrong!

Grizzlies love human beans. They are the ones that are always looking to give us a hug, but we keep running away.

Okay, enough foreplay. Here's the low-down on the Killer Black Bears:

Most fatal attacks by North American black bears during the past century were conducted by lone, male animals that stalked and then killed their human victims as prey, according to a new study* by the world's top authority on what triggers bear attacks.

Though black bears rarely kill or seriously injure people, when they do, it's most often the result of predatory behavior by males inside their wilderness home ranges and not by females protecting cubs or animals defending a carcass, said Dr. Stephen Herrero, professor emeritus at the University of Calgary and author of the classic Bear Attacks: Their Causes and Avoidance.


******

* 'new study' ~ my arse. This knowledge is as old as the hills.

*******

The study examined 59 fatal encounters between black bears and humans in Alaska, Canada and the Lower 48 during the 110 years ending in 2009. Some 88 percent of the 63 deaths were caused by a bear that exhibited predatory behavior, and 92 percent of these predatory black bears were male.

link

GA GA and Gonads owe me an apology for doubting my word.  Tongue U2.



Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Lord Herbert
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 34441
Gender: male
Re: Sea: shark's territory
Reply #48 - Apr 8th, 2014 at 8:29am
 
olde.sault wrote on Apr 8th, 2014 at 7:23am:
Those who admire sharks are just posers.


I'll have to disagree with you there.

They are awesome creatures for their brilliant design and the various tools that are built into them to detect prey, make a rapid 'ambush-style' attack from below (powering up at incredible speed) ~ and then finally ripping your head off to suck your innards through a straw.

They are perfection personified.

Humans, meanwhile, are still millions of years in evolutionary transit towards our final state of perfection. We've been unfurling very slowly, and we're not even halfway there yet.

Needless to say our evolutionary destiny is to end up looking like Jabba the Hutt.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Apr 8th, 2014 at 8:38am by Lord Herbert »  
 
IP Logged
 
GA
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1130
Gender: male
Re: Sea: shark's territory
Reply #49 - Apr 8th, 2014 at 11:03am
 
Lord Herbert wrote on Apr 7th, 2014 at 8:19pm:
GA wrote on Apr 7th, 2014 at 6:28pm:
Lord Herbert wrote on Apr 7th, 2014 at 5:04pm:
Any pack of wild dogs, hyenas, dingoes, jackals, etc will prey on humans if they think you can't fight back.


An adult human, due to their size, would have very little to fear from any of those animals, that's despite being incapable of defending themselves from them without being armed. These animals all have a natural fear of man.


Are you serious?

Hint: Pack animals.

A human lying out in the wilds with a broken leg, or trapped under a buggy that's rolled onto him is a pack animal's wet-dream.



A combination of curiosity and that the 'size' of the individual has been reduced by the circumstances they are in. And even then the wild animals won't just rush in and attack, they would be nervous. It's simple hardly any animals prey upon humans, accept it. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_V1J2Jyk3Uw
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
GA
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1130
Gender: male
Re: Sea: shark's territory
Reply #50 - Apr 8th, 2014 at 11:21am
 
Lord Herbert wrote on Apr 8th, 2014 at 8:29am:
olde.sault wrote on Apr 8th, 2014 at 7:23am:
Those who admire sharks are just posers.


I'll have to disagree with you there.

They are awesome creatures for their brilliant design and the various tools that are built into them to detect prey, make a rapid 'ambush-style' attack from below (powering up at incredible speed) ~ and then finally ripping your head off to suck your innards through a straw.

They are perfection personified.

Humans, meanwhile, are still millions of years in evolutionary transit towards our final state of perfection. We've been unfurling very slowly, and we're not even halfway there yet.

Needless to say our evolutionary destiny is to end up looking like Jabba the Hutt.


We've effectively stopped evolving, from now on the process would relate to changes in society, not so much the individuals themselves. Gendercide would be the next step that could result in a significant change. It might be that where ever advanced forms of life exist they are all female. And if our niche is intelligence, and intelligence has the maximum 'natural' value 'I', then I + 1 is still possible, but only artificially. It might be that a G.O.D. rules the universe.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
GA
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1130
Gender: male
Re: Sea: shark's territory
Reply #51 - Apr 8th, 2014 at 11:34am
 
miketrees wrote on Apr 7th, 2014 at 10:33pm:
It seems the new trendy lefty pinko thing is to get outraged at sharks being killed.
On one hand why are sharks any different to tuna or herring.
Shark killing had been done for ever, just now that the WA Liberal government does the responsible thing and tries to protect people it has become an 'outrage".

I am happy that they knock off a few of the big ones, i think they should be doing an autopsy on all the ones they kill tho, see if we can learn something.
we had been blowing big sharks up for years, they never became extinct.
Now we have been banned from killing them their numbers have built up again.
Its more about people with excessive repulsive disorder than it is about sharks.
Its all part of the new religion, the new neurosis of I am more outraged than you!
Look how green I am.


They're not all that interested in protecting people, it's tourism dollars that their protecting. Didn't anyone learn anything from watching the 70's movie 'Jaws'? And how many sharks have to be killed to halve the death rate, half the sharks? And even if it were an exponential thing, that is half the number of sharks resulting in four times less shark attack deaths, it's still an outrageous (but typical dumb vindictive Aussie) solution.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
miketrees
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 6490
Gender: male
Re: Sea: shark's territory
Reply #52 - Apr 8th, 2014 at 2:04pm
 
How many sharks would you kill to protect your children?

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Neferti
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 7965
Canberra
Gender: female
Re: Sea: shark's territory
Reply #53 - Apr 8th, 2014 at 2:18pm
 
miketrees wrote on Apr 8th, 2014 at 2:04pm:
How many sharks would you kill to protect your children?


Well, let's get reasonable here. Would YOU kill ONE shark to protect YOUR kids?

How would you do that?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Lord Herbert
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 34441
Gender: male
Re: Sea: shark's territory
Reply #54 - Apr 8th, 2014 at 2:32pm
 
The simplest solution that should please all parties is a portable net that surfers and beachgoers can take to any coastal waters and hang like a curtain in the water.

And then swim and surf within this protective curtain.



Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Gnads
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 29596
Gender: male
Re: Sea: shark's territory
Reply #55 - Apr 8th, 2014 at 5:50pm
 
olde.sault wrote on Apr 8th, 2014 at 7:23am:
Gnads wrote on Apr 6th, 2014 at 10:44am:
olde.sault wrote on Apr 5th, 2014 at 6:23am:
Untrue, the sea belongs to everyone, at least, for those who can swim.

The reason why sharks don't attack us on land is because they haven't legs nor can breathe on land.



And we don't have fins or gills & can't breathe under water Roll Eyes..... the sea belongs to sea creatures

we enter at our own risk

Is it any different to Lions, Tigers & bears?

We may not be their usual tucker ..... but they will eat us...

& I'm sure they do it purely to eat & survive....

If there is anything that may condition sharks to humans is all these nongs who go out "chumming" up sharks to the backs of boats to take photos or show tourists....

dumb idea


Those who admire sharks are just posers.

Sharks are just large-mouthed eating machines.

They don't partner each other and don't tend
their young, a complete loss.



I don't admire them ... I have a healthy respect for them & their role in the oceanic food chain .... they have a job to do.

Quote:
They don't partner each other and don't tend
their young, a complete loss
.


There are quite a few humans like that Roll Eyes
Back to top
 

"When you are dead, you do not know you are dead. It's only painful and difficult for others. The same applies when you are stupid." ~ Ricky Gervais
 
IP Logged
 
Gnads
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 29596
Gender: male
Re: Sea: shark's territory
Reply #56 - Apr 8th, 2014 at 6:04pm
 
Lord Herbert wrote on Apr 7th, 2014 at 8:36pm:
Gnads wrote on Apr 7th, 2014 at 7:51pm:

Herbert who told you that BS?

And a Kodiak bear & a Grizzly bear are one & the same thing....

the "Kodiak" is just a location name for grizzlies on Kodiak Island.


Quote:
The Kodiak is classified URSUS ARCTOS MIDDENDORFFI. The Grizzly is classified URSUS ARCTOS HORRIBILIS. There are both genetic and physical differences.


No need to apologise, Gonads. I don't expect perfection in my fellow human beans.

Gnads wrote on Apr 7th, 2014 at 7:51pm:
The only reason there are more black bear fatalities is because they have a much larger range than grizzlies.


No ... what I actually said was that Black bears and Polar bears will actively stalk humans for food ~ and no, it's not because they're mistaking you for a seal or a baby walrus. It's because they actually LIKE snacking on us. Nothing to do with protecting their young ... Nothing to do with defending their territory.


Quote:
The grizzly bear (Ursus arctos ssp.) is any North American subspecies of the brown bear, including the mainland grizzly (Ursus arctos horribilis), the Kodiak bear (Ursus arctos middendorffi), the peninsular grizzly (Ursus arctos gyas) and the recently extinct California grizzly (U. a. californicus)[1] and Mexican grizzly bear (U. a. nelsoni). Specialists sometimes call the grizzly the North American brown bear because the grizzly and the brown bear are one species on two continents.[1] In some places, the grizzly is nicknamed the silvertip bear for the silvery, grizzled sheen in its fur.
When it received its scientific name in 1815, the grizzly was classified as a separate species from all other bears. However, modern genetic testing reveals the grizzly to be a subspecies of the brown bear (Ursus arctos). So in Eurasia, it is the "brown bear"; in North America, it is the "grizzly".

In other words, the grizzly and the brown bear are one species on two continents.
Currently, Rausch and others classify three subspecies of the new "North American brown bear": U. a. horribilis, middendorffi, and gyas. But more recent studies of mtDNA suggest that this three-fold division of living grizzlies needs revision. Further testing of Y-chromosomes is required to yield an accurate new taxonomy with different subspecies.[1]

Coastal grizzlies, often referred to by the popular but geographically redundant synonym of "brown bear" or "Alaskan brown bear" are larger and darker than inland grizzlies, which is why they, too, were considered a different species from grizzlies. Kodiak grizzly bears were also at one time considered distinct. Thus, at one time there were five different "species" of brown bear, including three in North America.[7]


Care for another try Herbert?

As for you dingo post of a similar nature ... you were speaking about Fraser Island dingoes doing this or that .... which is complete BS.... what I said about their desensitisation because of increased human contact & feeding them is the truth ............

& why would I know anything about them?

Because I live very close to Fraser Island.

You keep "Googling" your BS ... & I'll stick to telling it how it is.
Back to top
 

"When you are dead, you do not know you are dead. It's only painful and difficult for others. The same applies when you are stupid." ~ Ricky Gervais
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49042
At my desk.
Re: Sea: shark's territory
Reply #57 - Apr 8th, 2014 at 6:58pm
 
Quote:
we had been blowing big sharks up for years, they never became extinct.


Because we put a stop to it.

Quote:
The study examined 59 fatal encounters between black bears and humans in Alaska, Canada and the Lower 48 during the 110 years


I think that is slightly more common than our shark attacks.

I followed a black bear for half an hour or so once in the eastern US. It was only a small one. It was getting dark, and the flash on my camera seemed to annoy it.

Quote:
We've effectively stopped evolving, from now on the process would relate to changes in society


Why is that not evolution? Teamwork has been a part of human evolution from the beginning. Our social skills are what set us apart and are the root of our intelligence. It is credited with our success over Homo Erectus.
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Lord Herbert
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 34441
Gender: male
Re: Sea: shark's territory
Reply #58 - Apr 8th, 2014 at 8:40pm
 


Quote:
The study examined 59 fatal encounters between black bears and humans in Alaska, Canada and the Lower 48 during the 110 years


freediver wrote on Apr 8th, 2014 at 6:58pm:
I think that is slightly more common than our shark attacks.


It's a no-brainer.

Where humans and Black bears cross paths, there's the possibility of a drama.

That's hardly going to happen with sharks where humans swim in shallow water, or sit in boats a little further out to sea.

freediver wrote on Apr 8th, 2014 at 6:58pm:
I think that is slightly more common than our shark attacks.
I followed a black bear for half an hour or so once in the eastern US. It was only a small one. It was getting dark, and the flash on my camera seemed to annoy it. [/quote]

You obviously took no notice of the pamphlets the forestry people hand out to tourists to warn them of how to behave in bear country.

********

Quote:
We've effectively stopped evolving, from now on the process would relate to changes in society


Why is that not evolution? Teamwork has been a part of human evolution from the beginning. Our social skills are what set us apart and are the root of our intelligence. It is credited with our success over Homo Erectus. [/quote]

It's not Darwinian Evolution of the human species.

Improved social development is something entirely different and totally distinct from the human species becoming more innately honed in terms of intelligence, memory recall, calculation skills, speed of learning, etc.


Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49042
At my desk.
Re: Sea: shark's territory
Reply #59 - Apr 8th, 2014 at 9:46pm
 
Quote:
You obviously took no notice of the pamphlets the forestry people hand out to tourists to warn them of how to behave in bear country.


I actually discussed the issue with some of the officials who harassed me over something else. I had not seen any such pamphlets. But I was vaguely aware that bears are dangerous. This one was small so I thought I could outrun it if necessary, and seemed scared of me. It kept half trying to climb a tree. I was very aware of my exit paths and kept checking for mother bears. Regarding the pamphlets, I had picked up that you should not leave food in your cars in national parks, as the bears will remove the door to get to it, and that you should make loud noises if they do this to scare them off. I was a bit worried about that one as I was sleeping in a van at the time. Apparently bears are also scared of small bells. I guess they must have retained some memory of being hunted by people for a few centuries.

Quote:
It's not Darwinian Evolution of the human species.


Sure it is. Social skills are the most important of all. You need skills to impress the ladies.
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 
Send Topic Print