Shark Stories
donweather wrote:https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-07/suspected-shark-attack-in-port-he...
Bull or tiger attack whilst spearing you’d imagine. Heavy.
amazing perspective of whites and humans....almost feel warm and fuzzy inside.......
Race director says this hasn't happened before-
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-23/shark-attacks-during-surf-ski-rac...
The story below the article says otherwise-
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-02-03/shark-attacks-teenagers-surf-ski-...
I got to watch a small shark hunt in the wild while it was below a walkway. The speed was impressive but what startled me was that is did a giant swooping U-turn to attack its prey from behind after it stalked for a bit. It freaked me out to see it not just attacking but using strategy.
simba wrote:amazing perspective of whites and humans....almost feel warm and fuzzy inside.......
Great footage simba
Fck Dad was watching....
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-24/sa-father-tells-of-sons-lucky-esc...
Almost ......
Ah...cognitive heuristics, that explains it???
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-11-01/shark-attack-why-surfers-are-not-...
san Guine wrote:Ah...cognitive heuristics, that explains it???
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-11-01/shark-attack-why-surfers-are-not-...
As soon as it’s obvious that someone is pointedly trying to reframe the relationship between humans and sharks by resolutely saying “bite” instead of “attack” , irrespective of circumstance, then that person’s opinion is negated.
Palm beach
udo wrote:Fck Dad was watching....
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-24/sa-father-tells-of-sons-lucky-esc...
Jeeeez!! Spooky and lucky outcome!
Didn't even hear about this one.
A couple of points, that have come up alot in the above thread..
He fainted the day before but never normally faints "the universe was trying to tell me something"
The shark had been seen (by him) the day or days before. How often you hear of a shark that's been in the area before an attack.
Just before the race began he had that dark feeling in the gut of his stomach and felt complete fear. Alot of people have experienced that in this thread and then had a shark encounter.
Also they're over 500m off the beach. So often on the Adelaide and Perth metro coastlines the attacks happen out on that shark highway.
Obviously there's a billion exceptions to these commonalities, but they do seem to come up more often than not in attacks and encounters . something to be aware of.
Glad he's ok and all are safe. Would have been bloody traumatic for them all.
udo wrote:Palm beach
Haha. Those Palmy/Mermaid Tigers are real pain in the arse.
Skull drag your fish or lose it when those things are around.
They seem pretty happy stealing hooked fish and a lot of people would be surprised how many of them turn up every year for mackerel season.
What a weird article.
AndyM wrote:What a weird article.
What's odd is no other local news outlets, newspapers, radio or TV have covered the story.
tlearyus wrote:AndyM wrote:What a weird article.
What's odd is no other local news outlets, newspapers, radio or TV have covered the story.
Media ban on shark attacks now?
tlearyus wrote:AndyM wrote:What a weird article.
What's odd is no other local news outlets, newspapers, radio or TV have covered the story.
Really?
A 30 second search shows that the Macleay Argus ran a story six days ago, as did the Daily Tele.
burleigh wrote:tlearyus wrote:AndyM wrote:What a weird article.
What's odd is no other local news outlets, newspapers, radio or TV have covered the story.
Media ban on shark attacks now?
Perhaps a more realistic response would be "Is there no interest in shark attacks any more?", rather than the suggestion of a "ban", which immediately inflames the rhetoric.
What’s weird is that Killick Creek is about waist deep at high tide so curious what sort of self respecting shark would be in there. Water can get dirty on a run out tide so possibility of a small Bull Shark, but still a bit odd.
Inflaming the rhetoric is in fashion these days.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-12-21/video-captures-shark-eating-whale...
Makes you wonder how this Bloke up Nth didnt get Eaten...
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-12-21/queensland-man-survives-20-hour-o...
thermalben wrote:burleigh wrote:tlearyus wrote:AndyM wrote:What a weird article.
What's odd is no other local news outlets, newspapers, radio or TV have covered the story.
Media ban on shark attacks now?
Perhaps a more realistic response would be "Is there no interest in shark attacks any more?", rather than the suggestion of a "ban", which immediately inflames the rhetoric.
Do you believe there is no interest in Shark Attacks anymore? GC news outlets were covering sharks eating a bait ball off Burleigh yesterday. A fucking bait ball! Yet there was nothing about an actual shark attack?
burleigh][quote=thermalben wrote:burleigh wrote:tlearyus wrote:AndyM wrote:What a weird article.
What's odd is no other local news outlets, newspapers, radio or TV have covered the story.
Media ban on shark attacks now?
Perhaps a more realistic response would be "Is there no interest in shark attacks any more?", rather than the suggestion of a "ban", which immediately inflames the rhetoric.
Ben, do you believe there is no interest in Shark Attacks anymore? GC news outlets were covering sharks eating a bait ball off Burleigh yesterday. A fucking bait ball! Yet there was nothing about an actual shark attack?
AndyM wrote:Inflaming the rhetoric is in fashion these days.
I think of you too Burls :)
By the way, where’s the irony?
News story on ABC radio about sharks today. But it was all about banning shark nets as "more effective options now exist" to reduce risk of "bites".
The beach goers and experts interviewed and selected for inclusion in the story all sided on removing nets.
The "expert" firmly stated that there is no evidence shark nets reduce the risk of "bites" - the event formerly known as an attack. No counterpoint to this statement offered.
The push continues. ABC on board it seems. Fact checking only when it suits them.
frog wrote:News story on ABC radio about sharks today. But it was all about banning shark nets as "more effective options now exist" to reduce risk of "bites".
The beach goers and experts interviewed and selected for inclusion in the story all sided on removing nets.
The "expert" firmly stated that there is no evidence shark nets reduce the risk of "bites" - the event formerly known as an attack. No counterpoint to this statement offered.
The push continues. ABC on board it seems. Fact checking only when it suits them.
Just amazing that a legit shark attack wasn’t “news worthy” but this is.
burleigh][quote=burleigh wrote:thermalben wrote:burleigh wrote:tlearyus wrote:AndyM wrote:What a weird article.
What's odd is no other local news outlets, newspapers, radio or TV have covered the story.
Media ban on shark attacks now?
Perhaps a more realistic response would be "Is there no interest in shark attacks any more?", rather than the suggestion of a "ban", which immediately inflames the rhetoric.
Ben, do you believe there is no interest in Shark Attacks anymore? GC news outlets were covering sharks eating a bait ball off Burleigh yesterday. A fucking bait ball! Yet there was nothing about an actual shark attack?
So you genuinely believe that there is now a "media ban" on shark attacks?
A more plausible answer is that - even though the story was run in News Corp (via the Daily Telegraph) - there was reduced interest from other organisations because they had higher priority stories to run that day. Remember, all stories require staff/resources - which are greatly limited in country locations. So, for major events, media companies will fly in reporters, cameramen etc, put them up in accommodation for a few nights etc to get a couple of stories. That costs money.
All media companies - Swellnet included - are also aware of the traffic that various kinds of stories receive. And although we don't base our editorial model on traffic targets, most other website's business is based on advertising revenue (and therefore clicks), and so they allocate their editorial resources as required. I suspect that if the event had happened closer to a more populated region, or had resulted in a death, then it would have been pushed much higher up the priority scale. All media content has a ROI and this one may have been more expensive than others to produce. Maybe, I don't know - I am just speculating.
A bait ball off Burleigh isn't a news story to me. But, obviously the media organisations who ran those stories (I didn't see it, so I don't know who they are) consider it to be newsworthy, so it was run. It would have also been very fast and cheap for a local GC media organisation to produce.
But of course, that's just my scientific, inquisitive mind looking for valid reasons as to why something happened, rather than jumping to a hyperbolic conclusion such as there now being a "media ban" on shark attacks.
"And some psychological evidence suggests that people are drawn to conspiracy theories when they do feel uncertain either in specific situations or more generally.
And there are other epistemic reasons why people believe in conspiracy theories as well in relation to this sort of need for knowledge and certainty.
So people with lower levels of education tend to be drawn to conspiracy theories.
And we don't argue that's because people are not intelligent.
It's simply that they haven't been allowed to have, or haven't been given access to the tools to allow them to differentiate between good sources and bad sources or credible sources and non-credible sources.
So they're looking for that knowledge and certainty, but not necessarily looking in the right places.
The second set of motives, we would call existential motives.
And really they just refer to people's needs to be or to feel safe and secure in the world that they live in.
And also to feel that they have some kind of power or autonomy over the things that happen to them as well.
So again, when something happens, people don't like to feel powerless.
They don't like to feel out of control.
And so reaching to conspiracy theories might, I guess, at least allow people to feel that they have information that at least explains why they don't have any control over this situation.
Research has shown that people who do feel powerless and disillusioned do tend to gravitate more towards conspiracy theories.
The final set of motives we would call social motives and those refer to people's desire to feel good about themselves as individuals and also feel good about themselves in terms of the groups that they belong to.
And I guess at the individual level, people like to feel... Well, they like to have high self-esteem.
They like to feel good about themselves.
And potentially one way of doing that is to feel that you have access to information that other people don't necessarily have.
And this is quite a common rhetorical tool that people use when they talk about conspiracy theories, that everybody else is some kind of sheep, but that they know the truth.
They have the truth.
And having that kind of belief, I guess, feeling that you're in possession of information that other people don't have, can give you a feeling of superiority over others.
And we have found, and others have shown as well that a need for uniqueness and a need to have, I guess, stand out from others is associated with belief in conspiracy theories.
And this happens at the level of the group as well.
So people who have an overinflated sense of the importance of the groups that they belong to, but at the same time, the feeling that those groups are underappreciated, those kinds of feelings as well, draw people towards conspiracy theories, especially conspiracy theories about their groups.
So in having those sorts of beliefs, you can maintain the idea that your group is good and moral and upstanding, whereas others are the evil doers out there who are trying to ruin it for everybody else."
https://www.apa.org/news/podcasts/speaking-of-psychology/conspiracy-theo...
AndyM wrote:"And some psychological evidence suggests that people are drawn to conspiracy theories when they do feel uncertain either in specific situations or more generally.
And there are other epistemic reasons why people believe in conspiracy theories as well in relation to this sort of need for knowledge and certainty.
So people with lower levels of education tend to be drawn to conspiracy theories.
And we don't argue that's because people are not intelligent.
It's simply that they haven't been allowed to have, or haven't been given access to the tools to allow them to differentiate between good sources and bad sources or credible sources and non-credible sources.
So they're looking for that knowledge and certainty, but not necessarily looking in the right places.The second set of motives, we would call existential motives.
And really they just refer to people's needs to be or to feel safe and secure in the world that they live in.
And also to feel that they have some kind of power or autonomy over the things that happen to them as well.
So again, when something happens, people don't like to feel powerless.
They don't like to feel out of control.
And so reaching to conspiracy theories might, I guess, at least allow people to feel that they have information that at least explains why they don't have any control over this situation.
Research has shown that people who do feel powerless and disillusioned do tend to gravitate more towards conspiracy theories.The final set of motives we would call social motives and those refer to people's desire to feel good about themselves as individuals and also feel good about themselves in terms of the groups that they belong to.
And I guess at the individual level, people like to feel... Well, they like to have high self-esteem.
They like to feel good about themselves.
And potentially one way of doing that is to feel that you have access to information that other people don't necessarily have.
And this is quite a common rhetorical tool that people use when they talk about conspiracy theories, that everybody else is some kind of sheep, but that they know the truth.
They have the truth.
And having that kind of belief, I guess, feeling that you're in possession of information that other people don't have, can give you a feeling of superiority over others.
And we have found, and others have shown as well that a need for uniqueness and a need to have, I guess, stand out from others is associated with belief in conspiracy theories.
And this happens at the level of the group as well.
So people who have an overinflated sense of the importance of the groups that they belong to, but at the same time, the feeling that those groups are underappreciated, those kinds of feelings as well, draw people towards conspiracy theories, especially conspiracy theories about their groups.
So in having those sorts of beliefs, you can maintain the idea that your group is good and moral and upstanding, whereas others are the evil doers out there who are trying to ruin it for everybody else."https://www.apa.org/news/podcasts/speaking-of-psychology/conspiracy-theo...
You should be a politician. The queen of deflection.
Easiest way to discredit anything is to label it a conspiracy.
Ya want to engage with that article at all burleigh? Or are you just happy to deflect?
etarip wrote:Ya want to engage with that article at all burleigh? Or are you just happy to deflect?
People believe in conspiracy theories because over the last two years most have come true.
‘Most’
Yup…. Righto
Skepticism on many matters is often justified. Both to weird theories and to official narratives.
An ex CIA guy described in a video how as the only Spanish speaking analyst covering a certain south American country years ago, he diligently reported up the line a whole range of interesting and factual info gleaned from a range of sources only accessible to a Spanish speaker / reader . Other analysts n his team also reported up as well but tended to use English language sources.
After two months of hard work and no feedback he was hauled into a meeting and was told his reports were contrary to other sources. He was saying things were actually not going so well. Change in US approach was needed. This was not welcomed.
The managers dressed him down for:
- not being a team player
- not giving the information that supported the well entrenched strategy.
- being potentially compromised somehow.
In his career over and over, the "you are not being a team player" line was used to bring contrary voices back into line across the agency.
The more politically serious it got and the higher up the levels the more the narrative over rode the facts. Analysts would often just report fiction to be seen to be active and on board the team.
He views most CIA intelligence as so distorted it should not be trusted.
Was he a conspiracy theorist? Were the analysts offering alternate perspectives conspiracy theorists?
Or is it just that group think and please the boss is one of the dominant human traits?
The anti shark net meme is well and truly in play now and the general story is one of enlightened experts and public pushing against primitive wildlife destroyers and that nets don't work anyway.
That lenses will influence the narrative and media from here in many ways.
But dramatic events will generally hit the front pages.
Haha. You need to read Graham Greene’s short novel ‘Our Man in Havana’, about British Intelligence in Cuba, set just before the Cuban revolution.
Mullumbimby and the 5G Tower Burners have gone quite....
The issue with conspiracy theories is that they often rely on weaving disparate elements together to make a ‘theory’, when these elements are at best tangential to each other and usually unrelated.
Then the ‘theory’ can be validated in the minds of the believers by one or more minor ‘facts’ being ‘right’ or ‘proven’. Confirmation bias does the rest.
etarip wrote:The issue with conspiracy theories is that they often rely on weaving disparate elements together to make a ‘theory’, when these elements are at best tangential to each other and usually unrelated.
Then the ‘theory’ can be validated in the minds of the believers by one or more minor ‘facts’ being ‘right’ or ‘proven’. Confirmation bias does the rest.
This will do me. lol
Lol back at ya
etarip wrote:Lol back at ya
So what you’re saying is the conspiracy theories that were proven to be true don’t count because someone labeled them “minor” truths
Haha fuck mate, go take a cold shower
in the last 2 years...most have come true? Gotta love how forgetful covidiots are.
"most" conspiracies on covid are as believable as burleigh saying he has been overseas twice in the last year or so. lmao
burleigh wrote:etarip wrote:Ya want to engage with that article at all burleigh? Or are you just happy to deflect?
People believe in conspiracy theories because over the last two years most have come true.
So which conspiracy theories have come true?
burleigh wrote:etarip wrote:Lol back at ya
So what you’re saying is the conspiracy theories that were proven to be true don’t count because someone labeled them “minor” truths
Haha fuck mate, go take a cold shower
No I’m saying that the majority who peddle these cobbled together conspiracy theories, take a minor win wherever they can, and it reinforces their (your) bias.
And for the most part the ‘minor truths’ were never really ‘hidden’ anyway. Whatever ‘expose’ that’s used a an ‘aha / gotcha’ moment is usually a prosaic detail that been contorted to fit the twisted tale. Or, it might be a mistake in a document, or a media release.
What conspiracy theories have been proven to be true? The bio labs in Ukraine? The 5G mind-control? The forced sterilisation?
Look in a mirror when you take a cold shower yourself.
Conspiracy theories. Go on. Lay them out there.
etarip wrote:burleigh wrote:etarip wrote:Lol back at ya
So what you’re saying is the conspiracy theories that were proven to be true don’t count because someone labeled them “minor” truths
Haha fuck mate, go take a cold shower
No I’m saying that the majority who peddle these cobbled together conspiracy theories, take a minor win wherever they can, and it reinforces their (your) bias.
And for the most part the ‘minor truths’ were never really ‘hidden’ anyway. Whatever ‘expose’ that’s used a an ‘aha / gotcha’ moment is usually a prosaic detail that been contorted to fit the twisted tale. Or, it might be a mistake in a document, or a media release.
What conspiracy theories have been proven to be true? The bio labs in Ukraine? The 5G mind-control? The forced sterilisation?
Look in a mirror when you take a cold shower yourself.
Conspiracy theories. Go on. Lay them out there.
You're all the same, find the craziest form of conspiricy and try to throw a blanket over ever person who questioned the Covid Vaccine.
You cause the divide. you cause the hate
Go on mate - put your money where you mouth is. You’ve just said that the conspiracy theories turn out to be true. Lay them out.
“You’re all the same / causing the divide / driving hate”
You’re driving hate yourself here fella.
Calm down. Take a shower. ;)
A few interesting stories on shark attacks and near misses on the Shark Shield report so I thought I would start this thread. Don't want to trivialize the subject as people have had their lives taken or changed forever by what can happen. I thought it might serve as an educational purpose by hearing others experiences so we may all learn from them and hopefully avoid it happening to us.
One of them was a mate of mine named Hazey.
He had been surfing at Castles, a notoriously sharky wave in the bay at Cactus.
Several hundred metres offshore the wave breaks before reforming into Inside Castles making a long left with several sections. The wave has been the scene of several attacks and near misses over the years including the local known as "Sharkbait" who had been attacked more than once.
Gerry Lopez is another who came very close to being attacked out there and vowed to never surf Cactus again after his near miss.
Well Hazey was surfing out the back with another bloke named Steve when out of the blue he was launched into the air still on his board by a huge force from below.
A shark had rammed him with a direct hit straight up into the air! In a moment it was gone but soon returned to the stunned Hazey and started biting him and his board. Hazey instinctively put his arms out to protect himself but both his arms ended up in its mouth. As the jaws closed down his arms could have easily been severed, but several teeth on the sharks lower jaw had become dislodged and imbedded in the board leaving his upper arms with massive injuries, but the vital inner arms where major arteries run were not majorly damaged. This probably saved his life.
By this time Steve had reacted and in a rush of adrenalin and pure ballsy courage he threw himself onto the sharks back and started gouging at the sharks eyeballs, eventually feeling one pop and the shark departed.
Steve got the two surfboards together and got himself and Hazey on and started the long paddle to shore.
Then they were both thrown into the air as the shark rammed them a third time before disappearing again. They continued to make their way closer to shore and the shark nudged them again. Steve told me he thought he really must of pissed it off when he popped its eye.
Finally they we're just a metre from shore when the shark made its fifth and final appearance. It beelined towards them and the shore while they stood in waist deep water with their boards. The sharks mouth was just rapidly opening and closing like one of those wind up sets of false teeth. The boys separated and put their hands on either side of it's body and held it on a 90 degree angle to the beach as they made the final steps to the safety of the sand.
Hazey was rushed to Ceduna hospital and then flown to Adelaide for micro surgery on his shredded arms.
Steve ended up receiving a bravery award and they both sold their story to 60 minutes and made $50,000 each out of it!
It was quite a story!